ANOVA Mixt Repeated Measures

C8057(ResearchMethodsinPsychology):RepeatedMeasuresANOVAusingSPSS
RepeatedMeasuresANOVA
Introduction
Repeatedmeasuresisatermusedwhenthesameparticipantstakepartinallconditionsofanexperiment.So,for
example, you might want to test the effects of alcohol on enjoyment of a party. In this type of experiment it is
importanttocontrolforindividualdifferencesintolerancetoalcohol:somepeoplecandrinkalotofalcoholwithout
reallyfeelingtheconsequences,whereasothers,likeme,onlyhavetosniffapintoflagerandtheyfalltothefloorand
pretendtobeafish.Tocontrolfortheseindividualdifferenceswecantestthesamepeopleinallconditionsofthe
experiment:sowewouldtesteachsubjectaftertheyhadconsumedonepint,twopints,threepintsandfourpintsof
lager. After each drink the participant might be given a questionnaire assessing their enjoyment of the party.
Therefore,everyparticipantprovidesascorerepresentingtheirenjoymentbeforethestudy(noalcoholconsumed),
afteronepint,aftertwopints,andsoon.Thisdesignissaidtouserepeatedmeasures.
WhatisSphericity?
Inweek1(exploringdata)wesawthattestsbasedonparametricdataassumethatdatapointsareindependent.This
isnotthecaseinarepeatedmeasuresdesignbecausedatafordifferentconditionshavecomefromthesamepeople.
This means that data from different experimental conditions will be related; because of this we have to make an
additional assumption to those of the independent ANOVAs you have so far studied. Put simply (and not entirely
accurately), we assume that the relationship between pairs of experimental conditions is similar (i.e. the level of
dependencebetweenpairsofgroupsisroughlyequal).Thisassumptionisknownastheassumptionofsphericity.(If
youwantthelesssimplebutentirelyaccurateexplanationthenseeField,2009,Chapter13).
The assumption of sphericity can be likened to the assumption of homogeneity of variance (see your handout on
exploringdata):ifyouweretotakeeachpairoftreatmentlevels,andcalculatethedifferencesbetweeneachpairof
scores,thenitisnecessarythatthesedifferenceshaveequalvariances(seeField,2009).
WhatistheEffectofViolatingtheAssumptionofSphericity?
Theeffectofviolatingsphericityisalossofpower(i.e.anincreasedprobabilityofaTypeIIerror)andateststatistic
(Fratio)thatsimplycannotbecomparedtotabulatedvaluesoftheFdistribution(formoredetailsseeField,2009).
AssessingtheSeverityofDeparturesfromSphericity
SPSS produces a test known as Mauchlys test, which tests the hypothesis that the variances of the differences
betweenconditionsareequal.
If Mauchlys test statistic is significant (i.e. has a probability value less than .05) we
concludethattherearesignificantdifferencesbetweenthevarianceofdifferences:the
conditionofsphericityhasnotbeenmet.
If,Mauchlysteststatisticisnonsignificant(i.e.p>.05)thenitisreasonabletoconclude
that the variances of differences are not significantly different (i.e. they are roughly
equal).
IfMauchlystestissignificantthenwecannottrusttheFratiosproducedbySPSS.
CorrectingforViolationsofSphericity
Fortunately,ifdataviolatethesphericityassumptionthereareseveralcorrectionsthatcanbeappliedtoproducea
validFratio.AllofthesecorrectionsinvolveadjustingthedegreesoffreedomassociatedwiththeFvalue.Inallcases
thedegreesoffreedomarereducedbasedonanestimateofhowsphericalthedataare;byreducingthedegreesof
freedomwemaketheFratiomoreconservative(i.e.ithastobebiggertobedeemedsignificant).Therearethree
differentestimatesofsphericityusedtocorrectthedegreesoffreedom:
1.
GreenhouseandGeissers(1958)
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page1
2.
HuynhandFeldts(1976)
3.
TheLowerBoundestimate
FormoredetailsontheseestimatesseeField(2009)orGirden(1992).
WhichcorrectionshouldIuse?
Lookattheestimatesofsphericity()intheSPSShandout.
When > .75thenusetheHuynhFeldtcorrection.
When < 0.75, or nothing is known about sphericity at all, then use the Greenhouse
Geissercorrection.
OneWayRepeatedMeasuresANOVAusingSPSS
Imacelebrity,getmeoutofhereisaTVshowinwhichcelebrities(well,I
mean,theyrenotreallyaretheyImstrugglingtoknowwhoanyoneisin
the series these days) in a pitiful attempt to salvage their careers (or just
have careers in the first place) go and live in the jungle and subject
themselves to ritual humiliation and/or creepy crawlies in places where
creepycrawliesshouldntgo.Itscruel,voyeuristic,gratuitous,carcrashTV,
andIloveit.AparticularfavouritebitistheBushtuckertrialsinwhichthe
celebrities willingly eatthings like stick insects,Witchetty grubs, fish eyes,
andkangarootesticles/penises.Honestly,yourmentalimageofsomeoneis
foreverscarredbyseeingafisheyeexplodingintheirmouth(heresprayingthatAngelaGossownevergoesonthe
show, although shed probably just eat the other contestants which could enhance rather than detract from her
appeal).
Table1:DatafortheBushtuckerexample
Celebrity
StickInsect
KangarooTesticle
FishEye
Witchetty Grub
10
12
Iveoftenwondered(perhapsalittletoomuch)whichofthebushtuckerfoodsismostrevolting.SoIgot8celebrities,
andmadethemeatfourdifferentanimals(theaforementionedstickinsect,kangarootesticle,fisheyeandWitchetty
grub)incounterbalancedorder.OneachoccasionImeasuredthetimeittookthecelebritytoretch,inseconds.The
dataareinTable1.
EnteringtheData
Theindependentvariablewastheanimalthatwasbeingeaten(stick,insect,kangarootesticle,fisheyeandwitchetty
grub)andthedependentvariablewasthetimeittooktoretch,inseconds.
LevelsofrepeatedmeasuresvariablesgoindifferentcolumnsoftheSPSSdataeditor.
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page2
Therefore,separatecolumnsshouldrepresenteachlevelofarepeatedmeasuresvariable.Assuch,thereisnoneed
foracodingvariable(aswithbetweengroupdesigns).Thedatacan,therefore,beenteredastheyareinTable1.
Savethesedatainafilecalledbushtucker.sav
Backinweek1welearnthowtodrawbargraphs.Drawanerrorbarchartofthesedata.The
resultinggraphisinFigure1.
Figure1:Graphofthemeantimetoretchaftereatingeachofthefouranimals(errorbarsshowthe95%confidence
interval)
ToconductanANOVAusingarepeatedmeasuresdesign,activatethedefinefactorsdialogboxbyselecting
.IntheDefineFactorsdialogbox(Figure2),youareaskedtosupplya
nameforthewithinsubject(repeatedmeasures)variable.Inthiscasetherepeatedmeasuresvariablewasthetypeof
animal eaten in the bushtucker trial, so replace the word factor1 with the word Animal. The name you give to the
repeatedmeasuresvariablecannothavespacesinit.Whenyouhavegiventherepeatedmeasuresfactoraname,you
havetotellthecomputerhowmanylevelsthereweretothatvariable(i.e.howmanyexperimentalconditionsthere
