Question: A bank manager has been presented with a new brochure that was designed to be more effective in attracting current customers to a personal financial counseling session that would include an analysis of additional banking services that could be advantageous to both the bank and the customer. The manager’s assistant, who created the new brochure, randomly selects 400 current customers, then randomly chooses 200 to receive the standard brochure that has been used in the past, with the other 200 receiving the promising new brochure that he has developed. Of those receiving the standard brochure, 35% call for more information about the counseling session, while 42% of those receiving the new brochure call for more information. Using the 0.10 level of significance, is it possible that the superior performance of the new brochure was just due to chance and that the new brochure might really be not better than the old one?