Please write up and interpret the results for the following


Please write up and interpret the results for the following repeated measures ANOVA, using the Activity 6.sav data set. Score_0 through Score _12 is the repeated measure (7 levels) and gender is a fixed factor. Discuss especially both main effects and the presence/absence of an interaction between the two.

All of the relevant data is given below.

 

Within-Subjects Factors

Measure:   MEASURE_1 

Score

Dependent Variable

1

Score_0

2

Score_2

3

Score_4

4

Score_6

5

Score_8

6

Score_10

7

Score_12

Between-Subjects Factors

 

Value Label

N

Gender

F

Female

8

M

Male

4

Descriptive Statistics

 

Gender

Mean

Std. Deviation

N

Pre-test score

Female

28.25

8.172

8

Male

32.25

19.432

4

Total

29.58

12.221

12

Week 2 score

Female

29.75

6.319

8

Male

39.75

13.889

4

Total

33.08

10.113

12

Week 4 score

Female

33.63

5.181

8

Male

39.00

16.432

4

Total

35.42

9.885

12

Week 6 score

Female

35.88

6.556

8

Male

35.25

17.802

4

Total

35.67

10.671

12

Week 8 score

Female

39.38

5.370

8

Male

41.00

16.633

4

Total

39.92

9.718

12

Week 10 score

Female

44.88

5.743

8

Male

47.25

13.961

4

Total

45.67

8.690

12

Week 12 score

Female

48.38

8.518

8

Male

53.25

13.793

4

Total

50.00

10.189

12

Multivariate Testsa

Effect

Value

F

Hypothesis df

Error df

Sig.

Score

Pillai's Trace

.961

20.439b

6.000

5.000

.002

Wilks' Lambda

.039

20.439b

6.000

5.000

.002

Hotelling's Trace

24.526

20.439b

6.000

5.000

.002

Roy's Largest Root

24.526

20.439b

6.000

5.000

.002

Score * Gender

Pillai's Trace

.491

.804b

6.000

5.000

.607

Wilks' Lambda

.509

.804b

6.000

5.000

.607

Hotelling's Trace

.965

.804b

6.000

5.000

.607

Roy's Largest Root

.965

.804b

6.000

5.000

.607

a. Design: Intercept + Gender

 Within Subjects Design: Score

b. Exact statistic

 

Mauchly's Test of Sphericitya

 

Measure:   MEASURE_1 

 

Within Subjects Effect

Mauchly's W

Approx. Chi-Square

df

Sig.

Epsilonb

 

Greenhouse-Geisser

Huynh-Feldt

Lower-bound

 

Score

.001

56.876

20

.000

.441

.674

.167

 

Tests the null hypothesis that the error covariance matrix of the orthonormalized transformed dependent variables is proportional to an identity matrix.

 

a. Design: Intercept + Gender

 Within Subjects Design: Score

 

b. May be used to adjust the degrees of freedom for the averaged tests of significance. Corrected tests are displayed in the Tests of Within-Subjects Effects table.

 

                             

Tests of Within-Subjects Effects

Measure:   MEASURE_1 

Source

Type III Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

Score

Sphericity Assumed

3246.536

6

541.089

20.609

.000

Greenhouse-Geisser

3246.536

2.646

1227.164

20.609

.000

Huynh-Feldt

3246.536

4.045

802.659

20.609

.000

Lower-bound

3246.536

1.000

3246.536

20.609

.001

Score * Gender

Sphericity Assumed

182.155

6

30.359

1.156

.342

Greenhouse-Geisser

182.155

2.646

68.853

1.156

.341

Huynh-Feldt

182.155

4.045

45.035

1.156

.344

Lower-bound

182.155

1.000

182.155

1.156

.307

Error(Score)

Sphericity Assumed

1575.321

60

26.255

 

 

Greenhouse-Geisser

1575.321

26.456

59.546

 

 

Huynh-Feldt

1575.321

40.447

38.948

 

 

Lower-bound

1575.321

10.000

157.532

 

 

