Answer:
um i don't know this (i do im just lazy as heck)
Step-by-step explanation:
One of the major advantage of the two-condition experiment has to do with interpreting the results of the study. Correct scientific methodology does not often allow an investigator to use previously acquired population data when conducting an experiment. For example, in the illustrative problem involving early speaking in children, we used a population mean value of 13.0 months. How do we really know the mean is 13.0 months? Suppose the figures were collected 3 to 5 years before performing the experiment. How do we know that infants haven’t changed over those years? And what about the conditions under which the population data were collected? Were they the same as in the experiment? Isn’t it possible that the people collecting the population data were not as motivated as the experimenter and, hence, were not as careful in collecting the data? Just how were the data collected? By being on hand at the moment that the child spoke the first word? Quite unlikely. The data probably were collected by asking parents when their children first spoke. How accurate, then, is the population mean?
8x-9y=11
Add 9y to both sides
8x = 11 + 9y
Subtract 11 on both sides
8x - 11 = 9y
Divide 9 on both sides
Answer:
$13.80
Step-by-step explanation:
So we start with 12.99 then we have to multiply that by 0.06 to find what we would add which is 0.7794. After this we add 12.99 with 0.7794 and it becomes 13.7694 round this to the nearest hundredth and it becomes 13.80
