Assignment 3

docx

School

University of Tennessee, Martin *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

318

Subject

Psychology

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

8

Uploaded by KidRainFish6

Report
1 ASSIGNMENT 3 Saucier Assignment 3: Up to 2-Group Parametric Design Department of Psychology, The University of Tennessee at Martin PSYC 318: Experimental Psychology II Dr. MacKewn
2 ASSIGNMENT 3 Saucier 1. What was the average triglyceride value (tg0) for males at the beginning of the study? What were the average triglycerides at the end of the study? (tg4) a. Utilizing a dependent paired samples t-test after determining normality, we are able to determine the average for males at the beginning of our study and at the end. We utilize this test as it is the same people within the levels. Triglyceride levels at the beginning of the study (tg0) averaged a level of 147.33 (mg/L) and their final triglyceride (tg4) average was 117.11 (mg/L).
3 ASSIGNMENT 3 Saucier 2. I think that males have significantly higher triglycerides (tg4) than females at the end of the study. Test this hypothesis. a. Null Hypothesis: “Males will not have significantly higher triglycerides (tg4) than females at the end of the study.” Since this is testing triglycerides between the two groups, we must first test for normality and homogeneity of variance. From running the tests, the assumption for normality is p>0.05, but the assumption for HOV is p<0.05, which results in the need to run a Mann-Whitney test, as assumptions are not satisfied. With the significance of p=.266 (p>0.05), we do not have enough statistical differences, which will lead to failing to reject the null.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
4 ASSIGNMENT 3 Saucier 3. In this study, the people consumed a diet pill for 5 weeks in the hopes that it would help them lose weight. Was there a significant weight loss from the beginning of the study (wgt0) compared to the end of the study (wgt4)? a. After determining normality, which showed p>0.05 and an HOV test is not required, we can then utilize a Dependent Paired Samples t-test. From this test, we can determine that there is a significant weight loss from the beginning of the study (wt0) compared to the end of the study (wt4). This is concluded by analyzing our p-value (p<0.001).
5 ASSIGNMENT 3 Saucier 4. Select just the females and test the hypothesis that this pill would significantly decrease triglyceride values from the baseline measure (tg0) compared to the end of the study (tg4). a. Null Hypothesis: “This pill will have no effect on female triglyceride baseline value (tg0) compared to the end of the study (tg4).” By selecting the specific case of “gender=1”, we are able to observe data associated with our female participants. Additionally, this creates a within-subject variable, therefore allowing for a dependent paired samples t-test to be run (after testing for normality). From observing the one-sided p-value, we see that p=.288 (p>0.05), therefore significant differences were not observed. This leads to the determination to fail to reject our null.
6 ASSIGNMENT 3 Saucier 5. According to the CDC, a healthy value for triglycerides is 150. Were the participants in this study at a healthy triglyceride level at the end of this study? a. Alternate hypothesis: The population mean triglyceride level at the end of the study is less than or equal to 150 (μ ≤150). Null Hypothesis: The population mean triglyceride level at the end of the study is more than 150 (μ > 150). By comparing the means through a one-sample analysis and utilizing the test value of 150, we can see with the results that p<0.05 (p=0.002), indicating that participants in the study did not have a mean triglyceride of 150, additionally, other resources also mention that a healthy triglyceride can be <150 (mg/L). Therefore, we can reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternate by observing our mean and standard deviation.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
7 ASSIGNMENT 3 Saucier 6. That the testicles were more disgusting than the witchetty grub. a. Null hypothesis: “Testicles were not more disgusting than witchetty grub.” Assuming that we are utilizing the same people repeatedly throughout this test, we would test for normality. Normality, in this case, is assumed since the significance is p>0.05. With the understanding that p>0.05, we then run a Dependent samples t- test. In this case, the significance of Testicle to Witchetty Grub is p>0.05 (p=.149), leading to a failure to reject the null.
8 ASSIGNMENT 3 Saucier 7. That the witchetty grub was more disgusting than the stick bug. a. Null Hypothesis: “Witchetty grub was not more disgusting than the stick bug.” Similar to the testing done in answer 6a, we test for normality. Since p>0.05 in our normality test, we run the dependent paired samples t-test, as the same people are being tested. With this being a directional hypothesis, we then observe the one- sided p, which is p>0.05 (p=.113). This leads to failing to reject our null.