 

Tests of Within-Subjects Contrasts

Measure:   MEASURE_1 

Source

Score

Type III Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

Score

Linear

2962.680

1

2962.680

46.905

.000

Quadratic

143.040

1

143.040

4.305

.065

Cubic

51.361

1

51.361

2.242

.165

Order 4

73.724

1

73.724

2.765

.127

Order 5

3.584

1

3.584

.405

.539

Order 6

12.147

1

12.147

4.444

.061

Score * Gender

Linear

25.537

1

25.537

.404

.539

Quadratic

21.254

1

21.254

.640

.442

Cubic

66.694

1

66.694

2.911

.119

Order 4

55.767

1

55.767

2.092

.179

Order 5

5.060

1

5.060

.572

.467

Order 6

7.841

1

7.841

2.869

.121

Error(Score)

Linear

631.638

10

63.164

 

 

Quadratic

332.272

10

33.227

 

 

Cubic

229.083

10

22.908

 

 

Order 4

266.594

10

26.659

 

 

Order 5

88.403

10

8.840

 

 

Order 6

27.330

10

2.733

 

 

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Measure:   MEASURE_1 

Transformed Variable:   Average 

Source

Type III Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

Intercept

114349.339

1

114349.339

188.733

.000

Gender

290.720

1

290.720

.480

.504

Error

6058.804

10

605.880

 

 

a. Is the assumption of sphericity violated? How can you tell? What does this mean in the context of interpreting the results?

Mauchly's Test of Sphericitya

Measure:   MEASURE_1 

Within Subjects Effect

Mauchly's W

Approx. Chi-Square

df

Sig.

Epsilonb

Greenhouse-Geisser

Huynh-Feldt

Lower-bound

Score

.001

56.876

20

.000

.441

.674

.167

Tests the null hypothesis that the error covariance matrix of the orthonormalized transformed dependent variables is proportional to an identity matrix.

a. Design: Intercept + Gender

 Within Subjects Design: Score

b. May be used to adjust the degrees of freedom for the averaged tests of significance. Corrected tests are displayed in the Tests of Within-Subjects Effects table.

The above table depicts the results of Mauchly's Test of Spheriicty which tests for one of the assumptions of the ANOVA with repeated measures, namely, sphericity (homogeneity of covariance). This particular table is important for viewing as this assumption is commonly violated. In this case, since p-value is less than .05, I conclude that there are significant differences between the variance of difference. Therefore, the condition of sphericity has not been met.

b. Is there a main effect of gender? Is so, explain the effect. Use post hoc tests when necessary (or explain why they are not required in this specific case).

In this case, there is no main effect of gender since gender has a p-value of .504 which means that this is not significant at the 5% level. Also, in this case, the effect is not significant so there is no need for a post hoc test. Moreover, if the effect was significant, then we would not be able to perform the post hoc test since we only have two categories. Post hoc can be run if there are more than two classifications.

c. Is there a main effect tie (i.e. an increase in scores from Week 0 to Week 12)? If so, explain the effect. Use post hoc tests when necessary (or explain why they are not required in this specific case). Examine the output carefully and give as much detail as possible in your findings.

Tests of Within-Subjects Effects

Measure:   MEASURE_1 

Source

Type III Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

Score

Sphericity Assumed

3246.536

6

541.089

20.609

.000

Greenhouse-Geisser

3246.536

2.646

1227.164

20.609

.000

Huynh-Feldt

3246.536

4.045

802.659

20.609

.000

Lower-bound

3246.536

1.000

3246.536

20.609

.001

Score * Gender

Sphericity Assumed

182.155

6

30.359

1.156

.342

Greenhouse-Geisser

182.155

2.646

68.853

1.156

.341

Huynh-Feldt

182.155

4.045

45.035

1.156

.344

Lower-bound

182.155

1.000

182.155

1.156

.307

Error(Score)

Sphericity Assumed

1575.321

60

26.255

 

 

Greenhouse-Geisser

1575.321

26.456

59.546

 

 

