With the given information, wtih 2 regions, etc., it would be the following:
Region A:
- nA = 505
- pA = 0.261
Region B:
- nB = 388
- pB = 0.295
Confidence level: 95% → z = 1.96
1st part of the question:
Step 1: Difference in sample proportions
- pB - pA = 0.295 - 0.261 = 0.034
Step 2: Standard Error
- SE = √pA(1 - pA) / nA + pB(1 - pB) / nB
- SE = √(0.261(0.739)) / 505 + (0.295(0.705)) / 388
- SE = √0.000382 + 0.000536
- SE = √0.000918 ≈ 0.0303
Step 3: Margin of error
- ME = z x SE = 1.96(0.0303) ≈ 0.059
Step 4: Confidene interval
- 0.034 ± 0.059
→ (-0.025, 0.093)
That means that 95% confidence interval would be: (-0.025, 0.093). That means we are 95% condident that the true difference in proportions of residents willing to use an online grocery service (Region B minue Region A) is between -2.5% and 9.3%
2nd part of the question: CEO's Claim
Since the CEO's claim was Region B having higher proportion of potenial customers than region A, the interval support would be no, because 0 is contained in the confidence interval, the data does not provide convincing evidence that Regions B's proportion is higher that Region A's at the 95% confidence level.