Docstoc

Spring Break

Document Sample
Spring Break Powered By Docstoc
					Spring Break “A UW-L Tradition?”
          Sarah Binford
           Jim Caulum
           Mitch Olson
          April Rundahl
            Ger Xiong

         Section 2 Group 2
           May 5, 2003




                                   1
                    Table of Contents

Managerial/Executive Summary……………………………………………………1

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………3

Methods……………………………………………………………………………..6

Results……………………………………………………………………………..10

Discussion………………………………………………………………………….15

Summary and Recommendations…………………………………………………..17

Closing Comments…………………………………………………………………18

Appendix A………………………………………………………………………...19

Appendix B…………………………………………………………………………20

Appendix C…………………………………………………………………………23

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………..28


Figures:

       Figure 1………………………………………………10

       Figure 2………………………………………………10

       Figure 3………………………………………………11

       Figure 4………………………………………………11

       Figure 5………………………………………………12

       Figure 6………………………………………………12

       Figure 7………………………………………………13

       Figure 8………………………………………………13




                                                     2
Tables :

       Table 1………………………………………………7

       Table 2………………………………………………7

       Table 3………………………………………………8

       Table 4………………………………………………9




                                    3
Managerial/Executive Summary


Objectives & Methodology:

    I.        The purpose of this project was to determine what University of Wisconsin-La

              Crosse students do during spring break vacation. This project will determine

              how the image created on Music Television (MTV) and the differences in

              laws in foreign countries influenced UW-L students’ decisions about spring

              break activities in 2003. It will also compare travel habits of students in 2003

              to a previous study that was conducted by a former BUS 230 study in 2000.

              This comparison will be used to determine whether September 11, 2001 had a

              dramatic influence on spring break travel in 2003.

    II.       The names and telephone numbers of UW-L undergraduate students between

              the ages of 18 to 25 were used as the sampling frame. Of the 250 randomly

              selected, 183 students agreed to participate.

    III.      Primary data was collected through telephone surveys from the 250 randomly

              selected students.

Findings:

           The first hypothesis is that students’ are choosing alternative spring break

activities rather than taking trips to sunny destinations. The results show that 36% of

UW-L students chose to do community service or work instead of taking a spring break

trip.

           The second hypothesis is that less than fifty percent of UW-L students participate

in a stereotypical MTV spring break. The results indicate that Music Television (MTV)

influenced the behavior of only 6% of the students who went on a spring break trip.




                                                                                             4
       The third hypothesis is that the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11,

2001 have caused a statistically significant decrease in spring break travel. The results

show that September 11, 2001 had affected 3% of the students’ decision to not go on a

spring break trip.

        The fourth hypothesis is that spring breakers travel across the border to avoid the

stricter laws in the United States. The results show that 50% of the students who traveled

outside the United States were trying to avoid certain U.S. laws.

Conclusions & Recommendations:

       The spring break travel habits of most students at the University Wisconsin-La

Crosse were not influenced by September 11, 2001, Music Television (MTV), or U. S.

laws. Money was the most common factor for why students did not go on a spring break

trip. Most students who did not go on a spring break trip worked. The study determined

that fewer students went on a spring break trip in 2003 compared to 2000.

       Future studies are recommended to take a larger sample to ensure more accurate

results. For the survey’s questions have more descriptive answers instead of just listing

other as an option. Since money was shown to be a large factor, it would be beneficial to

examine money related issues, such as: rent, tuition increases, and credit card debt.




                                                                                            5
Introduction


       Every year thousands of college students take spring break trips. This has been an

American tradition since the 1960’s when students flocked to Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

More recent popular destinations have included Cancun, Mexico and Panama City,

Florida. Regardless of the generation, the words spring break signifies freedom from

school and for some freedom from authority.

       Many factors influence students’ decisions about taking spring break trips. One

of these factors is the portrayal of spring break by MTV (Music Television). In recent

years MTV has broadcasted from various spring break locations, featuring partying

students and their activities as stereotypical spring break behaviors. These behaviors

consist of binge drinking, sex, nudity, constant partying, and beautiful bodies everywhere.

