Scott Petty

Class Project

Product purchased
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Yard sign
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
T-shirt
car magnet
T-shirt
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
beach towel
T-shirt
T-shirt
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt
Bumper Sticker
T-shirt (maternity)
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
T-shirt
T-shirt
T-shirt
beach towel
T-shirt

Revenue from purchase

$4.29
$4.29
$4.29
$4.29
$3.54
$25.00
$3.43
$3.43
$5.79
$4.29
$7.20
$21.45
$3.43
$4.29
$8.58
$19.80
$36.00
$19.80
$17.16
$4.29
$4.29
$4.29
$3.43
$4.29
$8.58
$29.70
$59.40
$19.80
$3.43
$19.80
$39.60
$42.90
$20.20
$19.80
$40.40
$39.60
$19.80
$19.80
$29.70
$39.60

Commission
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.35
2.50
0.34
0.34
0.58
0.43
0.72
2.15
0.34
0.43
0.86
0.99
3.60
0.99
1.72
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.34
0.43
0.86
2.97
2.97
0.99
0.34
0.99
1.95
4.29
1.01
0.99
4.04
1.95
0.99
0.99
2.97
1.95

Revenue from purchase

Bumper Sticker
Yard sign Car MagnetT-shirt
beach towelT-shirt (maternity)
4.29
25
7.2
19.8
29.7
20.2
4.29
36
19.8
29.7
40.4
4.29
3.43
59.4
4.29
19.8
3.54
19.8
3.43
39.6
3.43
20.2
5.79
19.8
4.29
40.4
21.45
39.6
3.43
19.8
4.29
19.8
8.58
39.6
17.16
4.29
4.29
4.29
3.43
4.29
8.58
42.9
Anova: Single Factor
SUMMARY
Groups
Count
Bumper Sticker
21
Yard sign
1
Car Magnet
3
T-shirt
13
beach towel
2
T-shirt (maternity) 2
0

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS
Between Groups
4381.529
Within Groups4628.85
Total

9010.379

Sum
164.62
25
46.63
377.4
59.4
60.6
0

df

Average Variance
7.839048 86.44516
25 #DIV/0!
15.54333 317.4096
29.03077 171.759
29.7
0
30.3
204.02
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!

MS
F
P-value
F crit
6 730.2548 5.521656 0.000414 2.371781
35 132.2529
41

P value is less than our alpha, so we reject Ho and conclude that there is a
difference in the revenue made from each category in the orders. It is possible
that a type 1 error is being made as the null may be correct and there may not
be a difference.

Scott Petty
Class Project
commission
Bumper Sticker
Yard sign Car MagnetT-shirt
beach towelT-shirt (maternity)
0.43
2.5
0.72
0.99
2.97
1.01
0.43
3.6
0.99
2.97
4.04
0.43
0.34
2.97
0.43
0.99
0.35
0.99
0.34
1.95
0.34
1.01
0.58
0.99
0.43
4.04
2.15
1.95
0.34
0.99
0.43
0.99
0.86
1.95
1.72
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.34
0.43
0.86
4.29
Anova: Single Factor
SUMMARY
Groups
Count
Bumper Sticker
21
Yard sign
1
Car Magnet
3
T-shirt
13
beach towel
2
T-shirt (maternity) 2
0

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS
Between Groups
16.95076
Within Groups
39.41403
Total

56.36479

Sum
Average
16.47 0.784286
2.5
2.5
4.66 1.553333
20.8
1.6
5.94
2.97
5.05
2.525
0 #DIV/0!

df

Variance
0.865866
#DIV/0!
3.177733
0.929233
0
4.59045
#DIV/0!

MS
F
P-value
F crit
6 2.825127 2.508737 0.039945 2.371781
35 1.126115
41

P value is less than alpha so the Ho is reject and it is concluded that the average
commission differs between categories of purchases. Again a type 1 error could
possibly be made as the null might by true and there is not a difference.

