A magazine reported that at the top 50 business schools in a region, students studied an average of 17.6 hours. We are interested in finding evidence that the average amount of hours is different from 17.6 hours. Which of the following is an example of a type II error?
/
n Tydskrif het beweer dat by die top 50 sake skole in ‘n streek, die studente ‘n gemiddeld van 17.6 ure studeer. Ons stel belang om bewyse te vind dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid ure verskil van 17.6 ure. Watter van die volgende is ‘n voorbeeld van ‘n tipe II fout?

Question

A magazine reported that at the top 50 business schools in a region, students studied an average of 17.6 hours. We are interested in finding evidence that the average amount of hours is different from 17.6 hours. Which of the following is an example of a type II error? 
 / 
 n Tydskrif het beweer dat by die top 50 sake skole in ‘n streek, die studente ‘n gemiddeld van 17.6 ure studeer. Ons stel belang om bewyse te vind dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid ure verskil van 17.6 ure. Watter van die volgende is ‘n voorbeeld van ‘n tipe II fout?

Accepted Answer

There is not sufficient evidence that the average amount of hours is different from 17.6 hours, given that the average amount really is different from 17.6 hours. (Do not reject the null hypothesis given that the null hypothesis is false) 
 / 
 Daar is nie genoegsame getuienis dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid ure verskil van 17.6 ure nie, gegee dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid werklik verskil van 17.6 ure. (Verwerp nie die nulhipotese gegee dat die nulhipotese vals is)/

Answer

There is sufficient evidence that the average amount of hours is different from 17.6 hours, given that the average amount really is equal to 17.6 hours. (Reject the null hypothesis given that the null hypothesis is true) 
 / 
 Daar is genoegsame getuienis dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid ure verskil van 17.6 ure gegee, dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid werklik 17.6 ure is.  (Verwerp die nulhipotese gegee dat die nulhipotese waar is) /

Answer

There is sufficient evidence that the average amount of hours is different from 17.6 hours, given that the average amount really is different from 17.6 hours. (Reject the null hypothesis given that the null hypothesis is false) 
 / 
 Daar is genoegsame getuienis dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid ure verskil van 17.6 ure gegee, dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid werklik verskil van 17.6 ure.  (Verwerp die nulhipotese gegee dat die nulhipotese vals is)

Answer

There is not sufficient evidence that the average amount of hours is different from 17.6 hours, given that the average amount really is equal to 17.6 hours. (Do not reject the null hypothesis given that the null hypothesis is true) 
 / 
 Daar is nie genoegsame getuienis dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid ure verskil van 17.6 ure nie, gegee dat die gemiddelde hoeveelheid werklik 17.6 ure is.  (Verwerp nie die nulhipotese gegee dat die nulhipotese waar is)

Crowdly

A magazine reported that at the top 50 business schools in a region, students st...

Хочете миттєвий доступ до всіх перевірених відповідей на emslearn.sun.ac.za?