Many students decision to go on spring break is influenced by the perception MTV

creates.

       Another factor that has influenced spring break travel is September 11, 2001.

Americans have been traveling less compared to previous years.1 The events of 9-11 have

led to a weakened economy leaving students with less money to spend on travel, and

leery of future terrorist attacks. The events of 9-11 have also led students to reassess the

value of life. This has resulted in more students giving back to communities in need

during spring break by volunteering their services.

       The final factor that has influenced spring break travel is the stricter laws in the

United States. Laws concerning drugs, alcohol, and excessive partying have been


1
 Yokoyama, Taka. “Student Bureau: Spring Break travel may be down this year” CNN
22 Mar. 2002. 12 Feb




                                                                                               6
imposed in many U.S. spring break destinations in order to curb excessive types of spring

break activities. This has caused many students to flock across the border where laws are

more lenient.2 Also, many minors are attracted to these destinations because of lower

drinking ages and less authority.

          Every year students from the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse (UW-L)

participate in these spring break rituals. This project will determine how the image

created on MTV and the differences in laws in foreign countries influence UW-L

students’ decisions about their 2003 spring break activities. It will also compare travel

habits of students in 2003 to a previous study that was conducted by a former BUS 230

study in 2000. This comparison will be used to determine whether 9-11 had a dramatic

influence on spring break travel. This study uses data collected in telephone interviews

with a random sample of current UW-L students.

         The following hypotheses will be tested. The first hypothesis is that students’ are

choosing alternative spring break activities rather than taking trips to sunny destinations.

There are alternatives to boozing on the beach including working or volunteering during

spring break. According to an article by CBS News, “3400 Christian students walking

the sands, hoping to get breakers to replace a beer with a bible” is evidence of these

alternatives.

         The second hypothesis is that less than fifty percent of UW-L students participate

in a stereotypical MTV spring break. The MTV portrayal of the everyday behavior of

college students is also a misconception. The mayor of Panama City Beach, Florida



2
    Leinwand, Donna. “Alcohol-soaked Spring Break Lures students Abroad.” 6 Jan. 2003.
         12 Feb. 2003. http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document.




                                                                                               7
stated that the average spring breakers behavior was no different from a weekend spent at

home.

        The third hypothesis is that the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11,

2001 have caused a statistically significant decrease in spring break travel. Based on an

article from USA Today, spring break travel was down for 2002.

        The fourth hypothesis is that spring breakers travel across the border to avoid the

stricter laws in the United States. This hypothesis is based upon an article from USA

Today that states “declining tolerance for hordes of boisterous, partying students --- have

helped to increase the number of spring break trips outside the USA.”

        The spring break travel habits of most students at the University Wisconsin-La

Crosse were not influenced by September 11, 2001, Music Television (MTV), or U. S.

laws. September 11, 2001 had affected 3% of the students’ decision to not go on a spring

break trip. Music Television (MTV) influenced the behavior of only 6% of the students

who went on a spring break trip. 50% of the students who traveled outside the United

States were trying to avoid certain U.S. laws. Money was the most common factor for

why students did not go on a spring break trip. Most students who did not go on a spring

break trip worked. The study determined that fewer students went on a spring break trip

in 2003 compared to 2000. The results show that 36% of UW-L students chose to do

community service or work instead of taking a spring break trip.




                                                                                              8
Methods


       The target population of this study consists of undergraduate students between the

ages of 18 and 25 at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse (UW-L). This group was

chosen because the study was to focus on traditional students attending UW-L rather than

nontraditional, graduate, or part time undergraduate students.

       The study used primary data, which was obtained through a telephone survey.

The students who participated in the study were randomly selected from a complete list

of UW-L students matching the criteria of the targeted population. A limitation of a

telephone survey is non-response. In this study, non-response occurred because of out-

dated telephone numbers and the interviewers’ inability to contact individuals. An over

sample of the target population was used to address these sources of error.

