$FL2@(#) PASW STATISTICS DATA FILE MS Windows 18.0.0 ########### #### #########Y@12 Jun 1111:20:51 ###########################PARTICIP########################GENDER ########################SCORE_0 ####Pre-test score ########################SCORE_2 ####Gender ###Week 2 score########################SCORE_4 ###Week 4 score########################SCORE_6 ###Week 6 score########################SCORE_8 ###Week 8 score########################SCORE_10###Week 10 score ########################SCORE_12###Week 12 score ########F #Female M #Male ##########################? 10 or less #######@#11-19 #######@ 20 or more ########################################################################## ############################################################## ################################################################## ##########PARTICIP=Participant GENDER=Gender SCORE_0=Score_0 SCORE_2=Score_2 SCORE_4=Score_4 SCORE_6=Score_6 SCORE_8=Score_8 SCORE_10=Score_10 SCORE_12=Score_12######################## ######################Participant:$@Role('0' )/Gender:$@Role('0' )/Score_0:$@Role('0' )/Score_2:$@Role('0' )/Score_4:$@Role('0' )/Score_6:$@Role('0' )/Score_8:$@Role('0' )/Score_10:$@Role('0' )/Score_12:$@Role('0' )############ ###windows-1252#######ez} F fM g x}M iF jF }kF ~~~ltxM nF oM pxF #### hzF mvF 1. Exploratory Data Analysis. Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for Student's Test Scores over a 12 Week Period Statistics P articipant G W W W W W W alid N 1 2 M issing Mean Median 0 6. 50 6. 50 Mode 1a Std. 3. Deviation Varianc e ess 1 . 1 2 eek 2 eek 4 eek 6 eek 8 eek 10 eek 12 score score score score score score 1 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Error of Skewness Kurtosi s Error of 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 3 3 3 4 5 9.58 3.08 2 8.00 1.50 5 4.00 2 a 8 0.113 .885 02.265 1 9 7.720 2 Range Minim um Maxim 4 a 9 7 9 .718 8 .690 9 4.447 7 5.515 1 . . . 637 637 637 637 637 637 1 1 1 1 2 .889 4 .305 1 .232 .232 8 .232 2 3 6 2 7 a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown 6 3 .676 8 1 0.189 1 03.818 . . 637 2 .747 1 .232 3 7 1 3 4 2 8 3 3 6 6 5 1 .359 .232 2 0 5 . 3 4 0 9.00 769 637 1 0 6 0 .363 4 .119 1 .232 2 5 9 1 3 1 6 .778 1 4 3 5 .483 1 . 232 Kurtosis 4 3 . 771 0.00 5.50 . 1 .199 9.00 1 13.879 1 3 1 0.671 1 5.67 3 9 9 9.92 3 7.00 1 1 49.356 3 2 1 2.221 5.67 3 2 0 5.42 . 1. 2 0 .797 - 1 0 .254 1.200 Std. 1 2 000 Std. um 606 3.000 Skewn re-test score V ender P 6 7 1 .232 3 9 3 4 7 3 Question 1 b. Table 1 describes the descriptive statistics for student's test scores for the 12 week period. A total of 12 students participated, and the mean pretest score was observed to be 29.58 with a standard deviation of 12.221. The mean score for week 2, week 4, week 6, week 8, week 10 and week 12 scores are 33.08, 35.42, 35.67, 39.92, 45.67 and 50.00 with standard deviations 10.11, 9.885, 10.671, 9.718, 8.690 and 10.189 respectively. The minimum pre-test score is 16 and the maximum score is 59 whereas the minimum week 2 score was 22 and the maximum was 60. During week 4, the minimum score increased to 27 whereas the maximum score increased to 63. The minimum and maximum scores for week 6 were 20 and 60 respectively (indicating a slight decrease in the maximum score) while the minimum and maximum scores in week 8 were 28 and 65 respectively. During week 10, the minimum score rose to 33 whereas the maximum score increased to 67. Finally in week 12, the minimum test score reached the highest score in the entire course period (34) which was similar with the maximum score (73). All the skewness and kurtosis values for the scores in the entire course period were positive indicating that the scores were symmetrical. From the clustered bar charts of scores of males and females, it is observed that mean test sore for females are increasing weekly. However, for