Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    How'd it go?

    I think the grade boundaries will be lower than usual due to the many explanation questions, and the two continuity correction questions.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    did you get 0.3222 for one question
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone approximate from binomial to normal for the out that was work out probability for 90 out of 100 (was 5 marks I think)
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ivoryivory)
    Did anyone approximate from binomial to normal for the out that was work out probability for 90 out of 100 (was 5 marks I think)
    I did
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    That paper was so annoying like i messed up the chi squared because v was 6 instead of 4 and i messed up the approximating God knows how many more questions i messed up
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ivoryivory)
    Did anyone approximate from binomial to normal for the out that was work out probability for 90 out of 100 (was 5 marks I think)
    did you get 0.3222 for that
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    i ****ed it up i got like reject h0 for all the hypothesis qs
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    What did people put for the question which asked why her friend couldn’t carry out the test after she’d found the PMCC as -0.138
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Paper was ok, except for the wordy questions
    For question 3, did people use binomial for two marker (10c10 and 10c9 added together)? And for the next 5 marker applied continuity correction, so it was 89.5 and used (mean=np=100*0.88, variance=now), got 0.322 as final answer?
    I have rejected everything apart from the one chi squared I think
    The PMCC was something like -0.18 or -0.8 something, cant remember but it was negative
    There was a two tailed test for the mean so you have to split sl
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luxyaaa)
    did you get 0.3222 for one question
    Yeeees, it was such a weird q, I spent ages on it
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ivoryivory)
    Did anyone approximate from binomial to normal for the out that was work out probability for 90 out of 100 (was 5 marks I think)
    Yes
    And applied continuity correction, got 0.3222
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    And i feel like i wrote the wrong conclusions
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zgogol18)
    Yes
    And applied continuity correction, got 0.3222
    yh i got that
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    0.6031 or something like that for one q?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DJBabooon)
    0.6031 or something like that for one q?
    yeah
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    what about when your friend tells you the population pmcc?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DJBabooon)
    what about when your friend tells you the population pmcc?
    I said that the hypotheses need to be decided before the data is collected and shouldn’t be based on it and therefore the test would be unreliable as she already has the PMCC
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    1(i)PMCC=-0.1842
    ii insufficient evidence to reject
    iii. Data must be drawn from population with bivariate normal distribution, it was roughly elliptical shape so seemed reliable
    iv. Didn’t really know what to say, figure was for a whole population not from a sample?
    v. Correlation doesn’t imply causation, might have been a third variable present that caused correlation

    2i uniform, independent random rate of occurrence
    ii. Variance=8.4
    iii. 0.6013 I think this was p(x >=8) used tables
    iv. 0.6502 p between two values I think


    3. The two marker, 0.6573, using binomial
    The five marker 0.3222

    The mean test for two tailed, reject H0
    The chi test first time didn’t have enough evidence to reject H0 for the second test rejected it I think
    The standard deviation where the mean was constant was something close the the as that was given in the question, 0. Something

    The rest I can’t really remember
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    First Pmcc test was two tailed as well
    Didn’t need to split sl, just looked as two tailed Colloumn in the table
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    How did you define PMCC
    I didn’t know how to define it, just said p(rho)- population PMCC for age and height
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: June 17, 2018

University open days

  1. University of Bradford
    University-wide Postgraduate
    Wed, 25 Jul '18
  2. University of Buckingham
    Psychology Taster Tutorial Undergraduate
    Wed, 25 Jul '18
  3. Bournemouth University
    Clearing Campus Visit Undergraduate
    Wed, 1 Aug '18
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.