STAT_12D_Practice Score: 7.9/11 5/7 answered Question 1 Questions 1-5: People often use the Internet to find health-related information. Two popular sources are WebMD and Wikipedia. Researchers were interested in comparing the readability of the health-related pages on these two sites. ' They measured readability using the Flesch reading ease score, which is based on properties such as sentence length and the number of syllables in the words used. A higher score indicates easier reading. (You can find more information about the Flesch reading ease score at https://yoast.com/flesch-reading-ease-score/ D.) The researchers determined the reading ease scores for random samples of general health-related pages from each site. They reported that for the sample of 59 pages from Wikipedia, the mean reading ease score was 28.5 and the sample standard deviation was 14.3. For the sample of 60 pages from WebMD, the mean reading ease score was 45.2 and the sample standard deviation was 19.8. In Questions 1-5, you will use this information to estimate the difference in mean reading ease scores between general health-related pages from Wikipedia and general health-related pages from WebMD using a 95% confidence interval. "Nowrouzi, B., Gohar, B., Nowrouzi-Kia, B., Garbaczewska, M., & Brewster, K. (2015, April 1). An examination of health, medical, and nutritional information on the Internet: A comparative study of Wikipedia, WebMD, and the Mayo Clinic Websites. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 39(1). https://www.canadianjournalofdiabetes.com/article/S1499-2671(15)00301-9/fulltext [ Score on last try: 1 of 1 pts. See Details for more. > Next question What are the populations of interest for this study? The 59 pages from Wikipedia and the 60 pages from WebMD used in the study All general health-related pages on Wikipedia and all general health-related pages on WebMD O All health-related web pages on the Internet O People who use the Internet to find health-related information and people who do not use the Internet to find health-related informationQuestion 2 Questions 1-5: People often use the Internet to find health-related information. Two popular sources are WebMD and Wikipedia. Researchers were interested in comparing the readability of the health-related pages on these two sites.' They measured readability using the Flesch reading ease score, which is based on properties such as sentence length and the number of syllables in the words used. A higher score indicates easier reading. (You can find more information about the Flesch reading ease score at https://yoast.com/flesch-reading-ease-score/ [.) The researchers determined the reading ease scores for random samples of general health-related pages from each site. They reported that for the sample of 59 pages from Wikipedia, the mean reading ease score was 28.5 and the sample standard deviation was 14.3. For the sample of 60 pages from WebMD, the mean reading ease score was 45.2 and the sample standard deviation was 19.8. In Questions 1-5, you will use this information to estimate the difference in mean reading ease scores between general health-related pages from Wikipedia and general health-related pages from WebMD using a 95% confidence interval. 'Nowrouzi, B., Gohar, B., Nowrouzi-Kia, B., Garbaczewska, M., & Brewster, K. (2015, April 1). An examination of health, medical, and nutritional information on the Internet: A comparative study of Wikipedia, WebMD, and the Mayo Clinic Websites. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 39(1). https://www.canadianjournalofdiabetes.com/article/S1499-2671(15)00301-9/fulltext _ Score on last try: 0.83 of 1 pts. See Details for more. > Next question If Sample 1 is the sample from Wikipedia and Sample 2 is the sample from WebMD, use the information given to complete the following table. Group Group 1 (Wikipedia) Group 2 (WebMD) Sample size 655! X 0 Sample mean reading ease score 28.5 45.2 6 Sample standard deviation 14.3 06 19.8 ofQuestion 3 Questions 1-5: People often use the Internet to find health-related information. Two popular sources are WebMD and Wikipedia. Researchers were interested in comparing the readability of the health-related pages on these two sites. ' They measured readability using the Flesch reading ease score, which is based on properties such as sentence length and the number of syllables in the words used. A higher score indicates easier reading. (You can find more information about the Flesch reading ease score at https://yoast.com/flesch-reading-ease-score/ [.) The researchers determined the reading ease scores for random samples of general health-related pages from each site. They reported that for the sample of 59 pages from Wikipedia, the mean reading ease score was 28.5 and the sample standard deviation was 14.3. For the sample of 60 pages from WebMD, the mean reading ease score was 45.2 and the sample standard deviation was 19.8. In Questions 1-5, you will use this information to estimate the difference in mean reading ease scores between general health-related pages from Wikipedia and general health-related pages from WebMD using a 95% confidence interval. Nowrouzi, B., Gohar, B., Nowrouzi-Kia, B., Garbaczewska, M., & Brewster, K. (2015, April 1). An examination of health, medical, and nutritional information on the Internet: A comparative study of Wikipedia, WebMD, and the Mayo Clinic Websites. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 39(1). https://www.canadianjournalofdiabetes.com/article/S1499-2671(15)00301-9/fulltext [ Score on last try: 1 of 1 pts. See Details for more. > Next question What assumptions/conditions do you need to think about before using the data from this study to construct a two-sample t confidence interval for the difference in mean reading ease scores between general health-related pages from Wikipedia and general health-related pages from WebMD? Select all that apply. The samples should be independent random samples from the populations of interest. The distribution of the reading ease scores for each of the two populations should be approximately normal or the sample sizes should be large. O None of the aboveQuestion 4 Questions 1-5: People often use the Internet to find health-related information. Two popular sources are WebMD and Wikipedia. Researchers were interested in comparing the readability of the health-related pages on these two sites. ' They measured readability using the Flesch reading ease score, which is based on properties such as sentence length and the number of syllables in the words used. A higher score indicates easier reading. (You can find more information about the Flesch reading ease score at https://yoast.com/flesch-reading-ease-score/ [.) The researchers determined the reading ease scores for random samples of general health-related pages from each site. They reported that for the sample of 59 pages from Wikipedia, the mean reading ease score was 28.5 and the sample standard deviation was 14.3. For the sample of 60 pages from WebMD, the mean reading ease score was 45.2 and the sample standard deviation was 19.8. In Questions 1-5, you will use this information to estimate the difference in mean reading ease scores between general health-related pages from Wikipedia and general health-related pages from WebMD using a 95% confidence interval. Nowrouzi, B., Gohar, B., Nowrouzi-Kia, B., Garbaczewska, M., & Brewster, K. (2015, April 1). An examination of health, medical, and nutritional information on the Internet: A comparative study of Wikipedia, WebMD, and the Mayo Clinic Websites. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 39(1) https://www.canadianjournalofdiabetes.com/article/S1499-2671(15)00301-9/fulltext [ Score on last try: 0.67 of 1 pts. See Details for more. > Next question You can retry this question below Is it reasonable to proceed with a two-sample t confidence interval? Fill in the blanks. Yes , because the samples are independent and random. The sample sizes are 59 and 60, which are both greater than 28.5 x. Calculator Submit QuestionQuestion 5 Questions 1-5: People often use the Internet to find health-related information. Two popular sources are WebMD and Wikipedia. Researchers were interested in comparing the readability of the health-related pages on these two sites. ' They measured readability using the Flesch reading ease score, which is based on properties such as sentence length and the number of syllables in the words used. A higher score indicates easier reading. (You can find more information about the Flesch reading ease score at https://yoast.com/flesch-reading-ease-score/ [.) The researchers determined the reading ease scores for random samples of general health-related pages from each site. They reported that for the sample of 59 pages from Wikipedia, the mean reading ease score was 28.5 and the sample standard deviation was 14.3. For the sample of 60 pages from WebMD, the mean reading ease score was 45.2 and the sample standard deviation was 19.8. In Questions 1-5, you will use this information to estimate the difference in mean reading ease scores between general health-related pages from Wikipedia and general health-related pages from WebMD using a 95% confidence interval. Nowrouzi, B., Gohar, B., Nowrouzi-Kia, B., Garbaczewska, M., & Brewster, K. (2015, April 1). An examination of health, medical, and nutritional information on the Internet: A comparative study of Wikipedia, WebMD, and the Mayo Clinic Websites. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 39(1). https://www.canadianjournalofdiabetes.com/article/S1499-2671(15)00301-9/fulltext [ Score on last try: 3 of 3 pts. See Details for more. > Next question Use the DCMP Compare Two Population Means tool at https://dcmathpathways.shinyapps.io/2sample mean/ D. Part A: Calculate a 95% confidence interval for the difference in mean reading ease scores between general health-related pages from Wikipedia and general health-related pages from WebMD. Hint (-22.97,-10.43)Part A: Calculate a 95% confidence interval for the difference in mean reading ease scores between general health-related pages from Wikipedia and general health-related pages from WebMD. Hint (-22.97,-10.43) Part B: Interpret the confidence interval in the context of this question. Fill in the blanks. I am 95 % confident that the actual difference in mean reading ease scores between general health-related pages from Wikipedia and general health-related pages from WebMD is between -22.9 of and - 10.4: of . Part C: What does the confidence interval tell you about how the mean reading ease scores compare for the two websites? Remember that higher reading scores indicate easier reading. Hint Edit Insert Formats . B I U X X A Ay Here the entire confidence Interval is Negative for the mean difference in scores. So this means that we are 95% confident that the Reading score for Wikipedia is less as compared to webMD which basically means that the Reading is much easier in webMD as compared to Wikipedia. Calculator Submit QuestionSTAT_12D_Practice Score: 7.9.111 5/7 answered 0 Question 6 V Questions 