Answer:
a) The null and alternative hypothesis are:
b) If 300 families were sampled, for a significance level of 5%, there is enough evidence to support the claim that a smaller proportion of American families own stocks or stock funds this year than 10 years ago (P-value = 0.001).
Step-by-step explanation:
The claim that we want to have evidence to support is that a smaller proportion of American families own stocks or stock funds this year than 10 years ago.
The hypothesis for this test should state:
- For the null hypothesis, that the population proportion is not significantly different from 53%.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/80a2d/80a2d67c8e7ff633e96f8b726a75d7c8bd53c4d4" alt="H_0:\pi=0.53"
- For the alternative hypothesis, that the population proportion is significantly less than 53%.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0e93a/0e93a4f5f9c579a32aea58adfe818a96304b291f" alt="H_a: \pi"
If 300 families are sampled, we can perform a hypothesis test for a proportion.
The claim is that a smaller proportion of American families own stocks or stock funds this year than 10 years ago.
Then, the null and alternative hypothesis are:
The significance level is 0.05.
The sample has a size n=300.
The sample proportion is p=0.44.
The standard error of the proportion is:
Then, we can calculate the z-statistic as:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e9da0/e9da0867a42279c8e02093b5ea70dd18c7ea6788" alt="z=\dfrac{p-\pi+0.5/n}{\sigma_p}=\dfrac{0.44-0.53+0.5/300}{0.029}=\dfrac{-0.088}{0.029}=-3.065"
This test is a left-tailed test, so the P-value for this test is calculated as:
As the P-value (0.001) is smaller than the significance level (0.05), the effect is significant.
The null hypothesis is rejected.
There is enough evidence to support the claim that a smaller proportion of American families own stocks or stock funds this year than 10 years ago.