1. One of my bad habits definitely has to be checking my email too often. I started developing this habit a while back but it has picked up recently as I am going through the process of searching for a job. Consequently, I have been constantly checking my email in hopes of a favorable response from a potential employer. After doing a search on Purdue's Library homepage, I came across an article that was published by the New York Times on January 9 2015 titled "Stop Checking Email So Often". I believe that this article is a secondary source as it was published in a newspaper and is written in a much less technical voice that is easy to understand from by a general audience. Furthermore, it does not follow a format of articles published in journals. However, this article is unique as it is actually written by the researchers themselves. The researchers designed an exploratory two-week experiment that intended to determine whether the frequency with which you check your email played a role in causing stress. They recruited a group of participants and randomly divided them into two groups that could either check their email an unlimited amount of times or were limited. The participants would switch positions after one week. The participants were given questionnaires daily, weekly and during an important activity that were from previous studies linking emails to stress to determine how stressed they were. The researchers also captured other metrics such as mindfulness, perceived sleep quality and self-reported productivity. This study found that during the limited email use week, participants experienced significantly lower daily stress than during the unlimited email use week. The study also found that lower stress predicted higher well-being on a diverse range of well-being outcomes. The research project in this article was an experiment as the authors explicitly stated that they designed an experiment. The researchers designed a two-week experiment where they randomly split the research participants into two groups: one that maximized their frequency of checking their email for week and one that minimized their frequency of checking their email for a week. Both groups of participants swapped positions after one week. The authors of the research project recruited 142 adults from a university community to participate in this research through posters in community centers, paid advertisements in local newspapers, listservs and snowball sampling. Participants of this research had a chance to win $150 and received feedback about their well-being during the study. The research advertised the study as suitable for people who got a lot of email and felt overwhelmed by it sometimes. 18 people dropped out of the study leaving only 124 people who actually participated in the research. The sample was therefore, a voluntary response. About 55% of the participants were Caucasian and about 28% of the sample were Asian. About two-thirds of the sample ide ...

1. 1.
One of my bad habits definitely has to be checking my email too
often. I started developing this habit a while back but it has
picked up recently as I am going through the process of
searching for a job. Consequently, I have been constantly
checking my email in hopes of a favorable response from a
potential employer.
After doing a search on Purdue's Library homepage, I came
across an article that was published by the New York Times on
January 9 2015 titled "Stop Checking Email So Often". I believe
that this article is a secondary source as it was published in a
newspaper and is written in a much less technical voice that is
easy to understand from by a general audience. Furthermore, it
does not follow a format of articles published in journals.
However, this article is unique as it is actually written by the
researchers themselves.
The researchers designed an exploratory two-week experiment
that intended to determine whether the frequency with which
you check your email played a role in causing stress. They
recruited a group of participants and randomly divided them
into two groups that could either check their email an unlimited
amount of times or were limited. The participants would switch
positions after one week. The participants were given
questionnaires daily, weekly and during an important activity
that were from previous studies linking emails to stress to
determine how stressed they were. The researchers also
captured other metrics such as mindfulness, perceived sleep
quality and self-reported productivity. This study found that
during the limited email use week, participants experienced

2. significantly lower daily stress than during the unlimited email
use week. The study also found that lower stress predicted
higher well-being on a diverse range of well-being outcomes.
The research project in this article was an experiment as the
authors explicitly stated that they designed an experiment. The
researchers designed a two-week experiment where they
randomly split the research participants into two groups: one
that maximized their frequency of checking their email for week
and one that minimized their frequency of checking their email
for a week. Both groups of participants swapped positions after
one week.
The authors of the research project recruited 142 adults from a
university community to participate in this research through
posters in community centers, paid advertisements in local
newspapers, listservs and snowball sampling. Participants of
this research had a chance to win $150 and received feedback
about their well-being during the study. The research advertised
the study as suitable for people who got a lot of email and felt
overwhelmed by it sometimes. 18 people dropped out of the
study leaving only 124 people who actually participated in the
research. The sample was therefore, a voluntary response.
About 55% of the participants were Caucasian and about 28% of
the sample were Asian. About two-thirds of the sample
identified as either undergraduates or graduate students and the
remaining third of the participants were community members
who came from various industries.
In order to show causation, a carefully controlled experiment
and a strong association is needed. Additionally, the association
has to be consistent and the alleged cause precedes the effect
and must be plausible. I believe that the research which was an
experiment, showed causation as the ANOVA tests indicated
that stress was the only outcome variable that was consistently
and directly influenced by the researchers manipulation

3. (limiting the frequency that a participant can check their email).
One extension of the research into my habit that I would like to
see has to do with the device with which I check my email and
how it affects my frequency of checking my email. I would like
to know whether using a particular device could make you more
or less stressed as well as make me check my email more often.
After reading the article, I do not plan on continuing my habit
of checking my email frequently. The research found that
people feel less stressed when they checked their email less
often. Therefore, I may feel less stressed if I checked my email
less often. Feeling less stressed is also likely to increase my
well-being in many other areas. Hence, I am likely to
experience better well-being outcomes by checking my email
less frequently.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/opinion/sunda...r=0 less
2.
Chewing gum has been my good habit, since my early
childhood. Chewing gum is a soft and cohesive substance has
been used by humans for quite a long time; it was originally
made of natural latex and chicle. The habit has several positive
effects, such as relieving stress and health benefits. Those who
take much of their time chewing gum reduce the effects of
stress and health problems, such as high blood pressure. Smith,
2013) I am including the links to both the primary source and
secondary source used in this study.

4. 1) http://www.confectionerynews.com/R-D/Chewing-gu...
2) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22496105
In this study, a web-based questionnaire was applied, where
gum chewing was measured using a 7 point scale; never,
occasionally, once a month, once a week 5 or more times a
week, once a day and more than once a day (Smith, 2013). The
perceived stress at work was measured using a five-point scale
that ranged from, not at all to extremely stress up. A 14item
anxiety scale was used to measure depression and anxiety. A
yes/no response was given by whether the patients have ever
seen a doctor concerning high blood pressure (Smith, 2013).
The study revealed that the chewing frequency will have a
significant linear effect on the occupational stress and
cholesterol scores. The chewing of gum was associated with the
significant reduction in stress and a reduced amount of
cholesterol in the body thus leading to a decrease in high blood
pressure. The subjects filled the questionnaires online, and their
responses were received and analyzed. The study can be
classified as an observational study, since it involves a use of a
sample of the population to complete the survey and infer to the
main population.
The study used a sample of volunteers of 338 workers, picked
from the public sector and aged from 17-64 years old. They
completed the questionnaires after they had an informed consent
of the study and agreed to share confidential information. The
researcher selected the sample purposively, based on the job
lifestyle and health.
The researcher showed causation, since, during the study,
he/she tried to establish the effect of chewing gum on the stress
and health of the subjects. In the analysis, the study depicted
that the researcher developed a significant linear relationship
that implied causation in the study between stress and chewing
gum. The study further reveals a significant logistic regression
model that showed much causation.

5. The study extended its clear explanations of the effects of
chewing gum where it was stated that it causes a reduction in
stress level at work. Also, it reduced the level of cholesterol in
the body thus reducing high blood pressure in humans.
Following these key findings of the research, my habit is
deduced to be good, as it was statistically established that helps
reduce stress and cholesterol that are both harmful to my body.
As the study suggest the chewing of gum helps to reduce
occupational stress and cholesterol levels. On the other hand, it
has some side effects though they do not outweigh its
advantages. In this regard, I will be chewing whenever doing
work and once during my leisure time. Though this current
chewing more frequent as compared from before.
The study is sparingly biased, especially in data collection
where questionnaires were used in collecting data. The study
mostly depended on the memory of the responded, thus
answering the scales like the chewing gum frequency scale
might lead to approximations thus creating bias. The personal
questions like health questions the respondent may lie for
his/her conscious public interest no matter how he/she might be
explained to that the response is confidential. The study’s
ability to select sample may be biased since the researcher knew
that the target was purposive sampling, which is not
probabilistic and is subject to bias. The study should have
included variable like alertness in a job and emotional
regulation when chewing gum. The research was good except on
the sampling procedure, to avoid many biases the study should
have used probabilistic sampling procedures like simple random
sampling or stratified sampling that could have reduced its level
of bias.
The main responses in my article are the level of stress,
presence of high blood pressure. All this response variables in
the study are categorical in that the responses are categorized in
their respective scales used in the questionnaires.
There were no graphs used. However, there should be the use of
bar graphs or pie charts in showing the results of individual

6. categorical variables scale response. For instance in the scale of
chewing gum it could show the percentage who chewed more
than once in a day all through the elements of the scale.
The study is not an experiment but a survey. However in the
study the principle of ethics has been highly observed by
informing the participants fully. I would use a different
sampling technique to avoid bias and change the whole study to
experimental. Here I could observe the individuals chewing gum
for a long period. The study could have easily been turned into
an experimental design by controlling individuals who are not
chewing gum and thus compare them to the group that is
constantly chewing gum.
References
1. Smith, A. (2013). Effects of Chewing Gum on Stress and on
Health: A Replication and Investigation of Dose-Response.
Stress & Health: Journal Of The International Society For The
Investigation Of Stress, 29(2), 172-174.
2. Effects of chewing on stress and health,
STAT 113 Mixable Assignment
Good habits vs. bad habits
60 points total
Search online for an article or video that goes into detail about
the scientific evidence for or against one of your potentially
controversial bad or good habits. Some examples of potential
controversial good/bad habits include (but certainly are not

