Question 1
3 marksA scientist measured the wing length of 125 adult house sparrows caught in one area. The figure shows the results.
Calculate the percentage of these sparrows that had a wing length of 78 mm or more. Give your answer to 2 significant figures.
Explain why the results are shown as a histogram rather than as a bar chart.
The scientist concluded from the figure that no adult house sparrow in this area has a wing length of less than 70 mm. Evaluate this conclusion.
Model answer
Sparrows with a wing length of 78 mm or more = 29 + 14 + 3 = 46
Percentage = 46 ÷ 125 × 100 = 36.8 = 37% (2 significant figures)
Wing length is a continuous variable. The classes follow on from each other with no gaps, so the bars of a histogram touch, whereas a bar chart has separate bars for separate categories.
None of the 125 sparrows measured had wings shorter than 70 mm, but this was only a sample. The frequencies fall gradually towards 70 mm, so a few sparrows in the whole population could have shorter wings and not have been caught.
Explanation
A histogram shows the frequency distribution of a continuous variable that has been grouped into classes, so the bars touch. Read each bar height carefully from the grid: the classes of 78 mm or more are 78-80, 80-82 and 82-84 mm, and the answer must be rounded to 2 significant figures. A sample shows the range of its own values, not of the whole population: rare extreme values are easily missed, especially where the frequencies tail off rather than stopping abruptly.
Mark scheme
-
1 mark
37 (%), from (29 + 14 + 3) ÷ 125 × 100 = 46 ÷ 125 × 100; a correct answer of 37 with no working scores this mark
Max 3. A correct answer of 37 (%) with no working scores this mark. Do not accept 36.8 (not given to 2 significant figures) or 67 (84 ÷ 125 × 100, the 76-78 mm class included).
-
1 mark
Wing length is a continuous variable / the data are continuous (grouped into classes with no gaps between them)
Accept "there are no gaps between the classes, so the bars touch". Ignore "there are a lot of data". Reject "wing length is categoric / discrete".
-
1 mark
Only a sample of 125 sparrows was measured, so rare sparrows with shorter wings may be present in the area but were not caught
Points 3 to 5: max 1. Ignore 'none of the 125 sparrows had wings shorter than 70 mm' on its own (it only restates the data).
-
1 mark
The numbers fall gradually towards 70 mm (only 4 sparrows in the 70-72 mm class), so a larger sample would be likely to include a few sparrows with shorter wings / the distribution may continue below 70 mm
-
1 mark
The sparrows caught may not be a random sample of those in the area (e.g. some birds are less likely to be caught), so birds with shorter wings may have been missed