were).Inthiscase,therewere4differentanimalseatenbyeachperson,sowehavetoenterthenumber4intothe
toaddthisvariabletothelistofrepeatedmeasuresvariables.This
boxlabelledNumberofLevels.Clickon
variablewillnowappearinthewhiteboxatthebottomofthedialogboxandappearsasAnimal(4).Ifyourdesignhas
severalrepeatedmeasuresvariablesthenyoucanaddmorefactorstothelist(seeTwoWayANOVAexamplebelow).
Whenyouhaveenteredalloftherepeatedmeasuresfactorsthatweremeasuredclickon
togototheMain
DialogBox.
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page3
Figure2:DefineFactorsdialogboxforrepeatedmeasuresANOVA
Figure3:MaindialogboxforrepeatedmeasuresANOVA
Themaindialogbox(Figure3)hasaspacelabelledwithinsubjectsvariablelistthatcontainsalistof4questionmarks
proceeded by a number. These question marks are for the variables representing the 4 levels of the independent
variable.Thevariablescorrespondingtotheselevelsshouldbeselectedandplacedintheappropriatespace.Wehave
only4variablesinthedataeditor,soitispossibletoselectallfourvariablesatonce(byclickingonthevariableatthe
top,holdingthemousebuttondownanddraggingdownovertheothervariables).Theselectedvariablescanthenbe
transferredbydraggingthemorclickingon .
When all four variables have been transferred, you can select various options for the analysis. There are several
optionsthatcanbeaccessedwiththebuttonsatthebottomofthemaindialogbox.Theseoptionsaresimilartothe
oneswehavealreadyencountered.
PostHocTests
There is no proper facility for producing post hoc tests for repeated measures variables in SPSS (but see below)!
However,youcanusethepairedttestproceduretocompareallpairsoflevelsoftheindependentvariable,andthen
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page4
applyaBonferronicorrectiontotheprobabilityatwhichyouacceptanyofthesetests.Theresultingprobabilityvalue
shouldbeusedasthecriterionforstatisticalsignificance.
A Bonferroni correction is achieved by dividing the probability value (usually .05) by the
numberoftestsconducted.
Forexample,ifwecomparedalllevelsoftheindependentvariableofthesedata,wewouldmake6comparisonsinall
and so the appropriate significance level would be .05/6 = .0083. Therefore, we would accept ttests as being
significant only if they have a p value that is less than .0083. One way to salvage what power you can from this
procedure is to compare only the pairs of groups between which you expect differences to arise (rather than
comparing all pairs of treatment levels). The fewer tests you perform, the less you have to correct the significance
level,andthemorepoweryouretain.
AdditionalOptions
The final options, that havent previously been described, can be accessed by clicking
in the main dialog
box. The options dialog box (Figure 4) has various useful options. You can ask for descriptive statistics, which will
providethemeans,standarddeviationsandnumberofparticipantsforeachleveloftheindependentvariable.The
option for homogeneity of variance tests will be active only when there is a between group factor as well (Mixed
designs,whicharecoverednextweek).
Figure4:Optionsdialogbox
Perhapsthemostusefulfeatureisthatyoucangetsomeposthoctestsviathisdialogbox.Tospecifyposthoctests,
select the repeated measures variable (in this case Animal) from the box labelled Estimated Marginal Means:
Factor(s)andFactorInteractionsandtransferittotheboxlabelledDisplayMeansforbyclickingon.Onceavariable
) becomes active and you should
has been transferred, the box labelled Compare main effects (
selectthisoption.Ifthisoptionisselected,theboxlabelledConfidenceintervaladjustmentbecomesactiveandyou
canclickon
toseeachoiceofthreeadjustmentlevels.Thedefaultistohavenoadjustmentand
simply perform a Tukey LSD post hoc test (this is not recommended). The second option is a Bonferroni correction
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page5
(recommendedforthereasonsmentionedabove),andthefinaloptionisaSidakcorrection,whichshouldbeselected
ifyouareconcernedaboutthelossofpowerassociatedwithBonferronicorrectedvalues.
Whenyouhaveselectedtheoptionsofinterest,clickon
toreturntothemaindialogbox,andthenclickon
toruntheanalysis.
OutputforRepeatedMeasuresANOVA
DescriptivestatisticsandotherDiagnostics
Within-Subjects Factors
Descriptive Statistics
Measure: MEASURE_1
Animal
1
2
3
4
Dependent
Variable
stick
ball
eye
witchetty
Stick Insect
Kangaroo Bollock
Fish Eyeball
Witchetty Grub
Mean
8.13
4.25
4.13
5.75
Std. Deviation
2.232
1.832
2.748
2.915
N
8
8
8
8
SPSSOutput1
SPSSOutput1showstheinitialdiagnosticsstatistics.First,wearetoldthevariablesthatrepresenteachlevelofthe
independent variable. This box is useful mainly to check that the variables were entered in the correct order. The
followingtableprovidesbasicdescriptivestatisticsforthefourlevelsoftheindependentvariable.Fromthistablewe
can see that, on average, the quickest retching was after the kangaroo testicle and fish eyeball (implying they are
moredisgusting).
AssessingSphericity
Earlier you were told that SPSS produces a test that looks at whether the data have violated the assumption of
sphericity.Thenextpartoftheoutputcontainsinformationaboutthistest.
Mauchlys test should be nonsignificant if we are to assume that the condition of
sphericityhasbeenmet.
Sometimes the SPSS output for Mauchlys test looks strange. In particular, when you
lookatthesignificance,allyouseeisadot.Thereisnosignificancevalue.Naturally,you
fear that SPSS has gone crazy and is going to break into your bedroom at night and
tattootheequationfortheGreenhouseGeissercorrectiononyourface.Thereasonthat
this happens is that you need at least three conditions for sphericity to be an issue.
Therefore, if you have a repeatedmeasures variable that has only two levels then
sphericity is met, the estimates computed by SPSS are 1 (perfect sphericity) and the
resultingsignificancetestcannotbecomputed(hencewhythetablehasavalueof0for
the chisquare test and degrees of freedom and a blank space for the significance). It
wouldbealoteasierifSPSSjustdidntproducethetable,butthenIguesswedallbe
confusedaboutwhythetablehadntappeared;maybeitshouldjustprintinbigletters
Hooray!Hooray!Sphericityhasgoneaway!Wecandream.
SPSSOutput2showsMauchlystestforthesedata,andtheimportantcolumnistheonecontainingthesignificance
vale.Thesignificancevalueis.047,whichislessthan.05,sowemustacceptthehypothesisthatthevariancesofthe
differencesbetweenlevelsweresignificantlydifferent.Inotherwordstheassumptionofsphericityhasbeenviolated.
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page6
Mauchly's Test of Sphericityb

