Question

TABLE2 shave found that people are generally reluctant to transmit bad news to their peers. This phenomenon has been termed the "MUM effect." To investigate the cause of the MUM effect, 40 undergraduates at Duke University participated in an experiment. Each subject was asked to administer an IQ test to another student and then provide the test taker with his or her percentile score. Unknown to the subject, the test taker was a bogus student who was working with the researchers. The experimenters manipulated two factors: subject visibility and success of test taker, each at two levels. Subject visibility was either visible or not visible to the test taker. Success of the test taker was either top 20% or bottom 20%. Ten subjects were randomly assigned to each of the 2 x 2-4 experimental conditions, then the time (in seconds) between the end of the test and the delivery of the percentile score from the subject to the test taker was measured. (This variable is called the latency to feedback.) The data were subjected to appropriate analyses with the following results. PR>F 0.043 0.050 0.002 visibilit 1380.24 1325.16 3385.80 11,664.00 17.755.20 1380.24 1325.16 3385.80 324.00 4.26 4.09 10.45 est taker success nteraction Total 39

Answer 1

Here we are testing for Subject visibility, test taker success as well as for interaction between them.

Also,

Number of observations = 39 + 1 = 40

Hence,

This is a randomized block design with four treatments and 10 blocks.

Option 2 is correct.