The recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders is 12%. A warden suspects that this percent is different if the sex offender is also a drug addict. Of the 340 convicted sex offenders who were also drug addicts, 48 of them became repeat offenders. What can be concluded at the a = 0.05 level of significance? a. For this study, we should use |z-test for a population proportion v b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be Ho: P V V E V 0.12 (please enter a decimal) H : PV VE 6 0.12 (Please enter a decimal) C. The test statistic [z v = 0.0176 * (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) d. The p-value = |0.51 * (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) 2. The p-value is = v v a . Based on this, we should fail to reject vy the null hypothesis. g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... The data suggest the populaton proportion is significantly different from 12% at a = 0.05, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 12%. The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly different from 12% at a = 0.05, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 12%. The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly different from 12% at a = 0.05, so there is statistically insignificant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 12%. h. Interpret the p-value in the context of the study. There is a 22.96% chance that the percent of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders differs from 12%. If the sample proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 14% and if another 340 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed then there would be a 22.96%% chance that we would conclude either fewer than 12% of all convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders or more than 12% of all convicted sex offender drug addicts become repeat offenders. If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 12% and if another 340 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed, then there would be a 22.96% chance that either more than 14% of the 340 convicted sex offender drug addicts in the study become repeat offenders or fewer than 10% of the 340 convicted sex offender drug addicts in the study become repeat offenders. There is a 22.96% chance of a Type I error. . Interpret the level of significance in the context of the study. If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 12% and if another 340 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed then there would be a 5% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is equal to 12%. There is a 5% chance that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 12%. There is a 5% chance that Lizard People aka "Reptilians" are running the world. If the population proportion of convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is 12% and if another 340 convicted sex offender drug addicts are observed, then there would be a 5%% chance that we would end up falsely concluding that the proportion of all convicted sex offender drug addicts who become repeat offenders is different from 12%.13% of all college students volunteer their time. Is the percentage of college students who are volunteers larger for students receiving financial aid? Of the 352 randomly selected students who receive financial aid, 49 of them volunteered their time. What can be concluded at the or = 0.10 level of significance? a. For this study, we should use | z-test for a population proportion v b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: PV VE 0.13 (please enter a decimal) H1 : p v v > 0.13 (Please enter a decimal) C. The test statistic z v V 0.502 * (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) d. The p-value = (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) e. The p-value is > v v a f. Based on this, we should fail to reject vy the null hypothesis. g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... The data suggest the populaton proportion is significantly higher than 13% at ( = 0.10, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the percentage of financial aid recipients who volunteer is higher than 13%. The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly higher than 13% at a = 0.10, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the percentage of financial aid recipients who volunteer is equal to 13%. The data suggest the population proportion is not significantly higher than 13% at @ = 0.10, so there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the percentage of financial aid recipients who volunteer is higher than 13%