Factorial Independent Samples ANOVA

Similar documents
Independent Samples ANOVA

Using SPSS for One Way Analysis of Variance

PSY 216. Assignment 12 Answers. Explain why the F-ratio is expected to be near 1.00 when the null hypothesis is true.

Multiple t Tests. Introduction to Analysis of Variance. Experiments with More than 2 Conditions

Prepared by: Prof. Dr Bahaman Abu Samah Department of Professional Development and Continuing Education Faculty of Educational Studies Universiti

Difference in two or more average scores in different groups

Retrieve and Open the Data

One-way between-subjects ANOVA. Comparing three or more independent means

One-way between-subjects ANOVA. Comparing three or more independent means

An Old Research Question

Analysis of Variance: Repeated measures

Analyses of Variance. Block 2b

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)

Repeated-Measures ANOVA in SPSS Correct data formatting for a repeated-measures ANOVA in SPSS involves having a single line of data for each

Keppel, G. & Wickens, T. D. Design and Analysis Chapter 4: Analytical Comparisons Among Treatment Means

One-Way ANOVA. Some examples of when ANOVA would be appropriate include:

1. What does the alternate hypothesis ask for a one-way between-subjects analysis of variance?

Two-Way ANOVA. Chapter 15

MBA 605, Business Analytics Donald D. Conant, Ph.D. Master of Business Administration

Note: k = the # of conditions n = # of data points in a condition N = total # of data points

Analysis of Variance: Part 1

Introduction to Analysis of Variance. Chapter 11

Taguchi Method and Robust Design: Tutorial and Guideline

16.3 One-Way ANOVA: The Procedure

Inferences for Regression

Introduction to Business Statistics QM 220 Chapter 12

Lecture 2. Estimating Single Population Parameters 8-1

4:3 LEC - PLANNED COMPARISONS AND REGRESSION ANALYSES

Preview from Notesale.co.uk Page 3 of 63

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)

The t-statistic. Student s t Test

Hypothesis T e T sting w ith with O ne O One-Way - ANOV ANO A V Statistics Arlo Clark Foos -

PSYC 331 STATISTICS FOR PSYCHOLOGISTS

The One-Way Repeated-Measures ANOVA. (For Within-Subjects Designs)

Do not copy, post, or distribute. Independent-Samples t Test and Mann- C h a p t e r 13

Module 8: Linear Regression. The Applied Research Center

1 DV is normally distributed in the population for each level of the within-subjects factor 2 The population variances of the difference scores

MANOVA is an extension of the univariate ANOVA as it involves more than one Dependent Variable (DV). The following are assumptions for using MANOVA:

Multiple Comparisons

One-Way ANOVA Source Table J - 1 SS B / J - 1 MS B /MS W. Pairwise Post-Hoc Comparisons of Means

An inferential procedure to use sample data to understand a population Procedures

Comparing Several Means: ANOVA

Analysis of Variance ANOVA. What We Will Cover in This Section. Situation

The One-Way Independent-Samples ANOVA. (For Between-Subjects Designs)

DETAILED CONTENTS PART I INTRODUCTION AND DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS. 1. Introduction to Statistics

PSY 216. Assignment 9 Answers. Under what circumstances is a t statistic used instead of a z-score for a hypothesis test

LAB 3 INSTRUCTIONS SIMPLE LINEAR REGRESSION

Analysis of variance

WELCOME! Lecture 13 Thommy Perlinger

The t-test: A z-score for a sample mean tells us where in the distribution the particular mean lies

Univariate analysis. Simple and Multiple Regression. Univariate analysis. Simple Regression How best to summarise the data?

Review. One-way ANOVA, I. What s coming up. Multiple comparisons

The independent-means t-test:

What Does the F-Ratio Tell Us?

Sampling Distributions: Central Limit Theorem

Unit 27 One-Way Analysis of Variance

10/31/2012. One-Way ANOVA F-test

Chap The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Hypothesis testing: Steps

same hypothesis Assumptions N = subjects K = groups df 1 = between (numerator) df 2 = within (denominator)

The entire data set consists of n = 32 widgets, 8 of which were made from each of q = 4 different materials.

