Simple Linear Regression

Description: The age and salary of the chief executive officers (CEOs) of small companies were determined. Small companies were defined as those with annual sales greater than five and less than $350 million. Companies were ranked according to 5-year average return on investment. This data covers the first 60 ranked firms. There are 60 observations on two variables. Variables:
Age Salary

The age of the CEO in years. The salary of chief executive officer (including bonuses) in thousands of dollars.
Age 56 44 46 58 48 38 74 60 32 51 50 40 61 63 56 45 61 70 59 57 69 44 56 50 56 43 48 52 62 48 Salary 204 206 250 21 298 350 800 726 370 536 291 808 543 149 350 242 198 213 296 317 482 155 802 200 282 573 388 250 396 572

Age 53 43 33 45 46 55 41 55 36 45 55 50 49 47 69 51 48 62 45 37 50 50 50 58 53 57 53 61 47

Salary 145 621 262 208 362 424 339 736 291 58 498 643 390 332 750 368 659 234 396 300 343 536 543 217 298 1103 406 254 862

Multiple Linear Regression

Description: The data concern the manpower and workload for US Navy Bachelor Officers' Quarters, to estimate manpower needs for manning Bachelor Officers Quarters. There are 25 observations on 9 variables. Variables:
Site X1 X2 X3 X4

The Site identifier: the numbers 1 to 25 Average daily occupancy Monthly average number of check-ins Weekly hours of service desk operation Square feet of common area use Operational berthing capacity Number of rooms Monthly man hours
X3 4.0 40.0 40.0 168.0 42.5 168.0 40.0 168.0 40.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 X4 1.26 1.25 1.00 1.00 7.79 1.12 0.0 0.60 27.37 5.52 19.00 6.03 17.86 7.77 24.48 31.07 25.99 45.44 20.05 20.31 21.01 46.63 22.76 7.36 30.26 X5 1 1 1 1 3 2 3 18 10 6 6 4 14 6 6 14 12 26 12 10 14 58 17 24 9 X6 6 5 13 7 25 19 36 48 77 47 165 36 120 66 166 185 192 237 115 302 131 363 242 540 292 X7 6 5 13 8 25 19 36 48 77 47 130 37 120 66 179 202 192 237 115 210 131 363 242 453 196 Y 180.23 182.61 164.38 284.55 199.92 267.38 999.09 1103.24 944.21 931.84 2268.06 1489.50 1891.70 1387.82 3559.92 3115.29 2227.76 4804.24 2628.32 1880.84 3036.63 5539.98 3534.49 8266.77 1845.89

X5 Number of building wings

X6 X7 Y Site 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

X1 X2 2.00 4.00 3.00 1.58 16.60 23.78 7.00 2.37 5.30 1.67 16.50 8.25 25.89 3.00 44.42 159.75 39.63 50.86 31.92 40.08 97.33 255.08 56.63 373.42 96.67 206.67 54.58 207.08 113.88 981.00 149.58 233.83 134.32 145.82 188.74 937.00 110.24 410.00 96.83 677.33 102.33 288.83 274.92 695.25 811.08 714.33 384.50 1473.66 95.00 368.00

Factor Analysis: Managerial skills

Rating scale Try to assess the extent to which you possess these skills (Scores ranged from 1 = very little extent to 7 = to a very great extent.) Items 1 I show confidence in my staff 2 I let my staff know they are doing well 3 I give feedback to staff on how well they are working 4 I would personally compliment staff if they did outstanding work 5 I believe in setting goals and achieving them 6 I achieve the things I want to get done in a day 7 I never try to put off until tomorrow what I can finish today 8 I plan the use of my time well 9 I remain clear headed when too many demands are made upon me 10 I rarely overlook important factors when plans are made 11 I handle complex problems efficiently

Solution: 3 factor (13 items; N = 114): 1. Feedback 2. Time Management 3. Problem Solving

Use data manage.sav

Factor Analysis: Classroom behavior

Rating scale Teachers, for each of the following paired behavioral statements, please mark a cross over the dot which is nearest the statement that best describes the TYPICAL behavior of THIS student at school Items Cannot concentrate on any particular task; easily distracted <-> Can 1 CONCENTRATES concentrate on any task; not easily distracted 2 CURIOUS 3 PERSEVERES 4 EVEN-TEMPERED 5 PLACID 6 COMPLIANT 7 SELF-CONTROLLED 8 RELATES-WARMLY 9 SUSTAINED ATTENTION Eager to learn; curious and enquiring <-> Shows little curiousity or motivation Perserveres in the face of difficult or challenging work <-> Lacks perseverance; is impatient with difficult or challenging work Irritable,'touchy', 'cranky' <-> Even-tempered Easily excited; gets 'high' <-> Not easily excited; placid Patient and compliant <-> Demanding and argumentative Is able to control own behaviour <-> Has difficulty controlling own behaviour Relates warmly to others <-> Provocative; disruptive; short attention span Persistent, sustained attention span <-> Easily frustrated; short attention span Difficult to reason and communicate with <-> Easy to reason and communicate with Restless; fidgety; can't sit still <-> Relaxed; can sit still On the go; lively; always moving <-> Settled, calm Purposeful activity <-> Aimless activity Co-operative; shared with others <-> Disputes, fights over sharing Is easily upset; unhappy <-> Contented; happy

10 COMMUNICATIVE 11 RELAXED 12 CALM 13 PURPOSEFUL ACTIVITY

14 COOPERATIVE 15 CONTENTED

Solution: 3-factor (13 items; N = 1500), Drop items 6 and 7 1. Sociability 2. Task orientation 3. Settledness

Use data behav.sav

Logistic Regression
Exercise 1: What is Beautiful is Good, and Vice Versa Castellow, Wuensch, and Moore (1990, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 547-562) found that physically attractive litigants are favored by jurors hearing a civil case involving alleged sexual harassment (we manipulated physical attractiveness by controlling the photos of the litigants seen by the mock jurors). Guilty verdicts were more likely when the male defendant was physically unattractive and when the female plaintiff was physically attractive. We also found that jurors rated the physically attractive litigants as more socially desirable than the physically unattractive litigants -- that is, more warm, sincere, intelligent, kind, and so on. Perhaps the jurors treated the physically attractive litigants better because they assumed that physically attractive people are more socially desirable (kinder, more sincere, etc.). Data from selected variables from this research project are in the SPSS data file named Jury94.sav VERDICT -- whether the mock juror recommended a not guilty (0) or a guilty (1) verdict -- that is, finding in favor of the defendant (0) or the plaintiff (1) ATTRACT -- whether the photos of the defendant were physically unattractive (0) or physically attractive (1) GENDER -- whether the mock juror was female (0) or male (1) SOCIABLE -- the mock juror's rating of the sociability of the defendant, on a 9-point scale, with higher representing greater sociability WARMTH -- ratings of the defendant's warmth, 9-point scale KIND -- ratings of defendant's kindness SENSITIV -- ratings of defendant's sensitivity INTELLIG -- ratings of defendant's intelligence

Exercise 2: Predicting Whether or Not Sexual Harassment Will Be Reported SPSS data file Harass.sav was obtained from David Howell's site. Here is a brief description for each variable: REPORTED -- whether (1) or not (0) an incident of sexual harassment was reported AGE -- age of the victim MARSTAT -- marital status of the victim -- 1 = married, 2 = single FEMinist ideology -- the higher the score, the more feminist the victim OFFENSUV -- offensiveness of the harassment -- higher = more offensive

Exercise 3: Predicting Who Will Drop-Out of School SPSS data file Dropout.sav simulated these data based on the results of research by David Howell and H. R. Huessy (Pediatrics, 76, 185-190). Here is a brief description for each variable: DROPOUT -- whether the student dropped out of high school before graduating -- 0 = No, 1 = Yes.

ADDSC -- a measure of the extent to which each child had exhibited behaviors associated with attention deficit disorder. These data were collected while the children were in the 2nd, 4th, and 5th grades combined into one variable in the present data set. REPEAT -- did the child ever repeat a grade -- 0 = No, 1 = Yes. SOCPROB -- was the child considered to have had more than the usual number of social problems in the 9th grade -- 0 = No, 1 = Yes.