Answer:
Following are the solution to these choices:
Explanation:
![\mu_(0)=39\\\\n = 25\\\\s = 3.8\\\\\bar{X}=40\\\\\alpha =0.1](https://img.qammunity.org/2022/formulas/mathematics/college/uolr56vcipk1omhkvlgewz5u2a3enmkh8y.png)
The test assumption is:
![\text{Null Hypothesis} \to H_0:\mu =\mu_(0)\\\\\text{Alternate Hypothesis} \to H_1:\mu >\mu_(0)\\\\](https://img.qammunity.org/2022/formulas/mathematics/college/ma956wbixstwf9m32ahyelzlaoaxozzkfn.png)
It is a checked right-tail, since the alternative hypothesis is produced to classify the argument when the data difference is greater than 0.
![\text{Critical value} =t_(\alpha,n-1) = t_(0.1, 24) =1.3178\\\\\text{Rejection Region:} t_(0) > t_(\alpha,n-1)\\\\\text{Since} \ t_(0) = 1.3158 < 1.3178 = t_(0.1)\\\\](https://img.qammunity.org/2022/formulas/mathematics/college/ztblxmfoq6othe6gbyvpcenylva3nur3dg.png)
The null hypothesis should be rejected:
![H_(o): \mu = 39.0\ at\ \alpha =0.1.](https://img.qammunity.org/2022/formulas/mathematics/college/f71ksocaftp0sjnab9ebzgh9zaq8f5b3gh.png)
They have little enough proof that perhaps the average number of calls per person per week amounts to even more than 39.