Name
Institution
Date
Part 1 Solution
H1: The groups mean scores are not equal
However, this can be rewritten as
H0: µ1 = µ2 = µ3
H1: µ1 ≠ µ2 ≠ µ3
Table 1
ANOVA test results
ANOVA | |||||
Final Exam Points | |||||
Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
Between Groups | 183.752 | 2 | 91.876 | 1.469 | .235 |
Within Groups | 6378.438 | 102 | 62.534 | ||
Total | 6562.190 | 104 |
Table 2
Post Hoc Tests
Multiple Comparisons | ||||||
Dependent Variable: Final Exam Points Tukey HSD | ||||||
(I) Section of Class | (J) Section of Class | Mean Difference (I-J) | Std. Error | Sig. | 95% Confidence Interval | |
Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||
1 | 2 | 2.042 | 1.870 | .521 | -2.41 | 6.49 |
3 | 3.303 | 1.947 | .211 | -1.33 | 7.93 | |
2 | 1 | -2.042 | 1.870 | .521 | -6.49 | 2.41 |
3 | 1.261 | 1.870 | .779 | -3.19 | 5.71 | |
3 | 1 | -3.303 | 1.947 | .211 | -7.93 | 1.33 |
2 | -1.261 | 1.870 | .779 | -5.71 | 3.19 |
Interpretation and Conclusion
From the ANOVA results, it is clear that there was no statistical significance to claim that the group means were different from each other. In other words, there were no statistical evidence to claim group mean differences for the three sections since the P-value = 0.235. The F-value was given as (F(2, 102) = 1.469, P= 0.235). Such results indicate that, there was no need to carry out he Post Hoc test since the group means are the same. Accordingly, the Post-Hoc test is carried out where there is significance different between the groups – hence this test aims to identify where exactly the difference is. In other words, it tells the analyst which groups differed. Therefore, the Post-Hoc test should be run where the results are statistically significance showing statistical evidence in difference between group means. Also, the plot indicates that the group sizes are unequal, hence making use of the Harmonic mean to represent the sample size (Harmonic mean = 34.784). Therefore, this reveals that the groups are heterogeneous and each mean score for the final exam is given separately as shown in the SPSS output file attached. To conclude on this test, for the three section of classes (1, 2 and 3) there is no statistical evidence to claim that their mean final exam points are different.
Solution 2
Set 1
H0: The mean final course scores is equal among the three sections
H1: The mean final course scores is different among the three sections
Set 2
H0: The mean final course scores is equal among the different ethnicities
H1: The Mean final Course scores is different among the different ethnicities
Table 3
Two-way ANOVA
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects | |||||
Dependent Variable: Final Course Percent | |||||
Source | Type III Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. |
Corrected Model | 2127.302a | 13 | 163.639 | 1.129 | .346 |
Intercept | 301720.719 | 1 | 301720.719 | 2081.881 | .000 |
section | 141.678 | 2 | 70.839 | .489 | .615 |
ethnicit | 180.606 | 4 | 45.152 | .312 | .870 |
section * ethnicit | 920.876 | 7 | 131.554 | .908 | .504 |
Error | 13188.355 | 91 | 144.927 | ||
Total | 693088.000 | 105 | |||
Corrected Total | 15315.657 | 104 | |||
a. R Squared = .139 (Adjusted R Squared = .016) |
Table 4
Post – Hoc Tests
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects | |||||
Dependent Variable: Final Course Percent | |||||
Source | Type III Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. |
Corrected Model | 2127.302a | 13 | 163.639 | 1.129 | .346 |
Intercept | 301720.719 | 1 | 301720.719 | 2081.881 | .000 |
section | 141.678 | 2 | 70.839 | .489 | .615 |
ethnicit | 180.606 | 4 | 45.152 | .312 | .870 |
section * ethnicit | 920.876 | 7 | 131.554 | .908 | .504 |
Error | 13188.355 | 91 | 144.927 | ||
Total | 693088.000 | 105 | |||
Corrected Total | 15315.657 | 104 | |||
