STAT E-150 Summer 2022 Homework 4- Part 2 (1)

docx

School

Harvard University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

E150

Subject

Statistics

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by mzaid0001

Report
STAT E-150 Summer 2022 Homework 4-Part 2 6. To test whether different professors were harder or easier graders, a group of students submitted the same report to four different profs and recorded the mark given to each essay by each professor. The IV is professor, the DV is grade (as a percentage of 100). In the table below, has the assumption of sphericity been met? Please report your findings in APA format. Mauchly’s Test of Sphericity Measure: Measure_I Within Subjects Effect Mauchly’s W Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. Greenhouse -Geisser Huynh- Feldt Lower- bound Tutor .131 11.628 5 .043 .558 .712 .333 Mauchly’s test indicated that there is significant deviation from sphericity (χ2 = 11.628, p = . 043). 7. How did we arrive at the Lower-bound estimate of .333 in the table above? Please provide any necessary formula. The Lower-bound estimate was calculated using the formula 1/ k -1, where k= the number of groups. In this example, there are four professors, so the formula is 1/(4-1) 8. Based on your answer in Question 1, please provide an interpretation of the Test of Within- Subjects Effects Table below in APA format. Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta Squ. Tutor Sphericity Assumed Greenhouse-Geisser Huynh-Feldt Lower-Bound 554.125 554.125 554.125 554.125 3 1.673 2.137 1.000 184.708 331.245 259.329 554.125 3.700 3.700 3.700 3.700 .028 .063 .047 .096 .346 .346 .346 .346 Error (WL) Sphericity Assumed Greenhouse-Geisser Huynh-Feldt Lower-Bound 1048.375 1048.375 1048.375 1048.375 21 11.710 14.957 7.000 49.923 89.528 70.091 149.768 Because epsilon is less than .75, you must use the Greenhouse-Geisser estimates. Using G-G, there is no significant difference across tutors, F 1.673, 11.710 = 3.7, p = .063, partial h = .59 in terms of grades given.
9. Let’s assume that the p -value in the Mauchly’s table in Question 1 was actually .425. How would you then interpret the Test of Within-Subjects Effects in Question 3? Please report your findings in APA format. Because Mauchly’s test indicates no deviation from sphericity, χ2 = 11.628, p = .425), you have to use the “Sphericity Assumed” row in the Test of Within Subjects Effects, this shows that there is a significant difference across tutors, F 3,21 = 3.7, p = .063, partial h = .59 in terms of grades given. 10. In class we went over an example of factorial ANOVA in which participants rated attractiveness of partners after 0, 2, 4, and 6 pints of beer. Let’s say that we also wanted to examine the effect of lighting on the attractiveness ratings, and we had three lighting settings (dim, moderate, and bright). Now we have a factorial repeated measures design. Using our usual SST = SSW + SSB model, how many parts is SSW broken into and what are those parts? (Hint – think about how we broke down the variance in lecture). SSW is broken down into 6 parts: Effect of alcohol (SSA) Error of alcohol (SSRA) Effect of lighting (SSB) Error of lighting (SSRB) Effect of interaction (SSA x SSB) Error of interaction (SSRA x SSRB)
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