No it's not a reasonable conclusion. Correlation does not lead to causation. If two variables are linked, then they may affect one another or there may be another set of factors involved. There isn't enough info to know for sure. The fact that r = -0.7 is fairly close to r = -1 indicates there's moderately strong negative correlation, but I don't think it's strong enough in my opinion. More research is needed.
In short, the keyword "caused" as part of the claim is what makes it unreasonable. There is no way to know that not eating vegetables leads to high blood pressure. It may be true but again, more info is needed.
If it's asking for the inverse then it would be (y + 11) / 5
Answer:
I think it's A to your answer
Answer:
Norma performed best on the aptitude test and should be offered the job.
Step-by-step explanation:
We are given that three potential employees took an aptitude test. Each person took a different version of the test. The scores are reported below. Tobias got a score of 74.7; this version has a mean of 61.7 and a standard deviation of 13. Norma got a score of 351; this version has a mean of 291 and a standard deviation of 25. Vincent got a score of 7.38; this version has a mean of 6.9 and a standard deviation of 0.4.
Now, to find which of the applicants should be offered the job, we have to find the z-score of each of the applicants, and the one who gets the highest z-score will get the job.
The z-score probability distribution for the normal distribution is given by;
Z = ~ N(0,1)
where, = mean and = standard deviation
Firstly, we will find the z-score for Tobias;
The z-score of 74.7 =
= = 1
Now, we will find the z-score for Norma;
The z-score of 351 =
= = 2.4
Now, we will find the z-score for Vincent;
The z-score of 7.38 =
= = 1.2
As we can clearly see that the z-score is highest for Norma which means that Norma performed best on the aptitude test and should be offered the job.
Answer:
first one is right b and c are 15mm