![Background Nete A onc-way ANOVA was run for cach row in the table in the excerpt. For each, a value of F is shown. Duncuns t](//img.homeworklib.com/images/37204414-2660-4e92-b55f-e7669137f48f.png?x-oss-process=image/resize,w_560)
3. Which group (family member/race/ethnicity) had the highest
mean score for “Global self-worth?”
4. Which group (family member, race/ethnicity) had the lowest
mean score for “Global self-worth?”
5. Should the mean differences for Fathers in “Physical
appearance” be declared statistically significant? Why or why
not?
6. Should the null hypothesis be rejected for the difference
referred to in Question 3? If so, at what probability level should
it be rejected?
7. Were there any statistically significant differences in
adolescents’ self-esteem scores across racial and ethnic categories
for any of the measures of self-esteem? Explain your answer.
3. Which group (family member/race/ethnicity) had the highest mean score for “Global self-worth?”...
Background Nete A onc-way ANOVA was run for cach row in the table in the excerpt. For each, a value of F is shown. Duncun's test was also run for cach row. In a given row, entries with superscript "a" have aigaificantly different means from entrics with superscript "b". Note that, as a gcncra! rule, il there is no indication that a difference (or a set of cifferences) is significant, the reaer should assome that it is nol significant. Excerpt from the Research Article As part ol a latger study of family functioning. a total of 104 families (adolcscenls, mothers and fathers) participated in this study. All participatng failies in the currenl siudy included an ad- lescnl, he mother, and the Labcr Adolescents were requircd io have at least mutnthly face-to-face contact with their biologicai mother and tbeir biological father for inclasion... Participants completed he age-appropriate version of the arter Self-Perception Protiles, wbich conceptualize sels-esteem aR perccived competence in muhiple domains. The social accen- tance domain ussesses participants' pcrccptios of feeling accepted by peers, feeling popular, snd feeling cornfortable around others. The physical appearancc domain assesses rts scif perceplions of their attractivencss and their satisfaction with their uppcarance. The athictic compe- tence dotnain assesses participanis feelings of their competence in sports and othcr physical activi- tes. The slohal sclf worth subscale assesses participants' leelings about themsclvesveral (ie., n: tied to any spccific domain...). In orucr lo iest for the racial ethnic group differences.. a series of ANOVAs was complcted for cach informant (adolescents, mothcrs, and nthers). Sişmifica ANOVAs werc followed up by post hoc Duncan's tests. י Soorac: Phares. .. Fields. S , watkins-Cay. M. M. Kamb uke. D. & Haa, s COS). Raeerhpicy sd elf-stocm in uilies of sdolescents Chiid&Foniy Behvior Therugv. 27, 3-26. Table 1 Means and Standard Deviations for Self-Esteem Race/ethnici Caucasian African American His F-Value Social acceptance Mothers Fathers 3.15 (.76) 3.23 (.67) 2.98 (.71) 3.13 (.74) 3.44 (55) 3.36 (.62) 3.38 (51) 3.25 (60) 3.20 (.66) 1.21 2.81 Physical appearance Mothers Fathers 2.82 (85) 2.49 (.84) 2.79 (.51) 3.14 (82) 3.06 (.77) 2.82 (84) 2.92 (.75) 2.70 (.70) 3.13 (.65) 0.81 1.56 3.16 Athletic competence Adolescents Mothers Fathers 2.79 (87) 2.04 (79 2.49 (78) 2.79 (.58) 2.96 (80) 2.90 (.68) 3.35 (.66) 3.18 (66) 2.07 (.64) 2.88 (.75) 1.96 3.95 0.27 Global self-worth Adolescents 3.34 (.60) 3.17 (.76) .96 (.62) 3.33 (.72) 3.25 (65) 3.24 (.71) 338 (53)b 0.23 3.32 (67) Fathers Note. Standard deviations are in parentheses. Different superscripts signify significant mean differences p<.05
Background Nete A onc-way ANOVA was run for cach row in the table in the excerpt. For each, a value of F is shown. Duncun's test was also run for cach row. In a given row, entries with superscript "a" have aigaificantly different means from entrics with superscript "b". Note that, as a gcncra! rule, il there is no indication that a difference (or a set of cifferences) is significant, the reaer should assome that it is nol significant. Excerpt from the Research Article As part ol a latger study of family functioning. a total of 104 families (adolcscenls, mothers and fathers) participated in this study. All participatng failies in the currenl siudy included an ad- lescnl, he mother, and the Labcr Adolescents were requircd io have at least mutnthly face-to-face contact with their biologicai mother and tbeir biological father for inclasion... Participants completed he age-appropriate version of the arter Self-Perception Protiles, wbich conceptualize sels-esteem aR perccived competence in muhiple domains. The social accen- tance domain ussesses participants' pcrccptios of feeling accepted by peers, feeling popular, snd feeling cornfortable around others. The physical appearancc domain assesses rts scif perceplions of their attractivencss and their satisfaction with their uppcarance. The athictic compe- tence dotnain assesses participanis feelings of their competence in sports and othcr physical activi- tes. The slohal sclf worth subscale assesses participants' leelings about themsclvesveral (ie., n: tied to any spccific domain...). In orucr lo iest for the racial ethnic group differences.. a series of ANOVAs was complcted for cach informant (adolescents, mothcrs, and nthers). Sişmifica ANOVAs werc followed up by post hoc Duncan's tests. י Soorac: Phares. .. Fields. S , watkins-Cay. M. M. Kamb uke. D. & Haa, s COS). Raeerhpicy sd elf-stocm in uilies of sdolescents Chiid&Foniy Behvior Therugv. 27, 3-26. Table 1 Means and Standard Deviations for Self-Esteem Race/ethnici Caucasian African American His F-Value Social acceptance Mothers Fathers 3.15 (.76) 3.23 (.67) 2.98 (.71) 3.13 (.74) 3.44 (55) 3.36 (.62) 3.38 (51) 3.25 (60) 3.20 (.66) 1.21 2.81 Physical appearance Mothers Fathers 2.82 (85) 2.49 (.84) 2.79 (.51) 3.14 (82) 3.06 (.77) 2.82 (84) 2.92 (.75) 2.70 (.70) 3.13 (.65) 0.81 1.56 3.16 Athletic competence Adolescents Mothers Fathers 2.79 (87) 2.04 (79 2.49 (78) 2.79 (.58) 2.96 (80) 2.90 (.68) 3.35 (.66) 3.18 (66) 2.07 (.64) 2.88 (.75) 1.96 3.95 0.27 Global self-worth Adolescents 3.34 (.60) 3.17 (.76) .96 (.62) 3.33 (.72) 3.25 (65) 3.24 (.71) 338 (53)b 0.23 3.32 (67) Fathers Note. Standard deviations are in parentheses. Different superscripts signify significant mean differences p