Question

1. A researcher is hired to investigate the effects of a drug treatment program on subsequent recidivism of drug offenders. Recidivism is measured by a urinalysis that will yield evidence of positive or negative drug use. The researcher observes that those individuals completing an 8 week version of the program have significantly higher levels of recidivism than those individuals who were assigned to a 12 week version of the program. The researcher concludes that the four extra weeks resulted in the lower recidivism rates. Do you agree or disagree with the researchers conclusion? Why did you make the choice that you did?

2. A researcher takes a sample of 50 individuals and administers a background check to identify the number of prior arrests for each person. For whatever reason, one person is removed from the analysis and another random person is selected to replace that person. Having no additional information, what is your best guess of the number of prior arrests experienced by the replacement person? Why?

Answer 1

SOLUTION:-

1).

• The end made by the scientist isn't really pleasing.
• This is on the grounds that he infers that it is definitely a direct result of the four additional weeks (for example the most recent a month of the multi week program) which results in the lower paces of recidivism, which might be a defective end as the bringing down of recidivism in multi week program people might be credited to different elements which may have happened during the past about two months too.
• There might be a connection between's the 4 additional weeks and the lower paces of recidivism, however that may a bit much be a circumstances and logical results relationship which the scientist may finish up, as he did in the given case.

NOTE:-

As per HomeworkLib rule one question is enough.If you need remaining question also please upload it as a another question.THANK YOU. ....