A senior accounting major at Midsouth State University has job offers from four CPA firms. To explore the offers further, she asked a sample of recent trainees how many months each worked for the firm before receiving a raise in salary. The sample information is submitted to Minitab with the following results: Analysis of Variance
Source df SS MS F P
Factor 3 28.17 9.39 5.37 0.010
Error 15 26.26 1.75
Total 18 54.43
A) Reject H0 if F >
B) For the 0.05 level of significance, is there a difference in the mean difference in the mean number of months before a raise was anted among the four CPA firms?

A) Reject H0 if F > 5.417

B) we fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that we do not have sufficient evidence at 0.05 level of significance to support the claim that there is a difference in the mean number of months before a raise was granted among the four CPA firms

Step-by-step explanation:

A) From the table, we can see that we have df1 = 3 and df2 = 15. And we are given a significance level of α = 0.01

We are also given f-value of 1.75

Thus,from the f-distribution table attached at significance level of α = 0.01 and df1 = 3 and df2 = 15, we have;

F-critical = 5.417

Normally, we reject H0 if F > 5.417

But in this case, F is 1.75 < 5.417 and so we conclude that we do not reject H0 at the 0.01 level of significance

B) for 0.05 level of significance, df1 = 3 and df2 = 15, from the 2nd table attached, we have;

F-critical = 3.2874

Again the f-value is less than this critical one.

Thus, we fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that we do not have sufficient evidence at 0.05 level of significance to support the claim that there is a difference in the mean number of months before a raise was granted among the four CPA firms

is only a line? i think so

the radius is 2 times the diameter.

step-by-step explanation: