Answer:
<em>Answer: A'Reana's weekly allowance is $100</em>
Step-by-step explanation:
<u>Backward Solution</u>
To solve some problems, we can work backward, using the inverse operations, to arrive at the solution.
The problem explains a sequence of expenses A'Reana does with her weekly allowance. In the end, she had $37.50.
That final balance came when she last spent $7.50 on a pizza. Thus, before that, she had $37.50+$7.50=$45
This balance is half of her previously remaining money. The other half was spent on a new shirt. Thus she had 2*$45=$90.
Those $90 were left after she gave $10 to her friend Taylor, thus, the initial money was $90+$10 = $100
Answer: A'Reana's weekly allowance is $100
Answer:
The 95% confidence interval would be given (0.622;0.644).
We are confident (95%) that the true proportion of people that said that they change their nail polish once a week is between 0.622 and 0.644
Step-by-step explanation:
Data given and notation
n=7000 represent the random sample taken
X=4431 represent the people that said that they change their nail polish once a week
estimated proportion of people that said that they change their nail polish once a week
represent the significance level
Confidence =0.95 or 95%
p= population proportion of people that said that they change their nail polish once a week
Solution to the problem
The confidence interval would be given by this formula
For the 95% confidence interval the value of 
and 
, with that value we can find the quantile required for the interval in the normal standard distribution.
And replacing into the confidence interval formula we got:
And the 95% confidence interval would be given (0.622;0.644).
We are confident (95%) that the true proportion of people that said that they change their nail polish once a week is between 0.622 and 0.644
Answer:
£71.2
Step-by-step explanation:
356= 5days
so to find one days pay, divide £356 by 5 to get the answer.
So, 356/5 = £71.2 a day.
Answer: (E) Not necessarily, because this wasn't an experiment
Step-by-step explanation:
As much as the results would suggest that the fast-paced music was responsible for the faster finishing time, this conclusion cannot be authoritatively made because this was not technically an experiment but rather a test to satisfy curiosity.
An experiment is planned and is scientific. It has more stringent requirements that ensure causation that Roshanda did not meet before she engaged in this trial so we cannot say for a fact that her findings are objective.
around 13% chance
Step-by-step explanation:
