Answer & Explanation:Hello,I have already done the work on this assignment. But I am hoping to get it looked at just to make sure I am on the right track with everything.assignment_15_questions.docxschwarz_mis86510_assignment_15.xlsxp10_04.xlsxp10_21.xlsx
assignment_15_questions.docx
schwarz_mis86510_assignment_15.xlsx
p10_04.xlsx
p10_21.xlsx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Assignment 15 Questions
2) The owner of the Original Italian Pizza restaurant chain would like to predict the
sales of his specialty, deep-dish pizza. He has gathered data on the monthly sales of
deep-dish pizzas at his restaurants and observations on other potentially relevant
variables for each of his 15 outlets in central Indiana. These data are provided in the
file P10_04.xlsx.
a. Estimate a multiple regression model between the quantity sold (Y) and the
explanatory variables in columns C–E.
b. Is there evidence of any violations of the key assumptions of regression analysis?
c. Which of the variables in this equation have regression coefficients that are
statistically different from zero at the 5% significance level?
d. Given your findings in part c, which variables, if any, would you choose to remove
from the equation estimated in part a? Why?
18) The Undergraduate Data sheet of the file P10_21.xlsx contains information on
101 undergraduate business programs in the U.S., including various rankings by
Business Week. Use multiple regression to explore the relationship between the
median starting salary and the following set of potential explanatory variables:
annual cost, full-time enrollment, faculty-student ratio, average SAT score, and
average ACT score. Which explanatory variables should be included in
a final version of this regression equation? Justify your choices. Is multicollinearity a
problem? Why or why not?
23) The Undergraduate Data sheet of the file P10_21.xlsx contains information on
101 undergraduate business programs in the U.S., including various rankings by
Business Week. Use forward, backward, and stepwise regression analysis to explore
the relationship between the median starting salary and the following set of
potential explanatory variables: annual cost, full-time enrollment, faculty-student
ratio, average SAT score, and average ACT score. Do these three methods all lead to
the same regression equation? If not, do you think any of the final equations are
substantially better than any of the others?
2
Outlet #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Source
Model
Error
Total
Quant Sold Avg Price
Mthly Adv C D.Income per household
85.300
10,14
64.800
42.100
40.500
10,88
42.800
38.300
61.800
12,33
58.600
41.000
50.800
12,7
46.500
43.300
60.600
12,29
50.700
44.000
79.400
9,79
60.100
41.200
71.400
11,26
55.600
41.700
70.700
11,23
57.900
43.600
55.600
11,97
52.100
39.900
70.900
12,07
60.700
44.800
77.200
10,68
64.400
41.800
63.200
12,49
55.600
44.200
71.100
12,36
60.900
40.100
55.500
9,96
47.200
39.100
42.100
11,77
46.100
38.000
Deg of Free Sum of Sqr Mean Sqr
3 2305491452 768497151
11 122204548
11109504
14 2427696000 779606655
F ratio = MSR / MSE
MSR = Mean Square Regression
MSE = Mean Square Error
F ratio = 768497151 / 11109504
F ratio = 69.17
Being that the F-ratio is vey high, the model would be considered significant.
Variable
Intercept
X1
Param Esti Stand Error t-value
p-value
-33302
17898
-1,86
0,0897
-4041,534
1040,64
-3,88
0,0025
X2
X3
1,454
1,528
0,152
0,513
9,59 <.0001
2,98
0,0125
predicted Y = -33302 - 4041.534X1 + 1.454X2 + 1.528X3
e sub I = y sub I - predicted y sub I, I = 1,2,…,15
D = E sub I = 2 (e sub I - e sub i-1) ^2 / E sub i=1 esub I ^2
dsubI = 0.82 for 5% level of Significance
0.59 for 1% level of significance
dsub u = 1.75 fir 5% level of significance
1.46 for 1% level of significance
d = 1.542
The test is inconclusive at 5% level of significance. However the null hypothesis is accepted at 1% lev
The dependent variable is following a Normal Distribution
It can be concluded that there is no evidence of any violation of the key points of regression.
Variable
Intercept
X1
X2
X3
Para est
Stan. Error t-value
p-value
-33302
17898
-1,86
0,0897
-4041,534
1040,64
-3,88
0,0025
1,454
0,152
9,59 <.0001
1,528
0,513
2,98
0,0125
From the above table it is seen that the p-value for testing the coefficients equals to zero against no
The 5% level of significance no value is greater than 0.05 except for the intercept term.
Therefore, we can reject the null hypothesis of coefficients equal to zero at 5% level of significance,
From the finding in the above part, there is no need to drop any variable from the regression since a
18
Yearly cost FT Enrment Med. St salar Facut stu r
9.490
655
58.000
10,4
36.847
1.669
55.000
19
37.526
2.528
61.001
11
10.848
1.050
60.000
15
4.110
1.783
50.000
19
8.932
668
55.000
26
36.390
225
60.000
3
20.364
712
55.000
19
36.336
622
55.000
10
9.354
3.942
55.000
34
37.530
1.731
52.000
16
70.000
60.000
50.000
40.000
30.000
20.000
10.000
Source
Model
Error
Total
Deg of free
Sum of Sqrs Mean Sqrs F-value
P-Value
5 1799281806 359856361
30,98 <.0001
96 1115126684
11615903
101 2914408489 371472264
Variable
Intercept
X1
X2
X3
X4
X5
Para Est
Stand Error t-value
p-value
6895,396
5409,071
1,27
0,2055
0,04473
0,03022
1,48
0,1421
0,62873
0,34806
1,81
0,074
-44,121
38,1264
-1,16
0,2501
7,176
8,142
0,88
0,3803
1202,973
309,759
3,88
0,0002
Predicted Y = 6895.396 + 0.04473X1 + 0.062873X2 - 44.121X3 + 7.176X4 + 1202.973X5
From the Parameter Estimate Table above the p-value shows that if we were to check the significanc
Its likely that X4 should have some impact on the dependent variable, but it is also clear that X4 and
It is to be anticipated that the annual cost, full time enrollment, and faculty student ratio not to affe
Therefore, all variable except for the ast one that is the final of the regression equation should only
If it is condered the final version of the regression then it will become a simple linear regression whe
23
09 Rank
08 Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
Regression Table
Constant
Avg ACT Score
2
3
1
6
7
11
Sch Name
Location
Va McIntire Charlottsvile
N.Dame/Mendoza
IND
Pa Wharton Philidelphia
MI (Ross)
Ann Arbor
Brig Yg
Provo, UT
UCB
Berkeley,CA
Type
Public
Private
Private
Public
Private
Public
Coefficient Std Error
t-value
p-value
7900,22133 3464,70023
2,2802
0,0247
1531,98379 127,879295
11,9799 <0.0001
Median Starting salary = 7900.22 + 1531.98Average ACT score
ANOVA Table
Explained
Unexplained
Deg of Free Sum of Sqrs Mean of Sqrs F-Ratio
1 1717617060 1717617060
143,5185
100 1196791429 11967914,3
Regression Table
Constant
Annual Cost
Avg ACT Score
Coefficient
9672,72541
0,04924834
1432,08515
Std Error
t-value
p-value
3581,89966
2,7004
0,0081
0,02857613
1,7234
0,0879
139,273781
10,2825 <0.0001
Median Starting Salary = 9672.72 + 0.04Annual Cost
plus 1432.08Average Act score
ANOVA Table
Explained
Unexplained
Deg of Free Sum Sqr
Mean of Sqr F-Ratio
2 1752476627
87623833
74,6581
99 1161931862 11736685,5
Regression Table
Constant
Avg ACT Score
Coefficient Std Error
t-value
p-value
7900,22133 3464,70023
2,2802
0,0247
1531,98379 127,879295
11,9799 <0.0001
Median Starting Salary = 7900.22 + 1531.98Average ACT Score
ANOVA Table
Explained
Unexplained
Deg of Free Sum of sqr Mean of sqr f-ratio
1 1717617060 1717617060
143,5185
100 1196791429 11967914,3
It is seen that the forward and stepwise regression analysis are having the same regression equation
70000
60000
50000
40000
Series1
Series2
30000
Series3
20000
10000
0
0
3,5
20.000
40.000
60.000
80.000
100.000
3,5
3
2,5
2
1,5
Series1
1
0,5
0
1,454
0,152
9,59
<.0001
-4041,534
1040,64
-3,88
0,0025
-33302
17898
-1,86
0,0897
In the above graph there is no such pattern. Therefore, there is no heteroscedasticity present.
pothesis is accepted at 1% level of significance.
y points of regression.
nts equals to zero against not equal to zero.
intercept term.
