1992
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4613-9722-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of Variance in Experimental Design

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
125
1
2

Year Published

1996
1996
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 180 publications
(128 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
125
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…On the contrary, when the codominant model was considered, a positive and independent effect of the CYP11B2 C(À344)T polymorphism on SBP was found in males (Table 3), even if comparisons among groups do not allow us to explain the main effect, 12 and on IVSD in females (Table 4). No significant associations of CYP11B2 genotypes with echocardiographic variables in males were found in the codominant model (Table 4) and no significant differences among genotypes were observed on echovascular variables either in males or females (data not shown).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…On the contrary, when the codominant model was considered, a positive and independent effect of the CYP11B2 C(À344)T polymorphism on SBP was found in males (Table 3), even if comparisons among groups do not allow us to explain the main effect, 12 and on IVSD in females (Table 4). No significant associations of CYP11B2 genotypes with echocardiographic variables in males were found in the codominant model (Table 4) and no significant differences among genotypes were observed on echovascular variables either in males or females (data not shown).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Changes in mean wing lengths among years were tested using the fixed-effect model of the oneway analysis of variance (Lindman 1992). Significant differences among values the means for subsequent years were compared by the Tukey's test for samples of different size (Lindman 1992).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Significant differences among values the means for subsequent years were compared by the Tukey's test for samples of different size (Lindman 1992).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All five conditions (including the control condition) were analyzed in a one-way ANOVA which yielded a significant F-value, F(4, 95) = 2.49, has been said that analysis of variance is robust despite the violation of its assumptions (Lindman, 1992). we tried to transform the numbers of days by taking which is used where some data are numerically small (e g , Winer, Brown, & Michels, 1991) The test of normal distribution in each cell was conducted using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov one-sample test, and the homogeneity of cell variances was conducted using the Bartlett-Box test Since all the former tests (all p > 230) and all the latter tests (p = 390) were not significant at the 05 level, we conducted ANOVA on the transformed data The results of that closely paralleled those of ANOVA on raw data only the main effect of self-esteem, F(1, 76) = 8 44, p = 005, and the social comparison x meaningfulness interaction, F(1, 76) = 4 08, p = 047, were significant The planned comparison and additional analyses using the transformed data also paralleled those using raw data 'Two supplemental questionnaires on some helping opportunities described as hypothetical situations were formed and presented to 41 different subjects For 18 of them the first description used in one questionnaire was the same meaningful helping opportunities manipulated in the experiment, for the other 23, the description was of the same unmeaningful helping opportunity After reading each description, each subject answered two main items included in the questionnaire "To what extent do you think the content of this helping is socially meaningful and significant?"…”
Section: Days Volunteeredmentioning
confidence: 99%