Methods of data analysis

Methods of analysis of data

2000 words

APA format

Intext referencing wherever required

Explain what is t-test?

How does it work ?

Where it is used in research?

Explain the given results of t-test using following format and words and analyse if the test is rejected or accepted.

Explain what is ANOVA?

How does it work ?

Where it is used in research?

Explain the given results of ANOVA using following format and words and analyse if the test is rejected or accepted.

Explain correlation ?

How does it work ?

Where it is used in research?

Explain the given results of CORRELATION using following format and words and analyse if the test is rejected or accepted.

Explain regression ?

How does it work ?

Where it is used in research?

Explain the given results of REGRESSION using following format and words and analyse if the test is rejected or accepted.

All above test should be written in 500 word count each.

Following are the table for each test which needs to be explained

Explain the following tests and tables as indicated in class.

T-Test

Group Statistics
	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
Informing	Female	106	2.9843	.82087	.07973
	Male	93	3.0645	.70413	.07301

Independent Samples Test
	Levene's Test for Equality of Variances	t-test for Equality of Means
	F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)
Informing	Equal variances assumed	1.654	.200	-.735	197	.463
	Equal variances not assumed			-.742	196.906	.459

Independent Samples Test
	t-test for Equality of Means
	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference	95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
			Lower	Upper
Informing	Equal variances assumed	-.08024	.10920	-.29558	.13510
	Equal variances not assumed	-.08024	.10811	-.29344	.13296

Oneway

Descriptives
OrgValue
	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error	95% Confidence Interval for Mean	Minimum	Maximum
					Lower Bound	Upper Bound
1.00	72	3.0694	.73145	.08620	2.8976	3.2413	1.00	4.67
2.00	81	3.0165	.77082	.08565	2.8460	3.1869	1.33	5.00
3.00	45	3.2444	.56586	.08435	3.0744	3.4144	1.67	4.33
Total	198	3.0875	.71655	.05092	2.9871	3.1880	1.00	5.00

ANOVA
OrgValue
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	1.541	2	.770	1.508	.224
Within Groups	99.609	195	.511
Total	101.149	197

Post Hoc Tests

Homogeneous Subsets

OrgValue
Student-Newman-Keulsa,b
Position1	N	Subset for alpha = 0.05
		1
2.00	81	3.0165
1.00	72	3.0694
3.00	45	3.2444
Sig.		.181

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.

a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 61.911.

b. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used. Type I error levels are not guaranteed.

Correlations

Descriptive Statistics
	Mean	Std. Deviation	N
DecMak	3.0875	.71655	198
Concern	3.0235	.92630	199

Correlations
	DecMak	Concern
DecMak	Pearson Correlation	1	.203**
	Sig. (2-tailed)		.004
	N	198	198
Concern	Pearson Correlation	.203**	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.004
	N	198	199

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Regression

Variables Entered/Removeda
Model	Variables Entered	Variables Removed	Method
1	EmpLeadb	.	Enter

a. Dependent Variable: Trust

b. All requested variables entered.

Model Summary
Model	R	R Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate
1	.749a	.561	.559	.61702

a. Predictors: (Constant), EmpLead

ANOVAa
Model	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	95.269	1	95.269	250.234	.000b
	Residual	74.621	196	.381
	Total	169.890	197

a. Dependent Variable: Trust

b. Predictors: (Constant), EmpLead

Coefficientsa
Model	Unstandardized Coefficients	Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
	B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	-.306	.215		-1.423	.156
	EmpLead	1.093	.069	.749	15.819	.000

a. Dependent Variable: Trust

The results should be written in following format with reference to the table

A t-test was conducted to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between the mean score for males and the mean score for females on the dependent variable KnowSh. Results of the t-test (t(196) = .17, p = .863) indicate that there was no statistically significant between the mean for males (M = 2.89, SD = .81) and the mean for females (M = 2.87, SD = .77) on the dependent variable KnowSh. The results can be interpreted to mean that both males and females report a similar level of KnowSh with respect to their work.

A one-way ANOVA was conducted to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between the mean score for three groups on the dependent variable Relate. Results of the F-test (f(2, 196) = 3.37, p = .04) indicate that there was a statistically significant difference between the means of one or more of the groups on the dependent variable Relate. A follow up analysis of the group differences using the Student-Newman-Keuls comparison indicates that there was a statistically significant difference between the mean of Group 1 (M = 3.38, SD = .57) and the mean of Group 3 (M = 3.07, SD = .52). The results can be interpreted to mean that Groups 1 and 3 report a dissimilar level of relatedness, whereas Groups 1 and 2, and Groups 2 and 3, report a similar level of relatedness.

A correlation analysis was conducted to determine whether there was a statistically significant relationship between two continuous variables namely Community and WorkSpirit. Results of the analysis (r = .80, p < .000) indicate that there was a statistically significant relationship between the variables. The results can be interpreted to mean that there is a positive linear relationship between Community and WorkSpirit. This relationship means that increases in Community are strongly related to increases in WorkSpirit and vice versa.

A regression analysis was conducted to determine whether: (a) WorkSpirit explained a statistically significant amount of variance in Trust, and (b) there was a statistically significant causal relationship between WorkSpirit and Trust. Results of the analysis (R = .41, R2 = .17, p < .000) indicate that WorkSpirit explained 17% of the variance in Trust. Results of the analysis ( = .41, t = 6.25, p < .000) also indicate that a statistically significant causal relationship exists between WorkSpirit and Trust. The results can be interpreted to mean that WorkSpirit explains variation in Trust and also predicts values of Trust.