Read each of the following scenarios and evaluate the conclusions drawn by the researchers on whether the conclusions are appropriate or not. If they are appropriate, then just write "This conclusion is appropriate"this will get you full points. This is also not a trick question. If there is nothing wrong with the conclusion, you do not somehow get more points by explaining why it is appropriate. If in the course of explaining why it is appropriate, it is revealed that you thought it was appropriate for the wrong reasons, it will lose you points. Again, if it the conclusion is appropriate, you really get full 2 points by saying that it is appropriate and nothing more. If they are not appropriate, explain what is wrong with the conclusions. Assume that all measures have good construct validity and appropriate analyses and statistical tests were carried out, meaning do not critique construct validity or their statistical tests. Also, do not critique ethics here. However, interpretations of statistical tests are fair game for critique.

QUESTION 6 & QUESTION 7: Use the following multiple regression table for Question 6 and Question 7

Factors associated with condence in the criminal courts {measured in scale, higher: more positive Sex t=male. i=female} m Married {D=no, (1.032 [1.023 1=marriedfcomrnon law} ' ' I it J: Education (higher more {W25 1: 40.012 education] -W- Crime (higher = more crime} Sense of belonging in (1.143\" [1.11'3.'M neighbourhood {higher = stronger] ___- (=no contact, l=contact} Having been the 1ii'ictin't of a 43.112" crime (D=no, latex} ___- *p-: 135:,\" pi: .l; "'11s: .[ll QUESTION 6: Based on the regression tabIe above, Dr. Kort: concludes that model 2 has the greatest expianatory capacity, compared to the other two models, as it only has one non-signicant variable compared to the other two models. QUESTION T: Based on the regression tabIe above, Dr. Kort: argues that controlling for other explanations, lower levels of education are associated with higher views of the courts