7. limited to):
tanning, eating bacon and other cured meats, vegetarian diet,
vegan diet, Atkins diet, drinking soda, using artificial
sweeteners, skiing without a helmet, participating in endurance
sports, pulling all-nighters before exams, binge drinking, taking
herbal supplements, biting your nails, getting pedicures in a
salon, wearing deodorants with aluminum,…
If you choose the same habit as somebody else in your class,
make sure your arguments and article are different. If you have
trouble finding a research article, the Purdue research librarians
are excellent resources. One of the things you will need to
discuss about your article is what type of article it is. Here are
your choices:
· A primary source research journal article is written by the
researchers who conducted the study. Examples of research
journals are Science, Nature, the Proceedings of the National
Academies of Science (PNAS), and Journal of the American
Medical Association, but there are many others. Primary source
research articles always begin with an abstract that summarizes
the research in that article.* If you do an internet search for
your topic, you will find lots of abstracts to read.
· A review article is published in a research journal
summarizing several other research projects, hopefully with
details about those other studies.
· A secondary source is a summary article written by a science
reporter but not by the researchers. Secondary sources can be
easier to read and give you a good overview of the research, but
you generally need to find a primary source to get enough
details to understand what the researchers did. MSNBC,
WebMD, and Newsweek are examples of secondary sources.
These are the questions that you must discuss in your Mixable
post (40 points total):
1. (2 points) “Tag” your post with the habit name. For
example, “tanning” or “pedicures in salon.”
2. (2 points) Begin with a sentence about your good or bad
habit and why you have this habit.

8. 3. (10 points) Include a link to the appropriate, unique article
that you found. If your article is easily accessible on the
internet, include the link to the whole article. If you used a
journal article through the Purdue library, then give the link to
the abstract and state that you had to get the full article from
the Purdue library. (Be prepared to produce the whole article
upon request from the instructor.)
4. (2 points) Is your article a primary source, review article, or
secondary source? How do you know?
5. (6 points) Summarize the research in a few sentences, as if
you are a science reporter for the Exponent. Be sure to include
all important details about the research, including the
conclusion.
6. (4 points) Identify whether the research project in your
article is an observational study or an experiment and how you
know this. If there are treatment groups, specify what they are.
7. (4 points) Who/what was the sample used? Give as many
details as possible. How was the sample collected (voluntary
response, convenience sample, simple random sample stratified
random sample, or something else)?
8. (4 points) Did the researchers show causation instead of just
association? Why or why not? Use what we know from STAT
113 about what is required to show causation.
9. (2 points) State at least one extension of the research into
your habit that you would like to see to give you a better
explanation of why your habit is good or bad.
10. (4 points) After reading this article, do you plan on
continuing with your habit? Give specific reasons why or why
not.
You also need to make 4 statistically intelligent comments that
further the discussion on other people’s posts (worth 5 points
each). Here are some things you might want to discuss:
· Do you think the research is biased? Why or why not? Use
appropriate STAT 113 terminology (nonresponse, response bias,
undercoverage) and explain your reasoning.
· Are there lurking variables that should be considered? Why

9. might they be important?
· Do you see any problems with how this research was done or
presented? Explain your answer.
· What is/are the main response variable(s) in your article, and
is it/are they categorical or quantitative?
· Were any graphs used? If so, what type, and what do they
show? If not, what type of graph would be appropriate for this
data, and what would that graph show?
· If it’s an experiment, were the 3 principles of good
experimental design used?
· If it’s an experiment, are the ethics of good experiments with
people or animals being used?
· How would you extend this research in some good,
statistically correct way? What other questions would you like
to ask the researchers that wasn’t explained in the link?
· Are there other ways to get more information about this
research question?
· If it’s an observational study, could this have been turned into
an experiment? Why or why not?
* Note on primary sources: Sometimes the journal articles that
go with these abstracts are easily accessible, and sometimes the
sites ask you to pay for the privilege of reading their articles.
You do not need to pay anybody anything. Purdue has paid for
membership to most of these journals for you. If you can't
easily get access to the articles online, try the Purdue library
website or talk to a librarian. Don't wait until the due date to
start this process though! If you get your article from the
librarian, then you need to at least provide the website for the
abstract in your text so that your reader can read the abstract. If
you can get the whole article easily online, then provide the
website for the whole article.
2