Measure: MEASURE_1
Epsilon
Within Subjects Effect
Animal
Mauchly's W
.136
Approx.
Chi-Square
11.406
df
5
Sig.
.047
Greenhous
e-Geisser
.533
Huynh-Feldt
.666
Lower-bound
.333
Tests the null hypothesis that the error covariance matrix of the orthonormalized transformed dependent variables is
proportional to an identity matrix.
a. May be used to adjust the degrees of freedom for the averaged tests of significance. Corrected tests are displayed in
the Tests of Within-Subjects Effects table.
b.
Design: Intercept
Within Subjects Design: Animal
SPSSOutput2
TheMainANOVA
SPSS Output 3 shows the results of the ANOVA for the withinsubjects variable. The table you see will look slightly
different(itwilllooklikeSPSSOutput4infact),butforthetimebeingIvesimplifieditabit.Bearwithmefornow.
ThistablecanbereadmuchthesameasforOnewayindependentANOVA(see
yourhandout).ThereisasumofsquaresforthewithinsubjecteffectofAnimal,
whichtellsushowmuchofthetotalvariabilityisexplainedbytheexperimental
effect (i.e. differences in the time taken to retch after eating different animals).
Thereisalsoanerrorterm,whichistheamountofunexplainedvariationacross
the conditions of the repeated measures variable. These sums of squares are
convertedintomeansquaresbydividingbythedegreesoffreedom1.
TheFratioisobtainedbydividingthemeansquaresfortheexperimentaleffect
(27.708)bytheerrormeansquares(7.304).AswithbetweengroupANOVA,thisteststatisticrepresentstheratioof
systematic variance to unsystematic variance. The value of the Fratio (27.708/7.304 = 3.794) is then compared
againstacriticalvaluefor3and21degreesoffreedom.SPSSdisplaystheexactsignificancelevelfortheFratio.The
significance of F is .026 which is significant because it is less than the criterion value of .05. We can, therefore,
concludethattherewasasignificantdifferenceinthetimetakentoretchaftereatingdifferentanimals.However,this
maintestdoesnottelluswhichanimalsresultedinthequickestretchingtimes.
Tests of Within-Subjects Effects
Measure: MEASURE_1
Sphericity Assumed
Source
Animal
Error(Animal)
Type III Sum

of Squares
83.125
153.375
df
3
21
Mean Square
27.708
7.304
F
3.794
Sig.
.026
SPSSOutput3
Althoughthisresultseemsveryplausible,wesawearlierthattheassumptionofsphericityhadbeenviolated.Ialso
mentioned that a violation of the sphericity assumption makes the Ftest inaccurate. So, what do we do? Well, I
mentionedearlieronthatwecancorrectthedegreesoffreedominsuchawaythatitisaccuratewhensphericityis
violated.ThisiswhatSPSSdoes.SPSSOutput4(whichistheoutputyouwillseeinyourownSPSSanalysis)showsthe
mainANOVA.Asyoucanseeinthisoutput,thevalueofFdoesnotchange,onlythedegreesoffreedom2.Butthe
Ifyoureinterestedinhowthedegreesoffreedomarecalculatedreadmybook(Chapter13).
SPSScorrects the degrees of freedom bymultiplyingthem by the estimates of sphericity in SPSSOutput2. If you
wantamoredetailedexplanationandanexamplesee:
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Users/andyf/research/articles/sphericity.pdf
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page7
effectofchangingthedegreesoffreedomisthatthesignificanceofthevalueofFchanges:theeffectofthetypeof
animalislesssignificantaftercorrectingforsphericity.
Measure: MEASURE_1
Source
Animal
Error(Animal)
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Type III Sum

of Squares
83.125
83.125
83.125
83.125
153.375
153.375
153.375
153.375
df
3
1.599
1.997
1.000
21
11.190
13.981
7.000
Mean Square
27.708
52.001
41.619
83.125
7.304
13.707
10.970
21.911
F
3.794
3.794
3.794
3.794
Sig.
.026
.063
.048
.092
SPSSOutput4
Thenextissueiswhichofthethreecorrectionstouse.EarlierIgaveyousometipsandtheywerethatwhen > .75
then use the HuynhFeldt correction, and when < 0.75, or nothing is known about sphericity at all, then use the
GreenhouseGeissercorrection;istheestimateofsphericityfromSPSSoutput2andthesevaluesare.533and.666
(the correction of the beast .); because these values are less than .75 we should use the GreenhouseGeisser
correctedvalues.Usingthiscorrection,Fisnotsignificantbecauseitspvalueis.063,whichismorethanthenormal
criterionof.05.
Inthisexampletheresultsarequiteweirdbecauseuncorrectedtheyaresignificant,and
applying the HuynhFeldt correction they are also significant. However, with the
GreenhouseGeissercorrectionappliedtheyarenot.
Thishighlightshowarbitrarythewhole.05criterionforsignificanceis.Clearly,theseFs
representthesamesizedeffect,butusingonecriteriontheyaresignificantandusing
anothertheyarenot.
PostHocTests
Giventhemaineffectwasnotsignificant,weshouldnotfollowthiseffectupwithposthoctests,butinsteadconclude
thatthetypeofanimaldidnothaveasignificanteffectonhowquicklycontestantsretched(perhapsweshouldhave
usedbeansontoastasabaselineagainstwhichtocompare).
However, just to illustrate how you would
interprettheSPSSoutputIhavereproducedit
inSPSSOutput5,whichissimilarinformatto
the table produced for betweengroup post
hoc tests (see your handout on this of Field,
2009):thedifferencebetweengroupmeansis
displayed, the standard error, the significance
value and a confidence interval for the
difference between means. By looking at the
significance values we can see that the only
significantdifferencesbetweengroupmeansis
between the stick insect and the kangaroo
testicle, and the stick insect and the fish eye.
Nootherdifferencesaresignificant.
Pairwise Comparisons
Measure: MEASURE_1
(I) Animal
1
(J) Animal
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
4
1
2
3
Mean
Difference
(I-J)
3.875*
4.000*
2.375
-3.875*
.125
-1.500
-4.000*
-.125
-1.625
-2.375
1.500
1.625
Std. Error
.811
.732
1.792
.811
1.202
1.336
.732
1.202
1.822
1.792
1.336
1.822
Sig.
.002
.001
.227
.002
.920
.299
.001
.920
.402
.227
.299
.402
95% Confidence Interval for

a
Difference
Lower Bound Upper Bound
1.956
5.794
2.269
5.731
-1.863
6.613
-5.794
-1.956
-2.717
2.967
-4.660
1.660
-5.731
-2.269
-2.967
2.717
-5.933
2.683
-6.613
1.863
-1.660
4.660
-2.683
5.933
Based on estimated marginal means

