In each of the following cases, explain which hypothesis should be set up as the

Question

In each of the following cases, explain which hypothesis should be set up as the null and which should be set up as the alternative by deciding which hypothesis, if incorrectly rejected, would result in a more serious error. This is the hypothesis that should be set up as the null. (4 pts each) 6. A chemical compound used as a food additive is a suspected carcinogen. The two hypotheses are: (i) it is safe, (ii) it is not safe in the amount normally consumed. a. b. In order for a new generic drug to be approved by the FDA, it must be demonstrated, among other things, that it is biologically equivalent to the original drug. The two hypotheses are: (i) it is bioequivalenti) it is not bioequivalent.

Explanation / Answer

We would like to set up the null hypothesis as the statement whose non-detection would result in a more serious error or after-effect.

(a) The null hypothesis should be - The chemical compound used as a food additive is a suspected carcinogen and is not consumed in the safe amount. Not detecting a cancer cause is a serious threat.

(b) The null hypothesis should be - The new drug is not bioequivalent to the original drug, because that is a critical factor for drug approval by the FDA. If it is incorrectly concluded that the drug is bioequivalent, then a potentially hazardous drug may come out in the market for general use.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse I
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.