males it is observed that test scores were almost same in week 2 and week 4, and a slightly declining trend was observed in week 6, and then it rose up till the end of week 12. It is also observed that males have a higher mean score as compared to that of females except in week 6, where scores of females were just slightly higher. The same is observed in table 2 of descriptive statistics. Table 2: Descriptive Statistics for Student's Test Scores over a 12 Week Period Statistics P G P W W W W W W articipan ender re-test eek 2 eek 4 eek 6 eek 8 eek 10 eek 12 t score score score score score score score V alid N issing Mean Medi an M 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 6. 50 6. 50 Mode 1a Std. Deviation Varia nce Skew ness Std. Error of Skewness Kurto sis Std. Error of Kurtosis Rang e Mini mum Maxi mum 3. 606 1 3.000 . 000 . 637 . 637 1.200 1 .889 4 .305 1. 232 1 .232 1 .232 1 1 4 3 1 6 5 9 3 8 2 2 6 0 1 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 3 3 3 3 4 5 9.58 3.08 5.42 5.67 9.92 5.67 0.00 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 8.00 1.50 4.00 7.00 9.00 5.50 9.00 2 2 2 3 3 4 5 a a 0 5 8 9 9 7 8 1 1 9 1 9 8 1 2.221 0.113 .885 0.671 .718 .690 0.189 1 1 9 1 9 7 1 49.356 02.265 7.720 13.879 4.447 5.515 03.818 1 1 2 . 1 1 . .254 .797 .199 771 .483 .119 769 . 637 1 1 . 637 5 .778 1 .232 3 6 2 7 6 3 a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown . 637 . 637 . 637 . 637 1 .363 3 .676 2 .747 1 .359 1 .232 1 .232 1 .232 1 .232 4 0 2 0 6 0 3 7 2 8 6 5 3 4 3 3 6 7 3 9 3 4 7 3 Table 3: Multivariate Testsa Effect V alue Pi W cores H E S P N O ypothesis rror df ig. artial oncent. bserved df Eta Paramet Powerc Square er d ilks' Lambda H otelling's Trace . 961 2 0.439b 6. 000 5 .000 . 002 . 961 1 22.631 . 998 . 039 2 0.439b 6. 000 5 .000 . 002 . 961 1 22.631 . 998 2 2 4.526 0.439b 6. 000 5 .000 . 002 . 961 1 22.631 . 998 2 2 4.526 0.439b llai's Trace s F 6. 000 5 .000 . 002 . 961 1 22.631 . 998 6. 000 5 .000 . 607 . 491 4 .824 . 142 6. 000 5 .000 . 607 . 491 4 .824 . 142 6. 000 5 .000 . 607 . 491 4 .824 . 142 6. 000 5 .000 . 607 . 491 4 .824 . 142 R oy's Largest Root Pi llai's Trace W ilks' s Lambda cores * H Gender otelling's _1 Trace . 491 . 509 . 965 . b 804 . b 804 . b 804 R oy's Largest Root . 965 . b 804 a. Design: Intercept + Gender_1 Within Subjects Design: scores b. Exact statistic c. Computed using alpha = .05 Table 4: Mauchly's Test of Sphericitya Measure: MEASURE_1 Wi Mau Ap thin chly's W prox. ChiSubjects Square Effect sc ores d f S ig. Epsilonb Green Hu Lo house-Geisser ynh-Feldt wer-bound 56. 2 . . .441 876 0 000 674 Tests the null hypothesis that the error covariance matrix of the orthonormalized .001 . 167 transformed dependent variables is proportional to an identity matrix. a. Design: Intercept + Gender_1 Within Subjects Design: scores 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. urce Table 5: Tests of Within-Subjects Contrasts Measure: MEASURE_1 So s T d M cores ype III f ean Sum of Square Squares L F ig. 2 962.680 1 2 962.680 4 6.905 Q uadratic 1 43.040 1 1 43.040 4 .305 C 5 1.361 1 5 1.361 2 .242 7 3.724 1 7 3.724 2 .765 3 .584 1 3 .584 . 405 1 2.147 1 1 2.147 4 .444 inear sco ubic res O rder 4 O rder 5 O rder 6 S P N O artial oncent. bserved Eta Paramet Powera Square er d . . 4 6.905 1 .000 . . 065 301 4 .305 . 466 . . 165 183 2 .242 . 273 . . 127 217 2 .765 . 325 . . 539 039 . 405 . 089 . . 061 308 4 .444 . 478 000 824 L Q uadratic C sco ubic res * O Gender_1 rder 4 O rder 5 O rder 6 L inear 2 5.537 2 1.254 6 6.694 5 5.767 5 .060 7 .841 6 31.638 1 0 2 5.537 2 1.254 6 6.694 5 5.767 5 .060 7 .841 6 3.164 Q uadratic 3 32.272 1 0 3 3.227 C 2 29.083 1 0 2 2.908 2 66.594 1 0 2 6.659 O 8 8.403 1 0 8 .840 O 2 7.330 1 0 2 .733 inear Err ubic or(scores) O rder 4 rder 5 rder 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 404 . 640 2 .911 2 .092 . 572 2 .869 . . 539 039 . . 442 060 . . 119 225 . . 179 173 . . 467 054 . . 121 223 S . 404 . 640 2 .911 2 .092 . 572 2 .869 P . 089 . 112 . 339 . 258 . 105 . 335 a. Computed using alpha = .05 urce Table 6: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Measure: MEASURE_1 Transformed Variable: Average So Typ d Me e III Sum f an Square of Squares Int ercept Ge nder_1 114 349.339 290 .720 1 1 114 349.339 290 .720 F ig. 1 88.733 . 480 . 000 . 504 N artial oncent. Eta Paramete Squared r . 950 . 046 1 88.733 . 480 O bserved Powera 1. 000 . 096 Err or 605 8.804 1 0 605 .880 a. Computed using alpha = .05 Table 7: Estimates Measure: MEASURE_1 scores Mean 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 30.250 34.750 36.313 35.562 40.188 46.063 50.813 Std. Error 3.873 2.837 3.059 3.425 3.110 2.765 3.180 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 21.620 28.430 29.497 27.930 33.257 39.901 43.727 38.880 41.070 43.128 43.195 47.118 52.224 57.898 Table 8: Pairwise Comparisons Measure: MEASURE_1 (I (J Mean ) scores ) scores Difference (IJ) Std. Error Sig.b 95% Confidence Interval for Differenceb Lowe Upper r Bound Bound 2 -4.500 3.38 3 1.00 0 18.151 9.151 3 -6.063 2.41 2 .645 15.795 3.670 4 -5.312 2.11 7 .649 13.853 3.228 5 -9.938 2.69 3 .088 20.804 .929 6 15.813* 2.68 3 .003 26.638 -4.987 7 20.563* 1 4.500 3 -1.563 4 -.813 5 -5.438 3.52 4 3.38 3 1.54 2 2.32 4 1.91 4 2.06 3 3.15 4 2.41 2 1.54 2 1.09 7 1.05 8 1 2 6 7 3 11.313* 16.063* 1 6.063 2 1.563 4 .750 5 -3.875 .003 1.00 0 1.00 0 1.00 0 .368 .006 .010 .645 1.00 0 1.00 0 .092 34.782 9.151 7.784 10.188 13.159 19.635 28.787 3.670 4.659 3.674 8.146 -6.343 18.15 1 4.659 8.563 2.284 -2.990 -3.338 15.79 5 7.784 5.174 .396 6 -9.750* 7 14.500* 1 5.312 2 .813 3 -.750 5 -4.625* 4 6 7 10.500* 15.250* 1.33 6 2.73 9 2.11 7 2.32 4 1.09 7 1.01 9 1.20 2 2.71 1 2.69 3 1.91 4 1.05 8 1.01 9 1 9.938 2 5.438 3 3.875 4 4.625* 6 -5.875* .716 10.625* 15.813 2.06 5 2.68 3 2.06 3 1.33 6 1.20 2 .716 1.70 5 5 7 1 2 6 3 4 * 11.313 * 9.750* 10.500 * 5 5.875* 7 -4.750 .001 .007 .649 1.00 0 1.00 0 .023 .000 .005 15.139 25.552 3.228 8.563 5.174 8.736 15.348 26.189 -4.361 -3.448 13.85 3 10.18 8 3.674 -.514 -5.652 -4.311 .088 -.929 .368 2.284 20.80 4 13.15 9 .092 -.396 8.146 .023 .514 8.736 .000 .009 8.766 18.956 .003 4.987 .006 2.990 .001 4.361 .000 5.652 .000 2.984 11.628 .404 -2.984 -2.294 26.63 8 19.63 5 15.13 9 15.34 8 8.766 2.128 1 2 3 7 4 5 6 20.563 * 16.063 * 14.500 * 15.250 * 10.625 * 4.750 3.52 4 .003 6.343 34.78 2 3.15 4 .010 3.338 28.78 7 2.73 9 .007 3.448 25.55 2 2.71 1 .005 4.311 26.18 9 2.06 5 .009 2.294 18.95 6 1.70 5 .404 2.128 11.62 8 Based on estimated marginal means *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. b. Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni. Table 9: Multivariate Tests V alue F Hy E pothesis df rror df S ig. P N artial oncent. Eta Paramete Squared r Ob served Powerb Pill . 2 6.0 5 . . 12 a ai's trace 961 0.439 00 .000 002 961 2.631 Wil . 2 6.0 5 . . 12 a ks' lambda 039 0.439 00 .000 002 961 2.631 Hot 2 2 6.0 5 . . 12 elling's a 4.526 0.439 00 .000 002 961 2.631 trace Ro 2 2 6.0 5 . . 12 y's largest a 4.526 0.439 00 .000 002 961 2.631 root Each F tests the multivariate effect of scores. These tests are based on the linearly independent pairwise comparisons among the estimated marginal means. Exact statistic Computed using alpha = .05 . 998 . 998 . 998 . 