To correctly interpret the slope of the line of best fit, which is given as 12, we need to understand what this means in the context of the data provided.
The slope indicates how many kills Ava gets per hitting attempt. Since the slope (12) shows the change in kills for a given change in hitting attempts, this would mean that for each additional hitting attempt, Ava gets about 12 more kills, which is impractical in terms of interpreting the results in relation to the number of attempts.
However, because the slope is given in a way that it's hard to relate to standard interpretations of average performance, we can derive meaning from this framework:
- Ava has about 2 kills for every game. - This doesn't accurately represent the slope.
- Ava has about 2 kills for every hitting attempt. - This also isn't aligned with the slope of 12.
- Ava has about 1 kill for every 2 hitting attempts. - This option suggests a ratio of Kills to Hitting attempts but doesn't match the 12.
- Ava’s number of kills increases by 2 for every game. - This also doesn't correspond correctly to the slope.
Based on the given options and the interpretation principles of slope, none of the statements accurately reflect the point described by the slope of 12. Given that typically in volleyball, everyone doesn't get 12 kills, it's possible that there was an error in the slope interpretation or data representation.
If we were just to choose based on closest metrics without considering the exact number of kills stemming from the accuracy, it stands to be aligned with Ava's games rather than attempts.
Revising critically, the statement closest could be interpreted as: "Ava's number of kills increases based on another factor associated with hitting attempts."
As such, please review if you meant a relation that makes sense or clarify the statistics for better suffix.