a. R Squared = .139 (Adjusted R Squared = .016) |
Table 5
Post Hoc tests for ethnicity
Multiple Comparisons | ||||||
Dependent Variable: Final Course Percent Tukey HSD | ||||||
(I) Ethnicity | (J) Ethnicity | Mean Difference (I-J) | Std. Error | Sig. | 95% Confidence Interval | |
Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||
AMERICAN INDIAN | ASIAN | -6.10 | 6.019 | .849 | -22.85 | 10.65 |
AFRO-AMERICAN | -3.88 | 5.918 | .965 | -20.35 | 12.59 | |
CAUCASIAN | -5.38 | 5.675 | .877 | -21.17 | 10.42 | |
HISPANIC | 2.02 | 6.493 | .998 | -16.05 | 20.09 | |
ASIAN | AMERICAN INDIAN | 6.10 | 6.019 | .849 | -10.65 | 22.85 |
AFRO-AMERICAN | 2.22 | 3.645 | .973 | -7.93 | 12.36 | |
CAUCASIAN | .72 | 3.235 | .999 | -8.28 | 9.73 | |
HISPANIC | 8.12 | 4.519 | .382 | -4.46 | 20.70 | |
AFRO-AMERICAN | AMERICAN INDIAN | 3.88 | 5.918 | .965 | -12.59 | 20.35 |
ASIAN | -2.22 | 3.645 | .973 | -12.36 | 7.93 | |
CAUCASIAN | -1.49 | 3.043 | .988 | -9.96 | 6.97 | |
HISPANIC | 5.90 | 4.383 | .663 | -6.30 | 18.10 | |
CAUCASIAN | AMERICAN INDIAN | 5.38 | 5.675 | .877 | -10.42 | 21.17 |
ASIAN | -.72 | 3.235 | .999 | -9.73 | 8.28 | |
AFRO-AMERICAN | 1.49 | 3.043 | .988 | -6.97 | 9.96 | |
HISPANIC | 7.40 | 4.049 | .365 | -3.87 | 18.67 | |
HISPANIC | AMERICAN INDIAN | -2.02 | 6.493 | .998 | -20.09 | 16.05 |
ASIAN | -8.12 | 4.519 | .382 | -20.70 | 4.46 | |
AFRO-AMERICAN | -5.90 | 4.383 | .663 | -18.10 | 6.30 | |
CAUCASIAN | -7.40 | 4.049 | .365 | -18.67 | 3.87 | |
Based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square (Error) = 144.927. |
Interpretation and conclusion
From the above analysis, it is clear that there is no statistical evidence that the final course score is different among the sections and across the ethnicities. Accordingly, for the first set of hypothesis the F = 0.489 with a P-value of 0.615 > 0.05 indicating, hence the difference between the means are not statistically significant – accept the null hypothesis. Similarly, for the second set of hypothesis, F = 0.312 with a P-value = 0.870 indicating that, the null hypothesis is accepted and claimed that there difference between group means is not statistically significant. Therefore, in each of these two tests, there is no need of carrying out a Post-Hoc tests as there is no evidence that either of the groups have their mean scores different from each other. Evidently, it can be concluded that the final course scores is not different across the ethnicities and class sections.
Solution 3
Given the relationship between these two variables is given by a R-value of (0.823), this value is strong enough to make predictions of the total points scored from quiz 1 scores. It indicates that 82.3% of the total points scored are influenced by changes in the QUIZ 1 scores. In other words, if a simple regression model is formulated, it is easier to forecast future total points based on the QUIZ 1 scores. To add on this, 17.7% of the changes in the Total Points scored are influenced by other factors with an exception of the QUIZ 1 score.
Total Points = 62.698 + 5.072(Quiz 1) + µ (Where µ is the error term)
Total Points = 62.698 + 5.072 * 6.5
Total Points = 95.666
Solution 4
Coefficientsa | ||||||
Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | ||
B | Std. Error | Beta | ||||
1 | (Constant) | 4.859 | .545 | 8.921 | .000 | |
Quiz 3 Points | .377 | .066 | .493 | 5.745 | .000 | |
a. Dependent Variable: Quiz 5 Points |
The model assumes that the Quiz 5 scores are dependent on the quiz 3 scores, therefore, Quiz 5 scores is the dependent variable while Quiz 3 is the independent variable.
Quiz 5 = 4.859 + 0.377 Quiz 3 + µ (µ is error term)
Quiz 5 = 4.859 + 0.377 (8.5) + u (however, u is assumed to be zero in the model)
Quiz 5 = 8.0635 points
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more