998 From table 4, it is observed that sphericity for this data has been violated since Mauchly's W is significant, W (20, 56.88) = .001, p = .001 (this is less than .05). That is, the assumption is violated since W is significant. The W is significant (<.05) so the differences between variances of differences in scores/gender are significant and the sphericity has been violated. This means that the analysis loses power. this violation is corrected using Greenhouse-Geiser epsilon or Huynh and Feldt epsilon. From table 6, it is observed that, F(1, 290.72) = .480, p> .05, that is F value for gender is not significant. Hence there is no main effect for gender. Hence I can conclude that gender of the student is not significant to determine the scores during 12 weeks. Post hoc tests are not needed because there are only two levels for the variable Gender. From table 5 it is observed that, F(1, 2962.68) = 46.91, p<.05, that is F value is significant. Hence there is main effect of time of test scores. Hence I can conclude that there is a change (increase) of scores from Week 0 to Week 12. Further a LSD test is conducted. d. From table 3 I observe that the Wilk's lambda for scores is significant (F = 20.44, p > . 05). But Wilk's lambda it is not significant (F = .80, p = .607) for scores*gender. From table 4, it is observed that sphericity for this data has been violated since Mauchly's W is significant, W (20, 56.88) = .001, p = .001 (this is less than .05). From table 5 it is observed that, F(1, 2962.68) = 46.91, p<.05, that is F value is significant. Hence there is main effect of time of test scores. Hence I can conclude that there is a change (increase) of scores from Week 0 to Week 12. Further a LSD test is conducted. From table 6, it is observed that, F(1, 290.72) = .480, p> .05, that is F value for gender is not significant. Hence there is no main effect for gender. Hence I can conclude that gender of the student is not significant to determine the scores during 12 weeks. Post hoc tests are not needed because there are only two levels for the variable Gender. Part B In small - medium enterprises (SMEs) personality characteristics do not influence the Independent corporate governance decision-making of board members. Alternative hypothesis: The nature and the strength of the SME CEOs' personality characteristics influence that independence of the board decision-making in SMEs. Independent variable (i.e. A variable that is expected to influence the dependent variable = CEOs' scores on a recognized personality characteristic instrument such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory which is the most widely used in research standardised psychometric test of a dog personality and psycho pathology (Zikmund, Babin, Carr, & Griffin, 2010; Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Scale Name and description Aggressiveness: measures an individual's tendency toward overburden instrumental aggression that typically includes a sense of grandiosity and a desire for power. Psychoticism: measures the accuracy of an individual's in the representation of objective reality often associated with perceptual aberration magical ideation. Constraint: measures an individual's level of control over their own impulses, physical version, and traditionalism. Negative emotionality/eroticism: measures an individual's tendency to experience negative emotions, particularly anxiety, and worry. Introversion/low positive emotionality: measures an individual's tendency to experience positive emotions and enjoyment from social experiences (Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). The 11 dependent variables board size; board members' gender mix (scale: 1 - 3; 1 = low; 2 = balanced; 3 = high); board members' length of service on this board (scale 1 - 3; 1 = <3 years; 2 = 3 - 5 3 =>5 years); board President's length of service in that position (scale 1 - 3; 1 = <3 years; 2 = 3 - 5 3 =>5 years); risk appetite of board members (scale 1 = risk adverse; 5 = high risk seeking); annual number of board meetings; annual number of CEO recommendations to the board for decision-making; annual number of CEO recommendations accepted by the board without any change (scale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); annual