COMPARING SEVERAL MEANS: ANOVA

COSC 341 Human Computer Interaction. Dr. Bowen Hui University of British Columbia Okanagan

Hotelling s One- Sample T2

Design of Experiments. Factorial experiments require a lot of resources

Stat 529 (Winter 2011) Experimental Design for the Two-Sample Problem. Motivation: Designing a new silver coins experiment

ANOVA continued. Chapter 11

Chapter Seven: Multi-Sample Methods 1/52

Variance Estimates and the F Ratio. ERSH 8310 Lecture 3 September 2, 2009

Lecture 11: Two Way Analysis of Variance

ANOVA continued. Chapter 10

Multiple Comparison Procedures Cohen Chapter 13. For EDUC/PSY 6600

Statistics For Economics & Business

Workshop Research Methods and Statistical Analysis

Chapter 10. Design of Experiments and Analysis of Variance

ANOVA in SPSS. Hugo Quené. opleiding Taalwetenschap Universiteit Utrecht Trans 10, 3512 JK Utrecht.

CHAPTER 10 ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE. It would be very unusual for all the research one might conduct to be restricted to

Your schedule of coming weeks. One-way ANOVA, II. Review from last time. Review from last time /22/2004. Create ANOVA table

Three Factor Completely Randomized Design with One Continuous Factor: Using SPSS GLM UNIVARIATE R. C. Gardner Department of Psychology

Hypothesis Tests and Estimation for Population Variances. Copyright 2014 Pearson Education, Inc.

Section 9.4. Notation. Requirements. Definition. Inferences About Two Means (Matched Pairs) Examples

SEVERAL μs AND MEDIANS: MORE ISSUES. Business Statistics

Degrees of freedom df=1. Limitations OR in SPSS LIM: Knowing σ and µ is unlikely in large

ANOVA continued. Chapter 10

ANCOVA. Lecture 9 Andrew Ainsworth

Sleep data, two drugs Ch13.xls

Logistic Regression Analysis

Statistics and Quantitative Analysis U4320. Segment 10 Prof. Sharyn O Halloran

Wed, June 26, (Lecture 8-2). Nonlinearity. Significance test for correlation R-squared, SSE, and SST. Correlation in SPSS.

Psy 420 Final Exam Fall 06 Ainsworth. Key Name

BIOL Biometry LAB 6 - SINGLE FACTOR ANOVA and MULTIPLE COMPARISON PROCEDURES

5:1LEC - BETWEEN-S FACTORIAL ANOVA

Statistics and Quantitative Analysis U4320

STAT 328 (Statistical Packages)

psyc3010 lecture 2 factorial between-ps ANOVA I: omnibus tests

Chapter 9: How can I tell if scores differ between three or more groups? One-way independent measures ANOVA.

M A N O V A. Multivariate ANOVA. Data

8/23/2018. One-Way ANOVA F-test. 1. Situation/hypotheses. 2. Test statistic. 3.Distribution. 4. Assumptions

OHSU OGI Class ECE-580-DOE :Design of Experiments Steve Brainerd

HYPOTHESIS TESTING. Hypothesis Testing

Transcription:

Factorial Independent Samples ANOVA Liljenquist, Zhong and Galinsky (2010) found that people were more charitable when they were in a clean smelling room than in a neutral smelling room. Based on that study, this fictitious example randomly assigned participants to be in a room with one of three odors neutral (the control group), foul (flatus (the odor of which is available in a spray!)), or clean smelling (citrus scented Windex, which is what Liljenquist et al. used). Students were also assigned to sit in a room of two different styles -- a messy room or an organized room. Participants played a game that is often used in research as a measure of trust (Liljenquist et al., 2010). A participant is given $10 and told that they can either keep it or invest it with another participant (who doesn t actually exist). Any money that is invested is tripled. The participant is told that the other participant will then decide how much, if any, of the money is sent back to them. If the participant trusts the other participant he or she would invest all $10, which would be tripled to $30 and the other participant, if trustworthy, would return half, $15. Thus both players would have $15 at the end. If the participant does not trust the other participant, they would not invest any of the $10 in the other participant. Thus, the amount of money invested is a measure of how much the participant trusts the other participant. The researcher wants to know if the odor influences how trustworthy people are. The researcher also wants to know if the room style influences how trustworthy people are. Finally, the researcher wants to know if odor and room style interact. 1. Step 1: Write the null and alternative hypotheses and specify the probability of making a Type I error: Main effect of odor: H 0 : µ Neutral = μ Foul = μ Clean H 1 : not H 0 Main effect of room style: H 0 : µ Messy = μ Organized H 1 : not H 0 Interaction of odor and room style: H 0 : There is no interaction of type of odor and room style H 1 : There is an interaction of type of odor and room style α =.05 2. Step 2: We will compare the reported p value to α. If p α, we will reject H 0 and conclude that the IV(s) likely had an effect on how trusting people are.

