1. The presenter’s conclusions are flawed because correlation does not imply causation. A correlation of $r=0.21$ only indicates a weak association between weight and hours of TV watched, not that watching TV causes weight gain. Also, the presenter did not perform a statistical test to compare the mean weights of men and women, so concluding that men weigh more than women is unsupported. 2. The difference in standard deviations ($SD_{men}=8.43$, $SD_{women}=1.57$) indicates that the weights of men are more spread out or variable compared to the weights of women, who have more consistent weights around the mean. 3. Reporting the standard deviation along with the mean is important because the mean alone does not convey the variability or spread of the data. The standard deviation helps understand how much individual data points differ from the average, which is crucial for interpreting the data’s reliability and distribution. 4. Limitations in the methodology include a small sample size (only 30 people), lack of random sampling which may cause bias, no control for confounding variables (like diet, physical activity), and no statistical test to compare groups. Also, the study design is correlational, so causal conclusions are invalid. 5. Recommendations to improve the study: - Increase the sample size and use random sampling to improve representativeness. - Conduct appropriate statistical tests (e.g., t-test) to compare mean weights between men and women. - Control for confounding variables such as diet, exercise, and socioeconomic status to better isolate the effect of TV watching on weight.