In 2004, the state of North Carolina released a large data set containing information on births recorded in this state. This data set is useful to researchers studying the relation between habits and practices of expectant mothers and the birth of their children. We will work with a random sample of observations from this data set.
Load the nc
data set into our workspace.
load("more/nc.RData")
We have observations on 13 different variables, some categorical and some numerical. The meaning of each variable is as follows.
variable | description |
---|---|
fage |
father’s age in years. |
mage |
mother’s age in years. |
mature |
maturity status of mother. |
weeks |
length of pregnancy in weeks. |
premie |
whether the birth was classified as premature (premie) or full-term. |
visits |
number of hospital visits during pregnancy. |
marital |
whether mother is married or not married at birth. |
gained |
weight gained by mother during pregnancy in pounds. |
weight |
weight of the baby at birth in pounds. |
lowbirthweight |
whether baby was classified as low birthweight (low ) or not (not low ). |
gender |
gender of the baby, female or male . |
habit |
status of the mother as a nonsmoker or a smoker . |
whitemom |
whether mom is white or not white . |
As a first step in the analysis, we should consider summaries of the data. This can be done using the summary
command:
summary(nc)
## fage mage mature weeks
## Min. :14.00 Min. :13 mature mom :133 Min. :20.00
## 1st Qu.:25.00 1st Qu.:22 younger mom:867 1st Qu.:37.00
## Median :30.00 Median :27 Median :39.00
## Mean :30.26 Mean :27 Mean :38.33
## 3rd Qu.:35.00 3rd Qu.:32 3rd Qu.:40.00
## Max. :55.00 Max. :50 Max. :45.00
## NA's :171 NA's :2
## premie visits marital gained
## full term:846 Min. : 0.0 married :386 Min. : 0.00
## premie :152 1st Qu.:10.0 not married:613 1st Qu.:20.00
## NA's : 2 Median :12.0 NA's : 1 Median :30.00
## Mean :12.1 Mean :30.33
## 3rd Qu.:15.0 3rd Qu.:38.00
## Max. :30.0 Max. :85.00
## NA's :9 NA's :27
## weight lowbirthweight gender habit
## Min. : 1.000 low :111 female:503 nonsmoker:873
## 1st Qu.: 6.380 not low:889 male :497 smoker :126
## Median : 7.310 NA's : 1
## Mean : 7.101
## 3rd Qu.: 8.060
## Max. :11.750
##
## whitemom
## not white:284
## white :714
## NA's : 2
##
##
##
##
Numerical variables: fage, mage, visits, gained, weight
Categorical variables: mature, premie, marital, lowbirthweight, gender, habit, whitemom
boxplot(nc$fage, main="father's age")
boxplot(nc$mage, main="mother's age")
boxplot(nc$visits, main="visits")
boxplot(nc$gained, main="weight gained by mother")
boxplot(nc$weight, main="baby's birth weight")
There are 2 outliers for father’s age on the high end.
There is 1 outlier for mother’s age on the high end.
There are 6 outliers for the number of hospital visits, 2 on the low end and 5 on the high end. At the extremes, 1 person did not ever visit the hospital when pregnant, and 1 person had around 30 visits.
There are a number of outliers for the weight gained by the mother on the high end.
There are 2 outliers on the high end for baby’s birth weight and a signficant number of outliers on the low end.
2.
boxplot(nc$weight~nc$habit, main="baby's birth weight")
The median birth weight for smoker’s is lower than the median birth weight for nonsmokers. The highest birth weight for smoker’s is lower than the highest birthweight for nonsmokers.
by(nc$weight, nc$habit, mean)
## nc$habit: nonsmoker
## [1] 7.144273
## --------------------------------------------------------
## nc$habit: smoker
## [1] 6.82873
There is an observed difference, but is this difference statistically significant? In order to answer this question we will conduct a hypothesis test.
by(nc$weight, nc$habit, length)
## nc$habit: nonsmoker
## [1] 873
## --------------------------------------------------------
## nc$habit: smoker
## [1] 126
Conditions for Inference:
Independence of observations - The sample must be less than 10% of the population. The data set is a random sample from the population and is less that 10% of the population. The data should be nearly normal. The sample size should be above 30, and it is. Since the sample size is large, even if there is some skew, we do not need to be concerned.
The conditions for inference are met.
4. Write the hypotheses for testing if the average weights of babies born to smoking and non-smoking mothers are different. Ho: The average weights of babies born to smoking mothers is the same as the average weight of babies born to non-smoking mothers. \(\mu\)smoking - \(\mu\)nonsmoking = 0
HA: The average weights of babies born to smoking mothers is different from the average weight of babies born to non-smoking mothers. \(\mu\)smoking - \(\mu\)nonsmoking \(\neq\) 0
inference(y = nc$weight, x = nc$habit, est = "mean", type = "ht", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical")
## Warning: package 'BHH2' was built under R version 3.4.2
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_nonsmoker = 873, mean_nonsmoker = 7.1443, sd_nonsmoker = 1.5187
## n_smoker = 126, mean_smoker = 6.8287, sd_smoker = 1.3862
## Observed difference between means (nonsmoker-smoker) = 0.3155
##
## H0: mu_nonsmoker - mu_smoker = 0
## HA: mu_nonsmoker - mu_smoker != 0
## Standard error = 0.134
## Test statistic: Z = 2.359
## p-value = 0.0184
Let’s pause for a moment to go through the arguments of this custom function. The first argument is y
, which is the response variable that we are interested in: nc$weight
. The second argument is the explanatory variable, x
, which is the variable that splits the data into two groups, smokers and non-smokers: nc$habit
. The third argument, est
, is the parameter we’re interested in: "mean"
(other options are "median"
, or "proportion"
.) Next we decide on the type
of inference we want: a hypothesis test ("ht"
) or a confidence interval ("ci"
). When performing a hypothesis test, we also need to supply the null
value, which in this case is 0
, since the null hypothesis sets the two population means equal to each other. The alternative
hypothesis can be "less"
, "greater"
, or "twosided"
. Lastly, the method
of inference can be "theoretical"
or "simulation"
based.
type
argument to "ci"
to construct and record a confidence interval for the difference between the weights of babies born to smoking and non-smoking mothers.inference(y = nc$weight, x = nc$habit, est = "mean", type = "ci", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical")
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_nonsmoker = 873, mean_nonsmoker = 7.1443, sd_nonsmoker = 1.5187
## n_smoker = 126, mean_smoker = 6.8287, sd_smoker = 1.3862
## Observed difference between means (nonsmoker-smoker) = 0.3155
##
## Standard error = 0.1338
## 95 % Confidence interval = ( 0.0534 , 0.5777 )
By default the function reports an interval for (\(\mu_{nonsmoker} - \mu_{smoker}\)) . We can easily change this order by using the order
argument:
inference(y = nc$weight, x = nc$habit, est = "mean", type = "ci", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical",
order = c("smoker","nonsmoker"))
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_smoker = 126, mean_smoker = 6.8287, sd_smoker = 1.3862
## n_nonsmoker = 873, mean_nonsmoker = 7.1443, sd_nonsmoker = 1.5187
## Observed difference between means (smoker-nonsmoker) = -0.3155
##
## Standard error = 0.1338
## 95 % Confidence interval = ( -0.5777 , -0.0534 )
weeks
) and interpret it in context. Note that since you’re doing inference on a single population parameter, there is no explanatory variable, so you can omit the x
variable from the function.inference(y = nc$weeks, est = "mean", type = "ci", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical")
## Single mean
## Summary statistics:
## mean = 38.3347 ; sd = 2.9316 ; n = 998
## Standard error = 0.0928
## 95 % Confidence interval = ( 38.1528 , 38.5165 )
conflevel = 0.90
.inference(y = nc$weeks, est = "mean", type = "ci", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical", conflevel = 0.90)
## Single mean
## Summary statistics:
## mean = 38.3347 ; sd = 2.9316 ; n = 998
## Standard error = 0.0928
## 90 % Confidence interval = ( 38.182 , 38.4873 )
inference(y = nc$weeks, x = nc$mature, est = "mean", type = "ht", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical")
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_mature mom = 132, mean_mature mom = 38.0227, sd_mature mom = 3.2184
## n_younger mom = 866, mean_younger mom = 38.3822, sd_younger mom = 2.8844
## Observed difference between means (mature mom-younger mom) = -0.3595
##
## H0: mu_mature mom - mu_younger mom = 0
## HA: mu_mature mom - mu_younger mom != 0
## Standard error = 0.297
## Test statistic: Z = -1.211
## p-value = 0.2258
The p value is .2258, which is higher than 0.05. We fail to reject the null hypothesis. The average weight gain by younger and mature mothers is the same.
- Now, a non-inference task: Determine the age cutoff for younger and mature mothers. Use a method of your choice, and explain how your method works.
library(dplyr)
##
## Attaching package: 'dplyr'
## The following objects are masked from 'package:stats':
##
## filter, lag
## The following objects are masked from 'package:base':
##
## intersect, setdiff, setequal, union
maxyoung <- nc %>%
filter(mature=="younger mom") %>%
summarise(max = max(mage, na.rm=TRUE))
maxyoung
## max
## 1 34
minmature <- nc %>%
filter(mature=="mature mom") %>%
summarise(min = min(mage, na.rm=TRUE))
minmature
## min
## 1 35
I filtered the data by the maturity of the mother. I looked at the maximum age for younger mothers and the minimum age of older mothers. The cutoff is 34 years old. Mothers younger and equal to 34 are considered younger. Mothers 35 and older are considered mature.
- Pick a pair of numerical and categorical variables and come up with a research question evaluating the relationship between these variables. Formulate the question in a way that it can be answered using a hypothesis test and/or a confidence interval. Answer your question using the inference
function, report the statistical results, and also provide an explanation in plain language.
Does the maturity of the mother affect the birth weight of the baby?
Ho: The average birth weight of a baby is the same for younger mothers and mature mothers. \(\mu_{young} - \mu_{mature}\) = 0
HA: The average birth weight of a baby is different for younger mothers and mature mothers. \(\mu_{young} - \mu_{mature}\) \(\neq\) 0
inference(y = nc$weight, x = nc$mature, est = "mean", type = "ht", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical")
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_mature mom = 133, mean_mature mom = 7.1256, sd_mature mom = 1.6591
## n_younger mom = 867, mean_younger mom = 7.0972, sd_younger mom = 1.4855
## Observed difference between means (mature mom-younger mom) = 0.0283
##
## H0: mu_mature mom - mu_younger mom = 0
## HA: mu_mature mom - mu_younger mom != 0
## Standard error = 0.152
## Test statistic: Z = 0.186
## p-value = 0.8526
We fail to reject the null hypothesis. The p-value is .8526 which is much greater than 0.05. There is no evidence for a difference between the average birth weights between younger and mature mothers.
This is a product of OpenIntro that is released under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported. This lab was adapted for OpenIntro by Mine Çetinkaya-Rundel from a lab written by the faculty and TAs of UCLA Statistics.