3. Step 3: Calculate the test statistic: a. Open SPSS b. Either type the data (see the third to last page for the data) or open a data set. The class data set (for homework) is available from <http://academic.udayton.edu/gregelvers/psy216/spss/216datas11.sav>. Save the data file somewhere and open it with SPSS. If you are typing the data, switch to the Variable View (click on that tab in the lower left) and create three variables. Name one of the variables odor (one of the IVs), name one room (the other IV) and name the third variable trust (the DV). If you want labels for the levels of the IVs to appear in the output, click in the cell at the intersection of a row with an IV and the Values column. Click on the button with the ellipsis ( ) on it. Enter the value and label for that value (see the last two sentences in this paragraph for appropriate values and labels.) Click add. Repeat for other values and labels. Click OK. Switch back to the Data View. When entering data or value labels, for the odor variable, enter 1 for neutral, 2 for clean and 3 for foul. For the room variable, enter 1 for messy and 2 for organized. c. Analyze General Linear Model Univariate d. Move the dependent variable (trust) into the Dependent Variable box.

e. Move the independent variables (odor and room) into the Fixed Factor(s) box: f. If either of the IVs have more than two levels (one of ours has three levels), click the Post Hoc button

g. Move the IV(s) that have more than two levels (odor) from the Factor(s) box to the Post Hoc Tests for box. h. Select the desired type of multiple comparison (in our case, Tukey):

i. Click the Continue button j. Click the Options button

k. Move everything from the Factor(s) and Factor Interactions Box into the Display Means for box l. In the Display section of the dialog box, check Descriptive Statistics, Estimates of Effect Size and Observed Power

m. Click the Continue button n. Click the OK button o. The SPSS output viewer will open p. Check the first part of the output to see if the levels of the independent variables are appropriately specified:

q. The next part of the output gives descriptive statistics for the dependent variable for each condition (one level of each independent variable paired together): r. This tells us that for the mean number of dollars invested for the neutral odor and messy room condition is 5.20 (mean column and Neutral, Messy row), the sample standard deviation (s) is 1.48, and the sample size (N) is 5. Likewise, this tells us that for foul smelling, organized room condition there were 5 scores (in the N column of the Foul, Messy row), that the sample mean ( ) is 3.60 (mean column and the Foul, Messy row), and the sample standard deviation (s) is 1.67. The mean for all of the neutral odor conditions is 5.30. The mean for all of the messy room conditions is 4.93. s. The next part of the output is the ANOVA summary table:

