A researcher wants to determine if facets of emotional judgment predict counselor self-efficacy among professional counselors. Three scales of the Emotional Judgment Inventory (EJI) are used to measure one's perceived skill in understanding and using emotions effectively. Higher scores on the EJI scales reflect better emotional judgment. The three EJI scales used are: (1) Identifying Own Emotions (idslf), (2) Expressing Emotions Adaptively (expres) and (3) Managing Others' Emotions (mngothr). The total score of the Counseling Self-Estimate Inventory (COSE) was used to measure counselor self-efficacy (cosetot). Higher scores on the COSE reflect more perceived counseling self-efficacy. The study sample was comprised of 118 counselors. The researcher used a sequential MRA entering the predictor variables in the following order: (First) Identifying Own Emotions (idslf), (Second) Expressing Emotions Adaptively (expres) and (Third) Managing Others' Emotions (mngothr). Please use an alpha of = .05 for all analyses. For thea priori power analysisusingF tests>Linear multiple regression: Fixed model, R² increase,the previous effect size Partial R²= .10 (use in the Determine window and calculate and transfer to main window), = .05, power = .80, Number of tested predictors = 3, Total number of predictors = 3.

ourid	idslf	expres	mngothr	cosetot
1	50	47	60	166
2	35	52	50	168
3	63	60	70	180
4	43	54	56	143
5	22	41	53	123
6	58	60	62	193
7	52	51	58	176
8	41	53	60	141
9	47	41	55	145
10	44	51	54	147
11	53	37	60	184
12	43	58	64	181
13	35	41	65	176
14	45	52	59	160
15	41	56	64	166
16	44	44	53	145
17	53	54	54	174
18	54	43	56	193
19	51	35	52	155
20	50	56	58	169
21	51	51	59	174
22	35	47	50	175
23	39	48	55	143
24	50	43	57	138
25	58	29	57	170
26	42	51	51	156
27	39	42	53	144
28	33	41	54	158
29	48	48	52	149
30	37	32	60	136
31	42	64	61	186
32	31	52	58	138
33	48	46	59	144
34	56	60	58	175
35	33	38	57	141
36	55	56	61	142
37	37	46	58	161
38	49	48	45	159
39	44	46	63	178
40	53	40	56	165
41	46	32	60	139
42	45	30	57	148
43	36	45	54	170
44	46	49	58	190
45	56	45	52	161
46	37	48	55	141
47	58	48	52	179
48	40	54	59	166
49	63	66	65	158
50	44	46	55	166
51	51	50	59	192
52	54	57	67	185
53	58	57	62	195
54	50	56	47	191
55	47	45	59	150
56	62	45	52	205
57	50	57	63	209
58	48	45	56	197
59	62	64	63	190
60	57	58	57	202
61	63	51	64	193
62	50	52	58	178
63	52	53	57	199
64	51	40	62	205
65	44	54	64	200
66	35	57	49	185
67	53	43	56	176
68	60	65	58	174
69	51	51	55	171
70	60	60	66	198
71	34	42	52	181
72	45	51	62	167
73	54	46	64	182
74	33	39	53	172
75	63	54	68	195
76	41	51	55	139
77	38	44	56	184
78	55	49	58	173
79	43	51	53	205
80	37	50	59	193
81	36	34	59	158
82	44	42	60	171
83	47	48	54	178
84	59	53	55	178
85	63	50	56	193
86	38	60	52	212
87	35	43	55	161
88	67	46	58	184
89	52	47	54	201
90	44	56	61	209
91	62	58	58	201
92	32	44	62	168
93	61	56	60	180
94	47	59	66	220
95	45	36	50	172
96	47	51	52	147
97	61	34	62	178
98	57	60	56	203
99	53	49	51	180
100	45	54	55	150
101	54	54	60	211
102	64	59	58	197
103	51	40	57	172
104	49	48	57	184
105	60	48	51	180
106	57	65	61	201
107	63	32	46	186
108	59	50	66	192
109	53	65	66	146
110	36	46	58	145
111	50	42	43	171
112	52	51	60	168
113	48	43	55	166
114	47	52	48	211
115	52	49	52	161
116	55	39	54	168
117	56	47	57	182
118	56	61	49	188

1. The three predictor (or independent) variables are operationally defined as scores on the Indentifying Own Emotions, Expressing Emotions Adaptively, and Managing Others' Emotions scales of the Emotional Judgment Inventory (EJI) How do you interpret the scores on the scales?

Higher scores on the EJI scales reflect better emotional judgment.

Lower scores on the EJI scales reflect better emotional judgment.

2. The dependent (outcome) variable counselor self-efficacy is operationally defined by scores on the Counseling Self-Estimate Inventory (COSE). How do you interpret the scores on the scale?

Higher scores on the COSE reflect more perceived counseling self-efficacy.

Lower scores on the COSE reflect more perceived counseling self-efficacy.

3. What was the Actual Power and the Total sample size needed from the a priori power analysis using G*Power?

Power = .8093103, Total sample size = 99

Power = 11.4444433, Total sample size = 99

Power = 11.4444433, Total sample size = 103

Power = .8039103, Total sample size = 103

4. Does the a priori power analysis suggest that we should proceed with the study?

Yes

No