Part 1:
1.
Interval
Type
|
Confidence
Level
|
n
|
Significance
Level
|
Z or
t?
|
Z or T
Value
| |
A
|
Two Tailed
|
90
|
45
|
0.1
|
Z test
|
1.64, -1.64
|
B
|
Two Tailed
|
95
|
12
|
0.05
|
t test
|
2.201, -2.201
|
C
|
One Tailed
|
95
|
36
|
0.05
|
Z test
|
±1.64
|
D
|
Two Tailed
|
99
|
180
|
0.01
|
Z test
|
2.57, -2.57
|
E
|
One Tailed
|
80
|
60
|
0.2
|
Z test
|
±0.84
|
F
|
One Tailed
|
99
|
23
|
0.01
|
t test
|
±2.508
|
G
|
Two Tailed
|
99
|
15
|
0.01
|
t test
|
2.977, -2.977
|
2.
A Department of the interior in Washington D.C.
estimates that the number of particular
invasive species in a certain county
(Bucks County) should number as follows (averages based on
data from the whole
state of Pennsylvania) per acre: Asian-Long Horned Beetle, 4; Emerald Ash
Borer
Beetle, 10; and Golden Nematode, 75. A
survey of 50 fields had the following results:
μ σ- Asian-Long Horned Beetle 3.2 0.73
- Emerald Ash Borer Beetle 11.7 1.3
- Golden Nematode 77 5.71
· Null Hypothesis: there is no difference between
the average amount of Asian Long Horned Beetles in the 50 field sample in Bucks
County and the average amount of Asian Long Horned Beetles in all of
Pennsylvania
·
Alternative Hypothesis: There is a difference
between the average amount of Asian Long Horned Beetles in 50 field sample in
Bucks County and the average amount of Asian Long Horned Beetles in all of
Pennsylvania.
·
A Z test will be used to determine whether or
not there is a difference between the mean of the sample species compared to
the entire state of Pennsylvania.
·
The significance level is 0.05 using a two
tailed test and a critical value of ±1.96.
·
The Z value is -7.75. Thus rejecting the null
hypothesis stating there is a difference between the average amount of Asian
Long Horned Beetles in the 50 field sample in Bucks County compared to the
average amount of Asian Long Horned Beetles in the entire state of
Pennsylvania. There are far less Asian Long Horned Beetles in the Bucks County,
compared to the entire state.
Emerald Ash Borer
Beetle
·
Null Hypothesis: there is no difference between
the average amount of Emerald Ash Borer Beetles in the 50 field sample in Bucks
County and the average amount of Emerald Ash Borer Beetles in all of
Pennsylvania
·
Alternative Hypothesis: There is a difference
between the average amount of Emerald Ash Borer Beetles in the 50 field sample
in Bucks County and the average amount of Emerald Ash Borer Beetle in all of
Pennsylvania.
·
A Z test will be used to determine whether or
not there is a difference between the mean of the sample species compared to
the entire state of Pennsylvania.
·
The significance level is 0.05 using a two
tailed test and a critical value of ±1.96.
·
The Z value is 9.25. Thus rejecting the null
hypothesis stating there is a difference between the average amount of Emerald
Ash Borer Beetles in the 50 field sample in Bucks County compared to the
average amount of Emerald Ash Borer Beetles in the entire state of
Pennsylvania. There are far more Emerald Ash Borer Beetles in Buck County compared
to the entire state.
Golden Nematode
·
Null Hypothesis: there is no difference between
the average amount of Golden Nematodes in the 50 field sample in Bucks County
and the average amount of Golden Nematodes in all of Pennsylvania
·
Alternative Hypothesis: There is a difference
between the average amount of Golden Nematode in the 50 field sample in Bucks
County and the average amount of Golden Nematode in all of Pennsylvania.
·
A Z test will be used to determine whether or
not there is a difference between the mean of the sample species compared to
the entire state of Pennsylvania.
·
The significance level is 0.05 using a two
tailed test and a critical value of ±1.96.
·
The Z value is 2.48. Thus rejecting the null
hypothesis stating there is a difference between the average amount of Golden
Nematodes in the 50 field sample in Bucks County compared to the average amount
of Golden Nematodes in the entire state of Pennsylvania. There are more Golden
Nematodes in Bucks County compared to the entire state.
3.
