Lee is a teacher at a local high school who wanted to assess whether or not dogs physically resemble their owners enough for people to be able to correctly match a dog to their owner better than if just guessing. Lee, who is also a dog owner, showed pictures of two dogs to her class of 16 students. One photo was of the teacher's dog (Yoda) and the other photo was of a dog the teacher had never met. The students were asked to guess which dog was actually the teacher's. If dogs do not physically resemble their owners, the students would get a correct match with probability 0.50. It turned out that 14 of the 16 students correctly picked out the teacher's dog. Does it appear that the population proportion of people who can correctly match a dog to their owner (out of two options) is better than just guessing?

The  decision rule is  

Reject the null hypothesis  

The conclusion is  

There is sufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of people who can correctly match a dog to their owner (out of two options) is better than just guessing

Step-by-step explanation:

From the question we are told that

   The sample size is n =  16  

   The population proportion =  0.5

     The number that of students that picked out the teachers dog is k  =  14

Generally the sample proportion is mathematically represented as

=>    

=>    

The null hypothesis is  

The null hypothesis is  

Generally the test statistics is mathematically represented as

Generally the p-value is mathematically represented as

From the z table the probability of  Z>3  is mathematically represented as

So

Let  assume the level of significance is  

Generally from the value  obtained we see that Hence  

The  decision rule is  

Reject the null hypothesis  

The conclusion is  

There is sufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of people who can correctly match a dog to their owner (out of two options) is better than just guessing

according to this law, when unemployment goes up by 1%, gdp drops by 2%. in the question, unemployment rate goes from 2% to 5%, meaning unemployment goes up by 3%, so the gdp drops by 6%. thus the effect is a drop in gdp by 6%.

step-by-step explanation:

all the angles opposite to the angle 150 would be 150 and all the angles that are next to 150 are 30 because they equal 180 it you add it up.

step-by-step explanation: