This question is about how statistics are reported in research articles. Below i

Question

This question is about how statistics are reported in research articles. Below is a brief excerpt from a study looking at how trained visual artists differ from non-artists in copying photographs of faces by sticking small pieces of tape within a grid to create pixelated-looking drawings of faces. The researchers were interested in whether the two groups differed in the accuracy of their depictions of faces. The dependent variable was a measure of accuracy, in which higher values indicate greater accuracy in copying the face. A total of 18 artists and 27 non-artists participated. Read the excerpt and answer the following questions. The excerpt: A comparison of the accuracy values of artists and non-artists revealed a highly reliable difference, t (43) = -6.91, p

Explanation / Answer

a) ho: there is no significant difference in the mean accuracy of artists and non – artists

H1: there is significant difference in the mean accuracy of artists and non – artists

b) artist and non-artist

c) Independent t test for unequal variances

d) mean (A) – mean(B) has high reliability difference. Df = 43 (n1+n2-2)

e) with p-value < .0001, I reject ho

f) d=2.15, large effect size

g) with t = -6.97 and p-value < 0.001, I reject ho and conclude that there is significant difference in the mean accuracy of artists and non – artists. That is there is sufficient evidence to say that there is significant difference in the mean accuracy of artists and non – artists. I have less than .1% chances that null hypothesis is true.

h) I support my claim as I reject null hypothesis at .1% level of significance. Effect size says large effect. 2 results are compatible. there is significantly large difference in the mean accuracy of artists and non – artists

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.