6 and 7: In a study designed to explore the impact of tness trackers for people who are trying to lose weight, study participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups. All of the study participants were interested in losing weight.2 3 The participants assigned to Group 1 (Self-Monitor Group) were given access to a website where they could self-monitor their physical activity and diets. The participants assigned to Group 2 (Fitness Tracker Group) were given wearable fitness trackers that interfaced with a website to automatically track their physical activity and monitor their diets The researchers conducting this study were interested in comparing the mean weight loss between people who did not use tness trackers and people who did use fitness trackers. The following summary statistics show the weight loss of the participants after two years. Weight loss was measured in kilograms (kg). One kilogram is about 2.2 pounds. \" Self-Monitor Group Fitness Tracker Group e_ Sample mean weight loss Sample standard deviation ZReynolds, G. (2016, September 20). Activiw trackers may undermine weightless e'orts. The New York Times. https:/rwww.nytimes.coml2016/09/27fwelIlactivity-trackers-mayundermineweight-loss-efforts.html 3Jakicic,]. M., Davis, K. K., Rogers, R.J., King, W. C., Marcus, M. D., Helsel, D., Rickman, A. D., Wahed, A. S., & Belle, S. H. (2016, September 20). Effect of wearable technology combined with a lifestyle intervention on long-term weight loss: The IDEA randomized clinical trial.jAMA, 316(11)11611171. DOI:10.1001!jama.2016.12858 Score on last try: 0.4 of 1 pts. See Details for more. > Next question You can retry this question below If the assumptions/conditions are met, a twosample t condence interval could be used to estimate the difference in mean weight loss between people who did not use fitness trackers and people who did use tness trackers. Are the assumptions/conditions met? Fill in the blanks. Yes v V a\" , because the participants were v V c' randomly assigned to the study groups and the sample sizes are 22.1 x and , which are both greater than E Calculator Question 7 Questions 6 and 7: In a study designed to explore the impact of fitness trackers for people who are trying to lose weight, study participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups. All of the study participants were interested in losing weight. The participants assigned to Group 1 (Self-Monitor Group) were given access to a website where they could self-monitor their physical activity and diets. The participants assigned to Group 2 (Fitness Tracker Group) were given wearable fitness trackers that interfaced with a website to automatically track their physical activity and monitor their diets. The researchers conducting this study were interested in comparing the mean weight loss between people who did not use fitness trackers and people who did use fitness trackers. The following summary statistics show the weight loss of the participants after two years. Weight loss was measured in kilograms (kg). One kilogram is about 2.2 pounds. Group Self-Monitor Group Fitness Tracker Group Sample size 170 181 Sample mean weight loss 5.9 kg 3.5 kg Sample standard deviation 3.5 kg 6.3 kg 2 Reynolds, G. (2016, September 20). Activity trackers may undermine weight loss efforts. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/27/well/activity-trackers-may-undermine-weight-loss-efforts.html 3jakicic, J. M., Davis, K. K., Rogers, R. J., King, W. C., Marcus, M. D., Helsel, D., Rickman, A. D., Wahed, A. S., & Belle, S. H. (2016, September 20). Effect of wearable technology combined with a lifestyle intervention on long-term weight loss: The IDEA randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 316(11) 1161-1171. DOI:10.1001/jama.2016.12858 Score on last try: 1 of 3 pts. See Details for more. You can retry this question below Use the DCMP Compare Two Population Means tool at https://dcmathpathways.shinyapps.io/2sample mean/D. Part A: Calculate a 90% confidence interval for the difference in weight loss between people who did not use fitness trackers and people who did use fitness trackers.Part A: Calculate a 90% condence interval for the difference in weight loss between people who did not use tness trackers and people who did use fitness trackers. Part B: Interpret the confidence interval in the context of this question. Fill in the blanks. I am % confident that the actual difference in mean weight loss between people who self- monitor and people who use fitness trackers is between and kilograms. Part C: An article in The New York Times describing this study has the title "Activity Trackers May Undermine Weight Loss Efforts." Is your confidence interval consistent with this headline? Yes; based on the confidence interval, it looks like the mean weight loss for people who use tness trackers to monitor activity and diet is less than the mean weight loss for people who just self-monitor. O No; based on the condence interval, it does not look like the mean weight loss for people who use fitness trackers to monitor activity and diet is less than the mean weight loss for people who just self-monitor. 0 Yes; based on the confidence interval, it looks like the mean weight loss for people who use tness trackers only is more than the mean weight loss for people whojust self-monitor. O No; based on the condence interval, it does not look like the mean weight loss for people who use fitness trackers only is more than the mean weight loss for people who just self- monitor. do\" E Calculator