Huynh-Feldt

1575.321

40.447

38.948

 

 

Lower-bound

1575.321

10.000

157.532

 

 

 

Pairwise Comparisons

Measure:MEASURE_1

(I) SCORE

(J) SCORE

Mean Difference (I-J)

Std. Error

Sig.a

95% Confidence Interval for Differencea

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

 

1

 

2

-4.500

3.383

.213

-12.039

3.039

3

-6.062*

2.412

.031

-11.437

-.688

4

-5.312*

2.117

.031

-10.029

-.596

5

-9.937*

2.693

.004

-15.938

-3.937

6

-15.813*

2.683

.000

-21.791

-9.834

7

-20.563*

3.524

.000

-28.415

-12.710

2

 

1

4.500

3.383

.213

-3.039

12.039

3

-1.562

1.542

.335

-4.998

1.873

4

-.812

2.324

.734

-5.990

4.365

5

-5.437*

1.914

.018

-9.701

-1.174

6

-11.313*

2.063

.000

-15.909

-6.716

7

-16.063*

3.154

.000

-23.089

-9.036

3

 

1

6.062*

2.412

.031

.688

11.437

2

1.562

1.542

.335

-1.873

4.998

4

.750

1.097

.510

-1.693

3.193

5

-3.875*

1.058

.004

-6.233

-1.517

6

-9.750*

1.336

.000

-12.726

-6.774

7

-14.500*

2.739

.000

-20.603

-8.397

4

 

1

5.312*

2.117

.031

.596

10.029

2

.812

2.324

.734

-4.365

5.990

3

-.750

1.097

.510

-3.193

1.693

5

-4.625*

1.019

.001

-6.895

-2.355

6

-10.500*

1.202

.000

-13.177

-7.823

7

-15.250*

2.711

.000

-21.291

-9.209

5

 

1

9.937*

2.693

.004

3.937

15.938

2

5.437*

1.914

.018

1.174

9.701

3

3.875*

1.058

.004

1.517

6.233

4

4.625*

1.019

.001

2.355

6.895

6

-5.875*

.716

.000

-7.471

-4.279

7

-10.625*

2.065

.000

-15.226

-6.024

6

 

1

15.813*

2.683

.000

9.834

21.791

2

11.313*

2.063

.000

6.716

15.909

3

9.750*

1.336

.000

6.774

12.726

4

10.500*

1.202

.000

7.823

13.177

5

5.875*

.716

.000

4.279

7.471

7

-4.750*

1.705

.019

-8.548

-.952

7

 

1

20.563*

3.524

.000

12.710

28.415

2

16.063*

3.154

.000

9.036

23.089

3

14.500*

2.739

.000

8.397

20.603

4

15.250*

2.711

.000

9.209

21.291

5

10.625*

2.065

.000

6.024

15.226

6

4.750*

1.705

.019

.952

8.548

Based on estimated marginal means

a. Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Least Significant Difference (equivalent to no adjustments).

*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

The mean effect of score is significant at 5% level of significance. From the table, I am able to ascertain the F-value for the score factor, its associated significance level, and the effect size (Partial Eta Squared). Because my data violated the assumption of sphericity, I examine the values in the Greenhouse-Geisser row (if sphericity had not been violated, I would have looked under the Sphericity Assumed row). Thus, I can report that when using an ANOVA with repeated measures with a Greenhouse-Geiseer correction, the mean scores for weeks were statistically significantly different (F(2.646,60) = 20.609, p < 0.0005.

In addition, in looking at the above Paired Comparisons Table, I recognize the labels associated with score in the experiment from the Within-Subject Factors Table. This is a table which gives the significance level of differences between the individual time points. It can be seen that there was a significant difference in scores in training from pre to week 12. The p-values indicate the significant differences between the groups.

Solution Preview :

Prepared by a verified Expert
Basic Statistics: Please write up and interpret the results for the following
Reference No:- TGS01254012

Now Priced at $50 (50% Discount)

Recommended (90%)

Rated (4.3/5)