Exam 15: Random- and Mixed-Effects Analysis of Variance Models

arrow
  • Select Tags
search iconSearch Question
  • Select Tags

To examine development in the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of new teachers, 12 novice teachers are measured on their PCK at the beginning of their teaching career, at the end of the first semester, and at the end of the first school year. The scale that measures PCK ranges from 0 to 45, with higher scores reflecting greater levels of PCK. The data are shown below. Conduct a one-factor repeated measures ANOVA to determine the mean differences across time, using α\alpha = .05. Use the Bonferroni method to detect exactly where the differences are among the time points (if they are different). Subject Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 1 16 17 28 2 17 23 32 3 11 21 30 4 15 23 35 5 21 32 40 6 14 22 31 7 12 19 31 8 17 21 25 9 11 16 24 10 8 14 20 11 14 24 28 12 12 19 25

Free
(Essay)
4.9/5
(34)
Correct Answer:
Verified

Procedure:
Create a data set with three variables: Time 1, Time 2, and Time 3. The data set should have 12 cases, representing 12 teachers.

1. Go to Analyze \rightarrow General Linear Model \rightarrow Repeated Measures.
"2. For Within-Subject Factor Name, enter ""Time.""
For Number of Levels, enter 3 (i.e., 3 time points). Click Add.
For Measure Name, enter ""PCK."" Click Add."
3. Click Define. Move Time1 through Time3 in the left box to Within-Subjects Variables (Time).
4. Click Options. Move "Time" to Display Means for. Select Compare main effects. Select Bonferroni under Confidence interval adjustment. Select Descriptive statistics, Estimates of effect size, and Observed power. Click Continue.
5. To get profile plots, click Plots. Move "Time" to the box under Horizontal Axis. Click Add. Click Continue.
"6. Click OK.
Selected SPSS Output:
 Procedure: Create a data set with three variables: Time 1, Time 2, and Time 3. The data set should have 12 cases, representing 12 teachers.  1. Go to Analyze  \rightarrow  General Linear Model  \rightarrow Repeated Measures. 2. For Within-Subject Factor Name, enter Time. For Number of Levels, enter 3 (i.e., 3 time points). Click Add. For Measure Name, enter PCK. Click Add. 3. Click Define. Move Time1 through Time3 in the left box to Within-Subjects Variables (Time). 4. Click Options. Move Time to Display Means for. Select Compare main effects. Select Bonferroni under Confidence interval adjustment. Select Descriptive statistics, Estimates of effect size, and Observed power. Click Continue. 5. To get profile plots, click Plots. Move Time to the box under Horizontal Axis. Click Add. Click Continue. 6. Click OK. Selected SPSS Output:      Pairwise Comparisons: Bonferroni Method  Measure: PCK   \begin{array}{r} \hline95 \% \text { Confidence Interval for }\\ \text { Difference } \quad\quad\quad\quad \\ \begin{array}{ccccccc} \hline\text {(I) }&\text {(J) }&\text {Mean}&\text { Std}\\ \text { Time}&\text { Time }&\text { Difference (I-J)}&\text {  Error}&\text {  Sig }&\text { Lower Bound }&  \text { Upper Bound }\\ \hline {1} & 2 & -6.917^{*} & .811 & .000 & -9.205 & -4.628 \\ & 3 & -15.083^{*} & 1.076 & .000 & -18.119 & -12.048 \\ \hline  {2} & 1 & 6.917^{*} & .811 & .000 & 4.628 & 9.205 \\ & 3 & -8.167^{*} & .796 & .000 & -10.412 & -5.922 \\ \hline  {3} & 1 & 15.083^{*} & 1.076 & .000 & 12.048 & 18.119 \\ & 2 & 8.167^{*} & .796 & .000 & 5.922 & 10.412 \\ \hline \end{array}\end{array}   The results of the test of sphericity give no evidence against the assumption of sphericity (Mauchly's W = .825,  \chi <sup>2</sup><sup> </sup>= 1.925, df = 2, p = .382).  Based on the results of the one-factor repeated measures ANOVA, the effect of the within-subjects factor, Time, is significant at the .05 level (F<sub>2</sub><sub>,</sub><sub>22</sub> = 139.556, p < .001) with large effect size (partial  \eta <sup>2</sup><sup> </sup>= .927) and maximum observed power, implying that the novice teachers' average level of PCK has changed significantly across three time points.  Results of MCP, using the Bonferroni method, reveal significant differences among all pairs of time points. Specifically, the level of PCK increased significantly from Time 1 (i.e., the beginning of the school year) to Time 2 (i.e., the end of the first semester), from Time 2 to Time 3 (i.e., the end of the school year), and from Time 1 to Time 3. The results therefore suggest that the novice teachers' pedagogical content knowledge increases substantially in their first two semesters of teaching.

Pairwise Comparisons: Bonferroni Method
Measure: PCK

95% Confidence Interval for  Difference (I) (J) Mean Std Time Time  Difference (I-J) Error Sig  Lower Bound  Upper Bound 126.917.811.0009.2054.628315.0831.076.00018.11912.048216.917.811.0004.6289.20538.167.796.00010.4125.9223115.0831.076.00012.04818.11928.167.796.0005.92210.412\begin{array}{r}\hline95 \% \text { Confidence Interval for }\\\text { Difference } \quad\quad\quad\quad \\\begin{array}{ccccccc}\hline\text {(I) }&\text {(J) }&\text {Mean}&\text { Std}\\\text { Time}&\text { Time }&\text { Difference (I-J)}&\text { Error}&\text { Sig }&\text { Lower Bound }& \text { Upper Bound }\\\hline {1} & 2 & -6.917^{*} & .811 & .000 & -9.205 & -4.628 \\& 3 & -15.083^{*} & 1.076 & .000 & -18.119 & -12.048 \\\hline {2} & 1 & 6.917^{*} & .811 & .000 & 4.628 & 9.205 \\& 3 & -8.167^{*} & .796 & .000 & -10.412 & -5.922 \\\hline {3} & 1 & 15.083^{*} & 1.076 & .000 & 12.048 & 18.119 \\& 2 & 8.167^{*} & .796 & .000 & 5.922 & 10.412 \\\hline\end{array}\end{array}
The results of the test of sphericity give no evidence against the assumption of sphericity (Mauchly's W = .825, χ\chi 2 = 1.925, df = 2, p = .382).
Based on the results of the one-factor repeated measures ANOVA, the effect of the within-subjects factor, Time, is significant at the .05 level (F2,22 = 139.556, p < .001) with large effect size (partial η\eta 2 = .927) and maximum observed power, implying that the novice teachers' average level of PCK has changed significantly across three time points.

Results of MCP, using the Bonferroni method, reveal significant differences among all pairs of time points. Specifically, the level of PCK increased significantly from Time 1 (i.e., the beginning of the school year) to Time 2 (i.e., the end of the first semester), from Time 2 to Time 3 (i.e., the end of the school year), and from Time 1 to Time 3. The results therefore suggest that the novice teachers' pedagogical content knowledge increases substantially in their first two semesters of teaching."

A researcher interested in making generalizations about the entire population of categories of the independent variable, not just the levels that were sampled, should pursue what type of ANOVA model?

Free
(Multiple Choice)
4.7/5
(43)
Correct Answer:
Verified

C

Dr. Bellus wants to study how people's perception of attractiveness is affected by the gender of the subjects, and the facial expression of the object. Each participant views six headshots (in random order) of the same person, who demonstrates different facial expressions (joy, surprise, fear, anger, sadness, and disgust) in each picture. The participants are then asked to rate the attractiveness level of each picture. The rating is the dependent variable. Below is the selected output of a two-factor split plot ANOVA. Test of Between-Subjects Effects Test of Within-Subjects Effects Source Type III SS df MS F A (between-subjects factor) 226.81 1 226.81 3.04 (subject) 2084.61 28 74.45 a. Identify the between-subjects factor and within-subjects factor. Source Type III SS df MS F B (within-subjects factor) 18802.53 5 3760.506 38.07 A*B 324.22 5 64.84 0.66 13829.70 140 98.78 b. Are the effects significant ( α\alpha = .05)? What do these results tell us about people's perception of attractiveness? c. Is MCP necessary? If so, on which effect(s) should we conduct MCP?

Free
(Essay)
4.8/5
(32)
Correct Answer:
Verified

a. The between-subjects factor is gender (the subject is either male or female).
The within-subjects factor is type of facial expression (each subject views and rates all six pictures).

b. For the AB interaction, .05F5,140 = 2.28 > .66, so we fail to reject the null and conclude that there is no significant interaction. In other words, the effects of facial expression, if any, are similar for males and females.

For the between-subject effects, .05F1,28 = 4.20 > 3.04, so we fail to reject the null and conclude that there is no significant gender effect. In other words, males and females do not give significantly different ratings.
For the within-subject effects, .05F5,140 = 2.28 < 38.07, so we reject the null and conclude that the type of facial expression has a significant effect. In other words, the perception of attractiveness is substantially affected by the facial expression of the person in the picture.

c. MCP should be conducted on the fixed-effect factor B, i.e., type of facial expression, because its effect turns out to be significant, and there are more than two levels.

Complete the following ANOVA summary table for a two-factor model, where there are two levels of factor A (fixed program effect) and five levels of factor B (random school effect). Each cell of the design includes seven students ( α\alpha = .05). Source SS df MS F Critical Value Decision 100 - - - - - 210 - - - - - - - 20 - - - Within - - - Total 690 -

(Essay)
4.8/5
(35)

Complete the following ANOVA summary table for a two-factor model, where there are three levels of factor A (random dosage effect) and four levels of factor B (random physician effect). Each cell of the design includes six patients ( α\alpha = .05). Source SS df MS F Critical Value Decision 25 - - - - - - - 15 - - - - - - - - - Within - - 1 Total 160 -

(Essay)
4.8/5
(35)

Which of the following is not a characteristic of a two-factor random effects ANOVA?

(Multiple Choice)
4.9/5
(29)

Which of the following are variations of a two-factor mixed-effects ANOVA?

(Multiple Choice)
4.8/5
(32)
close modal

Filters

  • Essay(0)
  • Multiple Choice(0)
  • Short Answer(0)
  • True False(0)
  • Matching(0)