Help with Topics for Math Studies Internal Assessment

Hi!

I think I could help you! I did math studies, got a 19/20 on my IA. The title and the RQ were:



I collected data from 386 women, it's a lot better to have an abundance of data than small samples of data. However my method was not random, as I explain and motivate in the section called Evaluation of methods used:

"Notice how the word “group” was included in the RQ;
Does a relationship between the two variables body length and shoe size in a group of women exist, or do they vary independently of each other?
This fact effectively conveys the message that it is not this investigation’s intention to discuss whether or not the results of this investigation can be applicable on the whole Swedish female population; the focus is primarily the group of 386 women in the group. Additionally, without the inclusion of the word “group” the method of the investigation would have had to be simple random sampling, a method which was consciously rejected as the method of sampling due to the amount of time that had to be spent in that case, due to the procedures of generating random numbers, assigning them to the subjects etcetera."

I did the following calculations:

1. Scatterplot
2. Correlation analysis including Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient and the sample coefficient of determination
3. Regression analysis including least square regression line and the standard error of estimate

These calculations was then critically discussed (such as the fact that Pearson's tend to generate an incorrect picture of the strength of the relationship whilst the sample coefficient of determination doesn't).

I was much aided by the book Hamburg, Morris. Basic Statistics: A Modern Approach (Third Edition). I used my GDC and the Minitab statistical package (free trial).

Hope that gave you an idea

Hi!

I think I could help you! I did math studies, got a 19/20 on my IA. The title and the RQ were:



I collected data from 386 women, it's a lot better to have an abundance of data than small samples of data. However my method was not random, as I explain and motivate in the section called Evaluation of methods used:

"Notice how the word “group” was included in the RQ;
Does a relationship between the two variables body length and shoe size in a group of women exist, or do they vary independently of each other?
This fact effectively conveys the message that it is not this investigation’s intention to discuss whether or not the results of this investigation can be applicable on the whole Swedish female population; the focus is primarily the group of 386 women in the group. Additionally, without the inclusion of the word “group” the method of the investigation would have had to be simple random sampling, a method which was consciously rejected as the method of sampling due to the amount of time that had to be spent in that case, due to the procedures of generating random numbers, assigning them to the subjects etcetera."

I did the following calculations:

1. Scatterplot
2. Correlation analysis including Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient and the sample coefficient of determination
3. Regression analysis including least square regression line and the standard error of estimate

These calculations was then critically discussed (such as the fact that Pearson's tend to generate an incorrect picture of the strength of the relationship whilst the sample coefficient of determination doesn't).

I was much aided by the book Hamburg, Morris. Basic Statistics: A Modern Approach (Third Edition). I used my GDC and the Minitab statistical package (free trial).

Hope that gave you an idea

Heey!
I was thinking about investigating if there is a relationship between length between arms, and body length....what do you think about that?

I did a stats report - comparing the literacy rates of 50 countries and their birth rates. After doing geography I already knew there would be a correlation, so I just did tables, scatterplots, regression analysis, box and whisker plots ... whatever you can think of. I got a 7. To be honest, I would suggest getting your data from elsewhere rather than collecting it yourself. The IB aren't looking at how well you can collect data (and it takes up so much time). As long as you can verify its validity (i.e. I emailed the editor of the book I got the results from and asked him some questions about sources etc) they're happy.

my topic was if the height and weight of an NHL player affected how many goals they scored in a season. it was really easy and i got a 19/20 on it- lost a point in the conclusion apparently. hope that helps

I did a stats report - comparing the literacy rates of 50 countries and their birth rates. After doing geography I already knew there would be a correlation, so I just did tables, scatterplots, regression analysis, box and whisker plots ... whatever you can think of. I got a 7. To be honest, I would suggest getting your data from elsewhere rather than collecting it yourself. The IB aren't looking at how well you can collect data (and it takes up so much time). As long as you can verify its validity (i.e. I emailed the editor of the book I got the results from and asked him some questions about sources etc) they're happy.

Hi!

I think I could help you! I did math studies, got a 19/20 on my IA. The title and the RQ were:



I collected data from 386 women, it's a lot better to have an abundance of data than small samples of data. However my method was not random, as I explain and motivate in the section called Evaluation of methods used:

"Notice how the word “group” was included in the RQ;
Does a relationship between the two variables body length and shoe size in a group of women exist, or do they vary independently of each other?
This fact effectively conveys the message that it is not this investigation’s intention to discuss whether or not the results of this investigation can be applicable on the whole Swedish female population; the focus is primarily the group of 386 women in the group. Additionally, without the inclusion of the word “group” the method of the investigation would have had to be simple random sampling, a method which was consciously rejected as the method of sampling due to the amount of time that had to be spent in that case, due to the procedures of generating random numbers, assigning them to the subjects etcetera."

I did the following calculations:

1. Scatterplot
2. Correlation analysis including Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient and the sample coefficient of determination
3. Regression analysis including least square regression line and the standard error of estimate

These calculations was then critically discussed (such as the fact that Pearson's tend to generate an incorrect picture of the strength of the relationship whilst the sample coefficient of determination doesn't).

I was much aided by the book Hamburg, Morris. Basic Statistics: A Modern Approach (Third Edition). I used my GDC and the Minitab statistical package (free trial).

Hope that gave you an idea