0 1 3. Ten bank tellers are asked to help test whether a corrective drill significantly improves the speed and accuracy

[answerhappygod]

0 1 3 Ten Bank Tellers Are Asked To Help Test Whether A Corrective Drill Significantly Improves The Speed And Accuracy 1 (58.58 KiB) Viewed 39 times

0 1 3 Ten Bank Tellers Are Asked To Help Test Whether A Corrective Drill Significantly Improves The Speed And Accuracy 2 (39.09 KiB) Viewed 39 times

0 1 3 Ten Bank Tellers Are Asked To Help Test Whether A Corrective Drill Significantly Improves The Speed And Accuracy 3 (39.64 KiB) Viewed 39 times

0 1 3. Ten bank tellers are asked to help test whether a corrective drill significantly improves the speed and accuracy with which they enter customer transactions into the bank computer. They are first given a five-minute "Before Drill" test, then the drill, and finally an "After Drill test. The corrective drill is expensive, and the bank wants to know if it gets a substantial improvement in performance to justify the cost. At the .05 level of significance, did the drill improve the speed and accuracy scores by more than 2 points? (Higher scores on the test mean improved speed and accuracy). Be careful is setting up HO and H1. Excel can handle only positive numbers for the hypothesized mean difference. 2 3 #4 S 06 Teller A B C D E F G H Before Drill Score 45 16 #17 18 319) 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 b. Get the Excel Output (-5 pt.) 127 t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means 128 538 2558 235 34 38 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 a. State Ho and H₁. Your MUST show the five-step process for determining Ho and H, (1 pt.) 1. Drill test improve the speed and accuracy scorces by more than 2 points 15 2. Before (drill score) < After (drill score) 47 42 52 49 After Drill Score 49 3. Before (drill score) 2 After (drill score) 4. HO: Before (drill score) 2 After (drill score) *4* & ±54443 57 52 41 66 56 54 55 HI: Before (drill score) < After (drill score) 5. HO: Before (drill score) - After (drill score)2 After (drill score)- After (drill score) HO: Before (drill score) - After (drill score) 0 HI: Before (drill score) - After (drill score)< After (drill score) -After (drill score) HI: Before (drill score) - After (drill score) <0

b. Get the Excel Output (.5 pt.) t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means Mean Variance Observations Pearson Correlation Hypothesized Mean Difference df t Stat P(Text) one-tal t Critical one-tail P(Test) two-tal t Critical two-tal Before Drill Score c. What is your pvalue? (1 pt.) d. Did you reject or not reject H₂? (1 pt.) 47.3 62.67777778 10 0.968709651 0 9 -4.497705837 0.000746934 1.833112933 0.001493868 2.262157163 After Drill Score 50.8 83.73333333 2 10 G H 0.000746934 e. There (is/is not) evidence that the drill improved the speed and accuracy scores by more than 2 points. (1 pt.) 4. Would it be appropriate to use the Empirical Rule to determine if it would be unusual for a bank teller to get a score of 64 after the person does the corrective drill? (.5 pt.) Yes No Defend your answer. (.5 pt.) No, there are not equal variances. J K M

3. Determine whether the Before Drill Scores predict the After Drill Scores at a.10 level of significance. Yes No (-5 pt.) Defend your answer. (.5 pt.) Put your Excel results below. t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means Mean Variance Observations Pearson Correlation Hypothesized Mean Difference df Stat P(Te-t) one-tal t Critical one-tal P(Te-t) two-tal t Critical two-tal Before Drit Score 47.3 62.67777778 10 0.968709651 0 9 -4.497705837 0.000746934 1.383028738 0.001493868 1.833112933 After Drill Score 50.8 83.73333333 10 Use your results to predict the After Drill Score of a bank teller with a Before Drill Score of 53. (.5 pt.) 6. Is there a lot of variability in the After Drill Scores? Yes No (-5 pt.) Defend your answer. (.5 pt.)