o at 5% level of significance, which implies that all of the variables in regression equation have the regression coefficients stat
e from the regression since all of the independent variables have regression coefficients significantly different from 0 at 5% le
70.000
60.000
50.000
Series1
40.000
Series2
30.000
Series3
Series4
20.000
10.000
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
4 + 1202.973X5
were to check the significance of the regression coefficient of every variable at 5% level of significance, than variables from X5
but it is also clear that X4 and X5 are highly correlated.
culty student ratio not to affect too much the dependent varaibleof the average median salary.
ession equation should only have the variable of X5.
simple linear regression where multicollinearity won't be in violation. However there would be a problem in X4 and X5 as the
p-value
<0.0001
erage Act score
p-value
<0.0001
p-value
<0.0001
he same regression equation, but the regression equation of the backward is different from the forward and stepwise.
he regression coefficients statistaically different from 0 at 5% level of significance.
Outlet Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Quantity Sold
85,300
40,500
61,800
50,800
60,600
79,400
71,400
70,700
55,600
70,900
77,200
63,200
71,100
55,500
42,100
Average Price
$10.14
$10.88
$12.33
$12.70
$12.29
$9.79
$11.26
$11.23
$11.97
$12.07
$10.68
$12.49
$12.36
$9.96
$11.77
Monthly Advertising Expenditures
$64,800
$42,800
$58,600
$46,500
$50,700
$60,100
$55,600
$57,900
$52,100
$60,700
$64,400
$55,600
$60,900
$47,200
$46,100
Disposable Income per Household
$42,100
$38,300
$41,000
$43,300
$44,000
$41,200
$41,700
$43,600
$39,900
$44,800
$41,800
$44,200
$40,100
$39,100
$38,000
This is fictitious data.
Business Week
The MBA data are self-reported data from the schools. The top 30 schools are
listed in order of their BusinessWeek ranking. The next 15 "second tier" schools
are listed in alphabetical orders, as are the last 25 "non-ranked" schools.
Note that there is missing data for some schools in some columns. All we can
infer is that these schools chose not to report this data.
To get the letter grades for the undergraduates in the last three columns, the top
20% among all 101 ranked programs got A+s. The next 25% got As, the next 35%
got Bs, and the bottom 20% got Cs.
Fulltime Business Week Ranking
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Second Tier
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
Not Ranked
School Name
University of Chicago
Harvard University
Northwestern University
University of Pennsylvania
University of Michigan
Stanford University
Columbia University
Duke University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
University of California-Berkeley
Cornell University
Dartmouth College
New York University
UCLA
Indiana University
University of Virginia
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
Southern Methodist University
Carnegie Mellon University
University of Notre Dame
University of Texas -- Austin
Brigham Young University
Emory University
Yale University
University of Southern California
University of Maryland
University of Washington
Washington University
Georgia Institute of Technology
Vanderbilt University
Arizona State University
Babson College
Boston University
George Washington University
Georgetown University
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Michigan State University
Ohio State University
Purdue University
Thunderbird School of Global Management
University of California, Irvine
University of Connecticut
University of Iowa
University of Minnesota
University of Rochester
American University
Boston College
Case Western Reserve University
College of William and Mary
Florida International University
Fordham University
Howard University
Northeastern University
Pepperdine University
Rice University
Rutgers University
Texas A & M
Texas Christian University
The Pennsylvania State University
The University of Tennessee at Knoxville
Tulane University
University at Buffalo
University of Arizona
University of Colorado at Denver
University of Florida
University of Georgia
University of Miami
University of Pittsburgh
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Wake Forest University
State
Illinois
Massachusetts
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Michigan
California
New York
North Carolina
Massachusetts
California
New York
New Hampshire
New York
California
Indiana
Virginia
North Carolina
Texas
Pennsylvania
Indiana
Texas
Utah
Georgia
Connecticut
California
Maryland
Washington
Missouri
Georgia
Tennessee
Arizona
Massachusetts
Massachusetts
Washington D.C.
Washington D.C.
Illinois
Michigan
Ohio
Indiana
Arizona
California
Connecticut
Iowa
Minnesota
New York
Washington D.C.
Massachusetts
Ohio
Virginia
Florida
New York
Washington D.C.
