Explain how you would solve the problem below using PEMDAS. Explain what you would do first, second, third, fourth and so on to
2 answers:
You might be interested in
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%.
Answer:
$276
Step-by-step explanation:
Create a proportion where x is the cost to refinish the larger wood floor:
=
Cross multiply and solve for x:
3x = 828
x = 276
So, to refinish the larger wood floor, it would cost $276