Partying vs.

Studying
An analysis based on a survey conducted at Cushing Academy

Kyle Yeung
Andy Wang
Jill Weigley
Introduction

Is there a difference between how Cushing male and female students predict what they
will view as their priority while in college? In order to use the methods we learned in
class we asked fifty-five random students to take part in a survey. They were asked if
they think partying and socializing or studying will be their priority while they are in
college. Students from all different grades were asked to examine the options of the
whole population. The data was computed using Chi-Squared along with comparisons
using joint distribution, marginal distribution, and conditional distribution. Using these
methods of tests and comparisons we will determine if males and females differ in the
way they foresee their priorities while in college.

Hypothesis

H0= There is no difference in the way males and females answer the question: “Do you
think studying or partying/socializing will be your priority in college?”

HA= There is a difference in the way males and females answer the question: “Do you
think studying or partying/socializing will be your priority in college?”

Explanation of Test
In order to determine if there is or is not a difference in how males and females answer
the question “do you think studying or partying/socializing will be your priority in
college,” a random sample had to be chosen to receive the survey. To conduct the survey
randomly, each math class that met during A block was chosen to answer the question. A
class is one of the most random things because the students have no way of picking who
is in their class, so that leads to a group that will describe the majority of the population.
One of the teachers in A block forgot to give the survey, so it was given during F block,
and one of the A blocks did not fully understand the nature of the question, so it was
given during a B block class. This did not change the randomness of the results because
none of the people surveyed overlapped and the students were still randomly chosen. Not
only did the students have to answer the question, but also they had to circle their gender.
The gender will be used to conclude if there is a difference in the way people of a
different gender answer the question. Grade was not included in the survey because math
classes of different levels were surveyed and all the different grades were represented.
Observed Data

Observed Partying/Socializing Studying Total

Male 19 13 32
Female 6 17 23
Total 25 30 55
Here is the observed data. As we can see, the number of females who want to socialize
more in college are low, but almost three times as many females want to concentrate on
studying in college. However, male students prefer partying and socializing to studying.
Also, we can compare the percents of each row and each column.

Expected Cell Count

Expected Partying/Socializing Studying Total

Male 14.545 17.455 32.000
Female 10.455 12.545 23.000
Total 25.000 30.000 55.000

Expected cell count – To test the null hypothesis in this chart, we compare the observed
cell counts with the expected cell counts, assuming that the null hypothesis is true. Since

row total × column total

Expected cell count =
n

Joint Distribution

Joint Distributions Partying/Socializing Studying

Male 34.54% 23.64%
Female 11% 30.90%

To find the joint distributions, we divide the total number of "Males who chose
partying/socializing," "Males who chose Studying," "Females who chose
Partying/socializing," "Females who chose Studying" by the total number of
observations. As we can see “Partying Males” consumes the majority of the observations.

individual cell count

Joint Distribution=
total sample size

Marginal Distribution

Marginal Distributions Male Female

Percent 40% 28.75%

Marginal Distributions Partying/Socializing Studying

Percent 45.45% 54.54%

To find the marginal distributions, we need to find the row and column total and divide
them by the total number of observations. For example, to find the marginal distribution
of the people who say "partying/socializing," we first find the total number of people who
said partying/socializing and divide that by the total number observations. As we can see,
the “partying/socializing” group has 45.45% of the observations.

total row or column count

Marginal Distribution=
total sample size

Conditional Distribution

Conditional
Distributions Male Female
Partying/Socializing 76% 24%

Conditional
Distributions Male Female
Studying 43.30% 56.67%

Conditional Partying/Socializing Studying

Distributions
Male 59.4% 40.6%

Conditional Partying/Socializing Studying

Distributions
Female 26.1% 73.9%

individual cell count

Conditional Distribution=
row or column total

For conditional distributions, we have to use a specific cell and divide that by either the
column or row total. For example, if we need to find the conditional distribution of
"Males" we use the total number of males who said "party or socializing" and divide that
by the total number of males who participated in the survey. Then we use the total
number of males who said "studying" and divide that by the total number of males who
participated. Other values can also be found by dividing the number of males who said
partying by the total number of people who said partying. This method can also be used
to find the conditional distributions of the females. By using this method, we can see that
those who said “studying” and are “male” is 43.3%. Using a different conditional
distribution we can see that of the males who participated 40.6% chose “studying.”
Females accounted for 24% of the people who chose “partying,” but 56.67% of the total
number of people who chose studying. Just looking at the “males,” we can see that 59.4%
chose “partying” and only 40.6% chose “studying.” For the “females” 26.1% chose
“partying,” but almost three times as many, 73.9% chose “studying.” The conditional
distribution can be used to compare the data in different ways so different comparisons
can be used truly see the patterns and analyze what the numbers represent.
Graphs

The first two charts “Partying” and “Studying” briefly show that more males are going to
spend a majority of time partying and socializing, while more females are going to spend
more time studying. The last two charts “Male” and “Female” show that among all the
males, they tend to socialize more than study, while among all the females, people tend to
study more than socialize.

χ2 Distribution
The Chi-Square statistic compares the observed counts with expected counts. To find the
Chi-Square distribution we have to multiply the total row count by the total column count
and divide by the total observation for the particular cell. Then after finding the expected
cell count, we subtract each cell’s observed count by the expected count, square it and
divide it by the expected cell count. Then we add every single outcome for each cell.

Chi-Square Partying/Socializing Studying

Male 14.54 17.45
Female 10.45 12.54
χ2= ∑ (observed − exp ected )
2

exp ected

Degree of Freedom = (Total Row Count – 1) × (Total Column Count – 1)

In this case it is (2-1) × (2-1) = 1
α= .05

Chi-Square = 5.98

P-Value= 0.01446

Conclusion
After conducting the survey and using the Chi-Squared method to compare the data that
was gathered, we reject H0 in favor of HA. We found it statistically significant that males
and females did not answer the question the same in the survey so we reject the null
hypothesis that said they did answer the question the same. The P-Value that was found
was 0.01446 and we were using a 0.05 significance level. Because the P-Value in smaller
than the significance level, it is statistically significance that males and females do not
have the same opinion on what they predict their priority will be in college. For the data
we gathered in our survey it was shown that males are more likely to choose partying and
socializing than studying while in college. By randomly choosing fifty-five people to take
our survey we were able to use the data to explain the pattern of the entire student
population at Cushing Academy.
 Work Cited Page

Moore, David S., and George P. McCabe. Introduction to the Practice of Statistics. Ed.

Craig Bleyer. 5th ed. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company, 2006.