2. State the null hypothesis for the Baird and Sands (2004) study that focuses on the effect of the GI with PMR treatment on patients’ mobility level. Should the null hypothesis be rejected for the difference between the two groups in change in mobility scores over 12 weeks? Provide a rationale for your answer. 3. The researchers stated that the participants in the intervention group reported a reduction in mobility diffi culty at week 12. Was this result statistically signifi cant, and if so at what probability? 4. If the researchers had set the level of signifi cance or α = 0.01, would the results of p = 0.001 still be statistically signifi cant? Provide a rationale for your answer. 5. If F(3, 60) = 4.13, p = 0.04, and α = 0.01, is the result statistically signifi cant? Provide a rationale for your answer. Would the null hypothesis be accepted or rejected?
274 EXERCISE 36 • Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) I
6. Can ANOVA be used to test proposed relationships or predicted correlations between variables in a single group? Provide a rationale for your answer.
7. If a study had a result of F(2, 147) = 4.56, p = 0.003, how many groups were in the study, and what was the sample size?
8. The researchers state that the sample for their study was 28 women with a diagnosis of OA, and that 18 were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 10 were randomly assigned to the control group. Discuss the study strengths and/or weaknesses in this statement. 9. In your opinion, have the researchers established that guided imagery (GI) with progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) reduces pain and decreases mobility diffi culties in women with OA? 10. The researchers stated that this was a 12-week longitudinal, randomized...