Massachusetts
California
Texas
New Jersey
Texas
Texas
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Louisiana
New York
Arizona
Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Florida
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
North Carolina
Type
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Private
Private
Public
Public
Public
Public
Private
Private
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Public
Private
Public
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Public
Public
Public
Private
Public
Public
Public
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Private
Public
Public
Private
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Private
Public
Public
Private
Enrollment Avg GMAT
1144
713
1801
720
1200
711
1651
714
898
706
739
726
1234
878
696
780
708
500
714
593
694
506
712
832
708
731
711
473
663
644
693
562
678
201
642
392
690
316
677
552
681
315
673
373
680
382
718
525
692
257
660
225
688
294
681
156
681
382
656
159
676
387
630
315
680
201
643
521
678
198
639
214
642
274
674
293
662
589
610
204
675
119
627
140
653
199
663
350
675
137
202
661
163
606
175
601
84
560
337
610
86
557
154
609
294
637
250
667
160
643
164
643
94
610
187
646
151
615
131
654
176
619
139
622
33
574
142
677
140
199
631
234
626
231
666
149
629
Resident Tuition, Fees
97165
101660
93918
104410
80879
97842
94104
95000
46784
66475
93000
91905
89184
66590
40882
84000
43503
81384
93840
77340
48800
18530
82856
93098
88800
60583
43556
83172
17816
81076
34082
72184
73996
65550
83868
42004
40937
47277
37700
78255
55629
21188
29224
58387
80010
Pct International Pct Female
35
35
33
38
34
36
44
36
27
34
43
36
33
32
40
39
36
35
39
30
27
39
31
33
32
41
32
34
37
26
30
29
32
32
18
28
23
21
28
24
24
31
10
20
42
39
28
34
34
29
35
29
18
36
34
37
19
27
18
25
26
25
41
37
32
45
27
45
24
30
45
34
30
22
33
27
45
27
45
32
40
37
38
25
38
29
19
32
55
33
Pct Asian American Pct Minority
16
7
25
7.8
21
13
9
13
12
19
14
29
15
8
14
14
12
6
5
7
25
10
11
13
12
9
4
7
13
15
6
13
9
10
8
12
9
11
5
14
11
6
11
5
12
5
6
4
11
8
4
5
15
13
7
6
9
1
9
4.8
5
26
8
14
23
18
15
7
7
7
3
14
14
9
17
16
22
13
13
7
18
5
2.4
6
15
66604
70666
42800
30490
69878
36380
72198
73630
76500
45061
25603
58500
38036
23612
74900
18156
31668
31606
17132
20
46
37
39
20
27
41
36
29
27
26
25
33
12
38
30
32
7
23
36
37
30
49
29
56
45
43
37
38
21
26
38
25
23
30
27
42
32
9
7
0
4
9
3
10
25
18
19
13
0
4
3.5
22
9
59
5
97
3
4
11
9
16
6
13
6
18
1
5
7
11
68626
36836
22957
70600
32
48
13
15
36
31
30
33
19
1.5
6
8
21
7
9
8
8
0
4
13
Pct with job offers
92
94
95
89
89
94
87
92
92
90
84
94
84
80
88
92
82
80
96
80
88
78
82
89
88
81
85
81
98
83
80
62
88
68
91
75
86
79
83
51
62
57
86
84
80
Avg starting base salary
107091
124378
108064
112186
103608
121171
107450
100136
111184
108967
100700
110305
101063
101306
92000
103963
95647
84828
103012
89660
96537
88958
93620
99562
91863
85225
86426
90775
93403
89891
86065
92296
89543
83746
94137
90317
90951
89584
83614
84295
81500
95120
82380
87539
18712
83
60
88
37
87140
84671
78222
49770
77659
80525
72061
75711
93006
83092
86700
71153
87444
71932
83558
55276
77376
49
72
84
82
78
68
34
74
62
91
65
91
87
85
54
46
30
85
76559
62567
75454
88626
79392
2009
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
2008
Rank
2
3
1
6
7
11
9
4
5
10
13
20
12
21
8
15
14
24
22
16
17
18
28
19
33
25
34
NA
47
29
23
35
30
32
43
26
31
38
41
37
27
59
42
54
36
School Name
Virginia (McIntire)
Notre Dame (Mendoza)
Pennsylvania (Wharton)
Michigan (Ross)
Brigham Young (Marriott)
UC-Berkeley (Haas)
MIT (Sloan)
Cornell
Emory (Goizueta)
Texas (McCombs)
Villanova
Richmond (Robins)
North Carolina (Kenan-Flagler)
Wake Forest (Calloway)
NYU (Stern)
Washington U. (Olin)
Boston College (Carroll)
Miami U. (Farmer)
Carnegie Mellon (Tepper)
Indiana (Kelley)
USC (Marshall)
Illinois
Babson
Georgetown (McDonough)
U. of Washington (Foster)
Lehigh
Northeastern
American (Kogod)
San Diego
William & Mary (Mason)
SMU (Cox)
Santa Clara (Leavey)
Bentley
Texas Christian (Neeley)
Maryland (Smith)
Rensselaer Polytech (Lally)
Texas A&M (Mays)
Penn State (Smeal)
Case Western (Weatherhead)
Wisconsin
Fordham
Ohio State (Fisher)
Boston U.