*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.
a. Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Least Significant Difference (equivalent to no
adjustments).
SPSSOutput5
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page8
ReportingOneWayRepeatedMeasuresANOVA
WecanreportrepeatedmeasuresANOVAinthesamewayasanindependentANOVA(seeyourhandout).Theonly
additional thing we should concern ourselves with is reporting the corrected degrees of freedom if sphericity was
violated.Personally,Imalsokeenonreportingtheresultsofsphericitytestsaswell.Therefore,wecouldreportthe
mainfindingas:
Mauchlystestindicatedthattheassumptionofsphericityhadbeenviolated,2(5)=11.41,p<.05,therefore
degrees of freedom werecorrectedusingGreenhouseGeisser estimates of sphericity ( = .53). The results
showthattherewasnosignificanteffectofwhichanimalwaseatenonthetimetakentoretch,F(1.60,11.19)
= 3.79, p = .06. These results suggested that no animal was significantly more disgusting to eat than the
others.
TwoWayRepeatedMeasuresANOVAUsingSPSS
Aswehaveseenbefore,thenameofanyANOVAcanbebrokendowntotellusthetypeofdesignthatwasused.The
twowaypartofthenamesimplymeansthattwoindependentvariableshavebeenmanipulatedintheexperiment.
The repeated measures part of the name tells us that the same participants have been used in all conditions.
Therefore,thisanalysisisappropriatewhenyouhavetworepeatedmeasuresindependentvariables:eachparticipant
doesalloftheconditionsintheexperiment,andprovidesascoreforeachpermutationofthetwovariables.
AnExample
Itseemsthatlotsofmagazinesgoonallthetimeabouthowmenandwomenwantdifferentthingsfromrelationships
(orperhapsitsjustmygirlfriendscopiesofMarieClares,whichobviouslyIdontread,honestly).Thebigquestionto
whichweallwanttoknowtheanswerisarelooksorpersonalitymoreimportant.Imagineyouwantedtoputthisto
thetest.Youdevisedacunningplanwherebyyoudsetupaspeeddatingnight.Littledidthepeoplewhocamealong
knowthatyoudgotsomeofyourfriendstoactasthedates.Specificallyyoufound9mentoactasthedate.Ineach
of these groups three people were extremely attractive people butdiffered in their personality: one had tonnesof
charisma,onehadsomecharisma,andthethirdpersonwasasdullasthishandout.Anotherthreepeoplewereof
average attractiveness, and again differed in their personality: one was highly charismatic, one had some charisma
andthethirdwasadullard.Thefinalthreewere,notwishingtobeunkindinanyway,buttuglyandagainonewas
charismatic, one had some charisma and the final poor soul was mindnumbingly tedious. The participants were
heterosexualwomenwhocametothespeeddatingnight,andoverthecourseoftheeveningtheyspeeddatedall9
men. After their 5 minute date, they rated how much theyd like to have a proper date with the person as a
percentage(100%=Idpaylargesumsofmoneyforyourphonenumber,0%=Idpayalargesumofmoneyfora
planetickettogetmeasfarawayaspossiblefromyou).Assuch,eachwomanrated9differentpeoplewhovariedin
theirattractivenessandpersonality.So,therearetworepeatedmeasuresvariables:looks(withthreelevelsbecause
the person could be attractive, average or ugly) and personality (again with three levels because the person could
havelotsofcharisma,havesomecharisma,orbeadullard).
RunningtheAnalysis
DataEntry
ToenterthesedataintoSPSSweusethesameprocedureastheonewayrepeatedmeasuresANOVAthatwecame
acrossinthepreviousexample.
LevelsofrepeatedmeasuresvariablesgoindifferentcolumnsoftheSPSSdataeditor.
Ifapersonparticipatesinallexperimentalconditions(inthiscaseshedatesallofthemenwhodifferinattractiveness
andallofthemenwhodifferintheircharisma)theneachexperimentalconditionmustberepresentedbyacolumnin
thedataeditor.Inthisexperimenttherearenineexperimentalconditionsandsothedataneedtobeenteredinnine
columns.Therefore,createthefollowingninevariablesinthedataeditorwiththenamesasgiven.Foreachone,you
shouldalsoenterafullvariablenameforclarityintheoutput.
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page9
att_high
Attractive
+ HighCharisma
av_high
AverageLooks
+ HighCharisma
ug_high
Ugly
+ HighCharisma
att_some
Attractive
+ SomeCharisma
av_some
AverageLooks
+ SomeCharisma
ug_some
Ugly
+ SomeCharisma
att_none
Attractive
+ Dullard
av_none
AverageLooks
+ Dullard
ug_none
Ugly
+ Dullard
The data are in the file FemaleLooksOrPersonality.sav from

