You are on page 1of 8

Height Vs.

Shoe
Sizes
Team Members:
Rachel Rogers; Jenna Solada
Date: May 20, 2015
Teacher: Mr. McDermontt
Stats II

The project we are doing compares the height of a female student to her shoe size. We
hypothesize that the correlation will be a strong positive association between height and shoe
size. To gather our data we will be going around the school and will be doing a sample survey to
ask girls their height and shoe size.
In statistics a population is the entire group of individuals that are being studied. In our
project our population was all the female students in DuBois Area School District. The term
sample is only a part of the population from where we collect our data. Our sample was only the
26 female students that we surveyed. A variable is any characteristic of an individual. Our
variables included height and shoe size, of which the height was the explanatory variable and the
shoe size was the response variable.

Height vs Size of Shoe


Height (inches)

Shoe size

64

68

65

66

63

66

64

67

10

65

63

69

11

65

11

63

61

65

10

68

63

61

65

10

68

10

63

66

66

66

68

10

71

10

Height vs Shoe Size


12
11
10

Shoe Size

f(x) = 0.26x - 8.37


R = 0.32
Data
Height vs Shoe Size Regression Line
9 Points
8
7
6
60

62

64

66

68

70

72

Height (inches)

In statistics correlation describes the direction and strength of a straight line relationship
between 2 quantitative variables, correlation is written as r. In our project our correlation value
was .562, which makes our correlation a moderate strength and a positive direction. This means
that the correlations is only moderately valid and that as height increases shoe size also increases.
The coefficient of determination is the fraction or percent of the variation in the values of y that
is explained by the least squares regression of y on x. Our coefficient of determination is .316,
which means that any prediction made has a 31.6% explained variation. Since 31.6% explained
variation is so fairly low, we would not be very confident with our predictions since 68.4% is
unexplained.

So say we have a female student who is a 411, or 59 inches, and we want to find out her
shoe size we can use the regression line to find this. Our regression line is y = .264x 8.365
y = .264x 8.365
y = .264(59) 8.365
y = 15.576 8.365
y = 7.211
We now can predict that a female student who is 59 inches tall would wear a size 7.211 at a
31.6% explained variation. Due to the low explained variation we would not be very confident
with this prediction since there is a lot of variation that is unexplained due to another variable
that we did not include in our work.
A lurking variable is a variable that has an important effect on the relationship among the
variables in a study but is not one of the explanatory variables. Some of the lurking variables in
our project include the brand of the shoe, the way a person was measured, genetics, and age.
Shoe size with each brand can affect the data because each brand has a different measure for
their shoe sizes, if a person usually only wears one brand of shoe they may believe they are a
certain size when if you actually measured their feet you may find them to be a size bigger or
smaller. Also the way a person was measured could affect the data because if they were measured
incorrectly then the data would be skewed slightly a different height to shoe size.
We believe there will be a strong positive association between height and shoe size. In
our statement we are only partially correct, the association was positive. However, the
association was not strong, it was moderate. In order for us to have been correct correlation

would have to be above .7 which would make it strong, our correlation was only .562 which
made it only a moderate association.

Works Cited
Avery, Kristin. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.
Caldwell, Heather. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Cranch, Sheryl. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Davies, Taylor. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.
Dodd, Jordan. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Gordon, Stephanie. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Hopkins, Abby. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Jablonkski, Jesslyn. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Johnson, Brandi. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Knepper, Haley. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.
Koren, Maddi. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.
Lockwood, Ashley. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.
Lupole, Cheyenne. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Maleski, Heather. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
McAnich, Marina. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Mooney, Sonya. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.

Olson, Brianna. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.


Rogers, Rachel. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Roudybush, Allison. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Salada, Paige. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Schmidt, Casey. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.
Sherwood, Renee. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Solada, Jenna. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.
Songer, Emily. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.
Woodward, Haley. Personal interview. 5 May 2015.
Wycoff, Haley. Personal interview. 4 May 2015.