Question 3 of 201.0/ 1.0 PointsA company that develops over-the-counter medicines is working on a new product that is meant to shorten the length of sore throats. To test their product for effectiveness, they take a random sample of 110 people and record how long it took for their symptoms to completely disappear. The results are in the table below. The company knows that on average (without medication) it

takes a sore throat 6 days or less to heal 42% of the time, 7-9 days 31% of the time, 10-12 days 16% of the time, and 13 days or more 11% of the time.Can it be concluded at the 0.01 level of significance that the patients who took the medicine healed at a different rate than these percentages? After running a Goodness of Fit test, can it be concluded that there is a statistically significant difference in duration of a sore throat for those that took the medicine and what is the p-value?6 days or less7-9 days10-12 days13 or more daysDuration of Sore Throat4940129Expected Counts46.234.117.612.1
A. Yes, the p-value = 0.287801B. No, the p-value = 0.712199C. Yes, the p-value = 0.712199D. No, the p-value = 0.287801Answer Key:DFeedback:Use Excel to find the p-value you have the Observed and Expected Counts you can use =CHISQ.TEST( Highlight Observed Counts, Highlight Expected Counts) = 0.2878010.287801 > .01, Do Not Reject Ho. No, this is not significant.
Question 4 of 200.0/ 1.0 PointsClick to see additional instructionsAn urban economist is curious if the distribution in where Oregon residents live is different todaythan it was in 1990. She observes that today there are approximately 3,109 thousand residents in

NW Oregon, 902 thousand residents in SW Oregon, 244 thousand in Central Oregon, and 102 thousand in Eastern Oregon. She knows that in 1990 the breakdown was as follows: 72.7% NW Oregon, 20.7% SW Oregon, 4.8% Central Oregon, and 2.8% Eastern Oregon. Can she conclude that the distribution in residence is different today at a 0.05 level of significance?Enter the test statistic - round to 4 decimal places.
Question 5 of 201.0/ 1.0 PointsClick to see additional instructionsA company manager believes that a person’s ability to be a leader is directly correlated to their zodiac sign. He never selects someone to chair a committee without first evaluating their zodiac sign. An irate employee sets out to prove her manager wrong. She claims that if zodiac sign trulymakes a difference in leadership, then a random sample of 210 CEO’s in our country would reveal a difference in zodiac sign distribution. She finds the following zodiac signs for her random sample of 210 CEO’s:BirthsSigns25Aries13Taurus17Gemini21Cancer16Leo18Virgo15Libra