Meeting 11

Data Discrepancies and Error Identification

• Participants noticed slight variations in the number of responses analyzed (50 vs. 51).

• This was attributed to potential errors in reverse coding or mistyped data.

• An extra person's data may have been included in some datasets.

Addressing Data Inconsistencies

• The group decided to identify shared means across datasets to consolidate the analysis.

• For neuroticism, four members had the same mean of $3.03$, which the group agreed to use.

• For the thriller measure, two members (the speaker and Jose) had the same mean of $3.28$.

• Given the close proximity of means, the group considered using the $3.28$ mean since it was shared by two members.

Correlation Analysis and Hypothesis Testing

• The group compared test statistics and significance levels.

• R-values were approximately the same, hovering around $0.11$ to $0.17$.

• Unfortunately, the analysis revealed no significant correlation.

• The initial hypothesis and its antithesis were not supported.

Selection of Official Group Output

• Faced with slightly different r-values, the group decided to designate one output as the "official" group output.

• The speaker and Jose considered using their data due to its similarity.

• To decide, they flipped a coin, and the speaker's data was chosen.

Addressing Discrepancies and Error Review

• The group acknowledged the need to identify the source of errors if r-values differed significantly but decided their values were close enough to proceed without a comprehensive review.

APA Results Section and Data Reporting

• The group responded to several questions to prepare for the results section of their APA-style report.

• A designated member was assigned to type and post the official responses.

Discussion of Results

• Hypothesis Support: The hypothesis was not supported.

• R-value: $0.116$

• Degrees of Freedom: $50$

• Significance: $0.416$

• Effect Size: $0.014$

• Number of Items: Each measure (neuroticism and thriller) had $20$ items.

• Min and Max Values:

  • Neuroticism: Min $1.1$, Max $4.8$

  • Thriller: Min $1.4$, Max $4.9$

• Item Reliability:

  • The neuroticism item that decreased reliability the most was N9.

  • The neuroticism item that increased reliability the most was NR29.

  • For the thriller measure: T6 and TR27 (increased) and T9 (decreased)

• Missing Data: There were no missing data cases.

• Normality: The data did not pass the normality test.

• Outliers: No outliers were identified.

• Homoscedasticity and linearity: The data exhibited homoscedasticity but not linearity.

Chronbach's Alpha and Reliability

• The Cronbach's alpha was high (above $0.9$), indicating strong reliability.

• This suggests the questionnaire measured what it intended to measure.

Posting and Sharing Results

• The group agreed to post the group's name and official responses, attaching the official output.

• The speaker uploaded the PDF for others to access and share.

Additional Discussion

• Members agreed to include meeting notes in their post.

• The group concluded the meeting, noting the upcoming summer session.