Question

In: Statistics and Probability

At a gymnastics meet, three judges evaluate the balance beam performances of five gymnasts. The judges...

At a gymnastics meet, three judges evaluate the balance beam performances of five gymnasts. The judges use a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is a perfect score. A statistician wants to examine the objectivity and consistency of the judges. Assume scores are normally distributed. (You may find it useful to reference the q table.)

                                    Judge 1                        Judge 2                        Judge 3

Gymnast 1                   9.5                               8.0                               7.8

Gymnast 2                   9.5                               9.5                               9.2

Gymnast 3                   9.1                               8.4                               7.4

Gymnast 4                   7.9                               8.2                               8.6

Gymnast 5                   9.3                               7.9                               9.1

a-1. Construct an ANOVA table. (Round intermediate calculations to at least 4 decimal places. Round "SS", "MS", "p-value" to 4 decimal places and "F" to 3 decimal places.)

ANOVA

Source of Variation                 SS                    df                    MS                  F                      p-value

Rows                                   _______          ______             ______           ______             _______

Columns                              _______          ______             ______           ______             _______

Error                                    _______          ______             ______           ______             _______

Total                                    _______           ______

a-2. At the 5% significance level, can you conclude that average scores differ by judge?

  • Yes, since the p-value for judge is less than significance level.
  • Yes, since the p-value for judge is greater than significance level.
  • No, since the p-value for judge is less than significance level.
  • No, since the p-value for judge is less than significance level.

a-3. Can you conclude that the judges seem inconsistent with their scoring?

  • No
  • Yes

b. At the 5% significance level, can you conclude that average scores differ by gymnast?

  • No, since the p-value for gymnast is greater than significance level.
  • No, since the p-value for gymnast is less than significance level.
  • Yes, since the p-value for gymnast is greater than significance level.
  • Yes, since the p-value for gymnast is less than significance level.

c. If average scores differ by gymnast, use Tukey’s HSD method at the 5% significance level to determine which gymnasts’ performances differ. (Negative values should be indicated by a minus sign. Round intermediate calculations to at least 4 decimal places. Round your answers to 2 decimal places.)

Population Mean Difference              Confidence Interval    Does the mean score differ at the 5%

                                                                                                            Significance level?

µ1-µ2                                                  [            ,           ]

µ1-µ3                                                  [            ,           ]

µ1-µ4                                                  [            ,           ]

µ1-µ5                                                  [            ,           ]

µ2-µ3                                                  [            ,           ]

µ2-µ4                                                  [            ,           ]

µ2-µ5                                                  [            ,           ]

µ3-µ4                                                  [            ,           ]

µ3-µ5                                                  [            ,           ]

µ4-µ5                                                  [            ,           ]

Solutions

Expert Solution

MINTAB used

a-1. Construct an ANOVA table. (Round intermediate calculations to at least 4 decimal places. Round "SS", "MS", "p-value" to 4 decimal places and "F" to 3 decimal places.)

Analysis of Variance

Source

DF

SS

MS

F-Value

P-Value

Gymnast

4

2.7493

0.6873

1.702

0.2418

Judge

2

1.4093

0.7047

1.745

0.2350

Error

8

3.2307

0.4038

Total

14

7.3893



a-2. At the 5% significance level, can you conclude that average scores differ by judge?

  • No, since the p-value for judge is greater than significance level.

a-3. Can you conclude that the judges seem inconsistent with their scoring?

  • No

b. At the 5% significance level, can you conclude that average scores differ by gymnast?

  • No, since the p-value for gymnast is greater than significance level.

c. If average scores differ by gymnast, use Tukey’s HSD method at the 5% significance level to determine which gymnasts’ performances differ. (Negative values should be indicated by a minus sign. Round intermediate calculations to at least 4 decimal places. Round your answers to 2 decimal places.)

Tukey Simultaneous Tests for Differences of Means

Difference
of Gymnast
Levels

Difference
of Means

SE of
Difference

Simultaneous
95% CI

T-Value

Adjusted
P-Value

2 - 1

0.967

0.519

(-0.83, 2.76)

1.86

0.405

3 - 1

-0.133

0.519

(-1.93, 1.66)

-0.26

0.999

4 - 1

-0.200

0.519

(-1.99, 1.59)

-0.39

0.994

5 - 1

0.333

0.519

(-1.46, 2.13)

0.64

0.963

3 - 2

-1.100

0.519

(-2.89, 0.69)

-2.12

0.298

4 - 2

-1.167

0.519

(-2.96, 0.63)

-2.25

0.254

5 - 2

-0.633

0.519

(-2.43, 1.16)

-1.22

0.741

4 - 3

-0.067

0.519

(-1.86, 1.73)

-0.13

1.000

5 - 3

0.467

0.519

(-1.33, 2.26)

0.90

0.889

5 - 4

0.533

0.519

(-1.26, 2.33)

1.03

0.836

Individual confidence level = 99.14%

Tukey Simultaneous Tests for Differences of Means

Difference
of Means

Difference
of Means

Simultaneous
95% CI

Significance

µ1-µ2                                                 

-0.967

(-2.76, 0.83)

No

µ1-µ3                                                 

0.133

(-1.66, 1.93)

No

µ1-µ4                                                 

0.200

(-1.59, 1.99)

No

µ1-µ5                                                 

-0.333

(-2.13, 1.46)

No

µ2-µ3                                                 

1.100

(-0.69, 2.89)

No

µ2-µ4                                                 

1.167

(-0.63, 2.96)

No

µ2-µ5                                                 

0.633

(-1.16, 2.43)

No

µ3-µ4                                                 

0.067

(-1.73, 1.86)

No

µ3-µ5                                                 

-0.467

(-2.26, 1.33)

No

µ4-µ5                                                 

-0.533

(-2.33, 1.26)

No


Related Solutions

At a gymnastics meet, three judges evaluate the balance beam performances of five gymnasts. The judges...
At a gymnastics meet, three judges evaluate the balance beam performances of five gymnasts. The judges use a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is a perfect score. A statistician wants to examine the jobjectivity and consistency of the judges. Assume scores are normally distrbuted. Judge 1 Judge 2 Judge 3 Gymnast 1 8.0 8.5 8.2 Gymnast 2 9.5 9.2 9.7 Gymnast 3 7.3 7.5 7.7 Gymnast 4 8.3 8.7 8.5 Gymnast 5 8.8 9.2 9.0 At the 1%...
At a gymnastics meet, three judges evaluate the balance beam performances of five gymnasts. The judges...
At a gymnastics meet, three judges evaluate the balance beam performances of five gymnasts. The judges use a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is a perfect score. A statistician wants to examine the objectivity and consistency of the judges. Assume scores are normally distributed. (You may find it useful to reference the q table.) Judge 1 Judge 2 Judge 3 Gymnast 1 7.9 8.7 7.6 Gymnast 2 6.5 7.8 8.6 Gymnast 3 7.8 7.7 7.8 Gymnast 4 9.4...
Suppose you wanted to evaluate the performance of the three judges in Smallville, Texas: Judge Adams,...
Suppose you wanted to evaluate the performance of the three judges in Smallville, Texas: Judge Adams, Judge Brown, and Judge Carter. Over a three-year period in Smallville, Judge Adams saw 26% of the cases, Judge Brown saw 33% of the cases, and Judge Carter saw the remainder of the cases. 3% of Judge Adams’ cases were appealed, 6% of Judge Brown’s cases were appealed, and 9% of Judge Carter’s cases were appealed. (See the case problem on pages 216-218 of...
Suppose you wanted to evaluate the performance of the three judges in Smallville, Texas: Judge Adams,...
Suppose you wanted to evaluate the performance of the three judges in Smallville, Texas: Judge Adams, Judge Brown, and Judge Carter. Over a three-year period in Smallville, Judge Adams saw 26% of the cases, Judge Brown saw 34% of the cases, and Judge Carter saw the remainder of the cases. 3% of Judge Adams’ cases were appealed, 6% of Judge Brown’s cases were appealed, and 9% of Judge Carter’s cases were appealed. Given the judge in a case from this...
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT