Question

7 points) From previous studies, it has been generally believed that Northern Hemisphere icebergs have a mean depth of 270 meters and a standard deviation of 20 meters. An environmental ist has suggested that global warming has caused icebergs to have greater depth. A team of scientists visiting the Northern Hemisphere observed a random sample of 41 icebergs. The depth of the base of the iceberg below the surface was carefully measured for each and the sample mean and standard deviation were calculated. Parta) Which of the following is/are the parameter(s) in the context of this problem? (Select all that apply) LA 41 B. The mean depth (in m) of the 41 icebergs in the study C. The mean depth (in m) of all Northern Hemisphere icebergs. D. The variance of the depths (in m2) of all Northern Hemisphere icebergs. DE. None of the above Part b) What would your null hypothesis be for the hypothesis test to be conducted? The mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs is 270 meters now. The mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs is greater than 270 meters now. The mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs is smaller than 270 meters now. The mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs is different from 270 meters now. The mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs used to be 270 meters The mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs used to be greater than 270 meters. The mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs used to be smaller than 270 meters. The mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs used to be different from 270 meters. Part c) You would take the alternative hypothesis to be: one-sided, right-tailed. two-sided. one-sided, left-tailed it does not matter whether we take a one-sided or two-sided alternative. Part d) Suppose that, based on data collected, you reject the null hypothesis. Which of the following could you conclude? There is sufficient evidence to suggest that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has increased. There is sufficient evidence to suggest that the mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs has not changed. There is sufficient evidence to suggest that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere iceberos has decreased. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that the mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs has not changed There is insufficient evidence to suggest that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has increased. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has decreased. Parte) Suppose that, based on data collected, you decide that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has increased. it is possible that you are making a Type I error. it is possible that you are making a Type Il error. it is certainly correct that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has increased. it is certainly incorrect that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has increased. there must have been a problem with the way the sample was obtained. Part 1) Suppose that, based on the data collected, you obtain a P-value of 0.04. This means the sample of icebergs are relatively greater in depth, if indeed the true mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs is 270 meters now. there is a 4% chance that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has increased. there is a 4% chance that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has decreased. the probability of the mean depth of icebergs measuring 270 meters, or greater is 0.04, if indeed the true mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs is 270 meters now. the probability of the mean depth of icebergs measuring 270 meters, or smaller is 0.04, if indeed the true mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs is 270 meters now. the sample of icebergs are relatively smaller in depth, if indeed the true mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs is 270 meters now. Part g) Based on the P-value that was obtained, you would (Select all that apply): DA. fail to reject the null hypothesis at all. B. neither reject nor accept the null hypothesis C. reject the null hypothesis at a = 0.1 level of significance D. believe the null hypothesis is true. E. reject the null hypothesis at = 0.05 level of significance F. None of the above Note You can earn nertial dit on this hiem

Answer 1

Answer:

a)   parameter(s) of interest with respect to the new investigation here-

B.. The mean depth (in m) of the 41 icebergs in the study.

F. The mean depth (in m) of all Northern Hemisphere iceberg

b) In testing a hypothesis about a parameter of interest, your null hypothesis would be-

The mean depth of the Northern Hemisphere icebergs is 270 meters now.

( H0:
u= 270
, H1:
μ2 270
)

c)  c) You would take the alternative hypothesis to be-

  one-sided, right-tailed. (   H1: )

μ2 270

d) Suppose that, based on data collected, you reject the null hypothesis.

There is sufficient evidence to suggest that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has increased due to global warming.

e) Suppose that, based on data collected, you decide that the mean depth of Northern Hemisphere icebergs has increased due to global warming.
it is possible that you are making a Type I error.

( Type I error is rejectin null hypotjesis when it is true)

** Sorry as per HomeworkLib policy we can solve only 4 questions a time.

NOTE:: I HOPE YOUR HAPPY WITH MY ANSWER....***PLEASE SUPPORT ME WITH YOUR RATING...

***PLEASE GIVE ME "LIKE"...ITS VERY IMPORTANT FOR ME NOW....PLEASE SUPPORT ME ....THANK YOU