Answer:
The answer is "Its results are not consistent with its three designs Yes. Its results show significant differences between both the three designs."
Step-by-step explanation:
Following are the distribution of preference:
[tex]Design 1 =54 \\\\ Design 2=38 \\\\\ Design 3=28 \\\\[/tex]
[tex]Design \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O_i \\ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 54 \\2 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 38\\3 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 28 \\Total \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 120[/tex]
An expected frequency([tex]E_i[/tex]) has 40 Null hypotheses to take n=120.to each design:
The effects of the three designs are standardized
Inaccurate.
Hypothesis Alternative:
The effects of the three prototypes are not uniform
Degrees Of freedom [tex]=(n-1)=(3-1)=2[/tex]
[tex]H_o, x^2 \ test\ statistic \ \sum_i {\frac{(O_i -E_i)^2}{E_i}} \\[/tex]
[tex]= \frac{(54 -40)^2}{40}+\frac{(38-40)^2}{40} + \frac{(28-40)^2}{40}\\\\=49+0.1+3.6\\\\=8.6[/tex]
Chi-squared distribution critical value at [tex]\alpha = 0.05 (x^2 _{0.052})=5.99[/tex]
Since [tex]x^2, a[/tex] value [tex]> x^2 -[/tex]table of [tex]\alpha =0.05 =5.99[/tex]is determined.
So[tex]H_o[/tex] is rejected.