To best answer our original question, it might make the most sense to test for significant correlation between income and drawn nickel size. Incomes (in thousands of $) are shown for each of the 75 samples below:

Income (thousands of $)Coin size (mm)
2325
2323
1521
1928
2029
2525
1817
1227
2822
3729
2221
2829
3424
2527
1124
3324
3525
819
1726
2923
1925
920
3113
2429
3818
1525
2126
1823
3412
2726
1123
1824
2522
3316
2032
3115
1827
2011
1929
3831
5621
5619
4320
8819
4326
6420
6419
6119
4821
7519
7413
8423
4221
7117
9415
10010
5719
7020
8723
6418
8522
8716
8115
5519
4710
6123
5925
9819
4820
6618
4218
5628
6220
9520
4114


You can copy the data into Excel by highlighting the data, right-clicking and selecting Copy, then opening Excel, clicking on a blank cell, and selecting Paste from the Edit menu.

Test the claim that there is significant correlation at the 0.05 significance level. Retain at least 3 decimals on all values.

a) If we use L\displaystyle {L} to denote the low income group and H\displaystyle {H} to denote the high income group, identify the correct alternative hypothesis.



b) The r\displaystyle {r} test statistic value is:  
Hint: You may find it more convenient to use Excel's CORREL, SLOPE, and INTERCEPT functions rather than your calculator

c) The critical value is:
If your sample size falls between table values, use the smaller sample size

d) Based on this, we


e) Which means


f) The regression equation (in terms of income x\displaystyle {x}) is:
y^=\displaystyle \hat{{y}}=  

g) To predict what diameter a child would draw a nickel given family income, it would be most appropriate to: