Subjects were classified according to which of three

smaakt4ucq 2022-04-02 Answered
Subjects were classified according to which of three groups they were assigned. Group A received lots of praise. Group B received moderate praise. Group C received no praise for correct answers to math problems. Following the manipulation, all subjects completed a posttest measure of mathematical ability. Higher scores indicate greater mathematical ability.
Does praise influence performance?
 Group A  Group B  Group C 743662541873354771
Identify the IV and the scale of measurement;
Identify the DV and the scale of measurement and for the IV – identify the number of levels;
Identify null and alternative hypotheses, are they directional or non-directional?
Assume that the distributions of the populations are approximately normal.
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (1)

Jayda Burch
Answered 2022-04-03 Author has 10 answers
Thank you for posting this question. Since it has multiple sub-parts, I am providing answer to the 3 sub-parts which you have mentioned above this question. To get the remaining hypothesis test problem solved, please resubmit this complete question and mention the sub-parts to be solved.
Solution:
It is asked to identify the IV, that is, independent variable and its scale of measurement.
Here, IV is praise for correct answers to math problems.
It is given that Group A received lots of praise, Group B received moderate praise and group C received no praise for correct answers to math problems.
That means, the data for praise has a natural order of a lot, moderate and absence.
So, the scale of measurement for IV is ordinal. There are 3 levels for the IV.
The DV is the dependent variable and in this case, it is the performance of subjects, that is, the scores in the posttest measure of mathematical ability and it is measured using Ratio scale of measurement since it has an absolute zero value and differences between the scores can be compared meaningfully.
The claim is: Does praise influence performance ?
The null and alternative hypotheses are:
H0: Praise does not influence performance. That means, praise and performance are independent of each other.
H1: Praise does influence performance. That means, praise and performance are dependent variables.
Did you like this example?
Subscribe for all access

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-05-23
MathJax(?): Can't find handler for document MathJax(?): Can't find handler for document I participate the stochastic course and we now speak about summable families. There we have the following definition:

Let Ω be countable and a : Ω R + { } be a map. Then we define
Ω a ( ω ) := sup F Ω , | F | < F a ( ω )

Now our Prof said that we can consider Ω a ( ω ) as the integral of math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> a over Ω to get a better connetion to measure theory afterwards when we speak about Fatou's lemma, Beppo Levi theorem ect. Because all this theorems we have seen with integrals last semester.
But somehow I don't see why this sum is equal to the integral. So I know from measure theory that if we have a simple function f : Ω R + { } where f ( Ω ) = { b 1 , . . . , b n } finately many then
Ω f   d μ = i = 1 n f ( b i ) μ ( Ω i )
where Ω i = f 1 ( { b i } ). So but here I don't think that this has to do something with simple functions right?
Therefore I wanted to ask you if someone could explain me why we can see this sum as the integral of a over Ω.
asked 2022-06-24
Is f ( x ) = { 1  if  x Q 0  if  x Q Lebesgue measurable ?
I haven't study rigorous the chapter of measurable function, so I don't have many tools to work on this.
My idea was to say that since f 1 ( 0 ) = { Q } Which is measurable and f 1 ( 1 ) = { R Q } which is also measurable then f is measurable, I don't think it's correct. How should I prove this (if f is even measurable)?
asked 2022-07-05
MathJax(?): Can't find handler for document MathJax(?): Can't find handler for document Let A 1 , A 2 , be a collection of events, and let A be the smallest σ-field of subsets of Ω which contains all of them. If A A , then there exists a sequence of events { C n } such that
C n A n  and  P ( A C n ) 0  as  n
where A n is the smallest σ-field which contains the finite collection A 1 , A 2 , , A n .
However, I do not know how to choose the C n such that they turn up in σ ( A 1 , . . A n )?
asked 2022-06-22
I have the following task from my textbook:
Let { f n } n N be a sequence of measurable function on M with
f n f  a.s., 
where f is also a measurable function. Here, a.s. means almost surely (= almost everywhere).
Show: if there exists a nonnegative measurable function g satisfying the following conditions:
| f n | g  a.s. for all  n N
and
M g p d μ <  for one  p > 0 ,
then
M | f n f | p d μ 0  for  n .
These notations remind me a little bit of the Hölder inequality.
What I have got:
I thought that we have
| f n | p g p a . s .
Thus
M | f n | p d μ M g p d μ i n f t y
And as
f n f
then the rest follows?
asked 2022-07-08
A continuous function f between two topological spaces X and Y is generally defined as follows f : X Y is such that for every open subset V of Y, the set f 1 ( V) is an open subset of X.
In this definition only I have a confusion/doubt: it is not mentioned anywhere that f is bijective. So how can we take the inverse of f and define the continuity of f ? Moreover, there is homeomorphism in which it is necessary for f to be bijective and hence speaking of f 1 , in this regard, makes sense.
Also, measurable functions in measure theory are defined in a similar fashion to that of continuous functions in topology. Here also I am confused about the same thing! Please give some insights. Thank you in advance.
asked 2022-05-12
Assume that ( X , E , μ ) is σ −finite and write X = n A n where ( A n ) n is an increasing sequence of elements in A n E . Then for every f L ( μ ) I have to show that
lim n lim p | | 1 A n f | | p = | | f | |
A well-known result is that lim p | | f | | p = | | f | | which I have to use but I am not sure other than that where to begin.
I know that if p [ 1 , ) then | | f | | p = ( X | f | p d μ ) 1 / p but I am not sure how to proceed.
asked 2022-09-17
How to measure 1/3 cup without measuring cup?