Roshanda was curious if students in her class would complete a maze faster if fast-paced music was playing in the background. Sh
e randomly assigned each student in her class to one of three groups: fast-paced music, slow-paced music, or no music. She timed each student as they individually completed a maze with their corresponding music (or no music) in the background. Students who worked with the fast-paced music, on average, completed the maze significantly faster than students in the other groups. Can we conclude that the fast-paced music caused her classmates to finish the maze faster? Why?
(A) Yes, because the study included each student in her class
(B) Yes, because the adults were randomly selected
(C) Yes, because the students were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups
(D) Not necessarily, because the sample size was too small
(E) Not necessarily, because this wasn't an experiment
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.
The null hypothesis is will state that there is no difference in mean of anxiety scores obtained for test taken of yellow and green papers
H0 : μYellow = μGreen.
The alternative hypothesis is the opposite of the null and it is to the left, where we want to test if the anxiety score is lower when take on a yellow paper
First set it up like this: <span>then add a zero on to the 18 and a decimal point like this: </span> then solve for 180/32 and add a decimal in the same location that it is in the 18.0 Hope this helps!
