# Question

Science (Jan. 1, 1999) reported on the ability of seven-month-old infants to learn an unfamiliar language. In one experiment, 16 infants were trained in an artificial language. Then each infant was presented with two 3-word sentences that consisted entirely of new words (e.g., “wo fe wo”). One sentence was consistent (i.e., constructed from the same grammar the infants got in the training session), and one sentence was inconsistent (i.e., constructed from grammar in which the infant was not trained). The variable measured in each trial was the time (in seconds) the infant spent listening to the speaker, with the goal being to compare the mean listening times of consistent and inconsistent sentences.

a. The data were analyzed as a randomized block design with the 16 infants representing the blocks and the two types of sentences (consistent and inconsistent) representing the treatments. Do you agree with this data analysis method? Explain.

b. Refer to part a. The test statistic for testing treatments was F = 25.7 with an associated observed significance level of p < .001. Interpret this result.

c. Explain why the data could also be analyzed as a paired difference experiment with a test statistic of t = 5.07.

d. The mean listening times and standard deviations for the two treatments are given here. Use this information to calculate the F -statistic for comparing the treatment means in a completely randomized ANOVA design. Explain why this test statistic provides weaker evidence of a difference between treatment means than the test in part b provides.

e. Explain why there is no need to control the experiment-wise error rate in ranking the treatment means for this experiment.

a. The data were analyzed as a randomized block design with the 16 infants representing the blocks and the two types of sentences (consistent and inconsistent) representing the treatments. Do you agree with this data analysis method? Explain.

b. Refer to part a. The test statistic for testing treatments was F = 25.7 with an associated observed significance level of p < .001. Interpret this result.

c. Explain why the data could also be analyzed as a paired difference experiment with a test statistic of t = 5.07.

d. The mean listening times and standard deviations for the two treatments are given here. Use this information to calculate the F -statistic for comparing the treatment means in a completely randomized ANOVA design. Explain why this test statistic provides weaker evidence of a difference between treatment means than the test in part b provides.

e. Explain why there is no need to control the experiment-wise error rate in ranking the treatment means for this experiment.

## Answer to relevant Questions

The partially complete ANOVA table given here is for a two-factor factorial experiment: a. Give the number of levels for each factor. b. How many observations were collected for each factor–level combination? c. Complete ...In Robotica (Vol. 22, 2004), researchers described a study of the effectiveness of display devices for three virtual-reality (VR)-based hand rehabilitation systems. Display device A is a projector, device B is a desktop ...Refer to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data on contaminated fish, saved in the FISHDDT file. The results of an ANOVA and Tukey multiple-comparison analysis to compare the three fish species (channel catfish, largemouth ...Refer to the Teaching of Psychology (Aug. 1998) study of whether a practice test helps students prepare for a final exam, presented in Exercise. Recall that students in an introductory psychology class were grouped according ...Refer to the Journal of Biogeography (Dec. 2003) study of ants in Mongolia, presented in Exercise. Data on annual rainfall, maximum daily temperature, and number of ant species recorded at each of 11 study sites are listed ...Post your question

0