Test the claim that the proportion of people who own dogs is less than 32%. a random sample of 1000 people found that 28% owned dogs. do the sample data provide convincing evidence to support the claim

So the p value obtained was a very low value and using the significance level assumed for example we have so we can conclude that we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis, and we can said that at 5% of significance the proportion of people who owned dogs is significantly less than 0.32.  

Step-by-step explanation:

1) Data given and notation

n=1000 represent the random sample taken

estimated proportion of people who owned dogs

is the value that we want to test

represent the significance level

z would represent the statistic (variable of interest)

represent the p value (variable of interest)  

2) Concepts and formulas to use  

We need to conduct a hypothesis in order to test the claim that proportion of people who own dogs is less than 0.32 or 32%"

Null hypothesis:  

Alternative hypothesis:  

When we conduct a proportion test we need to use the z statistic, and the is given by:  

(1)  

The One-Sample Proportion Test is used to assess whether a population proportion is significantly different from a hypothesized value .

3) Calculate the statistic  

Since we have all the info requires we can replace in formula (1) like this:  

4) Statistical decision  

It's important to refresh the p value method or p value approach . "This method is about determining "likely" or "unlikely" by determining the probability assuming the null hypothesis were true of observing a more extreme test statistic in the direction of the alternative hypothesis than the one observed". Or in other words is just a method to have an statistical decision to fail to reject or reject the null hypothesis.  

The next step would be calculate the p value for this test.  

Since is a left tailed test the p value would be:  

So the p value obtained was a very low value and using the significance level assumed for example we have so we can conclude that we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis, and we can said that at 5% of significance the proportion of people who owned dogs is significantly less than 0.32.