I am investigating how well people estimate the length of a line and the size of an angle.

Authors Avatar
I am investigating how well people estimate the length of a line and the size of an angle. I am going to compare the following:

* Year 7 compared to year 10 (Boys and girls) in estimating the size of an acute angle.

* Girls compared to boys (Years 7 and 10) in estimating the length of a short line.

I am going to compare these two because it is a very wide range of data. I am going to sample 40 people for each investigation,

For example:

* 40 people from year 7 and,

* 40 people from year 10.

A questionnaire has been circulated to a variety of people in set 1-5 and year 7-sixth form. The questionnaire includes questions, such as:

* Estimate the length of this line

* Estimate the size of this angle

* Estimate the length of this squiggle

For Investigation 1

'Year 7 compared to year 10 in estimating the size of an acute angle'

My hypothesis is that a larger amount of year 10 will be better at estimating the size of an angle than year 7. I think that more people from year 10 will be better at estimating the size of an angle because they have been in education longer and are more advanced at maths, while year 7 will be less advanced as they haven't been in education as long as year 10.

For Investigation 2

'Girls compared to boys I estimating the length of a short line'

My hypothesis is that girls will be better at estimating the length of a line and the size of an angle than boys. I think that girls will be better at estimating the length of a line and the size of an angle than boys because girls take time to study things more closely than boys as boys tend to rush things.

I will put all the data I collect in graphs. I will put my data in the following graphs:

* Box plot

* Cumulative frequency graph

I have chosen these graphs because they are clear, simple to look at and will show my results best. A box plot provides an excellent visual summary of important aspects of a distribution among my data. The box stretches from the lower quartile to the upper quartile and therefore contains the middle half of the data in the distribution. The median is shown as a line across the box. Therefore 1/4 of the distribution is between this line and the top of the box and 1/4 of the distribution is between this line and the bottom of the box. This makes it easy for me to comment on my data and compare two sets of data if they are both in box plots.

From the cumulative frequency graph it is possible to work out three important statistics:

* The lower and upper quartiles

* The median

* The interquartile range

From these 3 important statistics I will find it easy to compare data both on other cumulative frequency graphs and on box plots making it easier for me to come to a conclusion about my data and find out whether or not my hypothesis is correct.

I will use stratified random sampling to sample my data because it is an alternative to a simple random sample that provides more precision. In a simple random sample, I would select subjects randomly from a single large pool of data. In a stratified random sample, I will divide this large pool of subjects into several groups called strata (in this case strata will be gender and year group) and then randomly select subjects from within each group. The number of subjects selected from each group is fixed by design.

A stratified sample makes sense when your data is varied, but it can easily be split into strata that are more consistent. I am using a stratified sample because there is a lot variability between strata and little variability within strata.

The numbers I select from each strata will be proportional to the size of the strata.

CALCULATIONS

*The numbers I select from each strata will be proportional to the size of the strata, I am sampling 20% of each strata. I will then make this fair by finding the mean average of each strata with will in turn help me find out whether or not my hypothesis is right*

Hypothesis 1:

Year 10 will be better at estimating the size of an acute angle than Year 7:

Method: I will select my data of people's estimates for usage in hypothesis 1 and 2 using stratified random sampling. I intend to do this by sampling 20% of each strata, in these cases gender and year group. Once I have worked out what proportion of each strata I need to sample I will use the 'random' button on my calculator to randomly sample my data, to avoid biased data. I will then work out how far out their estimate was off the actual measurement and from that I will work out the percentage error so I can work out whether my hypothesizes are correct. I will work out whether my hypothesizes are correct by working out what the average percentage error is for each group. I will list the estimate, error and percentage error in order of ascending size to make it easier for myself when adding up percentage errors and dividing them by the amount of data in that particular strata, to get the mean average.
Join now!


Then I will for hypothesis 1(Year 10 will be better at estimating the size of an acute angle than Year 7):

* Add together the mean average of males and females in year 7 and divide it by 2 to get the mean average of males and females In year 7 combined.

* Add together the mean average of males and females in year 10 and divide it by 2 to get the mean average of males and females In year 10 combined.

* Compare the 2 averages. If the average for year 10 is ...

This is a preview of the whole essay