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:
so it took it 2:03 to 4:22 it took the train an 2km to 50dp
Step-by-step explanation:
1 it is that you now 14 to 2 and 16 to 4 there you go
Well, a fish can't drown, so were they fish in the first place?
To solve for x, add 3 to both sides, multiply both sides by -1, then take the square both sides.
Isolate the x. Root both sides
√x²< √81
x < 9 is your answer
hope this helps