Count of quantity

Types of purchases made by customers

n=40
16
14

TOTAL PURCHASED

12
10
8

Male or Female

F
6

4
2
0
beach towel

Bumper Sticker

Car Magnet

T-shirt

PRODUCT CATEGORY
Product purchased

T-shirt
(maternity)

Yard sign

Male or Female
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F

Product purchased
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Yard sign
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
T-shirt
car magnet
T-shirt
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
Bumper Sticker
beach towel
T-shirt
T-shirt
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt
Bumper Sticker
T-shirt (maternity)
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
T-shirt
T-shirt
T-shirt
beach towel
T-shirt

quantity
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
2
1
5
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
2
10
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
2

Revenue from purchase

$4.29
$4.29
$4.29
$4.29
$3.54
$25.00
$3.43
$3.43
$5.79
$4.29
$7.20
$21.45
$3.43
$4.29
$8.58
$19.80
$36.00
$19.80
$17.16
$4.29
$4.29
$4.29
$3.43
$4.29
$8.58
$29.70
$59.40
$19.80
$3.43
$19.80
$39.60
$42.90
$20.20
$19.80
$40.40
$39.60
$19.80
$19.80
$29.70
$39.60

Commission
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.35
2.50
0.34
0.34
0.58
0.43
0.72
2.15
0.34
0.43
0.86
0.99
3.60
0.99
1.72
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.34
0.43
0.86
2.97
2.97
0.99
0.34
0.99
1.95
4.29
1.01
0.99
4.04
1.95
0.99
0.99
2.97
1.95

Introduction
1
2

4
5

I am interested to find the difference between what men and women buy when they shop at my online store.
(The store serves the US)
The population chosen are online shoppers, and from that I have taken a 40 person sample. My data is from a
transaction history from my sales.
nominal data question will be "what product did they buy" (each shopper has made a purchase in only one
specific category). Three quantitative questions - "how many did they buy", "how much total revenue", "how
much total commission received from sale. For the product categories I am allowing gift purchases to be a
given, that is why maternity shirts are included in the nominal categories.
"Male or Female" will be the fifth question.
20 women and 20 men have been selected for my subgroups.

Scatterplot

Conclusion
The bar chart shows men purchase mostly bumper stckers, a small amount of car magnets, t-shirts and yard
signs, and no beach towels or maternity shirts. While women purchase mainly t-shirts and bumper stckers, a
small amount of car magnets, beach towels and maternity wear, and no yard signs. Each shopper made a
purchase from only one product category.
Most of the sales come from people who purchase one, then two was the next popular quantity, five was next
popular. Amounts three , four and ten were all only one shopper for each.
For revenue, most is made from the 3-12 dollar range, and decreases gradually from there. Commission is also
greatest at the smallest amount, and decreases gradually as well.
There is a direct upward correlation between revenue earned and commission. While this isn't surprising, the
commission policy can be a bit strange sometimes so I was still interested in their relationship. I believe they are
directly related because the current policy allows that the higher the revenue is, the higher the commission
percentage will be.

statistics

There is more revenue and commission made on average from female purchases and they also spend a higher
maximum amount and purchase more on average. There is a smaller range from the 25th percentile and 75
percentile for male purchases concerning both revenue and commission, showing a less spread out dollar
amount from purchases from men, this is also shown by the higher standard deviation for females. However,
when taking into account male and female coefficient of variations for revenue and commission, males have a
higher variation, showing that in relation to their own specific mean females are more consistant, and it was
merely the fact that they spent more that that resulted in a higher deviation.

Xtab

The Xtab shows the relative frequency distribution of product categories for men and women. The two most
popular categories, bumper stickers and t-shirts, make up 30% and 45% of female purchases, 75% and 10% of
male purchases and 53% and 28% of total overall purchases respectively.

population
parameters

1.) I will look at the sales parameter for last year in my own shop and compare the it to my sample from this
year. Last year 61% of the purchases involved bumper stickers. 2.) The average quanitity of merchandise from
purchases was 1.3, the average revenue from purchases was $14.23, and the average commission from sales
was $1.06.

