A scientist wants to know if adults prefer watching movies in a theater or in their home. He interviews 500 people leaving a loc
al movie theater and finds that 480 of them like watching movies in theaters. The scientists concludes that 96 percent of people like watching movies in theaters more than at home. Why is the scientist's conlucsion most likely unreliable?
because he didnt have any variables, he only interviewed 500 people from one movie theater, if he did different theaters, the answer would be different, and what if he just picked a bunch of people who liked it instead of getting a good mix?
The scientist conclusion is most likely unreliable because his sample collection is bias and skewed
Explanation:
The scientist will likely get an unreliable conclusion because of the location he chose to do his interview. He chose to do his interview in a theater, which simply means there is a higher probability that the interviewees prefer watching movies in a theater than at home.
The scientist should have done the interview on a neutral ground or location to get a better and unbiased opinion from individuals. Imagine him carrying out the interview in a bus, on the streets and homes. He is likely to meet more people that are not theater fans.
If he wants to get an unbiased sample he should have chose 250 individuals leaving the theater and another 250 individual watching movies in their homes .
It happens because the consuming is higher than the water drop rate, or even because there are too many people in a zone where there is not enough fresh water.
