Name: Ybur Clieve Olsen b.

Dahilog
Course: MS GENERAL SCIENCE EDUCATION
Adviser: Raul Orongan PhD.

EDUC – 242: STATISTICS ACTIVITY 5

PART I: SAMPLE EXERCISES

ANOVA

1. A consumer group wishes to test the longevity of various brands of lightbulbs. They
purchase six lightbulbs each of three brands and burn them until they fail. Here are the
results (numbers are hours that the bulb lasted):

Brand X Brand Y Brand Z

Bulb #1 2588 2020 2423
Bulb #2 2725 2084 2328
Bulb #3 2827 2027 2247
Bulb #4 2986 2227 2304
Bulb #5 2622 2082 2228
Bulb #6 2883 2027 2374
Brand Z looks better than the others, but it might just be chance variation - the brands
might all be the same. State an explicit null hypothesis and test to see. (You may treat each
column as a random sample of 6 bulbs from the given brand's production, for the purposes of
this problem. Actually choosing such a sample is a tricky business.)

1. IDENTIFY THE DEPENDENT AND INDEPENDENT VARIABLES.

DV- Hours
IV – Brands

2. STATE THE NULL AND ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS

Ho: There is no difference in the longevity of various brands of lightbulbs. Ha:

There is a difference in the longevity of various brands of lightbulbs.

3. ESTABLISH THE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE (USUALLY SET TO 0.05 LEVEL

FOR SOCIAL RESEARCHES UNLESS SPECIFIED)

Specify the level α = 0.05

4. DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE TEST STATISTICS

One-Way ANOVA
 5. COMPUTATION / ANALYSIS ( USE BASIC AVAILABLE STATISTICAL
SOFTWARE)

VARIABLE/GROUPINGS MEAN SD SIGNIFICANCE

BRAND X 2771.8333 154.72998 0.000
BRAND Y 2077.8333 78.50966
BRAND Z 2317.3333 74.29042

Data Aalysis:

Descriptives

N MEAN STD. STD. 95% CONFIDENCE MINIMUM MAXIMUM

DEVIATION ERROR INTERVAL FOR
MEAN
Lower Upper
Bound Bound
BRAND 6 2771.8333 154.72998 63.16825 2609.4542 2934.2125 2588.00 2986.00
X 2077.8333 2227.00
BRAND 6 78.50966 32.05143 1995.4425 2160.2242 2020.00
Y 2317.3333 2423.00
BRAND 6 2389.0000 74.29042 30.32894 2239.3703 2395.2963 2228.00 2986.00
Z
TOTAL 18 313.35509 73.85850 2233.1722 2544.8278 2020.00

ANOVA

SUM OF DF MEAN F SIG.

SQUARES SQUARE
BETWEEN 1491133.000 2 745566.500 62.786 .000
GROUPS
WITHIN 178121.000 15 11874.733
GROUPS
TOTAL 1669254.000 17

6. INTERPRETATION / IMPLICATION / CONCLUSION

By looking at the table we can see that the significance (sig.) value is ‘.000’. This is
considerably lower than our significance threshold of P<0.05. Therefore, we should reject the
null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis. At this point, we can confirm that there is
a difference in the longevity of various brands of lightbulbs.
 2. Someone claims that the percentage of their incomes that people pay in total taxes is
the same for different income levels. A "random sample" of tax data showing the
average taxes paid in six different cities is given below; the column heading is the
income level. Form an explicit null hypothesis and perform an ANOVA test to evaluate
this claim.
:
Bonus: discuss some difficulties with this "random" sample - since we are picking cities, how
does it affect the statement of the null hypothesis?

CITY 25000 50000 75000

INCOME INCOME INCOME
LEVEL LEVEL LEVEL
A 5.4 8.5 10.0
B 4.2 9.1 11.8
C 4.9 5.8 14.0
D 4.3 7.4 18.1
E 10.8 15.5 16.1
F 9.8 10.9 18.4

1. IDENTIFY THE DEPENDENT AND INDEPENDENT VARIABLES.

DV- Tax
IV – Income level

2. STATE THE NULL AND ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS

Ho: There is no difference in the percentage of their incomes that people pay in
total taxes for the different income levels.
Ha: There is a difference in the percentage of their incomes that people pay in
total taxes for the different income levels.

