QUESTION 1

STATISTICS PROJECT 6

QUESTION1

  1. There are 2 groups being compared.

  2. The sample size is 301.

  3. The null hypothesis is to be rejected because the p-value (0.004) is less than 0.05

  4. The results are statistically significant.

  5. The Post-Hoc tests were used because the p-value is less than 0.05.it is run to know where the statistical difference arises.

QUESTION2

a)Nullhypothesis: there were no significant differences between regions intolerance of abortion for 2010 GSS middle-age adults.

Researchhypothesis: there were significant differences between regions intolerance of abortion for 2010 GSS middle-age adult.

Descriptive

Abortion Should Be Possible Index (asked about 6 situations)

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Minimum

Maximum

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

Northeast

153

4.47

2.007

.162

4.15

4.79

0

6

Midwest

238

3.62

2.044

.132

3.36

3.88

0

6

South

327

3.83

2.051

.113

3.61

4.06

0

6

West

167

4.49

1.866

.144

4.20

4.77

0

6

Total

885

4.01

2.037

.068

3.87

4.14

0

6

ANOVA

Abortion Should Be Possible Index (asked about 6 situations)

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

Between Groups

116.809

3

38.936

9.660

.000

Within Groups

3551.119

881

4.031

Total

3667.928

884

Thesignificance value is less than 0.05.This indicates that there is asignificant difference between the group means. We reject the nullhypothesis, and so we proceed to carry out the Post-Hoc sTests inorder to know where the difference arises.

Post-Hoc Tests

Dependent Variable:Abortion Should Be Possible Index (asked about 6 situations)

(I) Region of Current Residence

(J) Region of Current Residence

Mean Difference (I-J)

Std. Error

Sig.

Tukey HSD

Northeast

Midwest

.853*

.208

.000

South

.636*

.197

.007

West

-.014

.225

1.000

Midwest

Northeast

-.853*

.208

.000

South

-.217

.171

.582

West

-.867*

.203

.000

South

Northeast

-.636*

.197

.007

Midwest

.217

.171

.582

West

-.650*

.191

.004

West

Northeast

.014

.225

1.000

Midwest

.867*

.203

.000

South

.650*

.191

.004

Dunnett t (2-sided)b

Northeast

West

-.014

.225

1.000

Midwest

West

-.867*

.203

.000

South

West

-.650*

.191

.002

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

b. Dunnett t-tests treat one group as a control, and compare all other groups against it.

QUESTION3

  1. paired sample t-test

  2. chi-square

  3. one-way ANOVA

  4. independent sample t-test

  5. paired sample t-test

  6. one sample t-test

  7. chi-square

  8. independent sample t-test

  9. paired sample t-test

  10. chi-square

QUESTION4

Nullhypothesis: There is no significant relationship between region ofthe country and race of the 2010 GSS.

Researchhypothesis: There is a significant relationship between region ofthe country and race of the 2010 GSS.

Case Processing Summary

Cases

Valid

Missing

Total

N

Percent

N

Percent

N

Percent

Race of Respondent * REGION = 3 (FILTER)

475

100.0%

0

0.0%

475

100.0%

Chi-Square Tests

Value

df

Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

87.648a

6

.000

Likelihood Ratio

83.609

6

.000

Linear-by-Linear Association

7.883

1

.005

N of Valid Cases

1258

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 11.57.

Thevalue of chi-square is 87.648 and the degrees of freedom are 6. Thesignificance level is 0.000. The probability of a chi-square istherefore 0.000. Therefore we reject the null hypothesis withindependence. The result is statistically significant.

References

Anderson,D. R., Burnham, K. P., &amp Thompson, W. L. (2000). Null hypothesistesting: problems, prevalence, and an alternative.&nbspThejournal of wildlife management,912-923.

Gardner,M. J., &amp Altman, D. G. (1986). Confidence intervals rather than Pvalues: estimation rather than hypothesis testing.&nbspBMJ,&nbsp292(6522),746-750.

Davies,R. B. (1987). Hypothesis testing when a nuisance parameter is presentonly under the alternative.&nbspBiometrika,&nbsp74(1),33-43.