Tuesday, February 17, 2009

X(3,n=100)=136.32,p<.05..MEANS "GIVE ME THE ROCKING CHAIR!!!"

Yea. That was the final equation on my final post in my statistics class this quarter. I submitted it this morning. I still have some homework to do, but that was my on-line post. I make a fuss about math, but when I get it, I LOVE it. There is a comfort in numbers that is difficult to explain. There is no arguing about the outcome. There are no gray areas. There is no ifs or maybe's or fuzzy borders. That is refreshing to someone like me who really can see everyone's viewpoint (typically). So, when I truly understand the equation, I enjoy it. And I really understood that above equation. In fact, I had to design my own mini-study. So I designed one about the furniture in the neonatal intensive care unit. Basically, all it said is that people preferred to sit in rocking chairs when they held their babies...that's all. It went something like this:

Research Question: In the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU), when parents and grandparents come to hold their children, they have four seating options. They have a rocking chair, a recliner, a couch, and a straight chair. The department is interested in restyling their visiting center and wishes to know which piece of furniture is preferred seating for visitations so they can redecorate accordingly. A chi-square, goodness-of-fit test was conducted. The sample included n=100 parents/grandparents.
Ho=There is no preference in seating types.
Ha=There is a preference in seating types.

fo:
rocker:75
recliner: 15
couch: 7
straight chair: 3

df=(C-1)=3
alpha=.05
critical chi squared=7.81
fe=pn=1/4(100)=25


fo, fe, (fo-fe), (fo-fe)2, [(fo-fe)2]/fe
Rocker 75, 25, 50, 2500, 100
Recliner 15, 25, -10, 100, 4
Couch 7, 25, -18, 324, 12.96
Straight Chair 3, 25, -22, 484, 19.36

chi-squared=X[(fo-fe)2/fe]=100+4+12.96+19.36=136.32.

136.32 is greater than the critical chi squared of 7.81, therefore we reject the null hypothesis.

The participants showed significant preferences among the four seating arrangements for holding babies in NICU.
X(3,n=100)=136.32, p<.05.

_______________________________________________________________

Yea....fancy schmancy talk for "Dibs on the rocker!"...who needs a statistic course for that?

8 comments:

Eli Bowman said...

With a substantial sample population like yours, and 4 variables within the equation there will almost certainly be a rejection of the null hypothesis, especially when dealing with practical theories like chair preference. In fact, I don't even know why marketing teams for car companies even use standard statistics...let alone chair designers.

The Katzbox said...

amen and can we get a nonqualitative witness?

Em Dog said...

shocked, amazed and very proud right now. wow, mom! WOWWW!!!!!

The Bowmans said...

Here's my interpretation of what I just read..."fe, fi, fo, fum! Ho ho ho! Ha ha ha!"

hi, i'm nancy! said...

wow, oh wow, oh wow! WOW!

WowWowWowWowWow!

freakin' WOW, man!

may i kiss your ring?

The Katzbox said...

Thank you. But oddly, the final chapter was the easiest for me to grasp, for some hideously annoying reason. It must be some cosmic joke. I had a knot in my stomach all quarter long, and then Chapter 18 showed up and I was, "Oh, hey, this is fun!" Yeesh....I still don't want to do the other two quarters......*shudder* And thanks again.

Diane said...

This is the simplest question EVER...

DEB gets the rocking chair. hands down. she's been rockin' away for years.

yep.....deb has dibs.

The Katzbox said...

See? That's what old friends are for.....