• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10
  11. 11
    11
  12. 12
    12
  13. 13
    13
  14. 14
    14
  15. 15
    15

Investigate people's judgement of measurements.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Nathan Hart        Maths Coursework        22 FEB 2003

Statistics Coursework:

Judgement of

Distance

By Nathan Hart


Judgement of Measurements

Object

I have decided to investigate people’s judgement of measurements as the subject for my Statistics Coursework.

Before starting this experiment I needed to define guidelines that would establish the fairness of the tests method of assessment. The method I chose to fulfil this requirement was to:

  1. Place the test candidates at one end of a table with their eyes level with the table-top
  2. Ask the candidates to look horizontally across the table at a pin located at a fixed position in the middle of a sheet of graph-paper [see diagram 1].
  3. Require the candidate to mark (on the graph-paper) that distance where they thought the pin was located (firstly marking using their right hand, and then their left). Viewing, per hand, is firstly using both eyes followed by each eye individually, right first.  The difference between the estimated and the actual position of the target pin is measured for each of the eye conditions. These 3 results are added together to give the final result.

This method creates two problems:

  1. How the candidate should mark the point which they feel is in line with the pin. I have chosen to use a pin as a marker since I feel it both represents the object they were viewing and gives a greater degree of accuracy than a pencil mark.
  2. How far to the side from the target pin should the candidate mark the graph-paper.
...read more.

Middle

3

2

17

8

12

6

15

10.5

13

15

26

15

12

6

11

22

* Denotes anomalous results which have been disregarded for the purposes of the graph, table totals and averages. This was thought a result of ‘seeing’ the target between tests with and without glasses on.

22

23

21

8

131*

8*

13.5

18.5

44

14

3

9

3

9

20

9

16

20

5

5

TOTAL:

344.5

410.5

MEAN:

11.9

14.2

Sample 3

Data: Girls judgement compared with that of Boys

To test whether girls are better judges of distance than boys I will compare every fifth boy and girl results when using their favoured hand. Candidates must not be spectacle wearers, as we would then be introducing another variable. The data shown is the total score of the candidates three estimates using their preferred hand.

Table5   Distance judgement by Girls compared with Boys (Sum of estimates mm)

Boys

Girls

52

81

21

44

13

14

29

6

33

9

19

5

19

20

16

4

22

12

18

50

11

19

20

5

39.5

40

6.5

14

27

6.5

20

16

40

16

20

11

0

11

53

5

1

4

6

12

4

17

76

40

18

3

5

12

59

13

4

11

28

8

27

20

TOTAL:

707

528.5

MEAN:

23.6

17.6


The data from table 5 has been grouped here into a second table 6. The reason for me doing this is so that I am able to then transfer the data in table 6, firstly into a frequency density graph, and then cumulative frequency graphs from table 7.

Table 6  Boys vs Girls grouped into 10mm increments

Mm

Boys(f)

Girls(f)

x (midpoint)

Boys(fx)

Girls(fx)

0 – 10

7

10

5

35

50

-20

10

15

15

150

225

-30

6

0

25

150

0

-40

3

2

35

105

70

-50

0

2

45

0

90

-60

3

0

55

165

0

-70

0

0

65

0

0

-80

1

0

75

75

0

-90

0

1

85

0

85

Sum fx

30

30

∑ fx

680

520

Table 7  Cumulative frequency

mm

Boys Cf

Girls Cf

0 – 10

7

10

0 – 20

17

25

0 – 30

23

25

0 – 40

26

27

0 – 50

26

29

0 – 60

29

29

0 – 70

29

29

0 – 80

30

29

0 – 90

30

30

Cf – Cumulative frequency


Conclusions for Sample 1

  1. Whether the individual is right or left handed

For this sample I predicted that handedness will have no effect on judgement of distance.

I made this prediction because the hands have nothing to do with a candidate’s judgement of distance, it is their eyes. As you can see from my results this apparently is the case.

...read more.

Conclusion

The tests I applied examined:

  • Firstly, the effect of an individuals handedness. My measurements, including a repeat second test, when analysed by tables of comparison, stem and leaf and box and whisker diagrams confirmed my prediction 1. There is no conclusive difference dependant on handedness. There was however considerable individual variability between candidates confirming my hypothesis that estimation of distance is an individual attribute.
  • Secondly, estimates of distance by candidates requiring spectacles would be better when wearing their spectacles than when not. My measurements did indicate estimation of distance was better when wearing their spectacles. A line of best fit from a scatter graph supported this conclusion although again there was considerable variation of estimates.
  • Thirdly, that girls would be better than boys at estimating distances. My measurements, including a second test, clearly supported this conclusion. The results were probably the most conclusive of all the tests. Superimposed graphs of the two tests for the Boys and Girls showed very good reproducibility of these results although individual estimates varied widely in both groups. However the Boys showed the greatest variation further supporting the conclusion that, on average, girls are better at estimating distance.

Whilst the indications are all my predictions have been shown to be apparently correct, the degree of variability from individual results makes absolute conclusions difficult. In any extension of the work I would try and increase the size of the test population database. This would increase the confidence in the conclusions.

Page  of

...read more.

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Probability & Statistics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Probability & Statistics essays

  1. I am going to design and then carry out an experiment to test people's ...

    17.5 19 7 13 8 7 5 7 7 14 16 16 5.5 17 7 15 9 5 6 13 8 16 16 13 0 7 8 17 8.5 13.5 14.5 7 8 18 14 7 11.5 12 8 19 10 14 5.5 7 8 20 7 12 8 11

  2. Statistics coursework

    Male 103 4 4 4 12 7 Male 100 4 4 4 12 7 Male 107 5 5 5 15 7 Male 101 4 4 4 12 7 Male 88 3 3 3 9 7 Male 105 4 5 5 14 7 Male 100 4 4 4 12 7 Male

  1. Probability of Poker Hands

    for the five cards and therefore, we must eliminate the possibility of getting the straight with the same suite. There are 40 ways of getting a straight flush. Choosing a Flush (all cards from the same suit): The possibility of getting a flush can be represented by 4C1 x 13C5.

  2. DATA HANDLING COURSEWORK

    join both of these tables to make it into one single table. Cumulative frequency Weight (kg) (up to and including) Boys Girls 0 - 10 0 0 11 - 20 0 0 21 - 30 0 0 31 - 40 4 1 41 - 50 15 17 51 - 60

  1. Anthropometric Data

    value for a small size socks, medium size sock and lager size socks. Checking 'r values Looking at the r value that obtain I which is 0.5305 in one d.p. is say I have +0.5 from this I can say I have a weak positive correlation.

  2. Statistics. The purpose of this coursework is to investigate the comparative relationships between the ...

    Some people may buy a new car before increasing the mileage a lot. This leads to the fact that all mileage done will be passed onto the next owner At some points, an owner may have bought a car to support their financial lifestyle (e.g.

  1. AS statistics coursework - correlation coefficient between height and weight in year 11 boys ...

    height = 1.91m weight = 82kg 2. height = 1.80m weight = 63kg 3. height = 1.68m weight = 56kg 1. y = -56.34 + (66.61x1.91) = 70.89kg residual = 70.89 - 82 = -11.11 a percentage error of 15.67% 2.

  2. Intermediate Maths Driving Test Coursework

    same to that in the preliminary analysis which was 16.77093 and 36 respectfully however the range seems to be a little more off than the other parts of the sample. Number of Minor Mistakes Mean Range 15.35 32 Number of Lessons Mean Range 23.1625 34 With these graphs and diagrams

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work