       The sampling frame was obtained from UW-L’s Office of Records and

Registration. The final target sample was 250 UW-L undergraduate students. SPSS 11.0

was used to generate a simple random sample of 300 students. The extra 50 names were

used as replacement for non-response. Out of the random sample of 300, only 183

students agreed to participate in the survey.

       The following tables are used to group and summarize the variables measured by

the survey. The results from the survey will be used to test the studies four hypotheses.




                                                                                            9
Table 1 summarizes the variables that measure if the student participated in spring break

activities or non-spring break activities.



                              Table 1: Spring Break Activities

Variable Label     Operational Definition           Response Code

Trip               Measure if student went on       0__No
                   spring break in 2003.            1__Yes
Non-Spring         Measure of non-spring break      0__Go home
break location     location                         1__Stay at School
                                                    2__Other
Work               Measure if student worked        0__No
                   during spring break              1__Yes
Spring break       Measure of spring break          0__Party
Activity           activities                       1__Community Service
                                                    2__Other


Table 2 summarizes the variables that measure students’ activities while on a spring

break trip.

                           Table 2: Spring Break Trip Activities

Variable Label     Operational Definition      Response Code

Destination        Measures where student 0__Florida
                   traveled               1__California
                                          2__Texas
                                          3__Arizona
                                          4__Other U.S. destination
                                          5__ México
                                          6__Jamaica
                                          7__The Bahamas
                                          8__Other foreign destination

Drink              Measures if student         0__No
                   consumed alcohol            1__Yes

Go to the          Measures if student         0__No
Beach              went to the beach           1__Yes




                                                                                        10
Used Drugs       Measures if student       0__No
                 used drugs                1__Yes

Go Dancing       Measures if student       0__No
                 went dancing              1__Yes

Had Sex          Measures if student had   0__No
                 sex                       1__Yes

Influence        Measure of MTV            0__No
                 influence on spring       1__Yes
                 break behavior
Party            Measure of spring         0__No
Comparison       break partying vs. UW-    1__Yes
                 L partying
Laws             Measure if UW-L           0__No
                 students traveled         1__Yes
                 outside the U.S. to
                 avoid certain U.S. laws
Fines            Measure if UW-L           0__No
                 students received fines   1__Yes
                 due to spring break
                 partying


Table 3 summarizes the variables that measure why the student did not go on a spring

break trip.

                      Table 3: Reasons For No Spring Break Trip

Variable Label   Operational Definition    Response Code

Money            Determines if money       0__No
                 was a factor for not      1__Yes
                 going on a spring break
                 trip
Parents          Determines if parents     0__No
                 were a factor for not     1__Yes
                 going on a spring break
                 trip
Importance of    Determines if             0__No
spring break     importance was a factor   1__Yes
trip             for not going on a
                 spring break trip




                                                                                       11
U.S. Laws          Determines if U.S. Law     0__No
                   were a factor for not      1__Yes
                   going on a spring break
                   trip
September 11,      Determines if              0__No
2001               September 11, 2001         1__Yes
                   was a factor for not
                   going on a spring break
                   trip


Table 4 summarizes the variables that measure the students’ demographics.

                                  Table 4: Demographics

Variable Label     Operational Definition     Response Code

Gender             Measure of students        0__Male
                   Gender                     1__Female

Legal Drinking     Measure if student is of   0__No
Age                legal drinking age.        1__Yes

Classification     Measure of the students 0__Freshman
                   current year in school  1__Sophmore
                                           2__Junior
                                           3__Senior




         The results were computed with SPSS 11.0 software. The statistical analysis

included 95% confidence intervals for proportions, means, hypothesis tests to compare

means, and graphs. The results of the analysis appear in the next section.




                                                                                        12
Results

One of the objectives of this project is to determine the factors that influence spring break

travel habits of UW-L students in 2003. In order to determine this we examined what

percent of UW-L students went on spring break during 2003.