An exhaustive survey of all users of a wilderness
park taken in 1960 revealed that the average number of persons per party was
2.1. In a random sample of 25 parties in
1985, the average was 3.4 persons with a standard deviation of 1.32
·
Null Hypothesis: there is no difference in the
average number of persons per party in the 25 party sample in 1985 compared to
the average number of persons per party in all parties in 1960.
·
Alternative Hypothesis: there is a difference in
the average number of persons per party in the 25 party sample in 1985 compared
to the average number of persons per party in all parties in 1960.
·
A t test will be used to determine whether or
not there is a difference between the mean number of people of the sample of
1985 parties, compared to the mean number of people of the total parties in
1960.
·
The significance level is 0.05 using a one
tailed test and a critical value of 1.177.
·
The t value is 4.92. Thus rejecting the null
hypothesis stating there is a difference between the number of people per party
in the sample of 25 people in 1985 and the number of people per party in all
parties in 1960. There are significantly more people per party in 1985 compared
to the number of people per party in 1960.
Part 2:Introduction:
The perception of “Up North” that many individuals who live
in Wisconsin have is an obscure concept for individuals outside of the state of
Wisconsin. For many the idea of up north is simply viewed as the directional
component, meaning north, south, east and west are merely a direction. However,
individuals who inhabit that state of Wisconsin possess a conceptual idea of
“Up North” attaching specific characteristics to the overall meaning. Certain
characteristics connected to this perception may include forested land cover,
cottages, and also deer hunting. To determine whether or not certain
characteristics such as these truly capture the true Wisconsin meaning of “Up
North” spatial representations are required. Mapping these variables and
defining a boundary dividing north and south by Highway 29, creates a visuals
perspective of the connection between the directionality and the
characteristics that define “Up North”. Not only will spatial representations
help define a connection between distinct variables and “Up North” but will also
determine whether or not northern Wisconsin is distinctly different than
southern Wisconsin overall. Therefore hypotheses testing becomes necessary to
interpret noticeable differences. The null hypothesis stating that there is no
difference between northern and southern Wisconsin according to the observed
variables, compared to the alternative hypothesis stating that there is a
difference between northern and southern Wisconsin according to the observed
variables, must be considered.
Methodology:
In order to determine distinct differences between northern
and southern Wisconsin and establish a concept of “Up North”, a finite boundary
dividing what is northern Wisconsin and southern Wisconsin must be created.
Highway 29, running east and west through the state of Wisconsin fairly
accurately divides that state into north and south segments. After a distinct
boundary has been created, certain variables, many individuals associate with
“Up North”, can be mapped in order to identify specific correlations between
these characteristics and the actual northern part of Wisconsin. In addition to
establishing these correlations, differences between the north and south can
also be interpreted.
SCORP data, collected from the DNR, provides a variety of
characteristics unique to Wisconsin. Several of these characteristics
accurately reflect the Wisconsin perception of “Up North”. Specific data for
variables such as amount of forested land cover, number of cottages, and number
of deer gun licenses throughout the state can be mapped to display any spatial
relationships which differentiate the north from the south. Data for each of
the three variables were mapped into separate representations using a graduated
color choropleth map. These maps show a division of four classes representing
the saturation for each variable at the county level. The county level
representation of the data provides the means to identify spatial patterns in
terms of the amount of forest acreage, number of cottages, and number of deer
gun licenses.
To further identify differences between northern Wisconsin
and southern Wisconsin, statistical chi squared testing of the data for each
variable can be used in correlation with the mapped representations. Chi
squared testing gives a numeric value for each variable comparing the observed distribution
of each variable with the expected distribution. Calculating chi squared provides
a statistical measure of how the observed variables are distributed throughout
the state in respect to the expected distribution, with a significance level of
95 percent. This testing will indicate whether or not the observed variables for
forest acreage, number of cottages, and number of deer gun licenses fit the
expected distribution or if they are significantly different. Therefore, if
there is a difference in the observed data compared to the expected
distribution there is a difference between northern and southern Wisconsin in
terms of these characteristics.
Results:
Chi squared testing for forest acreage, number of cottages,
and deer gun licenses with a significance value of 95 percent produced similar
results. The outcome of the chi squared testing for all three variables was
less than 0.5. The chi squared for deer gun licenses is 0.445, the number of
cottages it is 0.482, and the amount of forest acreage it is 0.445. All three
of these values are less than 0.5 or 5 percent, indicating the observed
variables fall outside the significance value of 95 percent. Because they fall
outside the 95 percent significance value, it is clear that these factors are
not reflective of the expected distribution and there is a clear difference between
northern and southern Wisconsin in terms of these characteristics. Not only
does the chi squared testing of the data for each variable identify a
difference between the north and south, but the spatial representation of the
mapped variables portrays an identifiable difference as well.
