1.8 Smoking habits of UK residents. A survey was conducted to study the smoking habits of UK residents. Below is a data matrix displaying a portion of the data collected in this survey. Note that “£” stands for British Pounds Sterling, “cig” stands for cigarettes, and “N/A” refers to a missing component of the data. (a) What does each row of the data matrix represent?
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) Each row represents a case.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) $1,691 participants
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
1.10 Cheaters, scope of inference. Exercise 1.5 introduces a study where researchers studying the relationship between honesty, age, and self-control conducted an experiment on 160 children between the ages of 5 and 15. The researchers asked each child to toss a fair coin in private and to record the outcome (white or black) on a paper sheet, and said they would only reward children who report white. Half the students were explicitly told not to cheat and the others were not given any explicit instructions. Differences were observed in the cheating rates in the instruction and no instruction groups, as well as some differences across children’s characteristics within each group. (a) Identify the population of interest and the sample in this study.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) Population of interest: children between the ages of 5 and 15 Sample: 160 children between the ages of 5 and 15
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) We don’t know if children were randomly selected for the study - so we can’t establish whether the sample is representative of the population. We can’t establish causal relationship - we can only establish association.
1.28. Reading the paper. Below are excerpts from two articles published in the NY Times: (a) An article titled Risks: Smokers Found More Prone to Dementia states the following: “Researchers analyzed data from 23,123 health plan members who participated in a voluntary exam and health behavior survey from 1978 to 1985, when they were 50-60 years old. 23 years later, about 25% of the group had dementia, including 1,136 with Alzheimer’s disease and 416 with vascular dementia. After adjusting for other factors, the researchers concluded that pack-a- day smokers were 37% more likely than nonsmokers to develop dementia, and the risks went up with increased smoking; 44% for one to two packs a day; and twice the risk for more than two packs.” Based on this study, can we conclude that smoking causes dementia later in life? Explain your reasoning.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) Association does not imply causation. We cannot infer a causal relationship based on an observational study.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
This statement is not justified - just because there is association between the 2 variable doesn’t mean that one is causing the other. It is possible that the relationship is the opposite - maybe being a bully is interfering with a child’s sleep. The more accurate conclusion is that there is association between the 2 variables.
1.36 Exercise and mental health. A researcher is interested in the effects of exercise on mental health and he proposes the following study: Use stratified random sampling to ensure resentative proportions of 18-30, 31-40 and 41-55 year olds from the population. Next, randomly assign half the subjects from each age group to exercise twice a week, and instruct the rest not to exercise. Conduct a mental health exam at the beginning and at the end of the study, and compare the results.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) This is an experiment
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) “Treatment group” is the part of the group that exercises and “control group” is the people who are told not to exercise.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) Yes, the blocking variable is age groups.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) No, there is no way to use a placebo in this study - we can’t make the control group believe they are exercising as well.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) Yes, this is an experiment and it can be used to establish a causal relationship and can be used to generalize populaton at large since a stratified random sample was used.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) The study seems to be reasonable, I might question the age groups used for the stratified sample. Why was that particular breakdown used? Is that the best way to break down subjects into groups?
1.48 Stats scores. Below are the final exam scores of twenty introductory statistics students. 57, 66, 69, 71, 72, 73, 74, 77, 78, 78, 79, 79, 81, 81, 82, 83, 83, 88, 89, 94 Create a box plot of the distribution of these scores.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
scores <- c(57, 66, 69, 71, 72, 73, 74, 77, 78, 78, 79, 79, 81, 81, 82, 83, 83, 88, 89, 94)
boxplot(scores, col='red')
1.50 Mix-and-match. Describe the distribution in the histograms below and match them to the box plots.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
Symmetric distribution, matches boxplot (2)
Uniform distribution, matches boxplot (3)
Right skewed distribution, matches boxplot (1)
1.56 Distributions and appropriate statistics, Part II . For each of the following, state whether you expect the distribution to be symmetric, right skewed, or left skewed. Also specify whether the mean or median would best represent a typical observation in the data, and whether the variability of observations would be best represented using the standard deviation or IQR. Explain your reasoning. (a) Housing prices in a country where 25% of the houses cost below $350,000, 50% of the houses cost below $450,000, 75% of the houses cost below $1,000,000 and there are a meaningful number of houses that cost more than $6,000,000.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) Right Skewed, median would best represent a typical observation, variability would be best described by IQR.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) Symmertic, mean would be best representation of typical observation, standard deviaiton would be best for variability.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) Left skewed, median would best represent a typical observation, variability would be best described by IQR.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) Right Skewed, median would best represent a typical observation, variability would be best described by IQR.
1.70 Heart transplants. The Stanford University Heart Transplant Study was conducted to determine whether an experimental heart transplant program increased lifespan. Each patient entering the program was designated an o
library(openintro)
## Please visit openintro.org for free statistics materials
##
## Attaching package: 'openintro'
## The following objects are masked from 'package:datasets':
##
## cars, trees
data(heartTr)
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
Mosaic plot suggeste there is a dependency between survival rate and whether the patient got the transplant. The proportion of survivers who got the transplant treatment appears to be significantly higher on the plot.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
The boxplots also suggest that heart transplant treatment is effective. All the date assiciated with survival time of patients with heart transplant shows that it is meaningfully longer than the the control group.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
mytable <- as.data.frame(table(heartTr$survived, heartTr$transplant))
MyTableControl <- mytable[which(mytable$Var2=='control'),]
MyTableTreatment <- mytable[which(mytable$Var2=='treatment'),]
MyTableTreatment$Percentage<-MyTableTreatment$Freq/sum(MyTableTreatment$Freq)*100
MyTableTreatment
## Var1 Var2 Freq Percentage
## 3 alive treatment 24 34.78261
## 4 dead treatment 45 65.21739
MyTableControl$Percentage<-MyTableControl$Freq/sum(MyTableControl$Freq)*100
MyTableControl
## Var1 Var2 Freq Percentage
## 1 alive control 4 11.76471
## 2 dead control 30 88.23529
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
88.2% of patients in control group have died
65.2% of patients in the treatment group have died
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
H0: The transplants and survival rates are independent. They have no relationship, and the difference in survival rates between the treatment and control groups is due to chance. HA: The transplants and survival rates are not independent. The difference in the survival rates between the treatment and control groups is not due to chance and heart transplant is associated with an increased chance of survival.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\) We write alive on 28 cards representing patients who were alive at the end of the study, and dead on 75 cards representing patients who were not. Then, we shuffle these cards and split them into two groups: one group of size 69 representing treatment, and another group of size 34 representing control. We calculate the diffrence between the proportion of dead cards in the treatment and control groups (treatment - control) and record this value. We repeat this 100 times to build a distribution centered at 0. Lastly, we calculate the fraction of simulations where the simulated differences in proportions are INDEPENDENT. If this fraction is low, we conclude that it is unlikely to have observed such an outcome by chance and that the null hypothesis should be rejected in favor of the alternative.
\(\color{red}{\text{Answer:}}\)
It is unlikely that the outcomes we observed were by chance. The transplant treatmnet was effective in increasing survival rate of patients.