October 12, 2014
1. The researchers found a significant difference between the two groups (control and treatment) for change in mobility of the women with osteoarthritis (OA) over 12 weeks with the results of F(1, 22) = 9.619, p = 0.005. Discuss each aspect of these results. The F-value is high enough at the 5% level of significance to suggest a significant difference between the control and treatment groups. The p-value 0.005 < 0.05 hence this suggests a rejection of the null hypothesis, meaning that the control and treatment groups are found to be different.
2. State the null hypothesis for the Baird and Sands (2004) study that focuses on the effect of the GI with PMR treatment on patients’ mobility level. Should the null hypothesis be rejected for the difference between the two groups in ...view middle of the document...
001, according to the text.
4. If the researchers had set the level of significance or α = 0.01, would the results of p = 0.001 still be statistically significant? Provide a rationale for your answer.
Yes this still implies statistical significance because 0.001 < 0.01
5. If F(3, 60) = 4.13, p = 0.04, and α = 0.01, is the result statistically significant? Provide a rationale for your answer. Would the null hypothesis be accepted or rejected?
In this case the result would not be considered statistically significant because 0.04 > 0.01 would indicate that there is no statistical significance and except the null and conclude that there is no difference between the groups.
6. NOVA cannot be used to test proposed relationships or predicted correlations between variables in a single group. This is because ANOVA is tests relationships within various groups and among the groups.
7. The study had 149 subjects and 2 groups
8. The strength of the study where that they include a control group to test the dependent variable to examine the differences over time. The weakness of the study comes from the low number of subjects in the study. More subjects would have made the study more creditable.
9. The study results indicated a significant improvement in the pain scores of women with OA who received the treatment of guided imagery (F(1, 26) =4.406, p = 0.046). Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected. But in my opinion I would have liked to have seen a larger number of subjects. Also, including the standard deviations for the treatment and control groups also are needed to calculate the effect size in the study. The effect size is needed to conduct a power analysis to predict the sample size needed for future studies.
10. Problems and limitation with the study are the pain that leads to limited mobility and may lead to disability all of which can keep them from completely the task.