John conducted his study to measure self-esteem among victims of domestic violen

Question

John conducted his study to measure self-esteem among victims of domestic violence before and after they complete an 8-week program for abuse victims with 10 individuals. He calculated t = 1.9 from his data. He had a directional hypothesis (i.e., self-esteem would be higher after attending the program). Write up the summary of his results and his conclusion regarding his hypothesis. Mark replicated John’s experiment in every way except he used 100 women in his study. He also calculated t = 1.9 from his data. He also had the same directional hypothesis. Write up the summary of his results and his conclusion regarding his hypothesis. What observations would you make from the findings of these two studies? John conducted his study to measure self-esteem among victims of domestic violence before and after they complete an 8-week program for abuse victims with 10 individuals. He calculated t = 1.9 from his data. He had a directional hypothesis (i.e., self-esteem would be higher after attending the program). Write up the summary of his results and his conclusion regarding his hypothesis. Mark replicated John’s experiment in every way except he used 100 women in his study. He also calculated t = 1.9 from his data. He also had the same directional hypothesis. Write up the summary of his results and his conclusion regarding his hypothesis. What observations would you make from the findings of these two studies?

Explanation / Answer

In Johns case : the total sample size is 10 and calculated t statistic is 1.9

Here Ho: Mean SE <= after program

Ha: Mean > after program

At 95% confidence , the right tailed test gives a t statistic value of 1.83. If our t statistic above this critical value , we can reject the initial hypothesis. Since it does, we reject the initial hypothesis. So from Johns data we can conclude that the program does increase self esteem. Unless the t statistic falls below 1.83( for 95% confidence) we can safely conclude the same result.

Now if we take a type 1 error rate of 99%(alpha =0.01) here the right critical value is 2.82. In this situation we dont reject null hypothesis which means our final result is that the self esteem does not increase.

2. In Mark's case the sample size differs(which affects t statistic). Here for 95% confidence the t critical vale for right tailed test is : 1.66.

Since the calculated t statistic 1.9> 1.66 , it falls in the rejection region and we reject null hypothesis.

For 99% confidence t critical value is 2.364(99 degrees of freedom). Here again we fail to reject the null hypothesis.

So in both the cases we find that for 95% confidence (alpha=5%) we can safely say that the program has increased self esteem, while for 99% confidence we fail to find evidence that the program has had any effect.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse J
• Subjects

---

---

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