10. Mixable Discussion Assignments General Instructions
Big picture: You will need to post 1 unique article/explanation
about detailed research. You also must make 4 statistically
intelligent and valid comments on other people’s posts. These
comments should be split among multiple posts, not 4 on the
same post. Read over the entire document to get the details of
exactly what is required.
Statistics are everywhere in the media. Some are used well, and
some are not. As part of the goal of STAT 113, you will
become a savvy media statistics consumer. This project is not
meant to be completed in one night. You are expected to be
keeping your eyes open for statistics in the media over the
whole semester. You will read something in a newspaper, in a
magazine, and on websites. You will hear about statistics in
radio reports, like on National Public Radio. You will see
statistics on television and on YouTube.
Please note that the articles must be news stories—they cannot
be course materials designed to teach statistical methods. The
stories do not have to be recent. Your posting has to be
UNIQUE. It won’t count if another student has posted a link to
the same story or if Ellen has used it in her lecture notes. This
means a Washington Post story about a research project will
count as exactly the same as an MSNBC story about the same
research. You will have to read what the other students have
posted and written to make sure that your posting is unique.
We will check postings across sections, too, to make sure you
aren’t sharing posts with students in other sections.
ASK FOR HELP if you are having trouble.
Have fun with this assignment! If you work on it a little bit
each day, you might actually enjoy it. Students are generally a
little timid in the beginning, but once they get going and know
what to look for, the assignment gets much easier. Student
feedback on this assignment is generally positive at the end of
the semester. One student described it as a “treasure hunt.”

11. Other students talked about how they never realized before that
statistics really is all around them, and this assignment opened
their eyes and showed them why they were required to take this
class.
For your topic, post the following on Mixable in your
appropriate recitation section:
· A link to the website or an upload of a relevant file.
· Post your discussion as part of the “status update.” Do NOT
make it a separate Word document. We want everything on the
Mixable site to make it easier and quicker for people to read.
Use the questions provided to create your discussion.
· Tag your habit!
Commenting on other people’s posts: You are also required to
make at least 4 comments on posts from other people. (Note:
Only 1 comment per person per post will receive credit, so
don’t try to do 4 comments on just 1 post. The goal is to get
you reading and commenting on lots of different posts.) These
comments must be thoughtful, indicate that you have thoroughly
read the article and any previous comments on that article, and
must add to the level of discussion on the statistical concepts.
Balance your comments between the different posts. The
instructor may post articles also, and comments on those
articles are acceptable for earning your discussion points. Just
as with everything we do in this course, please keep in mind
that it’s important to be respectful of each other and to engage
in professional dialogue.Examples of bad comments on posts
which did not receive credit: · “This was an interesting article.
It reminded me of junior high days.” · “I love everything that
has to do with monkeys and I find the way they act to be
fascinating. It is so crazy to me that they are such an intelligent
species, and act SO similarly to humans.”· “This was a great
experiment.” (This is an especially bad comment if the article
was actually about an observational study, and you didn’t catch
it! Not all the students who post articles will label them

12. correctly, and you should be on the lookout for that.)Examples
of good comments on posts which did receive credit:· “You
didn't label this post, but I'm pretty sure you meant to label it
“Experiment” based on your discussion. Anyway, this is
definitely not an experiment. It is an observational study. No
treatments were applied. It's true that they gave everyone a
hearing test, but that was simply a method of collecting data
since you can't just ask everyone if they have hearing problems
and get reliable feedback. They didn't divide the people tested
into groups and give them any sort of different treatment to see
if there was an effect on the outcome. In other words, they were
just looking for the data for a single variable as it was, as
opposed to changing another variable to see what its effect on
the measured variable would be.” · “This graph is interesting,
but pretty hard to read. I had to look very closely to see if red
was used in more than one place. I like that it is interactive, but
it is difficult to put your cursor over the extremely thin red
lines. I wonder why it raised back up in the 1940's? I do find it
interesting how drastically the name popularity has declined
over the years. It hasn't become popular again. The graph shows
that for the majority, the name has been on a decline.”
You should check back on your original posts periodically to
see if your instructor or fellow students had
questions/comments for you to answer.
Here are some websites which might be helpful to you:
www.theatlantic.com/health/category/studieswww.cnn.comwww
.futurity.org
www.time.comwww.psmag.comwww.npr.org
www.sciencedaily.comwww.usatoday.comwww.nytimes.com
http://fivethirtyeight.com/
If you have questions about how your Mixable assignment was
graded, please start by talking to your T.A. The T.A.s grade
these assignments.

13. See the course schedule for the due date. It is strongly
recommended that you do not wait until the last minute to try to
find these links to articles. Since your article needs to be
unique (stories not posted by any other student) and your
comments on other students’ postings need to be thoughtful, it
is to your advantage to work steadily in advance on these. With
the uniqueness requirement, this assignment will be much easier
for the people who get an earlier start!
3