Sample Items for Test 2: Psychology 303, Winter 2005

This gives sample items, but the test may differ in the number of questions

1.  For the following examples, please list the IV(s) and the DV(s) and select the best description of the design employed.  All examples are based on abstracts from journal articles.

We describe a rather common process that we call moralization, in which objects or activities that were previously morally neutral acquire a moral component.  Moralization converts preferences into values and in doing so influences cross-generational transmission (because values are passed more effectively in families than are preferences), increases the likelihood or internalization, invokes greater emotional response, and mobilizes the support of governmental and other cultural institutions.  In recent decades, we claim, cigarette smoking in American has become moralized.  We support our claims about some of the consequences of moralization with an analysis of differences between health and moral vegetarians.  Compared with health vegetarians, moral vegetarians find meat more disgusting, offer more reasons in support of their meat avoidance, and avoid a wider range of animal foods.  However, contrary to our prediction, liking for meat is about the same in moral and health vegetarians.  Rozin, Markwith, & Stoess, Psychological Science, 8, 67-73.
 

 IV(s):

 DV(s):

 DESIGN (Selected from below):  ________

Designs
a.  Basic two group between-subjects experiment
b.  Basic within-subjects with two levels
c.  Basic status variable with two groups
d.  One multiple level between-subjects IV
e.  One multiple level within-subjects IV
f.  One multiple level status variable
g.  factorial design: 2 between-subjects variables
h.  factorial design: 2 status variables
i.  factorial design: 2 within-subjects variables
j.  factorial design: 1 status; 1 between
k.  factorial design: 1 between; 1 within
l.  factorial design: 1 status; 1 within
 

2.  Describe what the two partitioned components of total deviation in a one-way between-subjects ANOVA measure.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

3.  For the following source table, please fill in the missing information.

Source                      SS                   df                MS                F             p
Between
    Delay Interval      28.73
Error                                                85                 3.63
     Total                                           88
 

4.  Based on the following written description, please fill in the source table.
 A one-way between-subjects ANOVA found an effect of treatment condition on the number of level of depression, F (3, 36) = 6.75, p < .01, MSE = 3.40.

Source                                    SS               df                     MS                       F                     p
Between
    Treatment
Error
     Total

5.  For the following set of means, please draw a graph of the means.  In drawing your graph, please label the x and y-axes carefully.  Then predict whether a 2 x 2 between-subjects ANOVA would find main effects (for each factor) and whether the interaction would be significant.  If you suspect that the ANOVA would give you a main effect that would be an artifact of an interaction, please state that as well.  (Keep in mind that your experiment has reasonable power -- i.e., enough subjects -- 20 per cell, and moderate error variance to discover effects if they are meaningful.)
 
                                                                   Menu Options
Restaurant Type                                          Mild                                  hot
Dives                                                        3.35 (SD = 1.89)                7.75 (SD = 1.94)
Fancy                                                       2.92 (SD = 1.43)                4.12 (SD = 1.61)

DV:  Rated spiciness (1 to 9)
 
 

6.  What do you know about this study based on the following results paragraph?  Be sure to mention basic research question, IV and levels, DV(s), design, statistics employed, number of subjects, and findings. In addition, for the significant effect reported, please recreate the source table for the ANOVA and then compute the two measures of effect size:  the overall proportion of variance accounted for (eta2) and the difference score (d) for each pair-wise comparison.

 
 Table 3 shows the mean number of direct-references to the stored information for each of the correction groups.  An analysis of variance of this direct-reference measure showed a significant difference in the correction groups, F (2, 27) = 11.71, p < .0001, MSE = 35.63.  Post-hoc analyses using Tukey's HSD procedure showed significant differences between the no correction control group and each of the correction groups, but no difference between two correction groups (p < .007).  There were no group differences on the story-recall and fact-recall measures (F < 1 for each).

Table 3
Number of Direct-References by Correction Group

                                                                             Correction Group
Dependent Variable                         Delayed                  Immediate                       None
Direct References                            3.27 (1.56)             4.40 (2.01)                     0.82 (1.66)
Story Recall                                   13.27 (7.56)            14.40 (12.01)                12.43 (7.56)
Fact Recall                                      3.45 (3.93)              5.40 (5.01)                     4.82 (3.32)

Based on Johnson & Seifert, (1994), Experiment 1a.  JEP:L,M, & C, 20, 1420-1436.
Basic Research Question:
 

IV(s):
 
 
Levels of IV(s)
 

DV(s):
 

Design:
 

Stats Employed:
 

Number of Subjects:
 

Findings:
 
 

Source Table
 
 
 
 
 

eta2
 
 
 
 

d