This graph shows 35% of UW-L students went on a spring break trip in 2003. It can be

stated with 95% confidence that          Figure 1

between 28% and 42% of UW-L
                                            Yes


students went on spring break trip.                  35.0%


(Refer to Appendix C) Out of the
                                                                          65.0%
35% of students who went on a
                                                                                     No

spring break trip, Figure 2 shows

the selected destinations.

                                    Destination
                    UW-L Students' Spring Break Destinations

          Other foreign destin

          3.0%
          Mexico

          15.2%                                                        Florida

                                                                       36.4%



          Other U.S. destinati
          30.3%                                                        Texas

                                                                        6.1%
                                                                      Arizona
                                                                        9.1%
       Figure 2




                                                                                          13
                          Figure 3
                   1.00
                                                                                 Spring Break Trips are usually
                             1.00

                                                                                 known for extreme party
                    .80                                  .82
                                                                                 behavior. Students were asked

                    .60
                                        .67                                      if they participated in any of

                                                                                 the following activities:
                    .40
                                                                                 drinking, going to the beach,

                                                                                 using drugs, dancing, and
Percentage




                    .20

                                                                                 having sex. Figure 4 shows
                                                .09                .09
                   0.00
                            Drinking   Beach   Drugs   Dancing   Have Sex        how many spring breakers took

             part in these activities. An interesting note is that 15 minors went on a spring break trip

             and 100% of them consumed alcohol. (Refer to Appendix C)

             In order to test UW-L students’ party intensity the survey compared the party behavior on

             a spring break trip to a typical weekend at
                                                                         Yes
                                                                                            Figure 4
             UW-L. Figure 4 shows that 51.5% of                          48.5%



             students said that their spring break partying

             was no more extreme than a weekend at                                                                No
                                                                                                             51.5%
             UW-L.

                     The second objective was to

             determine how the image created on MTV

             influenced UW-L students’ decision to go on spring break. Figure 3 shows students

             participated in stereotypical behaviors that are associated with a MTV spring break;

             however, only 2 of the 33 students said MTV influenced their spring behavior. (Refer to

             Figure 5.)




                                                                                                                  14
                                                Figure 5                       Only one out of 33 people who went on a
            Yes ( 2 )
                                                                              spring break trip received a fine.

                                                                                      The third objective was to

                                                                              determine if U.S. laws played a role in

                                                                              UW-L students’ decision on spring break

                                                                  No ( 31 )   trip destinations. Figure 2 shows the

                                                                              chosen destinations by UW-L students for

          spring break 2003. The results show 6 students went on a spring break trip outside the

          United States. Of these 6 students only 3 said it was to avoid certain U.S. laws

                                                Figure 6
                    80                                                                                 The fourth

                                                                                               objective was to
                    60
                                                                                               determine what students

                                                                                               did if they did not go on a
                    40
                                                                                               spring break trip. Out of

                                                                                               the 65% that did not go
                    20

                                                                                               on a spring break trip
Percent




                        0                                                                      78.2% of students went
                                      Go home        Stay at School           Other


                            Non Spring break location                                          home and 21.7% students

                                                                                               stayed at school.




                                                                                                                         15
       Figure 7


                                                     51.3% of students who did not go on a spring

                                                     break trip worked. (Figure 7)
           51.3%               48.7%            No
                                                            The study examined five probable
 Yes
                                                     reasons why students did not go on a spring

                                                     break trip. 74.8% of students stated that

money played a role in their decision not to go on a spring break trip. Figure 8 shows

money and the other factors, which include parents, importance of a spring break trip,

U.S. laws, and September 11, 2001.

