Discover the answers you need at Westonci.ca, a dynamic Q&A platform where knowledge is shared freely by a community of experts. Our platform provides a seamless experience for finding precise answers from a network of experienced professionals. Connect with a community of professionals ready to help you find accurate solutions to your questions quickly and efficiently.

A florist wants to determine if a new additive would help extend the life of cut flowers longer than the original additive. The florist randomly selects 20 carnations and randomly assigns 10 to the new additive and 10 to the original additive. After three weeks, 6 carnations placed in the new additive still looked healthy and 2 carnations placed in the original additive still looked healthy. The difference in proportions (new – original) for the carnations that still looked healthy after three weeks was 0.4. Assuming there is no difference in the additives, 200 simulated differences in sample proportions are displayed in the dotplot. Using this dotplot and the difference in proportions from the samples, is there convincing evidence that the new additive was more effective?
A Yes, because a difference in proportions of 0.4 or more occurred 7 out of 200 times, meaning the difference is statistically significant and the new additive is more effective.
B Yes, because a difference in proportions of 0.4 or less occurred 193 out of 200 times, meaning the difference is statistically significant and the new additive is more effective.
C No, because a difference in proportions of 0.4 or more occurred 7 out of 200 times, meaning the difference is not statistically significant and the new additive is not more effective.
D No, because a difference in proportions of 0.4 or less occurred 193 out of 200 times, meaning the difference is not statistically significant and the new additive is not more effective.