Gary has discovered a new paint the time this work if he can prove to himself that the painting to reduces the amount of time it takes to paint a room he has decided to rest in a tool for each of his helpers as well. From records of recent paintings that he completed before he pot the new tool Gary collected for a random sample of medium room. He determined that the mean amount of time that it took him to pamteach room was 36 hours with standard deviation of 2 hours. For a random sample of 6 medium-sired rooms that he painted using the new tool, be found that it took him a mean of 2 hours to paint each room with a standard deviation of 3 hours. At the 0.05 level can Gary conclude that is meantime for painting a medium-sued room without using the tool was greater than mean time when using the tool Atume that both populations are approximately normal and that the population variances are alle painting time without the tool be Population and letting times when it be pulation 2 Spot the unitetive typotheses for the still in the bank below HR Prev Gary has discovered a new painting tool to help him in his work. If he can prove to himself that the painting tool reduces the amount of time it takes to paint a room, he has decided to invest in a tool for each of his helpers as well. From records of recent painting jobs that he completed before he got the new tool Gary collected data for a random sample of medium-sized rooms. He determined that the mean amount of time that it took him to paint each room was 3.6 hours with a standard deviation of 0.2 hours. For a random sample of 6 medium-sized rooms that he painted using the new tool he found that it took him a mean of 3.2 hours to paint each room with a standard deviation of 0.3 hourt. At the 0.05 level can Gary conclude that his mean time for painting a medium-sized room without using the tool was greater than his mean time when using the tool? Assume that both populations are approximately normal and that the population variances are equal. Let painting times without using the tool be Population 1 and let painting times when using the toolbe Population 2 Step 2 of 3: Compute the value of the test statistic Round your awer to three decimal places Gary has discovered a new pting tool to help him in his work if he can prove to himself that the painting tool reduces the amount of time it takes to paint a room, he has decided to invest in a tool for each of his helpers as well. From records of recent painting jobs that he completed before he got the new tool Gary collected data for a random sample of 7 medium-sized rooms. He determined that the mean amount of time that it took him to paint each room was 3.6 hours with a standard deviation of 0.2 hours. For a random sample of 6 medium-sized rooms that he painted using the new tool, he found that it took him a mean of 3.2 hours to paint each room with a standard deviation of 0.3 hours. At the 0.05 level, can Gary conclude that his mean time for pointing a medium-sized room without using the tool was greater than his mean time when using the tool? Assume that both populations are approximately normal and that the population variances are equal, Let painting times without using the tool be Population 1 and let painting times when using the toolbe Population 2 Step 3 of Oraw a condusion and interpret the decision > Prev Not Answer Points Keypad Keyboard Shortcuts We reject the full hypothesis and conclude that there is insufficient evidence at a 0.05 level of significance to support Garys claim that his mean time for painting a medium-sized room without using the tool is greater than his mean time when using the tool We reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is sufficient evidence at a 0.05 level of spricance to support Garys claim that his meantime for painting a medium-sized room without using the tool is greater than his mean time when using the tool we fail to reject the nuit hypothes and conclude that there is sufficient evidence at a 0.05 level of significance to support Gary's claim that his mean time for painting a medium-sized room without using the tool is greater than his mean time when using the tool We fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is insufficient evidence at a 0.05 level of significance to support Garys claim that his mean time for painting a medium-sized room without using the tool is greater than his mean time when using the tool