                                                                                 Figure 8
                   A final objective of              80.0

                                                             74.8
the study was to compare the travel
                                                     60.0
habits of UW-L students in 2003 to

2000 in order to determine if                        40.0



September 11, 2001 had any
                                                     20.0
                                   Percentage




affects on student travel. Test 1 in
                                                                                     11.8
                                                                     10.1

Appendix C shows that 66% of                          0.0                                            4.2
                                                            Money             Importance of Spring           Sept. 11, 2001
                                                                    Parents                     U.S. Law s
UW-L students went on a trip in

2000. The test results prove that spring break travel was comparatively down in 2003;

however, money seems to be the number one factor for students not going on a spring

break trip. Our next Objective was to determine if students worked more in 2003




                                                                                                                              16
compared to 2000. Our research has concluded that students work the same now as they

did back then. (Refer to Appendix C)




                                                                                  17
Discussion:


       Spring break travel is down considerably from 2000. Only 35% of UW-L

students went on a spring break trip in 2003 where as 66% of UW-L students went on a

spring break trip in 2000. Few students stated September, 11 2001 as a reason for them

not traveling during spring break. Money proved to be the main reason for students

staying at school or going home over the break with all other reasons falling far behind.

       The fact that UW-L students are lacking the monetary funding to support spring

break trips is not unexpected. The economy has been struggling over the past couple of

years and may be reflected in the travel habits of UW-L students. The dramatic decrease

may also be explained by other reasons not tested for in this study. During spring break

this year, and at the time that this survey was administered, the nation was at war with

Iraq. This factor was not taken into consideration as a possible reason for students

staying home, however, it my have played a substantial role in UW-L students travel

decisions.

       Of the students that went on spring break trips, most of them stayed in the United

States. The most popular destination in the U.S. was Florida, followed distantly by

Arizona and Texas. Mexico was the most popular foreign destination and the second

most popular overall.

       While on spring break party trips, nearly all UW-L students consume alcohol. In

fact, 100% of the students on a party trip in this study consumed alcohol. The second

most popular Spring break party activity including 82% of UW-L partiers was dancing,

and around two thirds of the students on a party trip found their way to the beach.




                                                                                           18
       Very few students travel to foreign destinations to avoid U.S. laws. It appears

that strict U.S. laws are not a problem to UW-L students on spring break trips because all

15 minors that went on a spring break trip were able to consume alcohol regardless of

their location. Also, only five out the 119 students that did not go on a spring break trip

stated U.S. laws as a reason that they did not go on a trip.

        MTV has little influence over UW-L students’ spring break behaviors. Two of

the 33 students that partied noted MTV as having an influence on their behavior. Only

one person surveyed received a fine on a spring break party trip and over half of the

students indicated that their spring break partying was no more extreme than a typical

weekend at UW-L.

       Nearly eighty percent of the students that did not partake in a spring break trip

went home, and around twenty percent of them stayed at school. Although 74.8% of

these students stated money as a reason for them not going on a trip, only 51.3%of them

opted to work over the break. The percentage of students working over spring break in

2003 is comparable to the proportion of students who worked in the 2000 study when

66% of the students went on a trip.




                                                                                           19
Summary and Recommendations



       The spring break travel habits of most students at the University Wisconsin-La

Crosse were not influenced by September 11, 2001, Music Television (MTV), or U. S.

laws. September 11, 2001 had affected 3% of the students’ decision to not go on a spring

break trip. Music Television (MTV) influenced the behavior of only 6% of the students

who went on a spring break trip. 50% of the students who traveled outside the United

States were trying to avoid certain U.S. laws. Money was the most common factor for

why students did not go on a spring break trip. Most students who did not go on a spring

break trip worked. The study determined that fewer students went on a spring break trip

in 2003 compared to 2000. The results show that 36% of UW-L students chose to do

community service or work instead of taking a spring break trip.




                                                                                        20
Closing Comments



       Future studies are recommended to take a larger sample to ensure more accurate

results. For the survey’s questions have more descriptive answers instead of just listing

other as an option. Since money was shown to be a large factor, it would be beneficial to

examine money related issues, such as: rent, tuition increases, and credit card debt.




