KIN 610 - Spring 2023
Furtado (2023)
I will use a data set called dynamometer to demonstrate the analyses in this blog post. You can download the CSV file here and a summary of the data is provided in Table 1.
Age_Group | N | Mean | SD | |
Age | 18-39 | 20 | 27.9 | 6.43 |
40-60 | 20 | 49.3 | 6.38 | |
Before | 18-39 | 20 | 45.6 | 1.84 |
40-60 | 20 | 38.5 | 3.12 | |
After | 18-39 | 20 | 52.6 | 1.84 |
40-60 | 20 | 43.7 | 3.64 |
Assumption of Normality
Assumption of Homogeneity of Variances
Assumption of Independence
Cohen’s d
One-sample t-test
Independent samples t-test
Paired samples t-test
Interpreting Cohen’s d
Key concepts
Student’s t-distribution
Role in hypothesis testing
Key features
\[ t = \frac{\bar{X}_1 - \bar{X}_2}{s_p \sqrt{\frac{1}{n_1} + \frac{1}{n_2}}} \]
\[ s_p = \sqrt{\frac{(n_1 - 1)s_1^2 + (n_2 - 1)s_2^2}{n_1 + n_2 - 2}} \]
\[ t = \frac{\bar{X}_1 - \bar{X}_2}{\sqrt{\frac{s_1^2}{n_1} + \frac{s_2^2}{n_2}}} \]
In this example, the researcher wanted to investigate mean differences between the age groups.
Research question
Hypothesis statements
\[ t = \frac{\bar{d}}{s_d/\sqrt{n}} \]
A researcher wanted to investigate whether an intervention (such as an exercise program) has a significant effect on muscle strength. Participants were recruited based on specific inclusion criteria (e.g., age range, health status, etc.), and muscle strength measurements (in kg) were taken for each participant both before and after the intervention. The null hypothesis would be that there is no significant difference between the “Before” and “After” measurements, while the alternative hypothesis would be that there is a significant difference. The Paired-samples
t test would be an appropriate statistical analysis to test this hypothesis.
Research Question
Hypotheses Statements
dynamometer.csv
datasetBefore
and After
variables under Paired Variables
dynamometer.csv
datasetSuggested Reporting:
A Paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare the scores before and after the intervention. There was a significant difference in the scores for before (M = 42.1, SD = 4.42) and after (M = 48.2, SD = 5.35) conditions; t(39) = -31.208, p < .001, 95% CI [-6.495, -5.705], Cohen’s d = 4.93. The results indicate that there is a significant difference between the “Before” and “After” scores, with the “After” scores being higher on average. The effect size (Cohen’s d) is large, suggesting that the intervention had a substantial impact on the scores.