seen from Russia
seen from T1

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from T1

seen from United States
seen from China
seen from T1
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from Japan
seen from China
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Canada

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Week 4
Research Question
I am interested in analysing impact of variables like urabnisation, female employment, carbon emission and oil consumption per capita on breast cancer in females. All the explanatory variables used have high correlation with stress and environmental pollution. Is there a relationship between increasing stress and air pollution on breast cancer in females?
My Code
# Importing necessary packages import pandas as pd import numpy as np import seaborn as sns import matplotlib.pyplot as plt # importing data df = pd.read_csv("gapminder.csv", index_col = 0, header = 0) # converting required column to numeric for i in df.columns: df[i] = df[i].replace(" ", np.NaN) df[i] = pd.to_numeric(df[i]) #making bins for breast cancer cases df['breastcancerper100bins'] = pd.cut(x = df['breastcancerper100th'], bins = [3, 23, 43, 63, 83, 103]) # making labels for ranges of data df['urbanfactor'] = " " df['urbanfactor'] = np.where(df['urbanrate'] < 60, 'R', df['urbanfactor']) # R means underdeveloped or developing df['urbanfactor'] = np.where((df['urbanrate'] >= 60), 'D', df['urbanfactor']) # D means developed df['urbanfactor'] = np.where(df['urbanrate'] >=80, 'U', df['urbanfactor']) # U means urbanized df['urbanfactor'] = df['urbanfactor'].replace(" ", np.NaN) # # for femaleemployee rate df['femaleemployratebins'] = pd.cut(x = df['femaleemployrate'], bins = [11, 26, 41, 56, 71, 86]) # # for suicideper100th df['suicideper100bins'] = pd.cut(x = df['suicideper100th'], bins = [0, 7, 14, 21, 28, 36]) # #for carbon emmission df['co2emissionsbins'] = pd.qcut(df['co2emissions'], 5) #extracting columns of interest in dataframe sub = df[['breastcancerper100th', 'breastcancerper100bins', 'femaleemployrate','femaleemployratebins','co2emissions','co2emissionsbins', 'suicideper100th', 'suicideper100bins', 'urbanrate', 'urbanfactor']] #univariate distribution plt.figure(1) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.distplot(sub['breastcancerper100th'].dropna()) plt.xlabel('Breast Cancer Rate') plt.ylabel('Frequency') plt.title('Number of new cases of breast cancer in 100,000 female') plt.figure(2) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.distplot(sub['femaleemployrate'].dropna()) plt.xlabel('Female employement Rate') plt.ylabel('Frequency') plt.title('Percentage of female population, age above 15') plt.figure(3) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.distplot(sub['co2emissions'].dropna()) plt.xlabel('Cumulative CO2 emission') plt.ylabel('Frequency') plt.title('Total amount of CO2 emission in metric tons since 1751') plt.figure(4) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.distplot(sub['suicideper100th'].dropna()) plt.xlabel('Suicide, age adjusted, per 100 000') plt.ylabel('Frequency') plt.title('Mortality due to self-inflicted injury, per 100 000') plt.figure(5) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.distplot(sub['urbanrate'].dropna()) plt.xlabel('Urban population') plt.ylabel('Frequency') plt.title('Urban population %age of Total Population') # central tendency measure print('describe Breast Cancer Rate') print(sub['breastcancerper100th'].describe()) print('describe Female employement Rate') print(sub['femaleemployrate'].describe()) print('describe Cumulative CO2 emission') print(sub['co2emissions'].describe()) print('describe Suicide, age adjusted, per 100 000') print(sub['suicideper100th'].describe()) print('describe Urban population') print(sub['urbanrate'].describe()) # factor plots plt.figure(6) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.barplot(sub['urbanfactor'], sub['breastcancerper100th']) plt.ylabel('Breast Cancer Rate') plt.xlabel('urbanfactor') plt.title('Breast Cancer Rate vs urbanfactor') plt.figure(7) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.barplot(sub['femaleemployratebins'], sub['breastcancerper100th']) plt.ylabel('Breast Cancer Rate') plt.xlabel('femaleemployratebins') plt.title('Breast Cancer Rate vs femaleemployratebins') plt.figure(8) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.barplot(sub['co2emissionsbins'], sub['breastcancerper100th']) plt.ylabel('Breast Cancer Rate') plt.xlabel('Cumulative CO2 emission bins') plt.title('Breast Cancer Rate vs Cumulative CO2 emission bins') plt.figure(9) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.barplot(sub['suicideper100bins'], sub['breastcancerper100th']) plt.ylabel('Breast Cancer Rate') plt.xlabel('suicideper100bin') plt.title('Breast Cancer Rate vs suicideper100bin') # regression plot plt.figure(10) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.regplot(sub['urbanrate'], sub['breastcancerper100th']) plt.ylabel('Breast Cancer Rate') plt.xlabel('urbanfactor') plt.title('Breast Cancer Rate vs urbanrate') plt.figure(11) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.regplot(sub['femaleemployrate'], sub['breastcancerper100th']) plt.ylabel('Breast Cancer Rate') plt.xlabel('femaleemployrate') plt.title('Breast Cancer Rate vs femaleemployrate') plt.figure(11) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.regplot(sub['co2emissions'], sub['breastcancerper100th']) plt.ylabel('Breast Cancer Rate') plt.xlabel('co2emissions') plt.title('Breast Cancer Rate vs co2emissions') plt.figure(11) plt.figure(figsize = (12, 6)) sns.regplot(sub['suicideper100th'], sub['breastcancerper100th']) plt.ylabel('Breast Cancer Rate') plt.xlabel('suicideper100th') plt.title('Breast Cancer Rate vs suicideper100thr')
Univariate Analysis
Graphs
Describe Breast Cancer Rate count 173.000000 mean 37.402890 std 22.697901 min 3.900000 25% 20.600000 50% 30.000000 75% 50.300000 max 101.100000 So this is not symmetrical with median near 30, peaks near 20,and 70 and mode near 20
Describe Female employement Rate count 178.000000 mean 47.549438 std 14.625743 min 11.300000 25% 38.725000 50% 47.549999 75% 55.875000 max 83.300003 This is symmetrical with mean, median, mode near 50 Describe Cumulative CO2 emission count 2.000000e+02 mean 5.033261e+09 std 2.573812e+10 min 1.320000e+05 25% 3.484617e+07 50% 1.859018e+08 75% 1.846084e+09 max 3.342210e+11 This is very highly right skewed with mode near 0. It is not symmetrical.
Describe Suicide, age adjusted, per 100 000 count 191.000000 mean 9.640839 std 6.300178 min 0.201449 25% 4.988449 50% 8.262893 75% 12.328551 max 35.752872 This is not symmetrical, right skewed and mean > median.
Describe Urban population count 203.000000 mean 56.769360 std 23.844933 min 10.400000 25% 36.830000 50% 57.940000 75% 74.210000 max 100.000000 Not symmetrical, Bimodal with modes near 30 and 60.
Bivariate analysis
Categorical vs Quantitative
This graph supports our hypothesis as countries with large urban population have more breast cancer cases.
This doesn turned out as expected but this maybe possible due to less data points for countries with higher female employement rate. So, we didnt get any conclusive evidence as above.
This supports out hypothesis as we are getting that increased carbon emission have more breast cancer cases.
This is not turned out as expected maybe be due to beacause this variable doesnt capture the stress as we supposed it to.
Quantitative vs Quantitative Graphs
we can see week positive correlation between these variables supporting our hypothesis
No conclusive evidence
this plot doesnt makes the picture as clear as in the above case
No conclusive evidence
Summary
Hypothesis
Stress increase and exposure to pollution can cause increase breast cancer cases.
Variable of focus in data set:
Response variable = breastcancerper100TH Explanatory variable = femaleemployrate Explanatory variable = co2emissions Explanatory variable = suicideper100TH Explanatory variable = urbanrate In the available dataset unique identifier of a data point is country.
Except the breast cancer variable all other variables are included to capture the features of stress and pollution.
As turned out in our graphical analysis we can see that co2emissions(proxy for pollution) and urbanrate(expected to capture stress and polltuion) supports our hypothesis. But other 2 variables fail to provide any conclusive evidence. This doesnt mean our hypothesis is wrong as this may be due to lack of data or these variables are unable to capture the features are supposed to. But we have evidence that our hypothesis about effect of pollution is correct. Furthur clarification can be done by detailed analysis.
Week 4 Assignment
You are still not addressing stakeholders. This is the second week I have explained the need to address your top three stakeholders. You need to share how each group sees the solutions. They will not all be the same.
Instructions:Read the material at the sites listed in the Week 4 Lessons folder to help guide you assess the risks and rewards related to the solution(s) to the management problem…
View On WordPress
Week 4 - Assignment
Week 4 – Assignment
The primary purpose of the Concept Paper is to obtain instructor feedback to ensure that you are on track with the completion of your feasibility study. The complete instructions for the feasibility study can be found in Week Six of the online course.The Concept Paper is a draft version of your Final Paper with the initial list of relevant scholarly sources. In this draft, be certain to include…
View On WordPress
WEEK 4 ASSIGNMENT
This week, you will select a research topic for your Final Project and submit it to your Instructor for approval. Your topic should be related to gender, and the research that you conduct on the topic (in future weeks) should be from a psychological perspective. The following are examples of research topics:
Academic achievement gap in math test scores between boys and girls
Conflict over…
View On WordPress

