Question

a. A sports sociologist working for the Women’s Soccer Team USA! wants to determine if there are differences between three types of pep talk given to players prior to practice. Players are randomly assigned to three groups. The first group receives “individualism” talk (one’s own personal strengths). The second group receives “greed” talk (the material rewards of winning the cup). The third group receives “cooperation” talk (team-cooperation is the key to win). The data below represent the number of goalies scored by each player during the one-month experimental period—the higher the score, the better the player’s performance. Do not do the work that has been done for you.

∑x1 = 24 ∑x12 = 106 (∑x1)2 = 576 x̅1 = n1 = 6

∑x2 = 18 ∑x22 = 58 (∑x2)2 = 324 x̅2 = n2 = 6

∑x3 = 48 ∑x32 = 394 (∑x3)2 = 2304 x̅3 = n3 = 6

Source	SS	df	MS	Fobt	Fcrit	Decision
Between Group Variance		2
Within Group Variance (error)	24
Total	108	17

b. Perform the post-hoc comparisons: Tukey's Honestly Significantly Different (HSD).

Group of answer choices

Tukey's HSD

      [ Choose ]            It appears that greed talk was significantly better than individualism talk.            group1 - group2            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than greed talk.            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than individualism talk.            -4 and -5            1.913            3.03            3.7            .517      

Significant differences

      [ Choose ]            It appears that greed talk was significantly better than individualism talk.            group1 - group2            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than greed talk.            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than individualism talk.            -4 and -5            1.913            3.03            3.7            .517      

Conclusion for group mean 1 - group mean 3

      [ Choose ]            It appears that greed talk was significantly better than individualism talk.            group1 - group2            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than greed talk.            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than individualism talk.            -4 and -5            1.913            3.03            3.7            .517      

Conclusion for group mean 2 - group mean 3

      [ Choose ]            It appears that greed talk was significantly better than individualism talk.            group1 - group2            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than greed talk.            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than individualism talk.            -4 and -5            1.913            3.03            3.7            .517      

Critical value found in Turkey table

      [ Choose ]            It appears that greed talk was significantly better than individualism talk.            group1 - group2            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than greed talk.            It appears that cooperation talk resulted in significantly more goalies scored than individualism talk.            -4 and -5            1.913            3.03            3.7            .517      

c. Effect size (Eta squared) is .78

Group of answer choices

True

False

Answer 1

(a): Complete ANOVA table:

Source	SS	DF	MS	Fobt	Fcrit	Decision
Between Group Variance	(108-24)= 84	2	84/2 = 42	42/1.6=26.25	3.682	(Reject H0)
Within Group Variance(error)	24	(17-2) = 15	24/15 = 1.6
Total	108	17

(b):

Level of significance(alpha) = 0.05

Use this formula to perform Tukey's HSD:

Where q find from q-studentized table.

q(k,df,alpha) where k is the number of group=3 , df is error degree of freedom=15 and alpa = 0.05

Then q = 3.67

Where n is number of observation in each group are = 6

Now put all values:

Now take mean of each group:

group 1 = 24/6 = 4

group 2 = 18/6 = 3

group 3 = 48/6 = 8

Now Mean difference of group:

group1-group2 = 4-3 = 1

group1-group3 = 4-8 = -4

group2-group3 = 3-8 = -5

Take absolute value of mean difference:

group1-group2 = 4-3 = 1

group1-group3 = 4-8 = 4

group2-group3 = 3-8 = 5

Now compare mean difference of group to Tukey's HSD value:

If mean difference greater than Tukey's HSD value then there is a significant diiference between groups.

group1-group2 = 4-3 = 1, that is not greater than Tukey's HSD value, then there is no significant diiference between groups.

group1-group3 = 4-8 = 4, that is greater than Tukey's HSD value, then there is a significant diiference between groups.

group2-group3 = 3-8 = 5, that is greater than Tukey's HSD value, then there is a significant diiference between groups.

(c):Effect size using ANOVA table:

Where SSbetween = 84 and SStotal = 108

True.