                                                                                        21
Appendix A

Pretest:

        A pretest was administered to 20 undergraduate students between the ages of 18

and 25 at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse (UW-L). This was completed to

determine if students would understand the questions being asked and to find any errors

in the make up of the survey. No errors were found during the pretest. The survey used

for the pretest served as the final version.




                                                                                         22
Appendix B




_________ Number
_________ Interviewer Name
_________ Date and Time

Hello, my name is _________. I am a student at UW-L and I’m conducting a survey for
my Business Research class. The purpose of this survey is to determine UW-L students’
spring break travel habits and behaviors. Your name was randomly selected from a list of
UW-L students. This survey will only take about five minutes. Also, your responses will
be kept strictly confidential. If you have any questions, you may contact Professor Keith
Sherony at 785-8101. Do you wish to participate?

                               Spring Break Questions
 Please check your response

1__Did you go on a trip during spring break in 2003?
      0_119_No
      1_64_Yes
  (If no, go to question 13)

 YES SECTION

2__What did you do?
     0_33_Party (Go to question 3)
     1_1_Community Service    (Go to question 20)
     2_30_Other______________________             (Go to question 20)

3__Where did you go on spring break?
     0_12_Florida
     1__California
     2_2_Texas
     3_3_Arizona
     4_10_Other U.S. destination__________________
     (Go to question 5)

       5_5_México
       6__Jamaica
       7__The Bahamas
       8_1_Other foreign destination____________________
       (Go to question 4)




                                                                                      23
4__If you traveled outside the U.S. for spring break was it to avoid certain U.S. laws?
       0_3_No
       1_3_Yes

    Did you do any of the following?
       5__Drink               0_0_No 1_33_Yes
       6__Go to the Beach 0_11_No 1_22_Yes
       7__Use Drugs           0_30_No 1_3_Yes
       8__Go Dancing          0_6_No 1_27_Yes
       9__Have Sex            0_30_No 1_3_Yes

10__Did you receive any fines related to your spring break partying?
      0_32_No
      1_1_Yes

11__Did MTV influence your spring break behavior?
      0_31_No
      1_2_Yes

12__Was your spring break partying more extreme than one of your typical weekends at UW-L?
     0_17_No
     1_16_Yes

 NO SECTION

13__What did you do during spring break?
     0_90_Go home
     1_25_Stay at School
     2_4_Other____________________

14__Did you work during spring break?
      0_58_No
      1_61_Yes

    For what reason or reasons did you not go?
      15__Money                                             0_30_No 1_89_Yes
      16__Parents                                           0_107_No 1_12_Yes
      17__Spring break vacation is not important            0_105_No 1_14_Yes
      18__U.S. laws                                         0_114_No 1_5_Yes
      19__Do you not travel because of Sept. 11, 2001       0_116_No 1_3_Yes




                                                                                          24
 DEMOGRAPHICS SECTION

20__What is your gender?
     0_71_Male
     1_112_Female

21__Are you 21 years old or older?
      0_97_No
      1_86_Yes

22__What year are you in school?
     0_39_Freshman
     1_42_Sophomore
     2_50_Junior
     3_52_Senior




                                     25
Appendix C

Test 1

                   One -Sam ple Statis tics

                                                       Std. Error
             N          Mean         Std. Dev iation     Mean
  Trip           183       .35                 .478          .035

                                     One -Sam ple Tes t

                                           Test Value = .66
                                                                        95% Conf idence
                                                                         Interval of the
                                                          Mean             Dif f erence
              t           df         Sig. (2-tailed)   Dif f erence    Low er        Upper
  Trip       -8.777            182             .000             -.31       -.38          -.24

The purpose of the above test is to determine if spring break travel is down in 2003
compared to the results of the 2000 study.

Ho:µ = .66
Ha: µ < .66
α =.05
P-Value/2 = .000

Therefore reject the null hypothesis because the p-value is less than .05. The above
hypothesis test provides highly significant evidence that spring break travel was
comparatively down in 2003.




