1. A non- experimental study was done to asseas the impact of the accident at the Three Mile Island (TMI) nuclear power plant on nearby residents (Baum, Gatchel, and Schaeffer, 1983). Data were collected from residents of the following four areas: Group 1: Three Mile Island, where a nuclear accident occurred (n - 38) Group 2: Frederick, with no nuclear power plant nearby (n- 27) Group 3: Dickerson, with an undamaged coal power plant nearby (a - 24) Group 4: Oyster Creek, with an undamaged nuclear power plant nearby (n- 32) Several different measures of stress were taken for people in these four groups. One-way ANOVA was performed to assess differences among these four groups on each outcome. Selected results are reported below for you to discuss and interpret. Here are results for two of their outcome measures (each cell lists| the mean, followed by the standard deviation in parentheses). Undamaged F(3, 117) Outcome TMI nuclear No nuclear Undamaged Variable plant with coal plant nuclear plant accident plant Total reported 25.97 14.54 16.63 16.16 3.827 stress symptoms (21.0) (11.5) (11.8) (13.5) Beck 6.00 3.64 3.54 3.50 2.104 Depression Inventory (6.5) (3.3) (3.6) (4.2) a. As it was shown above the F statistic regarding the impact of the accident on stress symptoms was F (3, 117)- 3.827. What is the null hypothesis? What would be the critical F value we would use to test this null hypothesis? (i.e., use the F table for 3 and 117 df and an alpha level of .05 to locate the critical F value). Would you reject the null? Explain. b. As it was shown above the F statistic regarding the impact of the accident on depression was F (3, 117- 2.104. What is the null hypothesis? What would be the critical F value we would use to test thia null hypothesis? (i.e., use the F table for 3 and 117 df and an alpha level of .05 to locate the critical F value). Would you rejecet the null? Explain.