A recent newspaper article claims that 76% of car accidents involve some evidence of distracted driving. A police officer questions this claim, and pulls a random sample of 59 accident reports. If 43 of them involve distracted driving, is this enough evidence to show that the proportion of car accidents involve some evidence of distracted driving is significantly different from than reported by the newspaper? (Use =0.025)

1. For this study, we should use Select an answer Confidence Interval for a Population Proportion Chi-Square Test for Goodness of Fit Hypothesis Test for a Population Mean Given Statistics Confidence Interval for a Population Mean Given Data One-Way ANOVA Chi-Square Test for Independence Hypothesis Test for a Population Proportion Two Dependent Sample Means Comparison Given Data Hypothesis Test for a Population Mean Given Data Confidence Interval for a Population Mean Given Statistics Two Independent Proportions Comparison Two Independent Sample Means Comparison Given Statistics Two Independent Sample Means Comparison Given Data
2. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: H0H0: ? p Select an answer = < > (please enter a decimal) H1H1: ? p Select an answer > < = (Please enter a decimal)
3. The test statistic = (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.)
4. The p-value = (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.)
5. The p-value is ? >
6. Based on this, we should Select an answer reject accept fail to reject the null hypothesis.
7. As such, the final conclusion is that ...
   • The sample data suggest that the populaton proportion is significantly different from 76% at = 0.025, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of car accidents involve some evidence of distracted driving is different from 76%
   • The sample data suggest that the population proportion is not significantly different from 76% at = 0.025, so there is not sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of car accidents involve some evidence of distracted driving is different from 76%.