Sigall and Ostrov (1975) did an experiment to assess whether the physical attractiveness of a defendant on
Question:
a. Prior to assessment of the outcome, the researchers did a manipulation check. Members of group 1 and 2 rated the attractiveness (on a 1 to 9 scale with 9 most attractive) of the person in the photo. They reported that for the attractive photo, M = 7.53; for the unattractive photo, M = 3.20, F(1,108) = 184.29.
a. Was this difference statistically significant (using α = .05)?
b. What was the effect size for the difference in 2a?
c. Was their attempt to manipulate perceived attractiveness successful?
d. Why does the F ratio in 2a have just 1 df in the numerator?
e. The mean length of sentence given in the three groups was as follows:
Group 1, attactive photo, M = 2.80
Group 2, unattractive photo, M = 5.20
Group 3 , no photo, M = 5.10
They did not report a single overall F comparing all three groups; instead they reported selected pair wise comparisons. For Group 1 versus Group 2, F(1,108) = 6.60, p < .025.
Was this difference statistically significant? If they had done an overall F to assess the significance of differences of means among all 3 groups, do you think this overall F would have been statistically significant?
f. Was the difference in mean length of sentence in part 2e in the predicted direction?
g. Calculate and interpret an effect size estimate for this obtained F
h. What additional information would you need about this data to do a Tukey HSD test to see whether Groups 2 and 3, and 1 and 3, differed significantly?
Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!
Step by Step Answer:
Related Book For
Applied Statistics From Bivariate Through Multivariate Techniques
ISBN: 9781412991346
2nd Edition
Authors: Rebecca M. Warner
Question Posted: