SPSS ANOVA 400 words

Minor Data Analysis Assessment: One-way ANOVA (live)

Assignment Title: Minor Data Analysis

Due Date: 11:55pm Wednesday 5th August 2020 (middle of week 4)

Document Format: Formatted according to APA guidelines (size 12 Times New Roman font, justified, double-spaced lines could be used). Please include a Simple Title Page that lists the name of the assessment, your name, student ID and word count). There is no need for a running head.

File Format: Microsoft Word File – the file name must contain your surname and the assessment name, e.g., something like Smith Minor Data Analysis.docx.

Word count range: 250 – 400 words

Weighting: The Minor Data Analysis contributes 15% to the final grade for this course. You should thus see it as a ‘warm up’ task to get you using SPSS prior to larger assessments.

Reference list required: A reference list may be provided but does not contribute towards the word count. If you need to cite a reference, include the author(s) and year in the text.

One-w ay between groups ANOVA

Lakin, J.L. & Chartrand, T.L. (2003). Using non-conscious behavioural mimicry to create affiliation and rapport. Psychological Science, 14(4), 334–339

Non-conscious behavioural mimicry is the act of imitating behaviours of another individual without conscious realisation. This form of mimicry is a consequence of a perception-behaviour relationship - specifically, an individual witnesses another person engage in a behaviour, which activates a representation and leaves the witnessing party more likely to exhibit the behaviour they have seen. Non-conscious behavioural mimicry is also linked with both rapport and liking. A cyclic relationship exists with rapport, whereby rapport increases the likelihood of behavioural mimicry, which in turn elevates rapport. Lakin and Chartrand (2003) sought to investigate whether people unintentionally engage mimicry as a tool for advantage. They wanted to see whether either explicitly telling people that they want to affiliate with a person or unconsciously priming them to affiliate with a person would affect whether participants mimicked that person’s behaviour. Their hypothesis was that ‘individuals will mimic another person more when they have a goal to affiliate than when they do not’ (p. 334). This assumes that the goal will increase ‘affiliative behaviours’ like mimicry, to assist an individual achieve their goal. They measured the extent to which three groups of individuals (conscious affiliation goal, non-conscious affiliation goal, and no goal) engaged in mimicry.

The data presented below are participants’ time spent face touching (seconds/minute) as a measure of mimicry, with goal (no goal, non-conscious goal and conscious goal) as the independent variable. Scores are presented as average number of seconds of facial touching (i.e. higher numbers=more mimicry) per minute. You can assume that this face touching study was not done in the time of Covid- 19 ����

I

Below and over the page is a simulated dataset for this study. While the data are made up, the results follow a similar pattern of findings as those from Lakin & Chartrand (2003) experiment 1.

Group Average seconds/minute

Conscious goal 26.00 Non-conscious goal 26.00 No goal 4.00 Non-conscious goal 32.00 Non-conscious goal 33.00 Non-conscious goal 24.00 No goal 1.00 Non-conscious goal 39.00 Non-conscious goal 20.00 Conscious goal 24.00 No goal 13.00 No goal 22.00 No goal 11.00 No goal 5.00 Non-conscious goal 27.00 Non-conscious goal 27.00 Conscious goal 17.00 No goal 13.00 No goal 15.00 Non-conscious goal 32.00 Conscious goal 32.00 Conscious goal 33.00 Conscious goal 25.00 No goal 13.00 Non-conscious goal 36.00 No goal 8.00 Conscious goal 24.00 Conscious goal 28.00 No goal 18.00 Non-conscious goal 26.00 Conscious goal 30.00 No goal 2.00 Non-conscious goal 29.00 Conscious goal 32.00 Conscious goal 34.00 Conscious goal 27.00 No goal 19.00 No goal 22.00 Non-conscious goal 32.00 No goal 7.00 Non-conscious goal 31.00 No goal 11.00 Conscious goal 19.00 Non-conscious goal 23.00 Non-conscious goal 21.00 No goal 16.00 Non-conscious goal 21.00

Conscious goal 19.00 Conscious goal 20.00 Non-conscious goal 26.00 Non-conscious goal 31.00 No goal 17.00 Conscious goal 24.00 Non-conscious goal 21.00 Non-conscious goal 39.00 Non-conscious goal 31.00 Conscious goal 36.00 Non-conscious goal 27.00 Conscious goal 25.00 Non-conscious goal 32.00 Non-conscious goal 7.00

What are the main steps required?

