- Ratios, rates, and proportions — Basic example
- Ratios, rates, and proportions — Harder example
- Percents — Basic example
- Percents — Harder example
- Units — Basic example
- Units — Harder example
- Table data — Basic example
- Table data — Harder example
- Scatterplots — Basic example
- Scatterplots — Harder example
- Key features of graphs — Basic example
- Key features of graphs — Harder example
- Linear and exponential growth — Basic example
- Linear and exponential growth — Harder example
- Data inferences — Basic example
- Data inferences — Harder example
- Center, spread, and shape of distributions — Basic example
- Center, spread, and shape of distributions — Harder example
- Data collection and conclusions — Basic example
- Data collection and conclusions — Harder example
Data collection and conclusions — Harder example
Watch Sal work through a harder Data collections and conclusions problem.
Want to join the conversation?
- It doesn't seem that hard, just really, really long.(48 votes)
- Choice number1 didn't convince me, what's the relationship between players being part of the team and being born between January 1 and June 30?(12 votes)
- if you notice, 10 out of 12 were born in the first half of a year. and 10/12 is about 85% which is pretty high for data based on just 12 people(2 votes)
- Anyone have a faster method? Spending the time to write out and plot those points seems too long to be viable during the SAT.(3 votes)
- Here's how I would've solved the problem:
I is correct, because there are only two players not born between January 1st and June 30th (the last two players).
II. is incorrect because I is correct.
III. is incorrect because the table doesn't say anything about the skill of the players.
IV. is correct. You can know that by counting the players who are born in 1987.
Thus, I would've solved this in about a minute. Maybe this question isn't that hard, after all. :)(18 votes)
- It's 2007 in the question, but he says 2017.(5 votes)
- Is there a faster method of solving for this type of problem?(6 votes)
- Does it mean there is an association between two events if the number seems like there is one?(5 votes)
- if you notice, 10 out of 12 were born in the first half of a year. and 10/12 is about 85% which is pretty high for data based on just 12 people(1 vote)
- where can i find videos that will help me understand this concept(4 votes)
- Diction here is very vague, what do you mean by association? And Player number could be misread as number of players if it is on real SAT(3 votes)
- I think I it should add approximately in front of "42%",then the answer will be B.(1 vote)
- It sounds like it should be, but I actually don't think it would be. Because there is a chance that out of the 500 people randomly picked, all of them were political extremists or something and would support a policy no one else would, you can't say that anything must be true. Approximately 42% would mean that choice B) is very likely to be true, but not that it is true in all cases. This is the same in basically every SAT question like this, except if they give you a confidence interval in the question.(3 votes)
- I think what you could just do is when you have read all the choices, 4 seems to be the easiest to figure out. Then as you look at the answers with 4 in in them look at the fact the number 3 cant be proven so you will be left with 1 and 5.(1 vote)
- [Narrator] A polling agency recently surveyed 500 adults who are selected at random from a large city and asked each of the adults whether they supported a new federal policy. Of those surveyed, 42% responded that they support the new policy. Based on the results of the survey, which of the following statements must be true? So, pause this video and see if you can figure this out. All right, now let's work through this together. So, let's look at the statements. So, statement one, of all the adults in the city, 42% support the new federal policy. Let's see, they took a sample of 500 adults who are selected at random and 42% of them supported the policy. So, of all the adults in the city, 42% support the new federal policy. Well, we don't know that for sure 42% would be a pretty good estimate of it based on the sample. So, I'm feeling a little bit queasy about choice one, let's try to see choice two, If 500 different adults selected at random from the same city were surveyed, 42% of them would respond that they support the new federal policy. While I'm feeling queasy about that as well because once again, it's likely to be close to 42, but it could be 43%. We can might've just gotten lucky with the number of people who supported the federal policy it could be a lot lower or we could have gotten unlucky and it could be a lot higher. So, I'm feeling queasy about that one as well. So let's see, if 500 adults selected at random from a different city were surveyed, 42% of them would respond that they support the new federal policy. Well, that one feels actually the hardest one to believe, because now you're looking at a completely different city that it could have very different views, I don't like that one either. So actually, I like none of these choices, you don't know just based on the sample of 500 and you got 42% of them supporting. You don't know that every time you get a sample that you're gonna get exactly 42. You also don't know that it's exactly 42 of the entire population in the city. And you definitely don't know that if you took 500 adults at random from another city, that it would be 42%. So, I would say none.