the course website. First we have to define our repeated
measures variables, so access the define factors dialog box
select
.
AswithonewayrepeatedmeasuresANOVA(seetheprevious
example) we need to give names to our repeated measures
variables and specifyhow many levels they have. In this case
therearetwowithinsubjectfactors:looks(attractive,average
or ugly) and charisma (high charisma, some charisma and
dullard). In the define factors dialog box replace the word
factor1 with the word looks. When you have given this
repeatedmeasuresfactoraname,tellthecomputerthatthis
variable has 3 levels by typing the number 3 into the box
labelled Number of Levels. Click on
to add this
variable to the list of repeated measures variables. This
variablewillnowappearinthewhiteboxatthebottomofthe
dialogboxandappearsaslooks(3).
Nowrepeatthisprocessforthesecondindependentvariable.
EnterthewordcharismaintothespacelabelledWithinSubject
FactorNameandthen,becausetherewerethreelevelsofthis
variable,enterthenumber3intothespacelabelledNumberof
to include this variable in the list of
Levels. Click on
factors;itwillappearascharisma(3).Thefinisheddialogboxis
showninFigure5.Whenyouhaveenteredbothofthewithin
subjectfactorsclickon
togotothemaindialogbox.
Figure5:Definefactorsdialogboxforfactorial
repeatedmeasuresANOVA
ThemaindialogboxisthesameaswhenwedidafactorialrepeatedmeasuresANOVAinthepreviousexample.Atthe
topoftheWithinSubjectsVariablesbox,SPSSstatesthattherearetwofactors:looksandcharisma.Intheboxbelow
thereisaseriesofquestionmarksfollowedbybracketednumbers.Thenumbersinbracketsrepresentthelevelsof
the factors (independent variables). In this example, there are two independent variables and so there are two
numbersinthebrackets.Thefirstnumberreferstolevelsofthefirstfactorlistedabovethebox(inthiscaselooks).
Thesecondnumberinthebracketreferstolevelsofthesecondfactorlistedabovethebox(inthiscasecharisma).As
withtheotherrepeatedmeasuresANOVAswevecomeacross,wehavetoreplacethequestionmarkswithvariables
fromthelistonthelefthandsideofthedialogbox.Withbetweengroupdesigns,inwhichcodingvariablesareused,
thelevelsofaparticularfactorarespecifiedbythecodesassignedtotheminthedataeditor.However,inrepeated
measures designs,no suchcoding schemeis used and so we determine whichcondition to assignto a level at this
stage.
Thevariablescanbeenteredasfollows:
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page10
att_high
_?_(1,1)
att_some
_?_(1,2)
att_none
_?_(1,3)
av_high
_?_(2,1)
av_some
_?_(2,2)
av_none
_?_(2,3)
ug_high
_?_(3,1)
ug_some
_?_(3,2)
ug_none
_?_(3,3)
ThecompleteddialogboxshouldlookexactlylikeFigure7.Ivealreadydiscussedtheoptionsforthebuttonsatthe
bottomofthisdialogbox,soIlltalkonlyabouttheonesofparticularinterestforthisexample.
Figure6
Figure7
OtherOptions
The addition of an extra variable makes it necessary to
choose a different graph to the one in the previous
handout. Click on
to access the dialog box in
Figure 4. Place looks in the slot labelled Horizontal Axis:
and charisma in slot labelled Separate Line. When both
variables have been specified, dont forget to click on
to add this combination to the list of plots. By
asking SPSS to plot the looks charisma interaction, we
shouldgettheinteractiongraphforlooksandcharisma.
You could also think about plotting graphs for the two
maineffects(e.g.looksandcharisma).
Asfarasotheroptionsareconcerned,youshouldselect
the same ones that were chosen for the previous
example.Itisworthselectingestimatedmarginalmeans
for all effects (because these values will help you to
understandanysignificanteffects).
Dr.AndyField,2008
Figure8:Plotsdialogboxforatwowayrepeated
measuresANOVA
Page11
OutputforTwoWayRepeatedMeasuresANOVA
DescriptivesandMainAnalysis
SPSS Output 6 shows the initial output from this ANOVA. The first table merely lists the variables that have been
included from the data editor and the level of each independent variable that they represent. This table is more
importantthanitmightseem,becauseitenablesyoutoverifythatthevariablesintheSPSSdataeditorrepresentthe
correct levels of the independent variables. The second table is a table of descriptives and provides the mean and
standarddeviationforeachofthenineconditions.ThenamesinthistablearethenamesIgavethevariablesinthe
dataeditor(therefore,ifyoudidntgivethesevariablesfullnames,thistablewilllookslightlydifferent).Thevaluesin
thistablewillhelpuslatertointerpretthemaineffectsoftheanalysis.
Measure: MEASURE_1
Looks
1
Charisma
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Dependent
Variable
att_high
att_some
att_none
av_high
av_some
av_none
ug_high
ug_some
ug_none
Attractive and Highly Charismatic

Attractive and Some Charisma
Attractive and a Dullard
Average and Highly Charismatic
Average and Some Charisma
Average and a Dullard
Ugly and Highly Charismatic
Ugly and Some Charisma
Ugly and a Dullard
Mean
89.60
87.10
51.80
88.40
68.90
47.00
86.70
51.20
46.10
Std. Deviation
6.637
6.806
3.458
8.329
5.953
3.742
5.438
5.453
3.071
N
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
SPSSOutput6
SPSS Output 7 shows the results of Mauchlys sphericity test for each of the three effects in the model (two main
effects and one interaction). The significance values of these tests indicate that for the main effects of Looks and
Charismatheassumptionofsphericityismet(becausep>.05)soweneednotcorrecttheFratiosfortheseeffects.
However,theLooksCharismainteractionhasviolatedthisassumptionandsotheFvalueforthiseffectshouldbe
corrected.
Measure: MEASURE_1
Epsilon
Looks
Charisma
Looks * Charisma
Mauchly's W
.904
.851
.046
Approx.
Chi-Square
.810
1.292
22.761
df
2
2
9
Sig.
.667
.524
.008
Greenhous
e-Geisser
.912
.870
.579
Huynh-Feldt
1.000
1.000
.791
Lower-bound
.500
.500
.250
a. May be used to adjust the degrees of freedom for the averaged tests of significance. Corrected tests are displayed in
the Tests of Within-Subjects Effects table.
b.
Design: Intercept
Within Subjects Design: Looks+Charisma+Looks*Charisma
SPSSOutput7
SPSSOutput8showstheresultsoftheANOVA(withcorrectedFvalues).Theoutputissplitintosectionsthatreferto
eachoftheeffectsinthemodelandtheerrortermsassociatedwiththeseeffects(abitlikethegeneraltableearlier
oninthishandout).TheinterestingpartisthesignificancevaluesoftheFratios.Ifthesevaluesarelessthan.05then
we can say that an effect is significant. Looking at the significance values in the table it is clear that there is a
significantmaineffectofhowattractivethedatewas(Looks),asignificantmaineffectofhowcharismaticthedate
was(Charisma),andasignificantinteractionbetweenthesetwovariables.Iwillexamineeachoftheseeffectsinturn.
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page12