                                                                                                26
Test 2

                       One -Sam ple Statistics

                                                            Std. Error
                 N           Mean         Std. Deviation      Mean
  NEWQ2               64      .5156             .50371         .06296

                                         One -Sam ple Tes t

                                               Test Value = .506
                                                                            95% Conf idence
                                                                              Interval of the
                                                               Mean             Dif f erence
                 t             df         Sig. (2-tailed)   Dif f erence   Low er         Upper
  NEWQ2              .153           63              .879           .0096    -.1162           .1354

The objective of the test is to show that although fewer students are going on trips in
2003 compared to 2000, the same proportion of students that take trips are doing so to
party.

Ho: µ = .506
Ha: µ =/ .506
α =.05
p-value = .879

Therefore, fail to reject the null hypothesis because the p-value is greater that .05. This
test shows that there is statistical evidence that the proportion of students partying on
spring break trips is the same now as it was in 2000.




                                                                                                     27
Test 3

                       One -Sam ple Statistics

                                                              Std. Error
                   N          Mean          Std. Deviation      Mean
  NEWQ14               183     .3333              .47270         .03494

                                          One -Sam ple Tes t

                                                  Test Value = .34
                                                                               95% Conf idence
                                                                                 Interval of the
                                                                 Mean              Dif f erence
                   t           df           Sig. (2-tailed)   Dif f erence    Low er         Upper
  NEWQ14           -.191            182               .849           -.0067    -.0756           .0623


The purpose of this test is to determine if students are working more now compared to
2000, Due to the fact that students are traveling less.

Ho: µ = .34
Ha: µ > .34
α =.05
p-value /2= .425

Therefore, fail to reject the null hypothesis because the p-value is greater that .05. This
test shows that there is statistical evidence that the proportion of students working during
spring break vacation is the same now as it was in 2000.




                                                                                                        28
Test 4

                                      Warnings

  The Independent Samples table is not produced.


                                   Group Statis tics

                                                                               Std. Error
             Legal Drinking A ge       N          Mean       Std. Deviation      Mean
  Drinking   No                            15       1.00              .000 a         .000
             Y es                          18       1.00              .000 a         .000
     a. t c annot be computed bec aus e the standard dev iations of both groups are 0.



The purpose of this test is to determine if students who are minors consumed alcohol
while on a spring break trip in 2003.

Ho: µ = 1
Ha: µ < 1
α =.05
p-value /2= 1

Therefore, fail to reject the null hypothesis because the p-value is greater that .05. This
test shows that there is statistical evidence that the proportion of students who are minors
consumed alcohol while on a spring break vacation in 2003.




                                                                                            29
                           Cas e Proce ss ing Sum m ary

                                         Cases
                  Valid                  Mis sing                   Total
              N        Percent         N        Percent         N        Percent
  Trip          183     100.0%            0         .0%           183     100.0%

                                Des criptives

                                                    Statistic    Std. Error
  Trip    Mean                                            .35          .035
          95% Conf idence       Low er Bound              .28
          Interval f or Mean    Upper Bound
                                                          .42

          5% Trimmed Mean                                 .33
          Median                                          .00
          V arianc e                                    .229
          Std. Deviation                                .478
          Minimum                                           0
          Max imum                                          1
          Range                                             1
          Interquartile Range                           1.00
          Skew nes s                                    .635          .180
          Kurtosis                                    -1.614          .357




The purpose of this test was to find the confidence interval for UW-L students who went
on a spring break trip.




                                                                                     30
Bibliography



1
    Dehnart, Andy. Spring Breakout. 2001. 12 Feb.2003

          <http://articles.student.com/article/testpattern15>.
2
    Leinwand, Donna. “Alcohol-soaked Spring Break Lures students Abroad.” 6 Jan. 2003.

          12 Feb. 2003. http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document.
3
    Yokoyama, Taka. “Student Bureau: Spring Break travel may be down this year” CNN

          22 Mar. 2002. 12 Feb




                                                                                   31

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:3
posted:9/24/2011
language:English
pages:31