Title: The Flawed Conclusion of Laurita and Trey's Experiment with Hermit Crabs
Laurita and Trey's Observation
The Flaw in Their Conclusion
Why is their conclusion flawed? Their conclusion is flawed because they only tested two hermit crabs. In order to have a solid hypothesis, it is essential to test a larger group of hermit crabs to ensure the validity of their conclusion.The Importance of Sample Size in Scientific Investigations
A subset of the population, known as a "sample," must be representative of the entire population. In scientific investigations, it is crucial to carry out experiments in a significant sample size to draw accurate conclusions. In Laurita and Trey's case, their sample size of two hermit crabs is too small to make a generalization about all hermit crabs.The Role of Sample Size in Representativeness
When estimating a sample, the size of the population must be taken into account. Large populations require larger samples for representativeness, while small populations can suffice with smaller samples. In the case of hermit crabs, a larger sample size would provide a more accurate representation of their preferences.Conclusion
Laurita and Trey's conclusion that all hermit crabs prefer peanut butter over crab food is flawed due to the limited sample size used in their experiment. To draw valid conclusions in scientific investigations, it is essential to test a larger group to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the results.Laurita and Trey notice that the two hermit crabs in their class prefer peanut butter over the crab food from the pet store. They conclude that all hermit crabs prefer peanut butter to the crab food. Why is their conclusion flawed?
Answer: Its conclusion is flawed because in a scientific investigation it is necessary to carry out the experimentation in a significant sample of hermit crabs. In this case Laurita and Trey only considered 2 crabs whose behavior may be determined by other factors, so it is necessary to increase the study sample.