Now we will expand on the analysis of Exercise 16.2.

a) Run a one-way analysis of variance on treatments 1 and 3 combined (n = 20) versus treatments 2 and 4 combined. What question are you answering?

b) Why might your answer to part

(a) be difficult to interpret?

c) We will see a more appropriate analysis of variance for this design in the next chapter.

Exercise 16.2

Another way to look at the Eysenck study mentioned in Exercise 16.1 is to compare four groups of participants. One group consisted of Younger participants who were presented the words to be recalled in a condition that elicited a Low level of processing. A second group consisted of Younger participants who were given a task requiring the Highest level of processing

(as in Exercise 16.1). The two other groups were Older participants who were given tasks requiring either Low or High levels of processing. The data follow:

Conduct a one-way analysis of variance on these data.

Exercise 16.1

An important study in the memory literature is an old study by Eysenck (1974) in which he compared the recall of older participants under one of five levels of processing of the material.

He demonstrated that when asked to perform a higher level of processing of a list of words, participants showed better recall at a later time. Another aspect of Eysenck’s study compared Younger and Older participants on their ability to recall material in the face of instructions simply telling that they should memorize the material for later recall. (Presumably this task required a high level of processing, which older participants might not do well.) The data on 10 participants in each group follow, where the dependent variable is the number of items recalled.

Transcribed Image Text:

Younger/Low 8 6 + 6 7 6 5 7 9 7 Younger/Hi 21 19 17 15 22 16 22 22 18 21 Older/Low 9 8 6 8 10 4 16 5 7 7 Older/Hi 10 19 14 5 10 || 14 15