Ch14Data
Páginas: 2 (322 palabras)
Publicado: 14 de julio de 2012
Chapter 14 problem set
14.1
b.
c. With the failure of Mauchly’s Test to reach significance, we can assume sphericity for the data set. Thus the repeated measures ANOVA F ratio of 3.66did reach significance (.05) indicating that practice effects do exist on the GRE. Looking at mean scores for each of the trials, it appears that repeated taking of the GRE increases theprobability of a better score.
14.2
Both tests reached equal significance levels of .293.
14.6
b. The between subjects F ratio for calculator use = 8.258 (p=.021). This suggests that therewas a significant difference in scores on the tests between calculator users and non users. Looking at mean scores for both groups below, it appears that students who did not use calculatorsperformed better on the math tests. Therefore Howell was correct that he should not have bought his daughter a calculator.
14.10
The results for between-subject effects indicate that there aresignificant differences between scores based on age and reading ability, though no interaction is evident. For within-subject variables, there was a significant difference between the three summarymeasures for individuals. An interactive effect of summary X age X reading level was also significant.
14.11
a. To evaluate the simple effect of reading ability for children, a repeatedmeasures ANOVA was conducted selecting only for children. The between-subjects F ratio of 11.655 is significant (p=.009), thus it is evident that there was a difference in summary scores betweengood readers and poor readers for children.
b.
b. To calculate the simple effect of items for adult good readers, we selected for adult and good readers and performed a repeated-measuresANOVA. The resultant within-subjects F ratio of 3.647 did not reach significance (.07), suggesting that for adult good readers, there is no difference between the components of the summary score.
14.1
b.
c. With the failure of Mauchly’s Test to reach significance, we can assume sphericity for the data set. Thus the repeated measures ANOVA F ratio of 3.66did reach significance (.05) indicating that practice effects do exist on the GRE. Looking at mean scores for each of the trials, it appears that repeated taking of the GRE increases theprobability of a better score.
14.2
Both tests reached equal significance levels of .293.
14.6
b. The between subjects F ratio for calculator use = 8.258 (p=.021). This suggests that therewas a significant difference in scores on the tests between calculator users and non users. Looking at mean scores for both groups below, it appears that students who did not use calculatorsperformed better on the math tests. Therefore Howell was correct that he should not have bought his daughter a calculator.
14.10
The results for between-subject effects indicate that there aresignificant differences between scores based on age and reading ability, though no interaction is evident. For within-subject variables, there was a significant difference between the three summarymeasures for individuals. An interactive effect of summary X age X reading level was also significant.
14.11
a. To evaluate the simple effect of reading ability for children, a repeatedmeasures ANOVA was conducted selecting only for children. The between-subjects F ratio of 11.655 is significant (p=.009), thus it is evident that there was a difference in summary scores betweengood readers and poor readers for children.
b.
b. To calculate the simple effect of items for adult good readers, we selected for adult and good readers and performed a repeated-measuresANOVA. The resultant within-subjects F ratio of 3.647 did not reach significance (.07), suggesting that for adult good readers, there is no difference between the components of the summary score.
Leer documento completo
Regístrate para leer el documento completo.