Bar chart
Frequency
Histogram

Row Labels
1
2
3
4
5
10
Grand Total

Count of quantity
29
6
1
1
2
1
40

quantity

purchases
1
2
3
4
5
10

Grand Total

29
6
1
1
2
1
40

cummulative
cummulative
proportion of percent of cummulative proportion of percent of
purchases
purchases purchases
purchases
purchases
0.725
72.5%
29
0.725
72.5%
0.150
15.0%
35
0.875
87.5%
36
0.900
90.0%
0.025
2.5%
37
0.925
92.5%
0.025
2.5%
39
0.975
97.5%
0.050
5.0%
40
1.000
100.0%
0.025
2.5%
1.000
100.0%

Count of Revenue from purchase

20
8
5
4
2
1
40

k
2
4
8
16
32
64
128
256
512
1024
2048

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

width

Count of Revenue from purchase

revenue from sales

n=40
25
20

total purchases

Row Labels
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
Grand Total

15
10
5

8.142857
10

0
0-10

10-20

20-30

30-40

40-50

50-60

revenue in dollars from purchases

Revenue from purchase
Count of Commission

Count of Commission

n
27
5
5
1
2
40

commission from sales

n=40

k
2
4
8
16
32
64
128
256
512
1024
2048

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

30
25

total purchases

Row Labels
0-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
Grand Total

20
15

10
5
0
0-1

1-2

2-3

commission in dollars from purchases

width

1.333333
1

Commission

3-4

4-5

variable
variable x
observations n
point estimate of p
level of significance
confidence
z value
standard error estimate
margin of error
confidence interval lower limit
confidence interval upper limit

desired margin of error

z value
needed sample size est.
roundup needed sample size
need 4 times as mch for a sample size for half margin of error
assumed value
needed sample size for p
needed sample size roundup
Ho:p= two tail test
alpha level significance
hypothesized p standard error
test statistic z calculated
p value
z critical

Purchases involving bumper stickers

21
40
0.525
0.05
0.95
1.959963985
0.078958058
0.154754951
0.370245049
0.679754951
Confident that this years proportion falls within this range.
0.077377475
1.959963985
160
160
4
0.61
152.637594
153
0.61
0.05
0.077120036
-1.102177904
0.270384336 p>alpha keep Ho
-1.959963985
z calc is not over or under z critical limits, keep Ho
Fail to reject the null hypthesis due to P>Alpha and Z calc<Z critical.

Revenue from purchase

Commission
4.29
0.43
4.29
0.43
4.29
0.43
4.29
0.43
3.54
0.35
25
2.5
3.43
0.34
3.43
0.34
5.79
0.58
4.29
0.43
7.2
0.72
21.45
2.15
3.43
0.34
4.29
0.43
8.58
0.86
19.8
0.99
36
3.6
19.8
0.99
17.16
1.72
4.29
0.43
4.29
0.43
4.29
0.43
3.43
0.34
4.29
0.43
8.58
0.86
29.7
2.97
59.4
2.97
19.8
0.99
3.43
0.34
19.8
0.99
39.6
1.95
42.9
4.29
20.2
1.01
19.8
0.99
40.4
4.04
39.6
1.95
19.8
0.99
19.8
0.99
29.7
2.97
39.6
1.95

SUMMARY OUTPUT
Regression Statistics
Multiple R
0.869690715
R Square
0.75636194 about 75% of the varition in commission can be explained by revenue
Adjusted R Square
0.749950412
Standard Error
0.558915742
Observations
40
ANOVA
df
Regression
Residual
Total

Intercept
revenue from purchases

1
38
39

SS
MS
F
Significance F
36.85197886 36.85197886 117.9690631
3.27002E-13
11.87069864 0.312386806
48.7226775

Coefficients
Standard Error
t Stat
P-value
0.148751254
0.135141857 1.100704523 0.277949103
0.065997994
0.006076404 10.86135641 3.27002E-13
6.6%
slope = $.066 per dollar(revenue)

Lower 95%
Upper 95%
Lower 95.0%
-0.124829134 0.422331641 -0.124829134
0.053696956 0.078299032 0.053696956
5.4%
7.8%

Upper 95.0%
0.422331641
0.078299032

Assume $14.23 revenue(last year parameter)

14.23
x
0.148751 intercept predicted commission with no revenue
0.939151
predicted increase in commission with $14.23 revenue
1.087903 y hat
predicted commission with $14.23 revenue
P<alpha
Reject Ho: slope = 0
We conclude there is a positive linear relationship between revenue (x) and commission (y). For every
dollar of revenue there is a 6.6% increase in commission. For the population in which the sample was
derived we are 95% confident that the marginal commission increase per dollar is in the range of 5.4%
to 7.8%.

RELATIONSHIP OF COMMISSION AND REVENUE

N=40
$5.00
$4.50
R = 0.7564

y = 0.066x + 0.1488

$4.00

Commission

$3.50
$3.00
$2.50
$2.00

$1.50
$1.00
$0.50
$-

$0.00

$10.00

$20.00

$30.00

$40.00

Revenue

$50.00

$60.00

$70.00

Male or Female
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F

quantity
Revenue from purchase
Commission
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
1
$3.54 $ 0.35
1
$25.00 $ 2.50
1
$3.43 $ 0.34
1
$3.43 $ 0.34
1
$5.79 $ 0.58
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
1
$7.20 $ 0.72
5
$21.45 $ 2.15
1
$3.43 $ 0.34
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
2
$8.58 $ 0.86
1
$19.80 $ 0.99
5
$36.00 $ 3.60
1
$19.80 $ 0.99
4
$17.16 $ 1.72
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
1
$3.43 $ 0.34
1
$4.29 $ 0.43
2
$8.58 $ 0.86
1
$29.70 $ 2.97
3
$59.40 $ 2.97
1
$19.80 $ 0.99
1
$3.43 $ 0.34
1
$19.80 $ 0.99
2
$39.60 $ 1.95
10
$42.90 $ 4.29
1
$20.20 $ 1.01
1
$19.80 $ 0.99
2
$40.40 $ 4.04
2
$39.60 $ 1.95
1
$19.80 $ 0.99
1
$19.80 $ 0.99
1
$29.70 $ 2.97
2
$39.60 $ 1.95

male
n count
mean
median
min
max
first quartile
third quartile
range
inter-quartile range
variance
standard deviation
coefficient of variation

how many purchased

revenue commission
20
20
20
1.6
$10.23 $
0.92
1
$4.29 $
0.43
1
$3.43 $
0.34
5
$36.00 $
3.60
1
4.29
0.43
1
19.14
0.99
4
32.57
3.26
0
14.85
0.56
1.74 85.07036 0.75075475
1.319090596 9.223359 0.866461049
82%
90%
94%

female
n count
mean
median
min
max
first quartile
third quartile
range
inter-quartile range
variance
standard deviation
coefficient of variation

how many purchased

revenue commission
20
20
20
1.8
$23.42 $
1.59
1
$19.80 $
0.99
1
$3.43 $
0.34
10
$59.40 $
4.29
1
5.3625
0.5375
2
39.6
2.715
9
55.97
3.95
1 34.2375
2.1775
4.063157895 264.1996 1.538172632
1.96468827 15.84265 1.208827531
109%
68%
76%

Male or Female
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F

quantity Revenue from purchase

Commission
1
4.29
0.43
1
4.29
0.43
1
4.29
0.43
1
4.29
0.43
1
3.54
0.35
1
25
2.5
1
3.43
0.34
1
3.43
0.34
1
5.79
0.58
1
4.29
0.43
1
7.2
0.72
5
21.45
2.15
1
3.43
0.34
1
4.29
0.43
2
8.58
0.86
1
19.8
0.99
5
36
3.6
1
19.8
0.99
4
17.16
1.72
1
4.29
0.43
1
4.29
0.43
1
4.29
0.43
1
3.43
0.34
1
4.29
0.43
2
8.58
0.86
1
29.7
2.97
3
59.4
2.97
1
19.8
0.99
1
3.43
0.34
1
19.8
0.99
2
39.6
1.95
10
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
2

