Suppose that an individual has strong social convictions favoring companies that use "green" production techniques to preserve the environment.  Then a particularly attractive choice for them in their long-tern investments would be

Junk bonds have

If an investor wants a mutual fund that contains both bonds and stocks, the investor will seek a

Traditional marketing method of sending millions of customers the same advertisement is getting out of date as social media and mobile technologies enable us to communicate with each of the millions of customers and if necessary we can create one million different advertisements (I know, this is an extreme case but it really is possible to do this), customizing each advertisement to the individual consumer’s age, gender, lifestyle, culture, income level, etc. Pick any product or service and create two different advertisements involving retired people versus young single working females in your home country. Then create similarly two advertisements for a second country. Your student numbers last digit on the right will determine your second country. ( 1 China, 2 Korea, 3 Japan, 4 Italy, 5 Germany, 6 Sweden, 7 United Kingdom, 8 Brazil, 9 USA). Describe your advertisements in detail with at least 500 words for each, explaining why that advertisement will be liked by the target market audience in terms of its message and content.

The US is a net debtor because they import more than they export? Foreigners own more US assets than the US owns foreign assets. Correct? Is a net debtor always running a current account deficit?

Racism, juries, and interactions: In a study of racism, Nail, Harton, and Decker (2003) had participants read a scenario in which a police officer assaulted a motorist. Half the participants read about an African American officer who assaulted a European American motorist, and half read about a European American officer who assaulted an African American motorist. Participants were categorized based on political orientation: liberal, moderate, or conservative. Participants were told that the officer was acquitted of assault charges in state court but was found guilty of violating the motorist’s rights in federal court. Double jeopardy occurs when an individual is tried twice for the same crime. Participants were asked to rate, on a scale of 1–7, the degree to which the officer had been placed in double jeopardy by the second trial. The researchers reported the interaction as F(2, 58) = 10.93, p < 0.0001. The means for the liberal participants were 3.18 for those who read about the African American officer and 1.91 for those who read about the European American officer. The means for the moderate participants were 3.50 for those who read about the African American officer and 3.33 for those who read about the European American officer. The means for the conservative participants were 1.25 for those who read about the African American officer and 4.62 for those who read about the European American officer. ***This prompt requires certain formatting so that you can draw tables and bar graphs. You can use Microsoft Excel or Microsoft Word, or any other word processing software to create your post/ post it as an attachment in the discussion. Draw a table of cell means that includes the actual means for this study. Do the reported statistics indicate that there is a significant interaction? If yes, describe the interaction in your own words. Draw a bar graph that depicts the interaction. Include lines that connect the tops of the bars and show the pattern of the interaction. Is this a quantitative or qualitative interaction? Explain. Change the cell mean for the conservative participants who read about an African American officer so that this is now a quantitative interaction. Draw a bar graph that depicts the pattern that includes the new cell means. Change the cell means for the moderate and conservative participants who read about an African American officer so that there is now no interaction. Draw a bar graph that depicts the pattern that includes the new cell mean

Q.Explain the flaws in the following analysis or conclusion. (Note that this is not about chi-squared test per se, perhaps, it is about what a statistical analysis (hypothesis testing in this case) can tell us and what it cannot) Background - The Scholarship Committee comprises 3 faculty members, one of whom is Professor X. Professor X also wrote recommendation letter for 5 students who took his class earlier and four of them were awarded scholarships (out of a total of six scholarships awarded to graduate students). A student who applied but was not awarded a scholarship accused Professor X of favoritism, claiming that he/she was denied a scholarship despite having a very high GPA because he/she did not take class under Professor X and had declined him/her a recommendation letter. The student then did following statistical analysis as an evidence of favoritism . The student runs a Chisq-test and his result shows not independent between students who took class under Professor X and Students got scholarship. H0: students who get scholarship is independent with whether they have taken class under Professor X H1: not independent # Let total number of students who applied for scholarship is 70, and only 5 people get the scholarship, conservatively estimate only 3 out of 5 students took Class with ProfessorX, the other two selected did not take Class with ProfessorX # chisquare test shows the p-value <0.05, thus we reject H0 at .05 level and conclude students who got scholarship was affected by whether they have class under Professor X #student in addition tests , how about the total applicants were 60, or 80? and find out either case we reject H0, they are not independent.

Q.Explain the flaws in the following analysis or conclusion. (Note that this is not about chi-squared test per se, perhaps, it is about what a statistical analysis (hypothesis testing in this case) can tell us and what it cannot)

Background - The Scholarship Committee comprises 3 faculty members, one of whom is Professor X. Professor X also wrote recommendation letter for 5 students who took his class earlier and four of them were awarded scholarships (out of a total of six scholarships awarded to graduate students). A student who applied but was not awarded a scholarship accused Professor X of favoritism, claiming that he/she was denied a scholarship despite having a very high GPA because he/she did not take class under Professor X and had declined him/her a recommendation letter. The student then did following statistical analysis as an evidence of favoritism .

The student runs a Chisq-test and his result shows not independent between students who took class under Professor X and Students got scholarship.

H0: students who get scholarship is independent with whether they have taken class under Professor X

H1: not independent

# Let total number of students who applied for scholarship is 70, and only 5 people get the scholarship, conservatively estimate only
3 out of 5 students took Class with ProfessorX, the other two selected did not take Class with ProfessorX

# chisquare test shows the p-value <0.05, thus we reject H0 at .05 level and conclude students who got scholarship was affected by whether they have class under Professor X

#student in addition tests , how about the total applicants were 60, or 80?
and find out either case we reject H0, they are not independent.

Q.Explain the flaws in the following analysis or conclusion. (Note that this is not about chi-squared test per se, perhaps, it is about what a statistical analysis (hypothesis testing in this case) can tell us and what it cannot) Background - The Scholarship Committee comprises 3 faculty members, one of whom is Professor X. Professor X also wrote recommendation letter for 5 students who took his class earlier and four of them were awarded scholarships (out of a total of six scholarships awarded to graduate students). A student who applied but was not awarded a scholarship accused Professor X of favoritism, claiming that he/she was denied a scholarship despite having a very high GPA because he/she did not take class under Professor X and had declined him/her a recommendation letter. The student then did following statistical analysis as an evidence of favoritism . The student runs a Chisq-test and his result shows not independent between students who took class under Professor X and Students got scholarship. H0: students who get scholarship is independent with whether they have taken class under Professor X H1: not independent # Let total number of students who applied for scholarship is 70, and only 5 people get the scholarship, conservatively estimate only 3 out of 5 students took Class with ProfessorX, the other two selected did not take Class with ProfessorX # chisquare test shows the p-value <0.05, thus we reject H0 at .05 level and conclude students who got scholarship was affected by whether they have class under Professor X #student in addition tests , how about the total applicants were 60, or 80? and find out either case we reject H0, they are not independent.

Q.Explain the flaws in the following analysis or conclusion. (Note that this is not about chi-squared test per se, perhaps, it is about what a statistical analysis (hypothesis testing in this case) can tell us and what it cannot) Background - The Scholarship Committee comprises 3 faculty members, one of whom is Professor X. Professor X also wrote recommendation letter for 5 students who took his class earlier and four of them were awarded scholarships (out of a total of six scholarships awarded to graduate students). A student who applied but was not awarded a scholarship accused Professor X of favoritism, claiming that he/she was denied a scholarship despite having a very high GPA because he/she did not take class under Professor X and had declined him/her a recommendation letter. The student then did following statistical analysis as an evidence of favoritism . The student runs a Chisq-test and his result shows not independent between students who took class under Professor X and Students got scholarship. H0: students who get scholarship is independent with whether they have taken class under Professor X H1: not independent # Let total number of students who applied for scholarship is 70, and only 5 people get the scholarship, conservatively estimate only 3 out of 5 students took Class with ProfessorX, the other two selected did not take Class with ProfessorX # chisquare test shows the p-value <0.05, thus we reject H0 at .05 level and conclude students who got scholarship was affected by whether they have class under Professor X #student in addition tests , how about the total applicants were 60, or 80? and find out either case we reject H0, they are not independent.

Question 1 - Create a class named Student that has fields for an ID number, number of credit hours earned, and number of points earned. (For example, many schools compute grade point averages based on a scale of 4, so a three-credit-hour class in which a student earns an A is worth 12 points.) Include methods to assign values to all fields. A Student also has a field for grade point average. Include a method to compute the grade point average field by dividing points by credit hours earned. Write methods to display the values in each Student field. Save this class as Student.java.