Measure: MEASURE_1
Source
Looks
Error(Looks)
Charisma
Error(Charisma)
Looks * Charisma
Error(Looks*Charisma)
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Type III Sum

of Squares
3308.867
3308.867
3308.867
3308.867
448.244
448.244
448.244
448.244
23932.867
23932.867
23932.867
23932.867
783.578
783.578
783.578
783.578
3365.867
3365.867
3365.867
3365.867
867.689
867.689
867.689
867.689
df
2
1.824
2.000
1.000
18
16.419
18.000
9.000
2
1.740
2.000
1.000
18
15.663
18.000
9.000
4
2.315
3.165
1.000
36
20.839
28.482
9.000
Mean Square
1654.433
1813.723
1654.433
3308.867
24.902
27.300
24.902
49.805
11966.433
13751.549
11966.433
23932.867
43.532
50.026
43.532
87.064
841.467
1453.670
1063.585
3365.867
24.102
41.638
30.465
96.410
F
66.437
66.437
66.437
66.437
Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.000
274.888
274.888
274.888
274.888
.000
.000
.000
.000
34.912
34.912
34.912
34.912
.000
.000
.000
.000
SPSSOutput8
TheMainEffectofLooks
WecameacrossthemaineffectoflooksinSPSSOutput8.
Wecanreportthattherewasasignificantmaineffectoflooks,F(2,18)=66.44,p<.001.
This effect tells us that if we ignore all other variables, ratings were different for attractive,
averageandunattractivedates.
IfyourequestedthatSPSSdisplaymeansforthelookseffect(Illassumeyoudidfromnowon)youwillfindthetable
inasectionheadedEstimatedMarginalMeans.SPSSOutput9isatableofmeansforthemaineffectoflookswiththe
associatedstandarderrors.Thelevelsoflooksarelabelledsimply1,2and3,anditsdowntoyoutorememberhow
youenteredthevariables(oryoucanlookatthesummarytablethatSPSSproducesatthebeginningoftheoutput
seeSPSSOutput6).IfyoufollowedwhatIdidthenlevel1isattractive,level2isaverageandlevel3isugly.Tomake
thingseasier,thisinformationisplottedinFigure9:asattractivenessfalls,themeanratingfallstoo.Thismaineffect
seemstoreflectthatthewomenweremorelikelytoexpressagreaterinterestingoingoutwithattractivementhan
averageoruglymen.However,wereallyneedtolookatsomecontraststofindoutexactlywhatsgoingon(seeField,
2009ifyoureinterested).
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page13
Estimates
Measure: MEASURE_1
Looks
1
2
3
Mean
76.167
68.100
61.333
Std. Error
1.013
1.218
1.018
95% Confidence Interval

73.876
78.457
65.344
70.856
59.030
63.637
SPSSOutput9
Figure9
TheEffectofCharisma
ThemaineffectofcharismaisinSPSSOutput8.
Wecanreportthattherewasasignificantmaineffectofcharisma,F(2,18)=274.89,p<.001.
This effect tells us that if we ignore all other variables, ratings were different for highly
charismatic,abitcharismaticanddullardpeople.
ThetablelabelledCHARISMAinthesectionheadedEstimatedMarginalMeanstellsuswhatthiseffectmeans(SPSS
Output10).Again,thelevelsofcharismaarelabelledsimply1,2and3.IfyoufollowedwhatIdidthenlevel1ishigh
charisma,level2is somecharismaandlevel3isnocharisma.This informationisplottedinFigure10:Ascharisma
declines,themeanratingfallstoo.Sothismaineffectseemstoreflectthatthewomenweremorelikelytoexpressa
greater interest in going out with charismatic men than average men or dullards. Again, we would have to look at
contrastsorposthocteststobreakthiseffectdownfurther.
Estimates
Measure: MEASURE_1
Charisma
1
2
3
Mean
88.233
69.067
48.300
Std. Error
1.598
1.293
.751

84.619
91.848
66.142
71.991
46.601
49.999
SPSSOutput10
Figure10
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page14
TheInteractionbetweenLooksandCharisma
SPSS Output 8 indicated that the attractiveness of the date interacted in some way with how charismatic the date
was.
Wecanreportthattherewasasignificantinteractionbetweentheattractivenessofthedate
andthecharismaofthedate,F(2.32,20.84)=34.91,p<.001.
Thiseffecttellsusthattheprofileofratingsacrossdatesofdifferentlevelsofcharismawas
differentforattractive,averageanduglydates.
Theestimatedmarginalmeans(oraplotoflookscharismausingthedialogboxinFigure4)tellusthemeaningof
thisinteraction(seeFigure11andSPSSOutput11).
100
3. Looks * Charisma
80
Measure: MEASURE_1
Charisma
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Mean
89.600
87.100
51.800
88.400
68.900
47.000
86.700
51.200
46.100
Std. Error
2.099
2.152
1.093
2.634
1.882
1.183
1.719
1.724
.971
Mean Rating
Looks
1

84.852
94.348
82.231
91.969
49.327
54.273
82.442
94.358
64.642
73.158
44.323
49.677
82.810
90.590
47.299
55.101
43.903
48.297
60
40
20
High Charisma
Some Charisma
Dullard
0
Attractive
Average
Ugly
Attractiveness
SPSSOutput11
Figure11
Thegraphshowstheaverageratingsofdatesofdifferentlevelsofattractivenesswhenthedatealsohadhighlevelsof
charisma(circles),somecharisma(squares)andnocharisma(triangles).Lookfirstatthehighlightcharismaticdates.
Essentially,theratingsforthesedatesdonotchangeoverlevelsofattractiveness.Inotherwords,womensratingsof
dates for highly charismatic men was unaffected by how good looking they were ratings were high regardless of
looks.Nowlookatthemenwhoweredullards.Womenratedthesedatesaslowregardlessofhowattractivetheman
was.Inotherwords,ratingsfordullardswereunaffectedbylooks:evenagoodlookingmangetslowratingsifheisa
dullard.So,basically,theattractivenessofmenmakesnodifferenceforhighcharisma(allratingsarehigh)andlow
charisma (all ratings are low). Finally, lets look at the men who were averagely charismatic. For these men
attractivenesshadabigimpactattractivemengothighratings,andunattractivemengotlowratings.Ifamanhas
averagecharismathengoodlookswouldpullhisratingup,andbeinguglywouldpullhisratingsdown.Asuccinctway
todescribewhatisgoingonwouldbetosaythattheLooksvariableonlyhasaneffectforaveragelycharismaticmen.
GuidedExample:
A clinical psychologist was interested in the effects of antidepressants and cognitive behaviour therapy on suicidal
thoughts.Fourdepressivestookpartinfourconditions:placebotabletwithnotherapyforonemonth,placebotablet
with cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for one month, antidepressant with no therapy for one month, and
antidepressant with cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for one month. The order of conditions was fully
counterbalancedacrossthe4participants.Participantsrecordedthenumberofsuicidalthoughtstheyhadduringthe
finalweekofeachmonth.Thedataarebelow:
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page15
Drug:
Therapy:
None
Placebo
CBT
Antidepressant
None
CBT
Andy
70
60
81
52
Alex
66
52
70
40
Stavros
56
41
60
31
Maargi
68
59
77
49
Mean
65
53
72
43
TheSPSSoutputyougetforthesedatashouldlooklikethefollowing:
Measure: MEASURE_1
DRUG
1
2
THERAPY
1
2
1
2
Dependent
Variable
PLNONE
PLCBT
ANTNONE
ANTCBT
Placebo - No Therapy
Placebo - CBT
Antidepressant - No Therapy
Antidepressant - CBT
Mean
65.0000
53.0000
72.0000
43.0000
Std.
Deviation
6.2183
8.7560
9.2014
9.4868
N
4
4
4
4

