psy349 - project report - distinction

46
Project report by Khooshraj Mohun FILE T IME SUBMIT T ED 16-MAY-2016 10:51AM SUBMISSION ID 674521484 WORD COUNT 3509 CHARACT ER COUNT 18668 DLEDATA_TEMP_TURNITINTOOL_1715039388._34015_1463359850_62 148.PDF (928.1K)

Upload: khooshraj-kush-mohun

Post on 25-Jan-2017

35 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

Project reportby Khooshraj Mohun

FILE

TIME SUBMITTED 16-MAY-2016 10:51AM

SUBMISSION ID 674521484

WORD COUNT 3509

CHARACTER COUNT 18668

DLEDATA_TEMP_TURNITINTOOL_1715039388._34015_1463359850_62148.PDF (928.1K)

Page 2: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 3: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 4: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 5: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 6: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 7: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 8: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 9: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 10: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 11: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 12: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 13: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 14: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 15: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 16: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 17: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 18: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 19: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 20: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 21: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 22: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 23: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 24: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 25: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 26: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 27: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 28: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 29: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 30: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 31: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 32: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 33: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 34: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 35: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 36: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 37: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction
Page 38: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

QM

QM

QM

FINAL GRADE

/100

Project reportGRADEMARK REPORT

GENERAL COMMENTS

InstructorDear Khooshra

This was a tough assignment and you have done areally good job. Some areas that need improvementare: what a signif icant interaction means and how touse the analysis you choose to answer theparticular RQ and why.

Overall a good job though.

I have made many comments throughout so pleaseread through them caref ully.

Grade: Distinction

All the best in the exam

Josh

PAGE 1

PAGE 2

ContextSome background inf o needed, to set the context.

Comment 1Need to make a comment on why you chose to downgrade

GoodGood!

S:POk but calculate a subject:predictor ratio f or each RQ specif ically

Comment 2Hopef ully you dummy coded?

Page 39: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

QM

QM

QM

QM

QM

QM

QM

GoodGood!

RQ1 AIMSHmmm.... you said it better above, you want to see if the level of reading support of f ered tochildren signif icantly improves reading ability despite any deleterious ef f ects child behaviouralproblems may have

PAGE 3

GoodGood!

PAGE 4

GoodGood!

Comment 3Means and SDs f or this please

PAGE 5

GoodGood!

PAGE 6

GoodGood!

PAGE 7

PAGE 8

ERROR BARError bar plots are more suitable f or bivariate graphical representation of categorical variables

PAGE 9

Comment 4I think teacher liking may be about how much the child likes the teacher (I know it 's a bitstrangely worded)

Comment 5

Page 40: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

QM

QM

QM

QM

QM

Excellent

Cat. bivarNeed a separate regression analysis to assess the signif icance of the bivariate associationbetween the categorical (multi DF) IV as a whole and the DV

PAGE 10

Comment 6Really good bi variate graphs and interpretation! Well done!

PAGE 11

Comment 7I saw it in the appendix but would have been good to have the scatterplot showing interactionhere

PAGE 12

rquote correlation coef f icients in text to support

Comment 8Good, but should have put them in body

PAGE 13

Prev.See comment earlier in the report about this point

PAGE 14

PAGE 15

Regr eqnThis regression equation is what's being tested, but it 's not really that usef ul a way tocommunicate inf o to the reader

H0What you're saying about the null hypothesis is true, but it 's not the most relevant thing tocommunicate to the reader - try to f ocus on more broadly relevant inf o (i.e., the ef f ect of theIV), rather than more stats-y inf o (i.e., null hypothesis)

Comment 9I get what you are saying but unique predictive power is determined by the individual variable'sbeta value and p-value in the regression output with the other variable(s) in the model

Page 41: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

QM

QM

QM

QM

QM

Comment 10The model with B probs in it is in f act signif icant but it does not ADD a signif icant amount ofvariance explained - must remember what the RQ is and discuss results in that context

PAGE 16

GoodGood!

Comment 11What about normal P-P plot?

PAGE 17

Comment 12stats in body please

BSGood on you f or bootstrapping. Some inf o on how, specif ically, you went about it (e.g., howmany resamples, what kind of conf idence intervals) would be good to include.

Comment 13only f or the pairwise comparisons you plan to do- so Gamma = .03; IVs = .01 and pairwisecomparisons alpha equals .01/3 = .033

Comment 14What about classroom quality

Comment 15Interpret this as dif f erence between group means

Good intReally nice interpretation here

PAGE 18

GoodGood!

Seq interactionDon't need sequential regression f or single DF interactions, just use ordinary simultaneousregression

Comment 16

Page 42: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

QM

QM

just .05 here is f ine as we are just interested in one ef f ect

RQ3 -VE INTERACTIONAttending the school bef ore starting increases a child's school liking however is less important(-ve interaction term) the better quality the classroom (or something along those lines)

PAGE 19

Comment 17Nice!

PAGE 20

PAGE 21

PAGE 22

PAGE 23

PAGE 24

PAGE 25

PAGE 26

PAGE 27

PAGE 28

GoodGood!

PAGE 29

PAGE 30

PAGE 31

PAGE 32

PAGE 33

PAGE 34

PAGE 35

PAGE 36

Page 43: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

RUBRIC: PSY349 PROJECT REPORT 2016

STEP 1.

HD / D

CREDIT

PASS

FAIL

STEP 2

HD / D

CREDIT

PASS

FAIL

STEP 3

HD / D

CREDIT

PASS

HD / D

Recognise problem

Discusses measurement scale of DV and IVs, sampling population andpredictor:subject ratio accurately and shows good insight into implications f oranalysis.

Discusses measurement scale of DV and IVs, sampling population andpredictor:subject ratio accurately and shows adequate insight into implications f oranalysis.

Discusses measurement scale of DV and IVs and some mention of one or both ofsampling population and predictor:subject ratio, but with litt le insight into implicationsf or analysis.

This section is omitted or contains inaccuracies.

HD / D

Form Research Question

Shows high level of personal insight into the research questions and could put themin context. Aims were expressed clearly but concisely. Reader f elt the analysispurpose was unambiguous. Evidence of RQ put in context.

Shows some personal insight into the research questions and put in context. Aimswere expressed reasonably clearly and concisely. Reader f elt the analysis purposewas unambiguous.

Was able to express the purpose of the analysis clearly although litt le personalinsight was of f ered.

The purpose of the analysis, as expressed in this section, was ambiguous orincorrect.

HD / D

Univariate data

Shows good judgement in choice of univariate descriptive and graphical statistics andmake superior comments on insights into RQ and implications f or analysis.Comments are clear and concise. Reader does not have to ‘interpret’ at all.

Shows adequate judgement in choice of univariate descriptive and graphical statisticsand make usef ul comments on insights into RQ and implications f or analysis.Comments are clear and concise. Reader needs to use minimal interpretation.

Shows reasonable judgement in choice of univariate descriptive and graphicalstatistics although not optimal in all respects. Limited comments are made on insightsinto RQ and implications f or analysis. Comments may be adequate but reader needs

Page 44: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

FAIL

STEP 4

HD / D

CREDIT

PASS

FAIL

STEP 5

HD / D

CREDIT

PASS

FAIL

STEP 6

HD / D

CREDIT

to apply their own interpretation to glean insight.

Shows poor judgement in choice of univariate descriptive and graphical statistics orrelevant inf ormation is omitted. Comments on insights into RQ and implications f oranalysis are limited and inadequate. Reader needs to signif icantly interpret what iswritten to glean insight.

HD / D

Bivariate data

As per 3 but f or bivariate graphical statistics.

As per 3 but f or bivariate graphical statistics.

As per 3 but f or bivariate graphical statistics.

As per 3 but f or bivariate graphical statistics.

HD / D

Bivariate numeric descriptives

Produces accurate statistics and provides superior insight into implications f oranalysis and RQ. Reader does not have to ‘interpret’ at all.

Produces accurate statistics and provides adequate insight into implications f oranalysis and RQ. Reader needs to use minimal interpretation.

Produces reasonable statistics. Provides limited insight into implications f or analysisand RQ. Reader needs to apply their own interpretation to glean insight.

Shows poor judgement in choice of statistics. Provides limited or no insight intoimplications f or analysis and RQ. Reader needs to signif icantly interpret what iswritten to glean insight.

Credit

Fit Model 1

The choice of analysis approach is appropriate to the research questions andvariables and implementation is correct in all respects. Clear and correct rationale isgiven f or choice of approach. Measures of ef f ect size, uncertainty and statisticalsignif icance are all provided. The answers to RQs are given and linked to thestatistical results. Presentation of both results and comments are clear and concise.The reader does not need to ‘interpret’ what is meant at all.

The choice of analysis approach is appropriate to the research questions andvariables and implementation is correct in all respects. Some relevant rationale isgiven f or choice of approach. Measures of ef f ect size, uncertainty and statisticalsignif icance are all provided. The answers to RQs are given and linked to thestatistical results. Presentation of both results and comments are reasonably clear

Page 45: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

PASS

FAIL

STEP 7

HD / D

CREDIT

PASS

FAIL

STEP 8

HD / D

CREDIT

PASS

and concise. The reader hardly needs to ‘interpret’ what is meant at all.

The choice of analysis approach is generally appropriate to the research questionsand variables with limited and only minor technical and implementation errors. Limitedrelevant rationale is given f or choice of approach. Some of : measures of ef f ect size,uncertainty and statistical signif icance but not all of these are provided. The answersto RQs are given but only loosely linked to the statistical results. Presentation ofboth results and comments are adequate but lack in clarity, correctness orconciseness. The reader needs to substantially apply their own interpretation.

The choice of analysis approach and/or implementation is f lawed in signif icantrespects. Litt le relevant rationale is given f or choice of approach. Some of : measuresof ef f ect size, uncertainty and statistical signif icance but not all of these areprovided. The answers to RQs are given but poorly if at all linked to the statisticalresults. Presentation of both results and comments are inadequate and lack in clarity,correctness or conciseness. The reader needs to substantially apply their owninterpretation.

Credit

Fit Model 2

As above but f or Model 2. In addition, assumptions are correctly stated and correctlytested. Comments relevant to the interpretation of the statistical results are madeclearly and concisely. Any additional analyses needed to satisf y assumptions areconducted correctly and linked back to the research question.

As above but f or Model 2. In addition, assumptions are correctly stated and correctlytested. Adequate comments relevant to the interpretation of the statistical results aremade. Any additional analyses needed to satisf y assumptions are conductedcorrectly.

As above but f or Model 2. In addition, assumptions are correctly stated and correctlytested with at most minor f laws. Comments relevant to the interpretation of thestatistical results are made. Some attempt at conducting additional analyses tosatisf y assumptions is made, with some minor f laws.

As above but f or Model 2. In addition, assumptions are omitted or irrelevantassumptions are stated or assumptions are incorrectly tested. No usef ul commentsare made regarding implications f or the statistical results. Some attempt atconducting additional analyses to satisf y assumptions may be made, with substantialf laws.

Credit

Fit Model 3

As above but f or Model 1.

As above but f or Model 1.

As above but f or Model 1.

Page 46: PSY349 - Project report - Distinction

FAIL

CONCLUSION

HD / D

CREDIT

PASS

FAIL

As above but f or Model 1.

HD / D

The results of each analysis are summed up and linked clearly to the RQs. RQs putinto context and insight into the implications f or the wider f ield are discussed.

The results of each analysis are summed up and linked to the RQs. RQs put intocontext and attempt to discuss the implications f or the wider f ield.

The results of each analysis are vaguely summed up. Some discussion of the RQand/or wider context is presented.

Litt le or no attempt to sum up analyses.