42.9
20.2
19.8
40.4
39.6
19.8
19.8
29.7
39.6

4.29
1.01
0.99
4.04
1.95
0.99
0.99
2.97
1.95

Pooled-Variance t Test for the Difference Between Two Means

Revenue from purchase

(assumes equal population variances)

Data
Hypothesized Difference
Level of Significance

0
0.05
Population 1 Sample

Sample Size
Sample Mean
Sample Standard Deviation

19
10.54473684
9.615501009
Population 2 Sample

Sample Size
Sample Mean
Sample Standard Deviation

20
23.4205
16.25421742
Intermediate Calculations

Population 1 Sample Degrees of Freedom

Population 2 Sample Degrees of Freedom
Total Degrees of Freedom
Pooled Variance
Standard Error
Difference in Sample Means
t Test Statistic

18
19
37
180.6496
4.3059
-12.8758
-2.9903
Two-Tail Test

Lower Critical Value

Upper Critical Value
p -Value

-2.0262
2.0262
0.0049
Reject the null hypothesis

Pooled-Variance t Test for the Difference Between Two Means

Commission

(assumes equal population variances)

Data
Hypothesized Difference
Level of Significance

0
0.05
Population 1 Sample

Sample Size
Sample Mean
Sample Standard Deviation

19
0.950526316
0.905467796
Population 2 Sample

Sample Size
Sample Mean
Sample Standard Deviation

20
1.594
1.240230878
Intermediate Calculations

Population 1 Sample Degrees of Freedom

Population 2 Sample Degrees of Freedom
Total Degrees of Freedom
Pooled Variance

18
19
37
1.1887

Standard Error
Difference in Sample Means
t Test Statistic

0.3493
-0.6435
-1.8423
Two-Tail Test

Lower Critical Value

Upper Critical Value
p -Value

-2.0262
2.0262
0.0735
Reject the null hypothesis

Pooled-Variance t Test for the Difference Between Two Means

(assumes equal population variances)
Data
Hypothesized Difference
Level of Significance
Population 1 Sample
Sample Size
Sample Mean
Sample Standard Deviation
Population 2 Sample
Sample Size
Sample Mean
Sample Standard Deviation
Intermediate Calculations
Population 1 Sample Degrees of Freedom
Population 2 Sample Degrees of Freedom
Total Degrees of Freedom
Pooled Variance
Standard Error
Difference in Sample Means
t Test Statistic
Two-Tail Test
Lower Critical Value
Upper Critical Value
p-Value
Do not reject the null hypothesis

Quantity

0
0.05
19
1.631578947
1.382852379
20
1.8
2.015727634

18
19
37
3.016785206
0.556432771
-0.168421053
-0.302679967

-2.026192463
2.026192463
0.763828941

om purchase
Confidence Interval Estimate
for the Difference Between Two Means
Data
Confidence Level

95%
Intermediate Calculations

Degrees of Freedom
t Value
Interval Half Width

37
2.0262
8.7245
Confidence Interval

Interval Lower Limit

Interval Upper Limit

-21.6002 The population average revenue may be $21.6 lower than the sample's
-4.1513 The population average may be as little as $4.15 lower than the sample's

There is 95% confidence that the population average revenue differs in the interval shown.

Confidence Interval Estimate

for the Difference Between Two Means
Data
Confidence Level

95%
Intermediate Calculations

Degrees of Freedom
t Value
Interval Half Width

37
2.0262
0.7077
Confidence Interval

Interval Lower Limit

Interval Upper Limit

-1.3512
0.0642

population average commisson may differ by $1.35 below sample's

population average commission may differ by $.06 over sample's

Since there is a zero in the interval a difference cannot be concluded for

commission

Since there is a zero in the interval a difference cannot be concluded for

commission

Confidence Interval Estimate

for the Difference Between Two Means
Data
Confidence Level

0.95

Intermediate Calculations
Degrees of Freedom
t Value
Interval Half Width

37
2.026192463
1.127439888

Confidence Interval
Interval Lower Limit
Interval Upper Limit

-1.29586094 population quantitiy may differ $1.30 under sample average

0.959018835 population quantity may differ $.96 over sample average

We are 95% confident that the population average differs by the

amount shown.