Measure: MEASURE_1
Epsilon

DRUG
THERAPY
DRUG * THERAPY
Mauchly's
W
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approx.
Chi-Squa
re
.000
.000
.000
df
Sig.
0
0
0
.
.
.
Greenhou
se-Geiss
er
1.000
1.000
1.000
Huynh-Fe
ldt
1.000
1.000
1.000
Lower-bo
und
1.000
1.000
1.000
a. May be used to adjust the degrees of freedom for the averaged tests of significance. Corrected tests are
displayed in the Tests of Within-Subjects Effects table.
b.
Design: Intercept
Within Subjects Design: DRUG+THERAPY+DRUG*THERAPY

Measure: MEASURE_1
Source
DRUG
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Error(DRUG)
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
THERAPY
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Error(THERAPY)
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
DRUG * THERAPY
Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Error(DRUG*THERAPY) Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Type III
Sum of
Squares
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
18.500
18.500
18.500
18.500
1681.000
1681.000
1681.000
1681.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.500
289.000
289.000
289.000
289.000
4.500
4.500
4.500
4.500
df
1
1.000
1.000
1.000
3
3.000
3.000
3.000
1
1.000
1.000
1.000
3
3.000
3.000
3.000
1
1.000
1.000
1.000
3
3.000
3.000
3.000
Mean
Square
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
6.167
6.167
6.167
6.167
1681.000
1681.000
1681.000
1681.000
3.167
3.167
3.167
3.167
289.000
289.000
289.000
289.000
1.500
1.500
1.500
1.500
F
1.459
1.459
1.459
1.459
Sig.
.314
.314
.314
.314
530.842
530.842
530.842
530.842
.000
.000
.000
.000
192.667
192.667
192.667
192.667
.001
.001
.001
.001
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page16
1. DRUG
2. THERAPY
Measure: MEASURE_1
DRUG
1
2
Mean
59.000
57.500
Measure: MEASURE_1
Std. Error
3.725
4.668
95% Confidence
Interval
Lower
Upper
Bound
Bound
47.146
70.854
42.644
72.356
THERAPY
1
2
Mean
68.500
48.000
Std. Error
3.824
4.546
95% Confidence
Interval
Lower
Upper
Bound
Bound
56.329
80.671
33.532
62.468
80
Placebo
Antidepressant
Number of Suicidal Thoughts
3. DRUG * THERAPY
Measure: MEASURE_1
DRUG
1
2
THERAPY
1
2
1
2
Mean
65.000
53.000
72.000
43.000
Std. Error
3.109
4.378
4.601
4.743
95% Confidence
Interval
Lower
Upper
Bound
Bound
55.105
74.895
39.067
66.933
57.358
86.642
27.904
58.096
60
40
20
0
No Therapy
Type of Therapy
CBT
EnterthedataintoSPSS.
Savethedataontoadiskinafilecalledsuicidaltutors.sav.
YourAnswer:
YourAnswer:
YourAnswer:
Conduct the appropriate analysis to see whether the number of suicidal thoughts
patientshadwassignificantlyaffectedbythetypeofdrugtheyhad,thetherapythey
receivedortheinteractionofthetwo..
Whataretheindependentvariablesandhowmanylevelsdotheyhave?
Whatisthedependentvariable?
Whatanalysishaveyouperformed?
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page17
YourAnswer:
YourAnswer:
YourAnswer:
Describetheassumptionofsphericity.Hasthisassumptionbeenmet?(Quoterelevantstatistics
inAPAformat).
ReportthemaineffectoftherapyinAPAformat.Isthiseffectsignificantandhowwouldyou
interpretit?
ReportthemaineffectofdruginAPAformat.Isthiseffectsignificantandhowwouldyou
interpretit?
ReporttheinteractioneffectbetweendrugandtherapyinAPAformat.Isthiseffectsignificant
andhowwouldyouinterpretit?
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page18
YourAnswer:
UnguidedExample1:
Thereisalotofconcernamongstudentsastotheconsistencyofmarkingbetweenlecturers.Itisprettycommonthat
lecturersobtainreputationsforbeinghardmarkersorlightmarkersbutthereisoftenlittletosubstantiatethese
reputations. So, a group of students investigated the consistency of marking by submitting the same essay to four
differentlecturers.Themarkgivenbyeachlecturerwasrecordedforeachofthe8essays.Itwasimportantthatthe
sameessayswereusedforalllecturersbecausethiseliminatedanyindividualdifferencesinthestandardofworkthat
eachlecturerwasmarking.Thedataarebelow.
Essay
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Tutor1
Tutor2
(Dr.Field)
(Dr.Smith)
62
58
63
60
65
61
68
64
69
65
71
67
78
66
75
73
Tutor3
(Dr.Scrote)
63
68
72
58
54
65
67
75
Tutor4
(Dr.Death)
64
65
65
61
59
50
50
45
Savethedataontoadiskinafilecalledtutor.sav.
Conducttheappropriateanalysistoseewhetherthetutorwhomarkedtheessayhada
significanteffectonthemarkgiven.
ReporttheresultsinAPAformat?
Do the findings support the idea that some tutors give more generous marks than
others?
Theanswerstothistaskareonthecompanionwebsiteformybook.
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page19
UnguidedExample2:
In a previous handout we came across the beergoggles effect: a severe perceptual distortion after imbibing vast
quantitiesofalcohol.Imaginewewantedtofollowthisfindinguptolookatwhatfactorsmediatethebeergoggles
effect.Specifically,wethoughtthatthebeergoggleseffectmightbemadeworsebythefactthatitusuallyoccursin
clubs,whichhavedimlighting.Wetookasampleof26men(becausetheeffectisstrongerinmen)andgavethem
various doses of alcohol over four different weeks (0 pints, 2 pints, 4 pints and 6 pints of lager). This is our first
independentvariable,whichwellcallalcoholconsumption,andithasfourlevels.Eachweek(and,therefore,ineach
stateofdrunkenness)participantswereaskedtoselectamateinanormalclub(thathaddimlighting)andthenselect
a second mate in a specially designed club that had bright lighting. As such, the second independent variable was
whethertheclubhaddimorbrightlighting.Theoutcomemeasurewastheattractivenessofeachmateasassessedby