Step 1. You need to get the data from this Word file into SPSS. You can either

use cut n paste, OR type in the data (carefully). Hint: you may need to turn the

IV into a numerical (categorical) variable.

Step 2. You need to run assumption testing and briefly report what you find.

More details of what to test and report are given below. If one or more

assumptions are violated, we still want you to run and report the ANOVA and (if

appropriate) any post-hoc tests.

Step 3. Run the appropriate ANOVA using the General Linear Model sub-menu

within the Analyze menu.

Step 4. Report the results of the main ANOVA (whether significant or non-

significant) using APA style. Please report the partial eta squared effect size

value (for the omnibus ANOVA) and indicate whether it is small, medium or

large.

Step 5. If appropriate run and report post-hoc tests (not planned comparisons) so

the Reader knows which pairs of conditions differ (or do not differ) significantly

from each other. For this assessment we want you to use Tukey tests and report

the p value for each pair of tests. You do not need to calculate, nor report effect

sizes for these ����

Step 6. Make sure you tell the Reader what the mean and standard deviation (SD)

are for each condition as it helps to convey the direction of an effect /

comparison in your writing, e.g. “participants performed better in the conceptual

learning condition (M = xx, SD = xx) than the rote learning condition (M = xx,

SD = xx) … “

Assumption testing guidance

1. You need to test homogeneity of variance and normality

a. We would like you to report the homogeneity statistic in full,

including df and p value.

2. For normality we would like you to report the following to obtain high

marks on this criterion:

a. An indication of skewness OR kurtosis for each of the three groups.

b. Report the results of the Shapiro-Wilk test (p value only needed)

for each group and say whether it is violated.

Marking Rubric

C r it e r ia P r o p o r t io n o f t o t a l

A p p r o p r i a t e a n a l y s i s 2 m a r k s

A s s u m p t i o n t e s t i n g 3 m a r k s

C o r r e c t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f r e s u l t s 4 m a r k s

S t a t i s t i c s i n A P A f o r m a t 4 m a r k s

A d d i t i o n a l s t a t i s t i c s : e . g . e f f e c t s i z e 2 m a r k s

Additional notes

Unless stated otherwise, e.g. through extra guidance on Moodle forums, adhere to APA

formatting style wherever possible. But, of most relevance to this assessment are APA

guidelines for reporting statistics, e.g. including degrees of freedom, p values, effect sizes etc

versus minor formatting issues with headings and indentation etc. This is not a full

psychology report, just part of a hypothetical Results section. So, you do not need

background theory, methods etc and this is reflected in the low word count. The key thing for

grading will be whether you have generated the right statistical values, interpreted them

correctly and written them up clearly and concisely. There is some flexibility in write-up

wording, but you can use example write-ups that will be given in Moodle, in lectures and

textbooks. Just remember, you may need to adapt them (e.g. what to report from assumption

testing, types of post-hoc tests needed etc) to meet the specific requirements of this

assessment.

A PDF of the Lakin and Chartrand (2003) paper is on Moodle to provide some contextual

information for the assessment and to get you used to reading Results sections more

critically. Note however, reading this is not strictly needed to complete the assessment and it

differs in style (e.g. they used planned comparisons) to what you may have covered in this

unit. So please follow PSYC13015 tailored guidelines in this document and on Moodle.

As per Discussion Board questions on the draft version there is a) no need to comment upon,

nor remove outliers, b) there is no need to supply an APA reference for the SPSS software.

The data has not been changed since the original draft version.