一道quantitative methods的题目This question relates to a famous court case in the USA where for the first time results ofstatistical analysis were presented as evidence of discrimination.In 1972 Mr Partida,aMexican-American,was convicted of burg

一道quantitative methods的题目This question relates to a famous court case in the USA where for the first time results ofstatistical analysis were presented as evidence of discrimination.In 1972 Mr Partida,aMexican-American,was convicted of burg
一道quantitative methods的题目
This question relates to a famous court case in the USA where for the first time results of
statistical analysis were presented as evidence of discrimination.In 1972 Mr Partida,a
Mexican-American,was convicted of burglary by a jury in a particular county in Texas.
Mr Partida’s lawyers,appealed the conviction on the grounds that the jury must have
been selected in a discriminatory (and thus non-random fashion) because it had a
disproportionately small number of Mexican-Americans on it.They based their argument
on the following two pieces of information.First,a recent census had shown Mexican-
Americans made up 79.1% of adults in the population in that county and that this fact
was widely accepted.Second,in a sample of court cases in the county involving a total of
870 jury members,only 39% were Mexican-Americans.Assume that we will conclude
that jury selection in the county was discriminatory if there is less than a 1% chance that
a sample proportion of 39% (or less) would result from random selection from a
population where the proportion was 79.1%.If you were a Justice of the US Supreme
Court,what would your finding be?Would you find that there probably was
discrimination in jury selection in the county?

一道quantitative methods的题目This question relates to a famous court case in the USA where for the first time results ofstatistical analysis were presented as evidence of discrimination.In 1972 Mr Partida,aMexican-American,was convicted of burg
这个问题涉及一个著名案件中,美国在第一次结果
统计分析提出了作为证据的歧视.帕尔蒂达先生于1972年,一个
墨西哥裔美国人,被定罪为入室盗窃由陪审团在某一县在得克萨斯州.
他帕尔蒂达的律师,呼吁定罪的理由是,必须有陪审团
被选中的歧视（因此非随机的方式） ,因为它有一个
不成比例少数墨西哥裔美国人上.他们根据自己的论点
就以下两条信息.首先,最近的人口普查表明墨西哥
美国人占79.1 ％的成人人口的县,并在这一事实
被广泛接受.第二,在抽样法庭案件审理中,县,共涉及
870陪审团成员中,只有39 ％是墨西哥裔美国人.假设我们将结束
这挑选陪审团在县是歧视如果有不到1 ％的机会
抽样比例的39 ％ （或更少）而产生的随机选择的
人口的比例为79.1 ％ .如果你是法官的美国联邦最高法院
法院,那么您的发现是什么?你会发现,有可能是
歧视在挑选陪审团的县?

.........BAIDU下就知道