The Map Representing the number of cottages per county
strongly reflects a greater number of cottages in the northern part of the
state. With the exception of three counties in southern Wisconsin there are less
than 2519 cottages in each county, which is significantly less than the
northern part of the state. More than 10 counties in Northern Wisconsin have
2519 cottages or more, and in Vilas and Oneida County there are over 10,000
cottages in each. The map reveals that
the known difference between the north and south is reflective of a greater
number of cottages in the north.
In addition to the number of cottages, the amount of forest
acreage in northern Wisconsin compared to southern Wisconsin is also
significantly different according to the map. Almost the entire northern part
of Wisconsin has over 226,000 acres of forest and three distinct counties have
over 781,000 acres each. The vast majority of southern Wisconsin has less than
226,000 acres and there are only a few counties in which have slightly more.
Thus, the amount of forest acreage is predominantly in the northern part of the
state which establishes a distinct difference between northern and southern
Wisconsin in terms of this specific characteristic.
The number of cottages and forest acreage have a distinct
concentration in the north, however, the map for the number of deer gun licenses
is unclear when trying to interpret where a difference occurs. Chi Square
testing for the deer gun license variable indicates there is a difference
between the amounts in northern and southern Wisconsin, however the difference
is not as apparent when the amount of deer gun licensees are mapped. According to the map there is a similar
distribution of the amount of deer gun licenses throughout the entire state of
Wisconsin. In fact there are more counties in southern Wisconsin that have over
5000 deer gun licenses than there are in northern Wisconsin. Furthermore there
are several counties in southern Wisconsin that have more than 16,500 deer gun licenses,
including Dane, Waukesha, and Brown County, where Marathon county is the only
county in Northern Wisconsin that has more than 16,500. The map represents a
fairly even distribution in the amount of deer gun licenses throughout
Wisconsin, and one could even argue there are more deer gun licenses in
Southern Wisconsin. Considering the chi squared results, indicating a
difference in deer gun licenses between the north and south, with respect to
the map the difference may be in fact there are more deer gun licenses in
southern Wisconsin.
Conclusion: Based on analysis of the results for the chi squared testing in relation to the maps of the data the Null hypothesis is rejected, stating that there is difference between the observed and expected distribution of each variables and establishing a distinct difference between northern and southern Wisconsin. The chi square test of the data for each variable has indicated a difference in the observed and expected frequency for each variable, while the spatial representation allowed for a clarification on where differences are located. Because the chi squared testing identified that there was a difference in northern and southern Wisconsin, the maps could then be easily used to interpret where in Wisconsin each variable has a greater influence.
The amount of forest acreage, number of cottages, and number
of deer gun licenses were used as variables considering their associated
perception with what many in Wisconsin refer to as “Up North”. After chi square
established an identifiable difference in these factors between northern and
southern Wisconsin, the maps displayed whether or not these factors differed in
terms of a significantly greater concentration in the north compared to the
south. Two out of the three variables displayed a map with distinctly greater
concentrations in the north. Forest acreage and number of cottages were the two
variables that had significantly greater concentrations in northern Wisconsin
compared to southern Wisconsin. The relationship between forests and cottages
with the concept of “Up North” appears to be accurate according to the results.
However the number of deer gun licenses, another characteristic that can be
associated with “Up North”, did not reflect an accurate perception.
Unlike the accurate link the other variables have with the
idea of “Up North”, the number of deer gun licenses is a characteristic of “Up
North” that did not display its statistical difference based on greater
concentrations in the north. Even though chi squared testing specified a known difference,
the map for this variable portrays a fairly even distribution of the deer gun
licenses with a slightly higher concentration in the south. When considering
both the chi square results in relation to the map, it appears that more
individuals in the southern part of Wisconsin have deer gun licenses compared
to the north. Although there are slightly more deer gun licenses in the
southern part of Wisconsin, the hunting characteristic is still an accurate
perception of “Up North” when considering the fact that often individuals
travel north to hunt. Even with the assumption that many travel from southern Wisconsin
to the northern Wisconsin to hunt, the map does not accurately reflect the
association of hunting to “Up North”.