IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bit/bsrysr/v3y2012i2p27-40.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision making based on single and double acceptance sampling plans for assessing quality of lots

Author

Listed:
  • Dumičić Ksenija

    (Department of Statistics, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia)

  • Žmuk Berislav

    (Department of Statistics, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia)

Abstract

Background: Acceptance sampling is a statistical tool of quality control. Sampling plans and operating characteristic (OC) curves are very useful for conducting acceptance sampling and provide the quality manager with tools to evaluate the quality of a production run or shipment. There are developed different sampling plans, but common used in practise are single and double acceptance sampling plans. Objectives: The goal of the paper is to test if applying of single and double sampling plan can lead to statistically significant different conclusion about quality level of observed lot. Methods/Approach: Statistical tests of difference in proportions are used to test if there is some statistically significant difference in probabilities of lot fraction defectives between a single and a double sampling plan at the same levels of probability of acceptance. Results: The results of the analysis show that in some cases there is statistically significant difference. Namely, the quality manager should be careful when he chooses to use, instead of the first, the second sampling plan with different parameters because on that way he could make statistically significant different conclusion about quality level of observed lot. Conclusions: The paper shows that some intentional manipulations by using different sampling plans are possible.

Suggested Citation

  • Dumičić Ksenija & Žmuk Berislav, 2012. "Decision making based on single and double acceptance sampling plans for assessing quality of lots," Business Systems Research, Sciendo, vol. 3(2), pages 27-40, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bit:bsrysr:v:3:y:2012:i:2:p:27-40
    DOI: 10.2478/v10305-012-0010-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10305-012-0010-4
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/v10305-012-0010-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bit:bsrysr:v:3:y:2012:i:2:p:27-40. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.