quantity
sample mean
n sample size
s sample standard dev
alpha level of significance
confidence level
degrees of freedom
t critical
standard error estimate
margin of error
confidence interval lower limit
confidence interval upper limit

desired margin of error

Z critical
needed sample size estimate
needed size rounded

Revenue from purchases

Commission

1.7
16.82625
1.25925
40
40
40
1.697660532
14.7288001
1.117720637
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.95
0.95
0.95
39
39
39
2.02269092
2.02269092
2.02269092
0.268423699
2.328827775
0.17672715
0.542938178
4.710498795
0.357464402
1.157061822
12.1157512
0.901785598
2.242938178
21.5367488
1.616714402
The range of 1.16 to The range of 12.12 to 21.54 for The range of .90 to 1.62
2.24 for quantity is revenue from purchases is
for commission is greater
greater than 1.3
greater than 14.23
than 1.06
0.271469089
1.96
150.2301549
151

2.355249398
1.96
150.2301549
151

0.178732201
1.96
150.2301549
151

interested in over or under the pop mean.

1.3
14.23
1.06
alpha
0.05
0.05
0.05
t statistic
1.490181388
1.114831259
1.127444198
P value
0.144220441
0.271745716
0.26644361
t critical
2.02269092
2.02269092
2.02269092
If P<alpha reject Ho
do not reject
do not reject
do not reject
if t stat is > than upper t critical or < lower t
critical, reject Ho
do not reject
do not reject
do not reject
There is not sufficent evidence to conclude the average quantity, revenue and purchases differ from
last years.

product purchased
beach towel
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
Yard sign
Grand Total

Female

Male Grand Total

2
6
1
9
2
20

2
21
3
11
2
1
40

15
2
2
1
20

Z Test for Differences in Two Proportions

Data
Hypothesized Difference
Level of Significance
Group 1
Number of Items of Interest
Sample Size
Group 2
Number of Items of Interest
Sample Size
Intermediate Calculations
Group 1 Proportion
Group 2 Proportion
Difference in Two Proportions
Average Proportion
Z Test Statistic
Two-Tail Test
Lower Critical Value
Upper Critical Value
p-Value
Reject the null hypothesis

0
0.05
6
20
15
20

0.3
0.75
-0.45
0.525
-2.849614141

-1.959963985
1.959963985
0.00437723

Confidence Interval Estimate

of the Difference Between Two Proportions
Data
Confidence Level

0.95

Intermediate Calculations
Z Value
Std. Error of the Diff. between two Proportions
Interval Half Width

-1.959963985
0.140978722
0.276313217

Confidence Interval
Interval Lower Limit
Interval Upper Limit

-0.726313217 The proportion of female shoppers who purchase bumpers sticker may be .73 less than male
-0.173686783 The proportion of female shoppers who purchase bumper stickers may be .17 less than male

The very low P value indicates that we reject Ho hypothesis and determine female shoppers are not more likely than
male to purchase bumpers stickers. A type 2 error is still possible as we may be rejecting a correct null.

Male or Female
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F

quantity
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
2
1
5
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
2
10
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
2

Revenue from purchase

$4.29
$4.29
$4.29
$4.29
$3.54
$25.00
$3.43
$3.43
$5.79
$4.29
$7.20
$21.45
$3.43
$4.29
$8.58
$19.80
$36.00
$19.80
$17.16
$4.29
$4.29
$4.29
$3.43
$4.29
$8.58
$29.70
$59.40
$19.80
$3.43
$19.80
$39.60
$42.90
$20.20
$19.80
$40.40
$39.60
$19.80
$19.80
$29.70
$39.60