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Course 4 Assignment 4
My research question is what factors will affect the income per person. The potential quantitative clustervariables are alcconsumption, femaleemployrate, internetuserate, lifeexpectancy, urbanrate, employrate and incomeperperson. I set the numbers of cluster as 6 to classify the cluster variables. As you can see above table. Aftermath, I choose numbers of cluster as 4 to procedurecanonical discriminant analysis, let us look back the cluster means table with only 4 Clusters. The cluster 1 has female employrate rate -1.743 , internet use rate -1.312 and urban rate -0.825. The cluster 2 has female employrate rate 0.670, internet use rate 0.942 and urban rate 0.866. The cluster 3 has female employrate rate 0.904, internet use rate -0.870 and urban rate -0.847. The cluster 4 has female employrate rate -0.202, internet use rate 0.225 and urban rate 0.084. And let us see the table of Distribution of Income per person, F value is less than 0.0001. It indicates the fouding is statistically significant. Also, since the cluster 2 has higher Income per person, I am confident that income per person is associated with internet use rate and income per person is associated with urban rate.
Shared with Dropbox
SUMMARY
(1) The first graph is unimodal, with its highest peak at the category of $0 to $2000 income per person. It seems to be skewed to the right as there are higher frequencies in lower categories than the higher categories.
(2) The second graph is unimodal, with its highest peak at the category of 40% to 60% female employ rate. It seems to be skewed to the right as there are higher frequencies in lower categories than the higher categories.
(3) The third graph is unimodal, with its highest peak at the category of 0% to 20% internet use rate. It seems to be skewed to the right as there are higher frequencies in lower categories than the higher categories.
(4) The fourth graph above plots the income per person of a country to the country’s corresponding internet use rate. We can see that the scatter graph shows a positive relationship/trend between the two variables.