Still Thinking Of Assignment Help & Grades ? Book Your Assignment At The Lowest Price Now & Secure Higher Grades! CALL US +91-9872003804
Order Now
Value Assignment Help

Assignment sample solution of STAT1001 - Introduction to Statistics

 A researcher is conducting an experiment to examine the effect of three different teaching methods (A, B, and C) on student performance. The performance scores (out of 100) of students in each group are recorded as follows:

  • Method A: 85, 88, 90, 92, 86

  • Method B: 78, 82, 81, 80, 85

  • Method C: 92, 94, 96, 93, 91

Using the data provided, perform a one-way ANOVA to determine if there is a statistically significant difference in the mean performance scores between the three teaching methods.

Steps to follow:

  • State the null and alternative hypotheses.
  • Calculate the group means and overall mean.
  • Calculate the between-group variability (MSB) and within-group variability (MSW).
  • Calculate the F-statistic and compare it with the critical value from the F-distribution table.
  • Draw a conclusion based on the p-value.
  1. 1
  2. 2

Statistics Assignment Sample

Q1:

Answer :

Introduction to ANOVA

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) is a statistical technique used to compare the means of three or more groups to see if there are any statistically significant differences between them. In a one-way ANOVA, we are interested in determining whether the mean scores for the three different teaching methods differ from each other.

The steps involved in performing a one-way ANOVA are as follows:

  • State the null and alternative hypotheses.
  • Calculate the means of the groups and the overall mean.
  • Calculate the between-group variability (Mean Square Between, MSB) and within-group variability (Mean Square Within, MSW).
  • Calculate the F-statistic and compare it to the critical value to make a decision.

Step 1: State the Hypotheses

  • Null Hypothesis (H₀): There is no significant difference in the mean performance scores between the three teaching methods.
    H0:μA=μB=μCH₀: \mu_A = \mu_B = \mu_CH0​:μA​=μB​=μC​
    Where μA\mu_AμA​, μB\mu_BμB​, and μC\mu_CμC​ represent the mean performance scores of the students for teaching methods A, B, and C, respectively.

  • Alternative Hypothesis (H₁): At least one of the teaching methods leads to a significantly different mean performance score.
    H1:At least one mean is different.H₁: \text{At least one mean is different.}H1​:At least one mean is different.

We will use a significance level of α=0.05\alpha = 0.05α=0.05 to test the hypothesis.

Step 2: Calculate the Group Means and Overall Mean

 

First, we need to calculate the mean of each teaching method group and the overall mean of all students’ scores combined.

  • Mean of Method A:

Mean of A=85+88+90+92+865=4415=88.2\text{Mean of A} = \frac{85 + 88 + 90 + 92 + 86}{5} = \frac{441}{5} = 88.2Mean of A=585+88+90+92+86​=5441​=88.2

  • Mean of Method B:

Mean of B=78+82+81+80+855=4065=81.2\text{Mean of B} = \frac{78 + 82 + 81 + 80 + 85}{5} = \frac{406}{5} = 81.2Mean of B=578+82+81+80+85​=5406​=81.2

  • Mean of Method C:

Mean of C=92+94+96+93+915=4665=93.2\text{Mean of C} = \frac{92 + 94 + 96 + 93 + 91}{5} = \frac{466}{5} = 93.2Mean of C=592+94+96+93+91​=5466​=93.2

  • Overall Mean (grand mean):

Overall Mean=85+88+90+92+86+78+82+81+80+85+92+94+96+93+9115=130415=86.93\text{Overall Mean} = \frac{85 + 88 + 90 + 92 + 86 + 78 + 82 + 81 + 80 + 85 + 92 + 94 + 96 + 93 + 91}{15} = \frac{1304}{15} = 86.93Overall Mean=1585+88+90+92+86+78+82+81+80+85+92+94+96+93+91​=151304​=86.93

Step 3: Calculate the Between-Group Variability (MSB) and Within-Group Variability (MSW)

Between-Group Variability (MSB)

The between-group sum of squares (SSB) measures the variability between the group means and the overall mean. We can compute the formula for SSB as follows:

SSB=n[(XˉA−Xˉoverall)2+(XˉB−Xˉoverall)2+(XˉC−Xˉoverall)2]SSB = n \left[ (\bar{X}_A - \bar{X}_{\text{overall}})^2 + (\bar{X}_B - \bar{X}_{\text{overall}})^2 + (\bar{X}_C - \bar{X}_{\text{overall}})^2 \right]SSB=n[(XˉA​−Xˉoverall​)2+(XˉB​−Xˉoverall​)2+(XˉC​−Xˉoverall​)2]

Where nnn is the number of observations in each group (5 in this case). Using the group means and the overall mean:

SSB=5[(88.2−86.93)2+(81.2−86.93)2+(93.2−86.93)2]SSB = 5 \left[ (88.2 - 86.93)^2 + (81.2 - 86.93)^2 + (93.2 - 86.93)^2 \right]SSB=5[(88.2−86.93)2+(81.2−86.93)2+(93.2−86.93)2] SSB=5[(1.27)2+(−5.73)2+(6.27)2]SSB = 5 \left[ (1.27)^2 + (-5.73)^2 + (6.27)^2 \right]SSB=5[(1.27)2+(−5.73)2+(6.27)2] SSB=5[1.6129+32.8329+39.3129]SSB = 5 \left[ 1.6129 + 32.8329 + 39.3129 \right]SSB=5[1.6129+32.8329+39.3129] SSB=5×73.7587=368.7935SSB = 5 \times 73.7587 = 368.7935SSB=5×73.7587=368.7935

Next, we calculate the Mean Square Between (MSB):

MSB=SSBdf between=368.79353−1=368.79352=184.3968MSB = \frac{SSB}{\text{df between}} = \frac{368.7935}{3 - 1} = \frac{368.7935}{2} = 184.3968MSB=df betweenSSB​=3−1368.7935​=2368.7935​=184.3968

Within-Group Variability (MSW)

The within-group sum of squares (SSW) measures the variability within each group. The formula for SSW is:

SSW=∑i=13∑j=1n(Xij−Xˉi)2SSW = \sum_{i=1}^{3} \sum_{j=1}^{n} (X_{ij} - \bar{X}_i)^2SSW=i=1∑3​j=1∑n​(Xij​−Xˉi​)2

Where XijX_{ij}Xij​ represents each individual score and Xˉi\bar{X}_iXˉi​ represents the mean of group iii.

