Is the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south different from the proportion of...

Transcribed Image Text:

Is the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south different from the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west? 355 of the 514 randomly selected wildfires looked at in the south were caused by humans while 410 of the 561 randomly selected wildfires looked at the west were caused by humans. What can be concluded at the Q = 0.01 level of significance? a. For this study, we should use Select an answer b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: Select an answer Select an answer Select an answer (please enter a decimal) (Please enter a decimal) H1: Select an answer Select an answer Select an answer c. The test statistic ? = d. The p-value = e. The p-value is ? Q (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) f. Based on this, we should Select an answer the null hypothesis. g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is equal to the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is different from the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is different from the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of the 514 wildfires that were caused by humans in the south is different from the proportion of the 561 wildfires that were caused by humans in the west. Is the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south different from the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west? 355 of the 514 randomly selected wildfires looked at in the south were caused by humans while 410 of the 561 randomly selected wildfires looked at the west were caused by humans. What can be concluded at the Q = 0.01 level of significance? a. For this study, we should use Select an answer b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: Select an answer Select an answer Select an answer (please enter a decimal) (Please enter a decimal) H1: Select an answer Select an answer Select an answer c. The test statistic ? = d. The p-value = e. The p-value is ? Q (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) f. Based on this, we should Select an answer the null hypothesis. g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is equal to the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is different from the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is different from the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of the 514 wildfires that were caused by humans in the south is different from the proportion of the 561 wildfires that were caused by humans in the west.