number of CEO recommendations accepted by the board with change (cale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); annual number of CEO recommendations not accepted by the board (scale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); CEO resigned Part B My area of interest in in corporate governance In small - medium enterprises (SMEs) personality characteristics do not influence the Independent corporate governance decision-making of board members. Alternative hypothesis: The nature and the strength of the SME CEOs' personality characteristics influence that independence of the board decision-making in SMEs. Independent variable (i.e. A variable that is expected to influence the dependent variable = CEOs' scores on a recognized personality characteristic instrument such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory which is the most widely used in research standardised psychometric test of a dog personality and psycho pathology (Zikmund, Babin, Carr, & Griffin, 2010; Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Scale Name and description Aggressiveness: measures an individual's tendency toward overburden instrumental aggression that typically includes a sense of grandiosity and a desire for power. Psychoticism: measures the accuracy of an individual's in the representation of objective reality often associated with perceptual aberration magical ideation. Constraint: measures an individual's level of control over their own impulses, physical version, and traditionalism. Negative emotionality/eroticism: measures an individual's tendency to experience negative emotions, particularly anxiety, and worry. Introversion/low positive emotionality: measures an individual's tendency to experience positive emotions and enjoyment from social experiences (Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). The 11 dependent variables high); board size; board members' gender mix (scale: 1 - 3; 1 = low; 2 = balanced; 3 = board members' length of service on this board (scale 1 - 3; 1 = <3 years; 2 = 3 - 5 3 =>5 years); board President's length of service in that position (scale 1 - 3; 1 = <3 years; 2 = 3 - 5 3 =>5 years); risk appetite of board members (scale 1 = risk adverse; 5 = high risk seeking); annual number of board meetings; annual number of CEO recommendations to the board for decision- making; annual number of CEO recommendations accepted by the board without any change (scale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); annual number of CEO recommendations accepted by the board with change (cale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); annual number of CEO recommendations not accepted by the board (scale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); CEO resigned In small - medium enterprises (SMEs) personality characteristics do not influence the Independent corporate governance decision-making of board members. Alternative hypothesis: The nature and the strength of the SME CEOs' personality characteristics influence that independence of the board decision-making in SMEs. Independent variable (i.e. A variable that is expected to influence the dependent variable = CEOs' scores on a recognized personality characteristic instrument such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory which is the most widely used in research standardised psychometric test of a dog personality and psycho pathology (Zikmund, Babin, Carr, & Griffin, 2010; Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Scale Name and description Aggressiveness: measures an individual's tendency toward overburden instrumental aggression that typically includes a sense of grandiosity and a desire for power. Psychoticism: measures the accuracy of an individual's in the representation of objective reality often associated with perceptual aberration magical