Nine Experts Rated Two Brands Of Colombian Coffee In A Taste

1020 Nine Experts Rated Two Brands Of Colombian Coffee In A Taste Tes

1020 Nine experts rated two brands of Colombian coffee in a taste-testing experiment. A rating on a 7-point scale (1=extremely unpleasing, 7=extremely pleasing) is given for each of four characteristics: taste, aroma, rich-ness, and acidity. The following data stored in Coffee contain the ratings accumulated over all four characteristics: a. At the 0.05 level of significance, is there evidence of a difference in the mean ratings between the two brands?b. What assumption is necessary about the population distribution in order to perform this test?c.

Determine the p-value in (a) and interpret its meaning.d. Construct and interpret a 95% confidence interval estimate of the difference in the mean ratings between the two brands.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The evaluation of consumer preferences and perceptions of product qualities through taste tests is a common method in food science and marketing research. When comparing two brands of Colombian coffee, experts often rate specific characteristics such as taste, aroma, richness, and acidity on a standardized scale. This study involves analyzing whether the differences in these ratings are statistically significant, which can inform production decisions, marketing strategies, and product development. The primary goal is to determine if any statistically significant difference exists in the mean ratings between the two brands of Colombian coffee, based on accumulated expert evaluations, using appropriate statistical hypothesis testing at the 0.05 significance level. Additionally, the study highlights the assumptions necessary for the validity of the statistical tests, interprets the p-value associated with the test, and constructs a confidence interval to estimate the magnitude of the difference.

Data Overview and Methodology

The data underlying this analysis consist of ratings awarded by nine experts across four characteristics—taste, aroma, richness, and acidity—each scored on a 7-point scale. The ratings are pooled over these characteristics for each expert and each brand, yielding a dataset suitable for paired comparison. The hypothesis testing follows the framework for comparing two population means with paired data. Specifically, we analyze the differences in ratings for each expert between the two brands, then examine the mean difference using a t-test for paired samples.

The null hypothesis (H₀) posits that there is no difference in the mean ratings between the two brands, while the alternative hypothesis (H₁) asserts that a difference exists. Mathematically:

- H₀: μ_d = 0

- H₁: μ_d ≠ 0

where μ_d is the mean difference in ratings between Brand A and Brand B.

Assuming the dataset provides individual difference scores for each expert, the test statistic is computed based on the sample mean difference, the standard deviation of differences, and the number of experts (n=9). The significance level (α) is set at 0.05 for this analysis.

Assumption of Population Distribution

The key assumption necessary for performing the paired t-test is that the differences between the ratings for the two brands are approximately normally distributed in the population. This normality assumption is particularly important given the small sample size (n=9), as the t-test relies on the sampling distribution of the mean difference being approximately normal to produce valid results. If the differences are markedly skewed or contain significant outliers, the results may be unreliable, and non-parametric alternatives like the Wilcoxon signed-rank test should be considered.

Results of the Hypothesis Test

Using the collected data, the sample mean difference (d̄), the standard deviation of differences (s_d), and the calculated t-statistic are used to evaluate the null hypothesis. The degrees of freedom (df) for this test is n-1=8.

Suppose the calculated t-value exceeds the critical value from the t-distribution table at α=0.05 (two-tailed). In that case, we reject H₀ and conclude that there is statistically significant evidence of a difference in mean ratings between the two brands. Conversely, if the t-value does not exceed the critical value, we fail to reject H₀.

The p-value derived from the t-distribution quantifies the probability of obtaining the observed data (or more extreme) assuming H₀ is true. A p-value less than 0.05 indicates strong evidence against H₀, supporting the conclusion that the brands differ in ratings.

Interpretation of the p-Value

The p-value provides a measure of the strength of evidence against the null hypothesis. For example, a p-value of 0.03 implies only a 3% chance of observing such a difference in ratings if there truly is no difference. Therefore, when the p-value is less than 0.05, we consider the difference statistically significant, implying that the observed variation in expert ratings likely reflects true differences in coffee quality characteristics between the brands.

Confidence Interval for the Mean Difference

To quantify the magnitude and precision of the estimated difference, a 95% confidence interval (CI) can be constructed around the mean difference. This involves calculating:

- The point estimate of the mean difference

- The standard error of the mean difference

- The critical t-value for df=8 and α=0.05

The confidence interval provides a range of plausible values for the true difference in population means. If this interval includes zero, it suggests insufficient evidence to confirm a significant difference at the 95% confidence level. Conversely, an interval that does not include zero indicates a significant difference.

Interpreting the confidence interval involves examining its bounds: if both bounds are positive, it indicates a mean difference favoring one brand; if both are negative, favoring the other; and if zero is within the bounds, the difference is not statistically significant.

Conclusion

The analysis, employing a paired t-test and constructing a confidence interval, offers a comprehensive approach to evaluating expert ratings of the two Colombian coffee brands. When the assumptions are satisfied, the results point toward either confirming or refuting the presence of a meaningful difference in ratings. The findings support informed decision-making by stakeholders in the coffee industry, guiding product development and marketing strategies based on statistical evidence.

References

• Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
• Gibbons, J. D., & Chakraborti, S. (2011). Nonparametric statistical inference (5th ed.). CRC press.
• McDonald, J. (2014). Handbook of biological statistics (3rd ed.). Sparky House Publishing.
• Ryan, T. P. (2013). Modern experimental design. John Wiley & Sons.
• Laerd Statistics. (2018). Paired Samples t-test using SPSS Statistics. Retrieved from https://statistics.laerd.com
• Zar, J. H. (2010). Biostatistical analysis. Pearson.
• Ott, R. L., & Longnecker, M. (2010). An introduction to statistical methods and data analysis. Cengage Learning.
• Stevens, J. P. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Routledge.
• Wilcox, R. R. (2012). Introduction to robust estimation and hypothesis testing. Academic Press.
• Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley.