Normality Testing Question
Six Sigma – iSixSigma › Forums › Old Forums › General › Normality Testing Question
- This topic has 2 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 4 months ago by
Sridhar.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 25, 2002 at 5:48 am #28613
Dan HickeyParticipant@Dan-HickeyInclude @Dan-Hickey in your post and this person will
be notified via email.I have this question that I need to answer for my Black Belt study. Im confident that question related to normality testing but am confused as to how it can be assessed given the lack of data in question needed to answer it??? Any ideas???
Background.Two underwriters, Adam and Joan, process a total of 200 Mortgage Insurance deals over a 1 week period. The deals are essentially the same apart from size (large or small). A large deal is more complex and takes longer to process. A Six Sigma team has been assigned to analyse the data, before they can – YOU must validate that the data collected is fair and representative.
Results.
Adam. Large deals = 21; Small deals = 94
Joan. Large deals = 27; Small deals = 58
Questions.
1. What type of data are you dealing with here ?
2. What type of statistical test do you propose to use ?
3. State your Hypothesis test in terms of Ho and Ha.
4. Using Minitab, what results do you get (for the p-value and the) ?
5. Show me how you would calculate, by hand, this test result (not the p-value, the test result).
6. What does that tell you about the data, ie: do you reject Ha and accept Ho; or reject Ho and accept Ha ?0January 25, 2002 at 7:18 am #71530Dan,
Based on the fact that you have a discrete counting scenario and the overall structure of the scenario, here’s my recommendation. Form a 2×2 contingency table. You can perform the requisite analysis via Chi-Square.
Regards,
Erik0January 25, 2002 at 1:36 pm #71535Hi,
I think i will go with the Erick. For this kind of data it is better to do the contingency table approach. I am not sure whether i understand your question correct or not. I am trying to explain what i understood.
the resutls are
Large deals small deals total
Adam 21(a) 94(b) 115
Joan 27(c) 58(d) 85
Total 48 152 200
Null Hypothesis : P1 = P2
Aleternat : P1 P2
predicted values are calculated as
a = 48*115/200 = 27.6 b = 115*152/200 = 87.4
c = 48*85/200 = 20.4 d = 152*85/200 = 64.6
Chi square Ch(cal) = Sum (observed – predicted)^2 / perdicted
= 4.90
Chi square Ch(critical for df = 1, alpha = 0.05) = 3.85
Ch(cal) > Ch(critical) We reject the null hypothesis and conclude that the proportions of deals are not same for both adam and joan.
hope this helps you
regards
sridhar
0 -
AuthorPosts
The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.