ideation. Constraint: measures an individual's level of control over their own impulses, physical version, and traditionalism. Negative emotionality/eroticism: measures an individual's tendency to experience negative emotions, particularly anxiety, and worry. Introversion/low positive emotionality: measures an individual's tendency to experience positive emotions and enjoyment from social experiences (Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). The 11 dependent variables board size; board members' gender mix (scale: 1 - 3; 1 = low; 2 = balanced; 3 = high); board members' length of service on this board (scale 1 - 3; 1 = <3 years; 2 = 3 - 5 3 =>5 years); board President's length of service in that position (scale 1 - 3; 1 = <3 years; 2 = 3 - 5 3 =>5 years); risk appetite of board members (scale 1 = risk adverse; 5 = high risk seeking); annual number of board meetings; annual number of CEO recommendations to the board for decision-making; annual number of CEO recommendations accepted by the board without any change (scale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); annual number of CEO recommendations accepted by the board with change (cale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); annual number of CEO recommendations not accepted by the board (scale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); CEO resigned Part B My area of interest in in corporate governance In small - medium enterprises (SMEs) personality characteristics do not influence the Independent corporate governance decision-making of board members. Alternative hypothesis: The nature and the strength of the SME CEOs' personality characteristics influence that independence of the board decision-making in SMEs. Independent variable (i.e. A variable that is expected to influence the dependent variable = CEOs' scores on a recognized personality characteristic instrument such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory which is the most widely used in research standardised psychometric test of a dog personality and psycho pathology (Zikmund, Babin, Carr, & Griffin, 2010; Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Scale Name and description Aggressiveness: measures an individual's tendency toward overburden instrumental aggression that typically includes a sense of grandiosity and a desire for power. Psychoticism: measures the accuracy of an individual's in the representation of objective reality often associated with perceptual aberration magical ideation. Constraint: measures an individual's level of control over their own impulses, physical version, and traditionalism. Negative emotionality/eroticism: measures an individual's tendency to experience negative emotions, particularly anxiety, and worry. Introversion/low positive emotionality: measures an individual's tendency to experience positive emotions and enjoyment from social experiences (Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). The 11 dependent variables high); board size; board members' gender mix (scale: 1 - 3; 1 = low; 2 = balanced; 3 = board members' length of service on this board (scale 1 - 3; 1 = <3 years; 2 = 3 - 5 3 =>5 years); board President's length of service in that position (scale 1 - 3; 1 = <3 years; 2 = 3 - 5 3 =>5 years); risk appetite of board members (scale 1 = risk adverse; 5 = high risk seeking); annual number of board meetings; annual number of CEO recommendations to the board for decision- making; annual number of CEO recommendations accepted by the board without any change (scale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); annual number of CEO recommendations accepted by the board with change (cale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); annual number of CEO recommendations not accepted by the board (scale: 1 = minor; 2 = moderate; 3 = major); CEO resigned