n. The only rows of interest are the ones with the IVs (odor, room and odor * room), Error, and Corrected Total (not Total). The between-treatment information for each main effect is on the row labeled with the IV for that main effect (e.g. odor for the main effect of odor and room for the main effect of room style). The between-treatment information for the interaction is on the row labeled with the IVs for that interaction separated with asterisks (*) (e.g. odor * room for the interaction of odor and room.) The within-treatment information is on the row labeled with Error. (These should make sense between-treatment variance measures the effect of the IV and error and the within-treatment variances measures error.) 4. Step 4: Make decisions: For each main effect and interaction, find the p value for the effect (in the column labeled Sig. and the row labeled with the IV(s)). If the p value is less than or equal to the α level, then you should reject that effect s H 0. Otherwise, you should fail to reject H 0. For the main effect of type of odor, the p value equals.000 (from the Sig. column and the odor row.) Because p =.000 and α =.05, we reject H 0 and conclude that it is likely the case that at least one of the population means for the different types of odor is different from at least one of the other population means for the different types of odors. We would write: How trusting people are in the neutral (M = 5.30), clean (M = 7.70) and foul (M = 4.10) odor conditions are not likely all equal. The ANOVA revealed a main effect of type of odor, F(2, 24) = 16.941, MS error = 1.983, η 2 =.585, p =.000, α =.05. For the main effect of room style, the p value equals.006 (from the Sig. column and the room row.) Because p =.006 and α =.05, we reject H 0 and conclude that it is likely the case that at least one of the population means for the different room styles is different from at least one of the other population means for the different room styles. We would write: How trusting people are in the messy (M = 4.93) and organized (M = 6.47) room styles are not likely equal. The ANOVA revealed a main effect of room style, F(1, 24) = 8.891, η 2 =.270, p =.006. For the interaction of type of odor and room style, the p value equals.047 (from the Sig. column and the odor * room row.) Because p =.047 and α =.05, we reject H 0 and conclude that it is likely the case that odor and room style interact. We would write: See Figure 1 for the means and 95% confidence intervals for each condition. The ANOVA revealed an interaction of type of odor and room style, F(2, 24) = 3.496, η 2 =.226, p =.047.

5. Because we rejected H 0 and the type of odor IV had more than two levels, we need to look at the multiple comparisons output. First, write the hypotheses: H 0 : μ Neutral = μ Clean H 1 : μ Neutral μ Clean H 0 : μ Neutral = μ Foul H 1 : μ Neutral μ Foul H 0 : μ Clean = μ Foul H 1 : μ Clean μ Foul 6. Find the Multiple Comparisons part of the output: 7. To see if the population means for neutral and clean odors are likely different, find one of the rows (there are two of them) where one of the levels (e.g. neutral) is listed in the (I) odor column and the other level (e.g. clean) is listed in the (J) odor column. Look in the Mean Difference (I J) column. In this example, the intersection of that row and column has -2.400 * in it. If there is an asterisk (*) after the mean difference, then you should reject H 0 that those population means are equal. In this case, there is an asterisk after the mean difference, so we reject H 0 there is sufficient evidence in this set of data to conclude that the population means of neutral and clean odors are likely different. Repeat for the other two multiple comparisons. We would write:

Dollars Invested How trusting people are in the neutral (M = 5.30), clean (M = 7.70) and foul (M = 4.10) odor conditions are not likely all equal. The ANOVA revealed a main effect of type of odor, F(2, 24) = 16.941, MS error = 1.983, η 2 =.585, p =.000, α =.05. Tukey multiple comparisons revealed that the level of trusting behavior is not reliably different for the foul and neutral odor conditions, p >.05. Tukey tests revealed that the clean odor was reliably different from both the foul and neutral odors, both p.05. 8. Good luck getting Excel to make the graph! 12 10 8 6 4 Messy Organized 2 0 5.20 5.40 6.00 9.40 3.60 4.60 Neutral Clean Foul Odor

Step 1 is identical to those used with SPSS. Step 2: We will return to it once we know the dfs. Step 3: Calculate the test statistics: Odor Neutral Clean Foul Messy 3 5 7 5 6 4 6 7 8 5 2 4 2 6 4 T Messy = 74 Room Style Organized T = ΣX = 26 T = ΣX = 30 T = ΣX = 18 ΣX 2 = 144 ΣX 2 = 190 ΣX 2 = 76 n = 5 n = 5 n = 5 M = 5.2 M = 6 M = 3.6 SS=144-262/5=8.80 SS=190-302/5=10.0 SS=76-182/5=11.20 5 6 7 4 5 10 9 10 9 9 3 5 3 7 5 T Organized = 97 G=171 N=30 ΣX 2 =1121 T = ΣX = 27 T = ΣX = 47 T = ΣX = 23 ΣX 2 = 151 ΣX 2 = 443 ΣX 2 = 117 n = 5 n = 5 n = 5 M = 5.4 M = 9.4 M = 4.6 SS=151-272/5=5.20 SS=443-472/5=1.20 SS=117-232/5=11.20 T Neutral = 53 T Clean = 77 T Foul = 41 Stage 1: SS Total = ΣX 2 G 2 / N = 1121 171 2 / 30 = 146.3 SS Within-Treatment = ΣSS inside each treatment = 8.8 + 10.0 + 11.2 + 5.2 + 1.2 + 11.2 = 47.6 SS Between-Treatment = ΣT 2 /n G 2 /N = 26 2 /5 + 30 2 / 5 + 18 2 / 5 + 27 2 / 5 + 47 2 / 5 + 23 2 / 5 171 2 / 30 = 98.7

df Total = N 1 = 30 1 = 29 df Within-Treatments = Σdf = (5 1) + (5 1) + (5 1) + (5 1) + (5 1) + (5 1) = 24 df Between-Treatments = number of treatments 1 = 6 1 = 5 Stage 2: SS Room Style = ΣT 2 Rows / n Rows - G 2 /N = 74 2 / 15 + 97 2 / 15 171 2 / 30 = 17.63 SS Odor = ΣT 2 Columns / n Columns - G 2 /N = 53 2 / 10 + 77 2 / 10 + 41 2 / 10 171 2 / 30 = 67.20 SS Room Style X Odor = SS Between-Treatments SS Room Style SS Odor = 98.70 17.63 67.20 = 13.87 df Room Style = number of rows 1 = 2 1 = 1 df Odor = number of columns 1 = 3 1 = 2 df Room Style X Odor = df Room Style X Sdf dor = 1 X 2 = 2 MS Room Style = SS Room Style / df Room Style = 17.63 / 1 = 17.63 MS Odor = SS Odor / df Odor = 67.20 / 2 = 33.60 MS Room Style X Odor = SS Room Style X Odor / df Room Style X Odor = 13.87 / 2 = 6.93 MS Within-Treatments = SS Within-Treatments / df Within-Treatments = 47.60 / 24 = 1.983 F Room Style = MS Room Style / MS Within-Treatments = 17.63 / 1.983 = 8.89 F Odor = MS Odor / MS Within-Treatments = 33.60 / 1.983 = 16.94 F Room Style X Odor = MS Room Style X Odor / MS Within-Treatments = 6.93 / 1.983 = 3.50 Step 2: Determine the critical regions For the main effect of odor and the interaction of odor and room type, from a table of critical F values, find F critical with 2 (df numerator) and 24 (df denominator) degrees of freedom with α =.05. F critical = 3.40. For the main effect of room type, from a table of critical F values, find F critical with 1 (df numerator) and 24 (df denominator) degrees of freedom with α =.05. F critical = 4.26. Step 4: Decisions: For the main effect of type of odor: The observed F is 16.94 which is larger than the critical F (which equal 3.40), so we should reject H 0 and conclude that trust depends on the type of odor. For the main effect of room style: The observed F is 8.89 which is larger than the critical F (which equal 4.26), so we should reject H 0 and conclude that trust depends on room style.

For the interaction of type of odor and room style: The observed F is 3.50 which is larger than the critical F (which equal 3.40), so we should reject H 0 and conclude that type of odor and room style interact. Multiple Comparisons: Perform multiple comparisons only if the main effect is statistically significant and the number of levels of that IV is greater than 2. In this example, we only need to do multiple comparisons for the main effect of type of odor. Step 1 (write the hypotheses) is the same as for SPSS Step 2: Find the critical q value We need the df Within-Treatment (24), the number of levels of the IV (k = 3) and α (.05). The tabled value of q with those parameters is 3.533 Step 3: Calculate the statistic HSD = q (MS error / n) = 3.533 (1.983 / 10) = 1.573 n = 10 because there are 10 observations for each level of odor (5 in the messy room and 5 in the organized room). Step 4: Decide If the difference of the sample means is at least as large as the HSD, reject H 0. Neutral vs Clean: If Neutral - Clean HSD, reject H 0. 5.3 7.7 1.573, reject H 0. Neutral vs Foul: If Neutral - Foul HSD, reject H 0. 5.3 4.1 < 1.573, fail to reject H 0. Clean vs Foul: If Clean - Foul HSD, reject H 0. 7.7 4.1 1.573, reject H 0.