James Madison
Baylor (Hankamer)
Location
Charlottesville
South Bend, Ind.
Philadelphia
Ann Arbor
Provo, Utah
Berkeley, Calif.
Cambridge, Mass.
Ithaca, N.Y.
Atlanta
Austin
Villanova, Pa.
Richmond, Va.
Chapel Hill
Winston-Salem, N.C.
New York
St. Louis
Boston
Oxford, Ohio
Pittsburgh
Bloomington
Los Angeles
Urbana-Champaign
Babson Park, Mass.
Washington, D.C.
Seattle
Bethlehem, Pa.
Boston
Washington, D.C.
San Diego, Calif.
Williamsburg, Va.
Dallas
Santa Clara, Calif.
Waltham, Mass.
Fort Worth
College Park
Troy, N.Y.
College Station
University Park
Cleveland
Madison
New York
Columbus
Boston
Harrisonburg, Va.
Waco, Tex.
Type
Public
Private
Private
Public
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Public
Private
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Private
Public
Private
Public
Private
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Private
Public
Public
Private
Public
Private
Public
Private
Public
Private
Program
Length
2
3
4
3
2
2
3
4
2
4
4
4
2
2
4
4
4
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
4
4
4
4
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
4
4
4
4
4
46
47
48
49
50
51
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
NA
NA
40
52
49
55
55
39
46
NA
48
50
NA
60
64
NA
62
56
63
53
51
61
73
65
NA
NA
NA
70
81
76
80
84
NA
74
77
86
NA
NA
88
89
85
95
82
90
83
NA
NA
Chapman (Argyros)
Ohio
Binghamton
Syracuse (Whitman)
U. of Miami
Georgia Tech
Georgia Tech
Michigan State (Broad)
Florida (Warrington)
Virginia Tech (Pamplin)
Minnesota (Carlson)
Rutgers
St. Joseph's (Haub)
Delaware (Lerner)
Bryant
John Carroll (Boler)
Purdue (Krannert)
Clemson
Arizona (Eller)
Marquette
George Washington
Connecticut
Colorado State
Drexel (LeBow)
Xavier (Williams)
CalPoly (Orfalea)
DePaul
Arizona State (Carey)
Northern Illinois
Missouri (Trulaske)
Massachusetts (Isenberg)
Iowa (Tippie)
Texas Tech (Rawls)
Oregon (Lundquist)
Pittsburgh
Texas
Oklahoma (Price)
Tennessee
Arkansas (Walton)
Belmont
North Carolina State
South Carolina (Moore)
Houston (Bauer)
Louisiana State (Ourso)
Colorado (Leeds)
Rutgers
Cincinnati
Orange, Calif.
Athens
Binghamton, N.Y.
Syracuse, N.Y.
Coral Gables, Fla.
Atlanta
Atlanta
East Lansing
Gainesville
Blacksburg
Minneapolis
New Brunswick, N.J.
Philadelphia
Newark
Smithfield, R.I.
University Heights, Ohio
West Lafayette, Ind.
Clemson, S.C.
Tucson
Milwaukee
Washington, D.C.
Storrs
Ft. Collins
Philadelphia
Cincinnati
San Luis Obispo
Chicago
Tempe
DeKalb
Columbia
Amherst
Iowa City
Lubbock
Eugene
Pittsburgh
Dallas
Norman
Chattanooga
Fayetteville
Nashville
Raleigh
Columbia
Houston
Baton Rouge
Boulder
Newark, N.J.
Cincinnati
Private
Public
Public
Private
Private
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Private
Public
Private
Private
Public
Public
Public
Private
Private
Public
Public
Private
Private
Public
Private
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Private
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
4
4
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
4
2
4
2
4 ...
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more