ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) A hypothesis-testing procedure for studies with 3 or more groups, with each group being an entirely

separate group of people. Analyzing variances to look at whether the sample means differ. Null hypothesis: The several populations being compared all have the same mean Research hypothesis: They have different means. Similarity with t-tests: 1. True population variance is not known. 2. Population variance can be estimated. 3. Assumption: all populations have the same variance. VARIATION WITHIN EACH SAMPLE Within-groups estimate of the population variance: Estimate of the variance of population of individuals based on the variation among the scores in each of the actual groups studied. (a single pooled estimate) It is not affected by whether the NH is true. o Comes out the same whether the means of the populations are the same or not o It focuses only on the variation WITHIN each population (different scores between different people IN a population) Variation in scores within samples are due to chance o People responding differently OR o Experimental error Hence, within-groups population variance estimate = estimate based on chance factors that cause different people in a study to have different scores. VARIATION BETWEEN THE MEANS OF SAMPLES When the null hypothesis IS true: All samples come from populations that have the same mean. *Assumptions: all populations have same variation and have normal curves. Hence: if NH is true, all populations have same mean, variation and normal curve. BUT, even then, samples will still be a little different. Difference: depends on how much variation there is IN each population. Little variation in scores: then means of samples from that population will tend to be similar. Meaning the chance factors are similar. Much variation in scores: then means of a sample from each population are likely to be very different. (if we take one sample from 5 different populations, they are likely to have very different means) Means of 3 different populations may turn out to be the same. BUT if there is actually a large variance between scores IN each population, if we take ONE sample from EACH of the 3 populations, the means of the 3 samples will be very different. THEREFORE: it should be possible to estimate the variance in each population from the variation among the means of our samples. (since they are so strongly related)

Between-groups estimate of the population variance: Estimate of the variance of the population of individuals based on the variation among the means of the groups (samples) studied. Conclusion: Estimate gives an accurate indication of variation within the population If the null hypothesis is NOT true: The populations themselves have different means. Hence variation among means of samples taken from them is caused by: 1. Chance factors IN populations 2. Variation AMONG population means. (Treatment effect) Different treatment received by the groups causing different means The larger the variation within the populations, the larger the variation among means of samples. Conclusion: This method is influenced by both variation IN populations (chance) and variation AMONG populations (treatment). Will NOT give accurate estimate of variation WITHIN the population since it will also be affected by variation AMONG populations. F-RATIO Ratio of the between-groups population variance estimate to the within-groups population variance estimate. When the null hypothesis is true: Both estimates should be about the same. Ratio should be approximately 1:1 (about 1) When the null hypothesis is false: Between-groups estimate should be larger than the within-groups estimate o Distribution of means (within-groups) less likely to have extreme scores Ratio should be greater than 1. Look up an F table to see how extreme a ratio is needed to reject NH at a significance level. F distribution To find the cutoff for an F ratio that is large enough to reject the null hypothesis, we need an F distribution. E.g Find the F ratio for samples of 5 from 3 populations. X 100 times. Exact shape depends on how many samples taken each time, and how many scores are in each sample. NOT symmetrical: Long tail to the right, positive skew o Because an F distribution is a distribution of ratios of variances (always positive numbers). Most scores pile near 1.

F table Takes into account 2 different degrees of freedom. 1. Between-groups degrees of freedom = Numerator degrees of freedom 2. Within-groups degrees of freedom = Denominator degrees of freedom HYPOTHESIS TESTING Assumptions: (similar to t-test for independent means) Populations must follow a normal curve Populations must have equal variances If NH is rejected, means are not the same. BUT, we do not know which population means are significantly different from each other. Planned contrasts/comparison (priori comparison): Planning in advance to contrast the results from specific groups. Bonferroni procedure/ Dunns test: Dividing the significance level by the number of planned contrasts so that each contrast is tested at a more stringent significance level. With multiple contrast, there is a higher chance of getting a significant result if the null hypothesis is true. E.g Flipping a coin gives 50% chance of heads. Flipping 5 coins gives a higher chance that at least ONE will be heads. Post hoc comparisons: Making pairwise comparisons (comparing all possible pairings of means), done AFTER an analysis of variance, as part of an exploratory analysis. BUT, since were comparing ALL possible combinations, Bonferroni procedure might result in a very small significance level, Scheffe Test Method of figuring the significance of post hoc comparisons that takes into account all possible comparisons that could be made. Divide F ratio for comparison by the overall studys dfBetween (Ngroups 1). Compare this smaller F to overall studys F cutoff. Keeps overall risk of a Type 1 error at 0.05 Doesnt reduce statistical power too drastically Advantages: Only method that can be used for BOTH simple comparisons and complex ones Disadvantages: Most conservative: Gives higher chance of significance BUT still lower than any other post hoc contrasts.

Figuring Within-groups estimate of the population variance 1. Figure population variance estimate based on each groups scores a. Figure sum of squared deviation scores b. Divide sum of squared deviation scores by groups df (N-1). 2. Average these variance estimates.

Figuring Between-groups estimate of population variance 1. Estimate variance of distribution of means a. Find mean of all scores (mean of all the sample means). b. Minus the overall mean from each sample mean (deviation score). c. Figure sum of squared deviation scores d. Divide sum of squared deviations by number of means 1. 2. Figure estimated variance of the population of individual scores a. Multiply variance of distribution of means by number of scores in each group.

Figuring the F Ratio

()

Hypothesis testing with analysis of variance 1. Restate question as a RH and NH about the populations a. Population 1: People with secure style b. Population 2: People with avoidant style c. Population 3: People with anxious style d. NH: These 3 populations have the same mean e. RH: These population means are not the same 2. Determine the characteristics of the comparison distribution a. F distribution b. State the 2 degrees of freedom 3. Determine cutoff sample score at which NH should be rejected a. Use the F table 4. Determine samples score on the comparison distribution. a. Figure out samples F ratio 5. Decide whether to reject the null hypothesis

Figuring planned contrasts (between 2 populations) 1. Estimate the variance of the distribution of means (S2M) 2. Figure estimated variance of population of individual scores (S2Between) 3. Calculate the F ratio. 4. Do hypothesis testing to see if the planned contrast is significant using the true significance level (Bonferroni procedure). OR for post hoc contrasts, use Scheffe test.