# Question

Marilyn vos Savant writes a column for Parade magazine to which readers send questions, often puzzlers or questions with a twist. In the April 28, 1996, column, a reader asked, “A company decided to expand, so it opened a factory generating 455 jobs. For the 70 white-collar positions, 200 males and 200 females applied. Of the people who applied, 20% of the females and only 15% of the males were hired. Of the 400 males applying for the blue-collar positions, 75% were hired. Of the 100 females applying, 85% of were hired. A federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforcement official noted that many more males were hired than females, and decided to investigate. Responding to charges of irregularities in hiring, the company president denied any discrimination, pointing out that in both the white-collar and blue collar fields, the percentage of female applicants hired was greater than it was for males. But the government official produced his own statistics, which showed that a female applying for a job had a 58% chance of being denied employment while male applicants had only a 45% denial rate. As the current law is written, this constituted a violation. . . . Can you explain how two opposing statistical outcomes are reached from the same raw data?”

a. Construct two contingency tables giving counts relating gender to whether hired (yes or no), one table for white-collar jobs and one table for blue-collar jobs.

b. Construct a single contingency table for gender and whether hired, combining all 900 applicants into one table. Verify that the percentages not hired are as quoted above by the government official.

c. Comparing the data in the tables constructed in parts a and b, explain why this is an example of Simpson’s paradox.

a. Construct two contingency tables giving counts relating gender to whether hired (yes or no), one table for white-collar jobs and one table for blue-collar jobs.

b. Construct a single contingency table for gender and whether hired, combining all 900 applicants into one table. Verify that the percentages not hired are as quoted above by the government official.

c. Comparing the data in the tables constructed in parts a and b, explain why this is an example of Simpson’s paradox.

## Answer to relevant Questions

You have done a regression analysis for the catalog sales company you work for, using monthly data for the last year on y = total sales in the month and x = number of catalogs mailed in preceding month. You are asked to ...a. Find the approximate margin of error when n = 1. b. Show the two possible percentage outcomes you can get with a single observation. Explain why the result in part a means that with only a single observation, you have ...In Example 4, a random drawing was held to select the winners of the football tickets. Organizers randomly chose two numbers from a collection of slips of paper numbered 1 through 60. Using the Table of Random Digits, begin ...Some southern states in the United States have wrestled with the issue of a state flag that is sensitive to African Americans and not divisive. Suppose a survey asks, “Do you oppose the present state flag that contains the ...Give an example of a survey that would suffer from a. Sampling bias due to the sampling design b. Sampling bias due to under coverage c. Response bias d. Non-response biasPost your question

0