Answer:
There is not enough evidence to support the claim that Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%.
Step-by-step explanation:
We are given the following in the question:
Sample size, n = 1432
p = 23% = 0.23
Alpha, α = 0.05
Number of theft complaints , x = 321
First, we design the null and the alternate hypothesis
This is a one-tailed test.
Formula:
Putting the values, we get,
Now, we calculate the p-value from the table.
P-value = 0.298
Since the p-value is greater than the significance level, we fail to reject the null hypothesis and accept the null hypothesis.
Conclusion:
Thus, there is not enough evidence to support the claim that Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%.
The picture below explains how to get your answer
hope it helps :)
The formula for a triangle:
Base times height divided by 2
Equation Form:
b×h÷2
Answer:
y = x + 2
Step-by-step explanation:
The slope is 1
The y-intercept is 2
Answer:
D) 1
Step-by-step explanation:
When you start raising i to certain powers, you begin to notice a pattern.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fa41a/fa41ac2a5da73a1071bd6a76e202f6e0d6cf048c" alt="i^1=i \\\\i^2=-1 \\\\i^3=-i \\\\i^4=1 \\\\i^5=i \\\\ i^6=-1 \\\\ i^7=-i \\\\i^8= 1"
This cycle repeats forever. Since 84 is a multiple of 4, i^84 must be 1. Hope this helps!