Homework Help is Here – Start Your Trial Now!
Math
Statistics
For Tukey’s HSD, how would you report your results? (groups: 1= 5-25 years, 2 = 26-59 years, 3 = 60-92 years) Group of answer choices: 1. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ score for younger subjects (112.40) was significantly different than the mean FIQ scores for middle-age subjects (107.15) and older subjects (108.40). 2. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ score for younger subjects (112.40) was significantly higher than the mean FIQ scores for middle-age subjects (107.15) and older subjects (108.40). 3. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ score for younger subjects (109.08) was significantly lower than the mean FIQ score for middle-age subjects (112.40) but significantly higher than the mean FIQ score for older subjects (107.15). 4. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ scores for younger subjects (108.40) and older subjects (109.08) were not different, but both were significantly higher than the mean FIQ score for middle-age subjects (107.15). 5. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ scores for younger subjects (107.15) and middle-age subjects (108.40) were not different from one another, but both were significantly lower than the mean FIQ score for older subjects (112.40). 6. None of the above

For Tukey’s HSD, how would you report your results? (groups: 1= 5-25 years, 2 = 26-59 years, 3 = 60-92 years) Group of answer choices: 1. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ score for younger subjects (112.40) was significantly different than the mean FIQ scores for middle-age subjects (107.15) and older subjects (108.40). 2. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ score for younger subjects (112.40) was significantly higher than the mean FIQ scores for middle-age subjects (107.15) and older subjects (108.40). 3. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ score for younger subjects (109.08) was significantly lower than the mean FIQ score for middle-age subjects (112.40) but significantly higher than the mean FIQ score for older subjects (107.15). 4. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ scores for younger subjects (108.40) and older subjects (109.08) were not different, but both were significantly higher than the mean FIQ score for middle-age subjects (107.15). 5. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ scores for younger subjects (107.15) and middle-age subjects (108.40) were not different from one another, but both were significantly lower than the mean FIQ score for older subjects (112.40). 6. None of the above

MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
6th Edition
ISBN:9781119256830
Author:Amos Gilat
Publisher:Amos Gilat
Chapter1: Starting With Matlab
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1P
See similar textbooks
icon
Related questions
Question
For Tukey’s HSD, how would you report your results? (groups: 1= 5-25 years, 2 = 26-59 years, 3 = 60-92 years)
Group of answer choices:
1. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ score for younger subjects (112.40) was significantly different than the mean FIQ scores for middle-age subjects (107.15) and older subjects (108.40).
2. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ score for younger subjects (112.40) was significantly higher than the mean FIQ scores for middle-age subjects (107.15) and older subjects (108.40).
3. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ score for younger subjects (109.08) was significantly lower than the mean FIQ score for middle-age subjects (112.40) but significantly higher than the mean FIQ score for older subjects (107.15).
4. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ scores for younger subjects (108.40) and older subjects (109.08) were not different, but both were significantly higher than the mean FIQ score for middle-age subjects (107.15).
5. A Tukey’s post hoc test (p < .05) revealed that the mean FIQ scores for younger subjects (107.15) and middle-age subjects (108.40) were not different from one another, but both were significantly lower than the mean FIQ score for older subjects (112.40).
6. None of the above
Oneway Post Hoc Tests Descriptives Multiple Comparisons WAIS-R full scale IQ Dependent Variable: WAIS-R full scale IQ 95% Confidence Interval for Tukey HSD Mean Mean Difference (I- J) 95% Confidence Interval Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Minimum Maximum 5-25 Years 185 107.15 11.946 .878 105.41 108.88 77 146 (1) Subjects age in years (J) Subiects age in years Std. Error Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound 26-59 Years 380 108.40 12.840 .659 107.11 109.70 73 150 5-25 Years 26-59 Years -1.257 1.115 .497 -3.87 1.36 60-92 Years 185 112.40 12.052 .886 110.65 114.15 81 143 60-92 Years -5.254 1.293 <.001 -8.29 -2.22 Total 750 109.08 12.572 .459 108.18 109.98 73 150 26-59 Years 5-25 Years 1.257 1.115 .497 -1.36 3.87 60-92 Years -3.997" 1.115 .001 -6.61 -1.38 60-92 Years 5-25 Years 5.254 1.293 <.001 2.22 8.29 ANOVA 26-59 Years 3.997 1.115 .001 1.38 6.61 WAIS-R full scale IQ *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 2905.502 2 1452.751 9.398 <.001 Homogeneous Subsets Within Groups 115472.857 747 154.582 Total 118378.359 749 WAIS-R full scale IQ Tukey HSDa.b ANOVA Effect Sizes Subset for alpha = 0.05 Subjects age in years N 1 2 95% Confidence Interval Point Estimate Lower Upper 5-25 Years 185 107.15 WAIS-R full scale IQ Eta-squared 108.40 26-59 Years 380 .025 .006 .049 60-92 Years 185 112.40 Epsilon-squared .022 .004 .046 Omega-squared Fixed- .022 .004 .046 Sig. .534 1.000 effect Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed. a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 223.175. Omega-squared Random-effect .011 .002 .024 b. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used. Type I error levels are not guaranteed. a. Eta-squared and Epsilon-squared are estimated based on the fixed-effect model.
Transcribed Image Text:Oneway Post Hoc Tests Descriptives Multiple Comparisons WAIS-R full scale IQ Dependent Variable: WAIS-R full scale IQ 95% Confidence Interval for Tukey HSD Mean Mean Difference (I- J) 95% Confidence Interval Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Minimum Maximum 5-25 Years 185 107.15 11.946 .878 105.41 108.88 77 146 (1) Subjects age in years (J) Subiects age in years Std. Error Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound 26-59 Years 380 108.40 12.840 .659 107.11 109.70 73 150 5-25 Years 26-59 Years -1.257 1.115 .497 -3.87 1.36 60-92 Years 185 112.40 12.052 .886 110.65 114.15 81 143 60-92 Years -5.254 1.293 <.001 -8.29 -2.22 Total 750 109.08 12.572 .459 108.18 109.98 73 150 26-59 Years 5-25 Years 1.257 1.115 .497 -1.36 3.87 60-92 Years -3.997" 1.115 .001 -6.61 -1.38 60-92 Years 5-25 Years 5.254 1.293 <.001 2.22 8.29 ANOVA 26-59 Years 3.997 1.115 .001 1.38 6.61 WAIS-R full scale IQ *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 2905.502 2 1452.751 9.398 <.001 Homogeneous Subsets Within Groups 115472.857 747 154.582 Total 118378.359 749 WAIS-R full scale IQ Tukey HSDa.b ANOVA Effect Sizes Subset for alpha = 0.05 Subjects age in years N 1 2 95% Confidence Interval Point Estimate Lower Upper 5-25 Years 185 107.15 WAIS-R full scale IQ Eta-squared 108.40 26-59 Years 380 .025 .006 .049 60-92 Years 185 112.40 Epsilon-squared .022 .004 .046 Omega-squared Fixed- .022 .004 .046 Sig. .534 1.000 effect Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed. a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 223.175. Omega-squared Random-effect .011 .002 .024 b. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used. Type I error levels are not guaranteed. a. Eta-squared and Epsilon-squared are estimated based on the fixed-effect model.
Expert Solution
steps

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps

SEE SOLUTIONCheck out a sample Q&A here
Blurred answer
Similar questions
  • SEE MORE QUESTIONS
Recommended textbooks for you
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
Statistics
ISBN:
9781119256830
Author:
Amos Gilat
Publisher:
John Wiley & Sons Inc
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305251809
Author:
Jay L. Devore
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305504912
Author:
Frederick J Gravetter, Larry B. Wallnau
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Elementary Statistics: Picturing the World (7th E…
Elementary Statistics: Picturing the World (7th E…
Statistics
ISBN:
9780134683416
Author:
Ron Larson, Betsy Farber
Publisher:
PEARSON
The Basic Practice of Statistics
The Basic Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319042578
Author:
David S. Moore, William I. Notz, Michael A. Fligner
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman
Introduction to the Practice of Statistics
Introduction to the Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319013387
Author:
David S. Moore, George P. McCabe, Bruce A. Craig
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman
SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS