A local political leader claims that 95% of the families in his area of responsibility
were given “ayuda” during a one-month lockdown. Of a random sample of 200 families, 187 said they received relief or “ayuda”. Is this enough to affirm the
leader’s claim? Use 𝑎 = 0.05.
The following null and alternative hypotheses for the population proportion needs to be tested:
"H_0:p=0.95"
"H_a:p\\not=0.95"
This corresponds to a two-tailed test, for which a z-test for one population proportion will be used.
Evidence:
Based on the information provided, the significance level is "\\alpha = 0.05\n\n," and the critical value for a two-tailed test is "z_c = 1.96."
The rejection region for this two-tailed test is "R = \\{z: |z|> 1.96\\}."
The z-statistic is computed as follows:
Since it is observed that "|z| =0.9733<1.96= z_c," it is then concluded that the null hypothesis is not rejected.
Using the P-value approach:
The p-value is "p=2P(Z<-0.9733)= 0.330404," and since "p=0.330404>0.05=\\alpha," it is concluded that the null hypothesis is not rejected.
Therefore, there is not enough evidence to claim that the population proportion "p" is different than 0.95, at the "\\alpha = 0.05" significance level.
Comments
Leave a comment