apanelofindependentjudges.Torecap,allparticipantstookpartinalllevelsofthealcoholconsumptionvariable,
andselectedmatesinbothbrightlyanddimlylitclubs.ThisistheexampleIpresentedinmyhandoutandlecturein
writinguplaboratoryreports.
SavethedataontoadiskinafilecalledBeerGogglesLighting.sav.
Conducttheappropriateanalysistoseewhethertheamountdrunkandlightinginthe
clubhaveasignificanteffectonmateselection.
Do the findings support theidea that mate selectiongets worse as lighting dims and
alcoholisconsumed?
Foranswerslookatthecompanionwebsiteformybook.
DimLighting
BrightLighting
0Pints
2Pints
4Pints
6Pints
0Pints
2Pints
4Pints
6Pints
58
65
44
65
65
50
33
67
64
46
33
53
64
34
33
64
74
40
21
74
72
35
63
63
57
26
17
61
47
56
31
48
67
31
17
57
61
52
30
49
78
59
78
66
61
30
64
53
29
21
70
67
46
46
83
64
31
63
77
36
45
65
59
46
71
51
54
38
64
64
45
29
78
69
58
65
64
56
24
32
61
65
46
57
55
78
53
20
47
63
57
47
81
81
40
29
57
78
45
42
58
55
29
42
71
62
48
31
63
67
35
26
58
58
42
32
49
71
47
33
48
48
67
48
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page20
52
67
46
12
58
66
74
43
77
71
14
15
65
32
47
27
74
68
53
15
50
67
47
45
73
64
31
23
58
68
47
46
67
75
40
28
67
69
44
44
58
68
35
13
61
55
66
50
82
68
22
43
66
61
44
44
64
70
44
18
68
51
46
33
67
55
31
13
37
50
49
22
81
43
27
30
59
45
69
35
UnguidedExample3
Imagine I wanted to look at the effect alcohol has on the roving eye (apparently I am rather obsessed with
experimentsinvolvingalcoholanddatingforsomebizarrereason).Therovingeyeeffectisthepropensityofpeople
inrelationshipstoeyeupmembersoftheoppositesex.Itook20menandfittedthemwithincrediblysophisticated
glassesthatcouldtracktheireyemovementsandrecordboththemovementandtheobjectbeingobserved(thisis
thepointatwhichitshouldbeapparentthatImmakingitupasIgoalong).Over4differentnightsIpliedthesepoor
soulswitheither1,2,3or4pintsofstronglagerinapub.EachnightImeasuredhowmanydifferentwomenthey
eyedup(awomenwascategorizedashavingbeeneyedupifthemanseyemovedfromherheadtotoeandbackup
again).Tovalidatethismeasurewealsocollectedtheamountofdribbleonthemanschinwhilelookingatawoman.
1Pint
2Pints
3Pints
4Pints
15
13
18
13
15
18
15
13
17
16
15
14
13
10
12
10
14
16
21
16
24
15
10
14
19
16
20
18
18
12
15
16
13
11
13
12
10
23
12
13
14
13
13
12
11
12
11
10
15
17
12
19
26
19
15
18
25
21
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page21
20
21
12
11
18
SavethedataontoadiskinafilecalledRovingEye.sav.
Conduct the appropriate analysis to see whether the amount drunk has a significant
effectontherovingeye.
Do the findings support the idea that males tend to eye up females more after they
drinkalcohol?
Foranswerslookatthecompanionwebsiteformybook.
UnguidedExample4:
Westernpeoplecanbecomeobsessedwithbodyweightanddiets,andbecausethemediaareinsistentonramming
ridiculousimagesofstickthincelebritiesdownintooureyesandbrainwashingusintobelievingthattheseemaciated
corpses are actually attractive, we all end up terribly depressed that were not perfect (because we dont have a
coupleofredslugsstucktoourfacesinsteadoflips).Thisgivesevilcorporatetypestheopportunitytojumponour
vulnerability by making loads of money on diets that will apparently help us attain the body beautiful! Well, not
wishingtomissoutonthisgreatopportunitytoexploitpeoplesinsecuritiesIcameupwithmyowndietcalledthe
Andikinsdiet3.Thebasicprincipleisthatyoueatlikeme:youeatnomeat,drinklotsofDarjeelingtea,eatshedloads
ofsmellyEuropeancheesewithlotsoffreshcrustybread,pasta,andeatchocolateateveryavailableopportunity,and
enjoyafewbeersattheweekend.Totesttheefficacyofmywonderfulnewdiet,Itook10peoplewhoconsidered
themselvestobeinneedoflosingweight(thiswasforethicalreasonsyoucantforcepeopletodiet!)andputthem
onthisdietfortwomonths.TheirweightwasmeasuredinKilogramsatthestartofthedietandthenafter1month
and2months.
BeforeDiet
After1Month
After2Months
63.75
65.38
81.34
62.98
66.24
69.31
65.98
67.70
77.89
107.27
102.72
91.33
66.58
69.45
72.87
120.46
119.96
114.26
62.01
66.09
68.01
71.87
73.62
55.43
83.01
75.81
71.63
76.62
67.66
68.60
NottobeconfusedwiththeAtkinsdietobviously
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page22
SavethedataontoadiskinafilecalledAndikinsDiet.sav.
Conducttheappropriateanalysistoseewhetherthedietiseffective.
Doesthedietwork?
AndFinallyTheMultipleChoiceTest!
Go to http://www.sagepub.co.uk/field/multiplechoice.html and test yourself on the multiple

choice questions for Chapter 11. If you get any wrong, reread this handout (or Field, 2005,
Chapter11)anddothemagainuntilyougetthemallcorrect.
Thishandoutcontainsmaterialfrom:
Field,A.P.(2009).DiscoveringstatisticsusingSPSS:andsexanddrugsandrockn
roll(3rdEdition).London:Sage.
ThismaterialiscopyrightAndyField(2000,2005,2009).
Dr.AndyField,2008
Page23

ANOVA Mixt Repeated Measures

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

ANOVA Mixt Repeated Measures

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

C8057(ResearchMethodsinPsychology):RepeatedMeasuresANOVAusingSPSS

Mauchly's Test of Sphericityb

Type III Sum

Type III Sum

95% Confidence Interval for

Based on estimated marginal means

The data are in the file FemaleLooksOrPersonality.sav from

Attractive and Highly Charismatic

Tests of Within-Subjects Effects

Type III Sum

95% Confidence Interval

95% Confidence Interval

95% Confidence Interval

Mauchly's Test of Sphericityb

Within Subjects Effect

Tests of Within-Subjects Effects

Number of Suicidal Thoughts

Go to http://www.sagepub.co.uk/field/multiplechoice.html and test yourself on the multiple

Potrebbero piacerti anche