A soda manufacturer claims that its Cherry Fizz soda has more carbonation than a competitor’s Cherry Eclipse soda. Bottles of both types of soda are opened, covered with a balloon, and then shaken. The diameter of each balloon is then measured. The mean balloon diameters are 2.3 inches for the Cherry Fizz soda and 2.1 inches for the Cherry Eclipse soda. A 90 percent confidence interval to estimate the difference in mean diameters, in inches, is (−0.8,1.2). Which of the following claims is supported by the interval?

E) Because the interval contains 0, it is possible that there is no difference in mean carbonation levels.

Step-by-step explanation:

Hello!

The soda manufacturer claims that it's Cherry Fizz soda that has more carbonation than the competitor's Cherry Eclipse soda.

To test this claim they compared the carbonation by opening bottles of each soda, covered them with a balloon, and agitated the bottle to release the gas into the ballon. Later the balloon's diameter of each bottle of soda was measured.

Be the variables:

X₁: Diameter of a balloon filled with the gas of a Cherry Fizz soda bottle.

X₂: Diameter of a balloon filled with the gas of a Cherry Eclipse soda bottle.

X[bar]₁= 2.3 inches

X[bar]₂= 2.1 inches

The difference between the two means μ₁-μ₂ was estimated with a 90% CI, obtaining: [-0.8;1.2]inches

Usings 90% confidence level you can expect the interval [-0.8;1.2]inches to include the difference between the diameter of the balloons filled with the gas of the Cherry Fizz soda and the diameter of the balloons filled with the gas of the Cherry Eclipse soda.

The claims are:

A) Because 2.3 inches is larger than 2.1 inches, the manufacturer is correct, and Cherry Fizz has more carbonation.

INCORRECT, the given values are sample measures, you cannot reach any valid conclusions by simply comparing them.

B) Because the interval has more positive than negative values, Cherry Fizz has more carbonation.

INCORRECT, the confidence interval provides a range of values for the estimated parameter, it is equally probable that the parameter is closer to the lower bond, the upper bond, or in the middle of the interval.

C) Because 2.3 and 2.1 are very similar, there is no difference in the mean carbonation levels.

INCORRECT, same as in item A, you cannot reach any valid conclusion by just comparing the sample values, a propper hypothesis test is needed.

D) The interval cannot be interpreted because negative measurements are not possible.

INCORRECT, this interval vas made to estimate the difference between the two means, therefore if one value is less than the other it is possible to observe negative values.

If the CI was to estimate the value of the mean diameter of the balloons of one of the groups, then a negative measurement would be invalid.

E) Because the interval contains 0, there may be no difference in mean carbonation levels.

CORRECT

If you were to test the hypotheses

H₀: μ₁-μ₂=0

H₁: μ₁-μ₂≠0

Using a significance level, complementary to the confidence level used to construct the interval α: 0.1 you can decide whether or not the difference between population means are equal to zero or not.

If the interval contains the zero, then you do not reject the null hypotheses and there is no difference between the population means.

If the interval doesn't include the zero, then you reject the null hypothesis.

I hope this helps!

3.4 pizzas

step-by-step explanation:

given is a scatter plot showing number of pizzas sold during weeks for different issues of coupon

y represents number of pizzas sold and x number of coupons issued

y is marked verticaly and x horizontally

the trend line is given as

y =3.4x+43

this says that even when no coupon is issued pizzas sold will be 43

and rate of change of pizza sold for 1 unit of coupon = slope = 3.4

i.e. when x increases by 1 unit y increases by 3.4 units

hence for each additional coupon issued 3.4 pizzas more will be sold

2

step-by-step explanation: