0673appendix - Instructor’s Appendix Technology Project...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Instructor’s Appendix Technology Project From Data to Decision NOTE: This INSTRUCTOR’S APPENDIX offers suggestions and insights into the TECHNOLOGY PROJECT and FROM DATA TO DECISION sections at the end of each chapter. It has been added in response to requests for such material from users of the previous editions. Since many of the questions posed in these sections are open-ended and/or subjective, the material that follows represents only one possible interpretation of the questions posed is not intended to be a definitive answer and/or the only “correct” solution. Chapter 1 – Technology Project The printout will vary according to which statistics software is used. In general, this manual will use Minitab to analyze the data sets in Appendix A and to generate various graphics. Following the project directions produces the following Minitab printout. C1 nicotine 1 1.1 2 1.7 3 1.7 4 1.1 5 1.1 6 1.4 7 1.1 8 1.4 9 1.0 10 1.2 11 1.1 12 1.1 13 1.1 14 1.1 15 1.1 16 1.8 17 1.6 18 1.1 19 1.2 20 1.5 21 1.3 22 1.1 23 1.3 24 1.1 25 1.1 508 INSTRUCTOR’S APPENDIX Chapter 1 – From Data to Decision Too many details of the original experiment are missing from the brief summary presented in the text to allow for definitive answers, but the following answers suggest possible areas for discussion. 1. The original experiment contains several possible design flaws. If the original 60 persons in Wichita were not selected at random, they may have been a convenience sample or connected in some other way such as not to be representative of the general population. Those who chose to participate are a voluntary response sample, which is not necessarily representative of the general population. 2. There may be a discrepancy between what “degrees of separation” means in theory and what was actually measured by the experiment. If one of the original subjects had a friend who happened to be going to Cambridge, and that friend went out his way to hand deliver the letter to the otherwise unknown recipient while in Cambridge, there would be only one intermediary – but it would not be correct to say there was one only one degree of separation in the sense of people who actually knew people. Determining whether the experiment justifies the concept of “six degrees of separation” would involve clarification both of exactly what that concept means and of the directions communicated to each person in the ongoing chain of contacts. 3. Given the present technology and available databases that allow a person to find and contact almost any other given person, the concept of degrees of separation may no longer be meaningful – but an experiment to identify the number of legitimate person-to-person links necessary to connect any two people may still be possible and have some merit. In fact, one might even employ the present technology to conduct the experiment more quickly and with better control. With strict rules allowing contact only between persons that already have...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 03/07/2011 for the course STATISTICS 1022 taught by Professor Dr.kalluri during the Spring '11 term at University of South Florida - Tampa.

Page1 / 27

0673appendix - Instructor’s Appendix Technology Project...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online