Commission
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.35
2.50
0.34
0.34
0.58
0.43
0.72
2.15
0.34
0.43
0.86
0.99
3.60
0.99
1.72
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.34
0.43
0.86
2.97
2.97
0.99
0.34
0.99
1.95
4.29
1.01
0.99
4.04
1.95
0.99
0.99
2.97
1.95

Revnue
F-Test Two-Sample for Variances

Mean
Variance
Observations
df
F
P(F<=f) one-tail
F Critical one-tail

The null is rejected (n difference) and we

conclude there is a difference. Although a
possible type 1 error.
Variable 1
Variable 2
10.232
23.4205
89.54774316 264.1995839
20
20
19
19
0.338939758
0.011464145
0.022928 two tail
0.461201089

Commission
F-Test Two-Sample for Variances

Mean
Variance
Observations
df
F
P(F<=f) one-tail
F Critical one-tail

Quantity
F-Test Two-Sample for Variances

Mean
Variance
Observations
df
F
P(F<=f) one-tail
F Critical one-tail

Failed to reject null (no difference from

population) and conclude there is no
difference. Although a type 2 error may have
occured.

Variable 1
Variable 2
0.9245
1.594
0.790268158 1.538172632
20
20
19
19
0.513770783
0.077838971
0.155678 two tail
0.461201089

Failed to reject null and conclude that there

is no difference between average quantity
purchased between male and female.
Variable 1
Variable 2
1.6
1.8
1.831578947 4.063157895
20
20
19
19
0.450777202
0.04529833
0.090597 two tail
0.461201089

Count of quantity
Row Labels
beach towel
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
Yard sign
Grand Total

Column Labels
F

product purchased

Female

product purchased

Grand Total
15
2
2
1
20

20

beach towel
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
Yard sign
Grand Total

beach towel
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
Yard sign
Grand Total

M
2
6
1
9
2

Male
2
6
1
9
2

Grand Total
15
2
2
1
20

20

2
21
3
11
2
1
40

2
21
3
11
2
1
40

Female

Male
Grand Total
10%
0%
5%
30%
75%
53%
5%
10%
8%
45%
10%
28%
10%
0%
5%
0%
5%
3%
100%
100%
100%
conditional percentages
marginal percentages
observed conditional probabilities

observed

product purchased
beach towel
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
Yard sign
Grand Total

conditional probabilities
marginal probabilities
Female
Male
Grand Total
0.100
0.050
0.300
0.750
0.525
0.050
0.100
0.075
0.450
0.100
0.275
0.100
0.050
0.050
0.025
1.000
1.000
1.000

beach towel
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
Yard sign
Grand Total

0.700
0.600
0.500
0.400

female

0.300

male

0.200
0.100

expected frequencies

product purchased

0.800

Female

Male
1
10.5
1.5
5.5
1
0.5
20

1
10.5
1.5
5.5
1
0.5
20

Grand Total
2
21
3
11
2
1
40

beach towel

Bumper
Sticker

Car Magnet

T-shirt

T-shirt
(maternity)

Yard sign

Ho: no relationship
product purchased
beach towel
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
Yard sign
Grand Total

Chart if no relationship (null)

Female
0.05
0.525
0.075
0.275
0.05
0.025
1

Male
Grand Total
0.05
0.05
0.525
0.525
0.075
0.075
0.275
0.275
0.05
0.05
0.025
0.025
1
1

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

female
male

0.2

For chi squared

beach towel
Bumper Sticker
Car Magnet
T-shirt
T-shirt (maternity)
Yard sign

Female

Male
1
1
1.928571429 1.92857
0.166666667 0.16667
2.227272727 2.22727
1
1
0.5
0.5

chi calculated
alpha
df
chi critical
p value

13.645
0.05
5
11.0705
0.01803

P-value being less than alpha, Ho is rejected. A

difference in products purched by gender can be
concluded. A type 1 error is possible.

0.1

0
beach towel

Bumper
Sticker

Car Magnet

T-shirt

T-shirt
(maternity)

Yard sign