Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
AP Statistics
6th Period
William Kiker
Rowan Pruitt
Spring 2015
CULMINATING PROJECT
!1
Table of Contents
Page 1 Project Paper
Page 8 Works Cited
Page 9 Appendix:
Page 9 Teachers with 4th Periods Master List
Page 10 Simple Random Sample Lists
Page 16 Data and Signatures
Page 17 Hypothesis Test Work
Page 18 Peer Review
Page 20 Original Inquiry Pitch
Page 22 Revised Inquiry Pitch
Page 24 Website Link
CULMINATING PROJECT
!2
!3
teachers and asked for a rooster of their fourth period classes. To continue simple random sample
each class until there were three subjects from each class. This was done to make the group
aspect easier and more manageable to not have to disturb classes for as long. There were benefits
and consequences to this method of grouping.
After a sample was gathered and a bunch of goldfish, the first set of experiments with the
individuals were conducted. To sort of explain the situation, there was a slip delivered to the
students that said Congrats you have been selected to receive a gift provided by an Austin High
Stats Student, Rowan Pruitt. Please accept your gift in the hall, for the individual block and
Congrats you have been selected to receive a gift provided by an Austin High Stats Student,
Rowan Pruitt. Please accept your gift in the hall with the other students in your class, for the
group block. This proved to just be another thing to accommodate for but it made the reception
of the experiment a little more understandable to the subjects. To finalize the interaction their
signatures were gathered for proof, hoping this interaction will give them enough time on their
own or in the group to decide on whether to say thank you or not.
After the subjects received their slips they came outside to get their reward. The overall emotion
from the experiment was confusion, both in the individual block and group block was confusion.
Most people didnt entirely understand that the were just getting a gift and they didnt entirely
know how to respond. This confusion had an overall effect of the subjects response, they either
woke up from their confusion and said thank you, or they said thank you because they were
confused, or just had no idea how to react and didnt say anything at all. In the individual setting
more so than in the group environment it was much clearer when the subjects didnt say thank
you rather than when they did say it. This phenomenon occurs because of the underlying cultural
CULMINATING PROJECT
!4
concept of manners in this region, it is expected of people. The individual setting was more
personal between the facilitator and the subject which made the need for manners more relevant
to compensate for the awkwardness.
For the group block, the facilitator waited until every subject had entered the hall to give
them their reward, in order to get the best results. The goldfish were handed out and before
waiting for their responses keeping tabs on who said what in the group and how they interacted
with each other and the administrator. In the end it didnt seem as if the group had any effect on
their responses and if it did, it was negatively rather than positively as I had originally proposed.
The group aspect of random students made the subjects more awkward rather than comfortable
as it was intended to do. This was the main issue with the concept because it was based on the
attitude among friends which would affect a persons cultural behavior such as manners rather
than just a persons peer.
An issue that came along throughout the experimentation occurred when the facilitator
ran out of goldfish, the original snack, after not finding the same product the prize had to change
from to chips from an assorted pack. In order to make the experiment as similar as possible, all
the subjects in the groups were given the same gift in case that affected whether or not that said
thank you and then they didnt see any other kinds of chips in case they wanted to trade again
effected whether or not they said thank you.
Following the experiment, a two-sample proportions test was performed to find the true
population difference in proportions of students that said thank you when given a gift
individually and of students that said thank you when given a gift in a group. The gift being a
snack. The null hypothesis that these two proportions would be the same, with no significant
CULMINATING PROJECT
!5
difference between being in a group or not and the alternative that there is some difference.
When the experiment was originally designed, it made sense to conduct a one-tailed test for this
date because the experiment tested to see if being in a group made people more likely to say
thank you but after completing the experiment, it became evident that any difference would have
a significant commentary on cultural dynamics.
Not all of the conditions were met while multiplying the sample size to the p and q hat
values for both samples, this condition was not met and it had a great effect on the end result of
the test. Despite this, the test was run with a z-score of 1.1366 and a p-value (2p(z>1.1366)) of .
2557. Meaning that the chance of my experimental results occurring if the proportion of students
that were given a gift individually and in a group were the same was 25.57%. Since p-value of .
2557 is larger than our alpha level, we can fail to reject the claim that the true population
proportion of students that receive a gift are equally likely to say thank you individually or in a
group. Central Limit Theorem suggests that with the larger the sample size the more normal a
distribution becomes, not only would this particular distribution become more normal, a larger
sample size would be more likely to demonstrate a significant difference. In addition to the small
size, the experiment was limited to being conducted during the school day and had to limit the
search to students in 4th period classes which misrepresented the population of Austin High
students.
Despite my personal findings, there is a large amount of evidence that suggests group
behavior in this situations such as manners and others like it does present itself as I had inquired
about. This positive group behavior occurs because of our connections with people in our day to
day life, their habits tend to mold to become the subjects habits. In addition, this group behavior
CULMINATING PROJECT
!6
relies on the cultural significance of manners, which as we mature from a traditional society,
manners has become less of a common concept. But group behavior has an intrinsic identity in
society that develops on its own, which could account for the variation in data from the original
project idea because the groups were not established on their own rather than by a facilitator.
Overall this experiment shows the four concepts of exploring data, sampling and
experimentation, anticipating patterns, and statistical inference based on how the idea developed
into an actual experiment with subjects blocked into two groups to properly test the difference in
individual dynamics with manners and group dynamics with manners before noticing the
patterns that formed within the individuals and within the group to statistically infer the
difference in these two concepts. This becomes more evident when reviewing the original
inquiry pitch before becoming a more developed idea and experiment. Mob mentality and group
behavior has a negative connotation but the psychological power can have positive benefits too
including when it comes to manners as this experiment was designed to show.
CULMINATING PROJECT
!7
Works Cited
A Crowded World: Scientists Study Collective Psychology. US News. US News, 09 25 09.
Web. 03 25 15.
CULMINATING PROJECT
!8
CULMINATING PROJECT
!9
CULMINATING PROJECT
!10
CULMINATING PROJECT
!11
CULMINATING PROJECT
!12
CULMINATING PROJECT
!13
CULMINATING PROJECT
!14
CULMINATING PROJECT
!15
CULMINATING PROJECT
!16
CULMINATING PROJECT
!17
CULMINATING PROJECT
!18
CULMINATING PROJECT
!19
CULMINATING PROJECT
!20
results.
By doing this experiment it would show a significant difference in the students that said thank
you one on one and the students that said thank you in a group showing a positive example of
mob mentality and group behavior. Overall I think this experiment will show how cultural
behavior has shifted for people to be less professional or formal with each other.
CULMINATING PROJECT
!21
CULMINATING PROJECT
!22
until they have said thank you because that can sway results. With the treatment of the idea of the
group one level being the individual block and the other being the group block, we can see
whether this dynamic has an impact on the manners of individuals.
By doing this experiment it would show a significant difference in the students that said thank
you one on one and the students that said thank you in a group showing a positive example of
mob mentality and group behavior. Overall I think this experiment will show how cultural
behavior has shifted for people to be less professional or formal with each other.
Potential Issues include not testing enough subjects, students in the group block being absent
resulting in postponing the test for all those subjects in that class, and running out of snacks that
then effecting the experiment.
CULMINATING PROJECT
!23
CULMINATING PROJECT
!24