3. ESTABLISH THE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE (USUALLY SET TO 0.05 LEVEL

FOR SOCIAL RESEARCHES UNLESS SPECIFIED)

Specify the level α = 0.05

4. DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE TEST STATISTICS

One-Way ANOVA
 5. COMPUTATION / ANALYSIS (USE BASIC AVAILABLE STATISTICAL
SOFTWARE)

VARIABLE/GROUPINGS MEAN SD SIGNIFICANCE

25,000 INCOME LEVEL 6.5667 2.94120 0.002
50,000 INCOME LEVEL 9.5333 3.38270
75,000 INCOME LEVEL 14.7333 3.41155

Data Aalysis:

Descriptives

N MEAN STD. STD. 95% CONFIDENCE MINIMUM MAXIMUM

DEVIATION ERROR INTERVAL FOR
MEAN
Lower Upper
Bound Bound
LEVEL 6 6.5667 2.94120 1.20074 3.4801 9.6533 4.20 10.80
A 6 3.38270 15.50
LEVEL 9.5333 1.38098 5.9834 13.0833 5.80
B
LEVEL 6 14.7333 3.41155 1.39276 11.1531 18.3135 10.00 18.40
C 18 4.62558 18.40
TOTAL 10.2778 1.09026 7.9775 12.5780 4.20

ANOVA

SUM OF DF MEAN F SIG.

SQUARES SQUARE
BETWEEN 205.071 2 102.536 9.694 .002
GROUPS
WITHIN 158.660 15 10.577
GROUPS
TOTAL 363.731 17

6. INTERPRETATION / IMPLICATION / CONCLUSION

By looking at the table we can see that the significance (sig.) value is ‘.002’. This is
considerably lower than our significance threshold of P<0.05. Therefore, we should reject the
null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis. At this point, we can confirm that there is
 a difference in the percentage of their incomes that people pay in total taxes for the different
income levels. In other words, someone claim is NOT true that people paid the same.

3. Sixteen midsize cars (divided into four groups) were chosen (and divided) at random
to test the mileage claims of four different brands of gasoline. The table lists the
mileage (in miles/gallon) achieved with each brand. Is there any evidence here that all
gasolines are NOT the same? Use ANOVA to find out.

CAR # GAS BRAND A GAS BRAND B GAS BRAND C GAS BRAND D

1 30.3 34.9 36.0 19.7

2 18.9 33.7 38.0 16.3

3 17.5 35.0 34.5 17.9

4 19.0 33.9 35.4 15.3

1. IDENTIFY THE DEPENDENT AND INDEPENDENT VARIABLES.

DV- Mileage
IV – Gas Brand

2. STATE THE NULL AND ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS

Ho: There is no difference in mileage tested in midsize cars of four different

brands of gasoline.
Ha: There is a difference in mileage tested in midsize cars of four different
brands of gasoline.

3. ESTABLISH THE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE (USUALLY SET TO 0.05 LEVEL

FOR SOCIAL RESEARCHES UNLESS SPECIFIED)

Specify the level α = 0.05

4. DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE TEST STATISTICS

One-Way ANOVA
 5. COMPUTATION / ANALYSIS ( USE BASIC AVAILABLE STATISTICAL
SOFTWARE)

VARIABLE/GROUPINGS MEAN SD SIGNIFICANCE

BRAND A 21.4250 5.95616 0.000
BRAND B 34.3750 .67020
BRAND C 35.9750 1.48408
BRAND D 17.3000 1.92527

Data Aalysis:

Descriptives
N MEAN STD. STD. 95% CONFIDENCE MINIMUM MAXIMUM
DEVIATION ERROR INTERVAL FOR
MEAN
Lower Upper
Bound Bound
BRAND 4 21.4250 5.95616 2.97808 11.9474 30.9026 17.50 30.30
A .67020 35.00
BRAND 4 34.3750 .33510 33.3086 35.4414 33.70
B
BRAND 4 35.9750 1.48408 .74204 33.6135 38.3365 34.50 38.00
C 1.92527 19.70
BRAND 4 17.3000 .96264 14.2365 20.3635 15.30
D 8.81209 38.00
TOTAL 16 27.2688 2.20302 22.5731 31.9644 15.30

ANOVA

SUM OF DF MEAN F SIG.

SQUARES SQUARE
BETWEEN 1039.292 3 346.431 33.124 .000
GROUPS
WITHIN 125.503 12 10.459
GROUPS
TOTAL 1164.794 15
 6. INTERPRETATION / IMPLICATION / CONCLUSION

By looking at the table we can see that the significance (sig.) value is ‘.000’. This is
considerably lower than our significance threshold of P<0.05. Therefore, we should reject the
null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis. At this point, we can confirm that there is
a difference in mileage tested in midsize cars of four different brands of gasoline. In other
words, there is sufficient evidence that all gasolines are NOT the same.

4. Three methods of teaching infection control are being compared using three groups of
students selected at random. Their scores out of 20 are shown. Is there a significant
difference between the means of each group? Explain clearly.

Method A 5.5 9.5 5.5 8.5 5.5 7.5 6.5 7.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 7.5

Method B 12.5 6.5 11.5 7.5 15.5 7.5 15.5 8.5 15.5 9.5 9.5 9.5

Method C 15.5 14.5 15.5 17.5 14.5 12.5 9.5 11.5 12.5 8.5 7.5 9.5

1. IDENTIFY THE DEPENDENT AND INDEPENDENT VARIABLES.

DV- Score
IV – Group

2. STATE THE NULL AND ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS

Ho: There is no significant difference between the means of each group.

Ha: There is significant difference between the means of each group.

3. ESTABLISH THE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE (USUALLY SET TO 0.05 LEVEL

FOR SOCIAL RESEARCHES UNLESS SPECIFIED)

Specify the level α = 0.05

4. DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE TEST STATISTICS

One-Way ANOVA

5. COMPUTATION / ANALYSIS (USE BASIC AVAILABLE STATISTICAL

SOFTWARE)
 Variable/Groupings Mean SD SIGNIFICANCE
Method A 6.92 1.24 0.000
Method B 10.75 3.31
Method C 12.42 3.18

Data Aalysis:

Descriptives

N MEAN STD. STD. 95% CONFIDENCE MINIMUM MAXIMUM

DEVIATION ERROR INTERVAL FOR
MEAN
Lower Upper
Bound Bound
METHOD 12 6.9167 1.24011 .35799 6.1287 7.7046 5.50 9.50
A 12 3.30633 15.50
METHOD 10.7500 .95446 8.6493 12.8507 6.50
B
METHOD 12 12.4167 3.17543 .91667 10.3991 14.4342 7.50 17.50
C
TOTAL 36 10.0278 3.54148 .59025 8.8295 11.2260 5.50 17.50

ANOVA

SUM OF DF MEAN F SIG.

SQUARES SQUARE
BETWEEN 190.889 2 95.444 12.696 .000
GROUPS
WITHIN 248.083 33 7.518
GROUPS
TOTAL 438.972 35
6. INTERPRETATION / IMPLICATION / CONCLUSION

By looking at the table we can see that the significance (sig.) value is ‘.000’. This is
considerably lower than our significance threshold of P<0.05. Therefore, we should reject the
null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis. At this point, we can confirm that there is
significant difference between the means of each group. In other words, Method C has the
highest mean and it is the most effective teaching methods compare to other methods A&B.
PART II:

USE YOUR 180 GENERATED RANDOM SAMPLES IN PS1, PERFORM THE SUGGESTED
STEPS IN HYPOTHEIS TEST:

1. Do motive and scores differ significantly when grouped by SES?

1. IDENTIFY THE DEPENDENT AND INDEPENDENT VARIABLES.

DV- Motive and Score

IV – Socio-Economic status

2. STATE THE NULL AND ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS

Ho: There is no significant difference of motive and score when group by SES.
Ha: There is significant difference of motive and score when group by SES.

3. ESTABLISH THE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE (USUALLY SET TO 0.05 LEVEL

FOR SOCIAL RESEARCHES UNLESS SPECIFIED)

Specify the level α = 0.05

4. DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE TEST STATISTICS

One-Way ANOVA

5. COMPUTATION / ANALYSIS (USE BASIC AVAILABLE STATISTICAL

SOFTWARE)
 VARIABLE/GROUPINGS MEAN SD SIGNIFICANCE
MOTIVE 1 4.3337 .54900 0.219
2 4.1883 .49233
3 4.3335 .53150
SCORE 1 59.4000 15.53258 .053
2 58.8667 12.54344
3 53.6667 14.30499

Data Aalysis:

Descriptives
N MEAN STD. STD. 95% CONFIDENCE MINIMUM MAXIMUM
DEVIATION ERROR INTERVAL FOR
MEAN
Lower Upper
Bound Bound
MOTIVE 1 60 4.3337 .54900 .07088 4.1918 4.4755 2.67 5.00
2 60 4.1883 .49233 .06356 4.0612 4.3155 3.33 5.00
3 60 4.3335 .53150 .06862 4.1962 4.4708 3.33 5.00
Total 180 4.2852 .52637 .03923 4.2077 4.3626 2.67 5.00
SCORES 1 60 59.4000 15.53258 2.00525 55.3875 63.4125 32.00 92.00
2 60 58.8667 12.54344 1.61935 55.6264 62.1070 24.00 96.00
3 60 53.6667 14.30499 1.84677 49.9713 57.3620 16.00 84.00
Total 180 57.3111 14.33723 1.06863 55.2024 59.4199 16.00 96.00

ANOVA
SUM OF DF MEAN F SIG.
SQUARES SQUARE
MOTIVE Between .844 2 .422 1.532 .219
Groups 48.751 177 .275
Within 49.594 179
Groups
Total
SCORES Between 1203.911 2 601.956 2.994 .053
Groups 35590.667 177 201.077
Within 36794.578 179
Groups
Total

6. INTERPRETATION / IMPLICATION / CONCLUSION

 By looking at the table we can see that the significance (sig.) value is ‘.219’ and ‘.053’
respectively. This is considerably greater than our significance threshold of P>0.05. Therefore,
we should accept the null hypothesis and reject the alternative hypothesis. At this point, we can
confirm that there is no significant difference of motive and score when group by SES.