  • Method A (SSW for A):

SSWA=(85−88.2)2+(88−88.2)2+(90−88.2)2+(92−88.2)2+(86−88.2)2SSW_A = (85 - 88.2)^2 + (88 - 88.2)^2 + (90 - 88.2)^2 + (92 - 88.2)^2 + (86 - 88.2)^2SSWA​=(85−88.2)2+(88−88.2)2+(90−88.2)2+(92−88.2)2+(86−88.2)2 SSWA=(−3.2)2+(−0.2)2+(1.8)2+(3.8)2+(−2.2)2=10.24+0.04+3.24+14.44+4.84=32.80SSW_A = (-3.2)^2 + (-0.2)^2 + (1.8)^2 + (3.8)^2 + (-2.2)^2 = 10.24 + 0.04 + 3.24 + 14.44 + 4.84 = 32.80SSWA​=(−3.2)2+(−0.2)2+(1.8)2+(3.8)2+(−2.2)2=10.24+0.04+3.24+14.44+4.84=32.80

  • Method B (SSW for B):

SSWB=(78−81.2)2+(82−81.2)2+(81−81.2)2+(80−81.2)2+(85−81.2)2SSW_B = (78 - 81.2)^2 + (82 - 81.2)^2 + (81 - 81.2)^2 + (80 - 81.2)^2 + (85 - 81.2)^2SSWB​=(78−81.2)2+(82−81.2)2+(81−81.2)2+(80−81.2)2+(85−81.2)2 SSWB=(−3.2)2+(0.8)2+(−0.2)2+(−1.2)2+(3.8)2=10.24+0.64+0.04+1.44+14.44=26.80SSW_B = (-3.2)^2 + (0.8)^2 + (-0.2)^2 + (-1.2)^2 + (3.8)^2 = 10.24 + 0.64 + 0.04 + 1.44 + 14.44 = 26.80SSWB​=(−3.2)2+(0.8)2+(−0.2)2+(−1.2)2+(3.8)2=10.24+0.64+0.04+1.44+14.44=26.80

  • Method C (SSW for C):

SSWC=(92−93.2)2+(94−93.2)2+(96−93.2)2+(93−93.2)2+(91−93.2)2SSW_C = (92 - 93.2)^2 + (94 - 93.2)^2 + (96 - 93.2)^2 + (93 - 93.2)^2 + (91 - 93.2)^2SSWC​=(92−93.2)2+(94−93.2)2+(96−93.2)2+(93−93.2)2+(91−93.2)2 SSWC=(−1.2)2+(0.8)2+(2.8)2+(−0.2)2+(−2.2)2=1.44+0.64+7.84+0.04+4.84=14.80SSW_C = (-1.2)^2 + (0.8)^2 + (2.8)^2 + (-0.2)^2 + (-2.2)^2 = 1.44 + 0.64 + 7.84 + 0.04 + 4.84 = 14.80SSWC​=(−1.2)2+(0.8)2+(2.8)2+(−0.2)2+(−2.2)2=1.44+0.64+7.84+0.04+4.84=14.80

Thus, the total within-group sum of squares is:

SSW=SSWA+SSWB+SSWC=32.80+26.80+14.80=74.40SSW = SSW_A + SSW_B + SSW_C = 32.80 + 26.80 + 14.80 = 74.40SSW=SSWA​+SSWB​+SSWC​=32.80+26.80+14.80=74.40

Now, calculate the Mean Square Within (MSW):

MSW=SSWdf within=74.4015−3=74.4012=6.20MSW = \frac{SSW}{\text{df within}} = \frac{74.40}{15 - 3} = \frac{74.40}{12} = 6.20MSW=df within SSW​=15−374.40​=1274.40​=6.20

Step 4: Calculate the F- statistic

The F-statistic is calculated as the ratio of the between-group variability to the within-group variability:

F=MSBMSW=184.39686.20=29.7F = \frac{MSB}{MSW} = \frac{184.3968}{6.20} = 29.7F=MSWMSB​=6.20184.3968​=29.7

Step 5: Compare the F- statistic with the Critical Value

To determine if the observed F-statistic is statistically significant, we compare it with the critical value from the F-distribution table. For α=0.05\alpha = 0.05α=0.05, the degrees of freedom for between-groups (df between) is 2, and for within-groups (df within) is 12.

Using an F-distribution table or statistical software, the critical value for F at α=0.05\alpha = 0.05α=0.05, df1 = 2, and df2 = 12 is approximately 3.89.

Since the calculated F-statistic (29.7) is much greater than the critical value (3.89), we reject the null hypothesis.

Conclusion

There is enough evidence to conclude that there is a statistically significant difference in the mean performance scores between the three teaching methods (A, B, and C) at the 5% significance level. Therefore, at least one teaching method leads to a significantly different mean performance score compared to the others.