In explosive detection research (Porrit et al., 2015), which group did very poorly (only a few dogs found explosives at all) at finding explosives after searching the abandoned schoolhouse for several weeks?
Added by Noelia P.
Step 1
The research topic is explosive detection, and the context involves dogs searching for explosives in an abandoned schoolhouse over several weeks. Show more…
Show all steps
Your feedback will help us improve your experience
Md.Daniyal Arshad and 58 other Psychology educators are ready to help you.
Ask a new question
Labs
Want to see this concept in action?
Explore this concept interactively to see how it behaves as you change inputs.
Key Concepts
Recommended Videos
Samuel recently got his first dog, and he's considering if he should pay for professional dog training. He's skeptical paying for this training is worth it, but fortunately Samuel is a statistician and friends with some researchers at the veterinary school. They randomly recruit 70 dogs to take part in the study, and a respected pet trainer in the region agrees to help train these dogs as part of the study. Prior to the study, Samuel and the vets pair off all the dogs based on both biological characteristics as well as owner characteristics. As a result, they have 35 pairs of dogs that are relatively similar. One dog in each pair is randomly chosen to receive the professional behavior training, while the other dog will not receive the training (but will still be trained by its owners). After training the dogs for two months, a second professional dog trainer is brought in to assess the obedience levels of all the dogs. Assume they are able to do so and can convert their ratings to a 0-100 point scale (treat this as being quantitative and not categorical). A 100 is a perfectly obedient dog. The second dog trainer does not know which dog received the treatment and which received the control. Professionally trained? | Pair 1 | Pair 2 | ... | Pair 35 | Mean | St Dev No | 88 | 56 | ... | 34 | 62.1 | 11.3 Yes | 97 | 52 | ... | 47 | 70.4 | 14.1 Diff (yes - no) | 9 | -4 | ... | 13 | 8.3 | 4.02 Histograms for each of the three rows of data indicates that they are reasonably close to being normally distributed. Calculate the appropriate test statistic to test the hypothesis H0 : μd = 0 vs. HA : μd > 0 if μd is the true mean difference in obedience score a dog would receive if they were professionally trained instead of being solely trained by its owners. Give your answer to two digits past the decimal point. Answer: At an α = 0.01 significance level, what's the formal conclusion to our hypothesis test and a reasonable interpretation of the conclusion to this study? Select one: a. We fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude there's evidence that professional dog training services help train dogs better than normal owners typically do. b. We fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude there's insufficient evidence that professional dog training services help train dogs better than normal owners typically do. c. We reject the null hypothesis and conclude there's evidence that professional dog training services help train dogs better than normal owners typically do. d. We reject the null hypothesis and conclude there's insufficient evidence that professional dog training services help train dogs better than normal owners typically do.
Md.Daniyal A.
Dogs Ignore an Unreliable Person A study12 investigated whether dogs change their behavior depending on whether a person displays reliable or unreliable behavior. Dogs were shown two containers, one empty and one containing a dog biscuit. An experimenter pointed to one of the two containers. If the experimenter pointed to the container with the treat on the first trial, 16 of 26 dogs followed the experimenter's cue on the second trial. However, if the experimenter misled the dog on the first trial, only 7 of 26 dogs followed the cue on the second trial. Test to see if the proportion following the cue is different depending on whether the person exhibited reliable or unreliable behavior. The standard error for the difference in proportions is $0.138 .$ Use a $5 \%$ significance level and show all details of the test.
Approximating with a Distribution
Hypothesis Tests Using Normal Distributions
The study investigated whether dogs change their behavior depending on whether a person displays reliable or unreliable behavior. Dogs were shown two containers - one empty and one containing a dog biscuit. An experimenter pointed to one of the two containers. If the experimenter pointed to the container with the treat on the first trial, 16 out of 26 dogs followed the experimenter's cue on the second trial. However, if the experimenter misled the dog on the first trial, only 7 out of 26 dogs followed the cue on the second trial. The test aims to see if the proportion of dogs following the cue is different depending on whether the person exhibited reliable or unreliable behavior. The standard error for the difference in proportions is 0.138. A 5% significance level is used. Let group A be the dogs that follow the cue from a reliable person, and let group B be the dogs that follow the cue from an unreliable person.
Sri K.
Recommended Textbooks
Psychology Openstax
Myers' Psychology for AP
Psychology
Transcript
Watch the video solution with this free unlock.
EMAIL
PASSWORD