A study compared three display panels used by air traffic controllers. Each display panel was tested for four different simulated emergency conditions. Twentyfour highly trained air traffic controllers were used in the study. Two controllers were randomly assigned to each display panelemergency condition combination. The time (in seconds) required to stabilize the emergency condition was recorded. The following table gives the resulting data and the JMP output ofa twoway ANOVA of the data. Emergency Condition Display Panel 1 2 3 4 A 17 25 31 14 14 24 34 13 B 15 22 28 9 12 1'3 31 16 C 21 2'3 32 15 24 28 37 19 Least Squares Means Estimates Panel Estimate Condition Estimate A 21.566999 1 17.333336 B 18.3?5999 2 24.599966 C 25.625999 3 32.166626 4 13.333366 Analysis of Variance Sum of Mean Source DF Squares Squar'e F Ratio Model 11 1J466.3333 133.393 36.1818 Error 12 53.6666 4.417 Pr'ob > F C. Total 23 1J519.3333 <.6661 effect tests sum of source nparm df squares f ratio prob> F Panel 2 2 211.5833 23.9528 <. condition w panel tukey hsd all pairwise comparisons quantile="2.66776," adjusted df="12.0," adjustment="Tukey" difference std error t ratio prob> | t| Lower 95% Upper 95% A B 3.12500 1. 050793 2.97 0. 0290* 0. 3217 5.92826 A -4.12500 1. 050793 -3.93 0. 0053* -6.9283 -1. 32174 -7.25000 1. 050793 -6.90 |t| Lower 95% Upper 95% -7.1667 1. 213352 -5.91 0. 0904* -10.7689 -3.5645 -14.8333 1. 213352 -12. 23