Academic Integrity: tutoring, explanations, and feedback — we don’t complete graded work or submit on a student’s behalf.

Assume that there is no meaningful Interaction (even it exists) in the Hypothesi

ID: 3261584 • Letter: A

Question

Assume that there is no meaningful Interaction (even it exists) in the Hypothesis Test in part ‘b’ in Qu.#4 above. (In other words, all following sub-questions can be done without worrying if such analysis should be done in the first place!)
a. Conduct the 4 step Hypothesis Test if ShelfLevel used in this experiment has any effect in terms of the sales of cereal boxes. Calculate all the statistics manually and use the critical value of the statistic to reach your conclusion. You should use the appropriate “SS” from MiniTab.
b. Calculate the p-Value for the test in part ‘a’. c. Which factor explains a larger portion of the sum of squares? Give numbers. Also calculate the value of R2 manually.
d. Calculate the Bonferroni Margin of Error, ME. ME can be treated as the ±margin of error for the Bonferroni confidence intervals for pairs of treatment means. Specify which treatment means are significantly superior at the .05 level. Specifically comment if the Difference in Population Treatment Means exists when using (Barand-1 and Shelf Level-3) and (Brand-3 and Shelf Level-3). What can you say about the Difference in Population Treatment Means when comparing (Barand-1 and Shelf Level-3) and (Brand-2 and Shelf Level-4).

e. Can you justify the parametric analysis you have used above. Give specific reason/s with 4 specific plots. (Hint: Refer to your Week 8/9 Class Notes.)

Shelf_Level Brand1 Brand2 Brand3 Brand4 C6-T Boxes Brand ShelfLevel 1 335 300 450 270 385 275 435 335 Suggestion#1: Stack data in C2-C5 in C7 290 240 490 280 Suggestion#2: "ID" the Brand# in C8 2 445 350 500 463 Suggestion#3: Code the "Shelf_Level" in C9 390 335 488 445 460 410 463 455 3 550 413 520 475 575 425 550 488 588 400 508 470 4 300 238 375 263 313 275 388 295 338 250 400 273

Explanation / Answer

We will conduct an ANOVA with effect as Shelf and Brand. We will assume tht there is no interaction between Shelf and Brand. Our anlaysis is to comment whether there is effect of brand and shelf separately on sales of cerslas boxes or not.

As I don't have exposure in Minitab we will conduct everything on R.

Firstly, here is the code to import the data properly in R.

Code:

box<-c(335, 300, 450, 270,

385, 275, 435, 335,

290, 240, 490, 280,

445, 350, 500, 463,

390, 335, 488, 445,

460, 410, 463, 455,

550, 413, 520, 475,

575, 425, 550, 488,

588, 400, 508, 470,

300, 238, 375, 263,

313, 275, 388, 295,

338, 250, 400, 273

)

shelf<-rep(c("1","2","3","4"),each=12)

brand<-rep(c("1","2","3","4"),12)

data<-data.frame(shelf,brand,box,stringsAsFactors = TRUE)

data

Output:

> box<-c(335, 300, 450, 270,

+ 385, 275, 435, 335,

+ 290, 240, 490, 280,

+ 445, 350, 500, 463,

+ 390, 335, 488, 445,

+ 460, 410, 463, 455,

+ 550, 413, 520, 475,

+ 575, 425, 550, 488,

+ 588, 400, 508, 470,

+ 300, 238, 375, 263,

+ 313, 275, 388, 295,

+ 338, 250, 400, 273

+ )

> shelf<-rep(c("1","2","3","4"),each=12)

> brand<-rep(c("1","2","3","4"),12)

> data<-data.frame(shelf,brand,box,stringsAsFactors = TRUE)

> data

shelf brand box

1 1 1 335

2 1 2 300

3 1 3 450

4 1 4 270

5 1 1 385

6 1 2 275

7 1 3 435

8 1 4 335

9 1 1 290

10 1 2 240

11 1 3 490

12 1 4 280

13 2 1 445

14 2 2 350

15 2 3 500

16 2 4 463

17 2 1 390

18 2 2 335

19 2 3 488

20 2 4 445

21 2 1 460

22 2 2 410

23 2 3 463

24 2 4 455

25 3 1 550

26 3 2 413

27 3 3 520

28 3 4 475

29 3 1 575

30 3 2 425

31 3 3 550

32 3 4 488

33 3 1 588

34 3 2 400

35 3 3 508

36 3 4 470

37 4 1 300

38 4 2 238

39 4 3 375

40 4 4 263

41 4 1 313

42 4 2 275

43 4 3 388

44 4 4 295

45 4 1 338

46 4 2 250

47 4 3 400

48 4 4 273

>

Now, following is the code to conduct the anova.

Code:

anova<-aov(box~shelf+brand,data=data)
summary(anova)

Output:

> anova<-aov(box~shelf+brand,data=data)
> summary(anova)
Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F)
shelf 3 266886 88962 65.23 1.17e-15 ***
brand 3 122966 40989 30.05 1.93e-10 ***
Residuals 41 55915 1364   
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1

a) H0: All the treatment means for the 4 levels of shelfs are equal. Vs H1: Atleast one treatment mean is different from the other.

Test -Statistic = F = (SS(shelf)/d.f) / (SS(error)/d.f) (refer to the the results above. D.f = Degrees of freedom)

= (266886/3) / (55915/41) = 65.23

degrees of freedom of test statistic = (3,41)

Critical value at 5% significance level = 95 th percentile of F distribution with (3,41) d.f = qf(0.95,3,41) (code in R) = 2.833

As the test-statistic = 65.23 > critical value = 2.833, so at 5% level, we reject H0.

Conclusion: We conclude that there is enough significant statistical evidence to claim that shelflevels has a signifcant effect on sales of cereals boxes.

b) p-value = Pr(F > test-statistic) = 1- pf(65.23,3,41) = 0.0000

c) SS(shelf)/SS(total) = 266886/(266886+122966+55915) = 59.87%

SS(Brand)/SS(total) = 122966/(266886+122966+55915) = 27.59%

We see that, almost 60% of the total variability is explained by Shelf, where as 28% is by Brand. So, it is the factor Shelf which explain lastest porportion of Sum of squares.

R2 = ( SS(Shelf) + SS(brand) )/ SS(Total) = (266886+122966)/(266886+122966+55915) = 87.46% (ans)

d) Please upload the class notes. Otherwise it is very difficult to know your teacher have taught you. After that, I will answer (d)