1. A poll of 700 persons attending the Taste of Chicago showed that 455 persons, 65% of the sample, believed that the food was overpriced. It is estimated that 1,250,000 persons attend the Taste. Statistics suggest that, although 65% plus or minus 5% of attendees believe that the food is overpriced, the Taste is a popular event. The raw data of the study is (are)
A. 700 persons, 455 persons.
B. 1,250,000 persons, 700 persons, 455 persons.
C. (60%, 70%).
is it B
2. A homeowner put a brand-name fertilizer/weed killer on half of his lawn and a generic fertilizer/weed killer on the other half. After three weeks, the generic side had 1 weed per square meter, the other side 1.7 weeds per square meter. The generic side required two mowings in the 3 weeks, the brand-name side one. The homeowner concluded that the generic was superior to the brand-name. Determine which evaluation guideline applies best in questioning the results of the described study.
A. Consider possible confounding variables.
B. Consider the type of study.
C. Consider the source.
is it C
1. The correct answer is A. The raw data of the study is 700 persons attending the Taste of Chicago and 455 persons who believed that the food was overpriced. This information is provided in the question.
To arrive at this answer, you need to analyze the information given in the question. It states that a poll was conducted among 700 persons attending the Taste of Chicago, and 65% of them believed that the food was overpriced. This translates to 65% of 700, which is 455 persons.
2. The correct answer is A. The evaluation guideline that applies best in questioning the results of the described study is to consider possible confounding variables.
To arrive at this answer, you need to analyze the information provided in the question. The homeowner concluded that the generic fertilizer/weed killer was superior to the brand-name based on the fact that the generic side had fewer weeds and required fewer mowings. However, it is important to consider other factors that may have influenced these results. Confounding variables could include factors such as weather conditions, soil composition, or maintenance practices. By considering these possible confounding variables, you can take a more comprehensive approach in evaluating the validity of the homeowner's conclusion.
1. The raw data of the study is A. 700 persons, 455 persons.
2. The evaluation guideline that applies best in questioning the results of the described study is A. Consider possible confounding variables.