A middle school is running a social media awareness campaign. They want to understand how recent events might influence students’ perceptions of social media use. The school randomly divides 200 8th grade students into two groups:
Group A (100 students): Reads recent news articles about cyberbullying incidents.
Group B (100 students): Reads recent news articles about teens using social media for positive community projects.
Both groups are then asked two questions:
1. What percentage of social media interactions do you think are negative (e.g., cyberbullying, arguments)?
2. How many hours per week do you think is safe for a teenager to spend on social media?
Results:
Group A:
– Average estimated percentage of negative interactions: 65%
– Average estimated safe hours per week: 5 hours
– Standard deviation of safe hours estimate: 2 hours
Group B:
– Average estimated percentage of negative interactions: 30%
– Average estimated safe hours per week: 12 hours
– Standard deviation of safe hours estimate: 3 hours
Recent studies suggest that about 40% of teen social media interactions involve some form of negativity, and experts recommend no more than 9 hours per week on social media for teenagers.
1. Calculate the difference in average estimated percentage of negative interactions between the two groups.
2. What is the difference between Group B’s average estimated safe hours and the expert recommendation?
3. Using the empirical rule, estimate the range within which approximately 95% of Group A’s safe hour estimates fall.
4. Calculate the z-score for the expert recommendation (9 hours) relative to Group A’s distribution. Interpret what this means.
5. How might availability bias explain the differences in responses between the two groups?
6. Suggest two ways the school could provide a more balanced view of social media use to its students.
1. Difference in average estimated percentage of negative interactions:
Group A – Group B = 65% – 30% = 35%
2. Difference between Group B’s average estimate and expert recommendation:
12 hours – 9 hours = 3 hours more than recommended
3. Range for 95% of Group A’s safe hour estimates (using empirical rule):
Mean ± 2 standard deviations
5 ± (2 × 2) = 5 ± 4
Range: 1 hour to 9 hours
4. Z-score for expert recommendation relative to Group A:
z = (x – μ) / σ
z = (9 – 5) / 2 = 2
This means the expert recommendation is 2 standard deviations above Group A’s mean.
Approximately 97.5% of Group A’s estimates fall below this value.
5. Availability bias explanation:
The recent information provided to each group made certain aspects of social media use more “available” in their minds:
– Group A, exposed to cyberbullying news, easily recalled negative aspects, leading to higher estimates of negative interactions and lower estimates of safe usage time.
– Group B, exposed to positive project news, more readily thought of beneficial aspects, resulting in lower estimates of negative interactions and higher estimates of safe usage time.
6. Ways to provide a more balanced view:
a) Present students with a mix of both positive and negative social media stories, ensuring a balanced representation of real-world usage.
b) Invite guest speakers who can share personal experiences of both the benefits and challenges of social media use.
c) Organize a debate where students research and present arguments for both the advantages and disadvantages of social media.
Remember, at QMAK, we don’t just teach; we empower. We don’t just inform; we inspire. We don’t just question; we act. Become a Gold Member, and let’s unlock your child’s full potential, one question at a time.