Final Exam: The Purpose Is To Give You The Opportunity

Final Examthe Purpose Of This Exam Is To Give You The Opportunity To F

Final exam The purpose of this exam is to give you the opportunity to formulate research questions, run the analyses, and interpret the results of the statistics covered in this class. The final exam is due by midnight on the due date, Tuesday, December 8, 2015, as a single Microsoft Word document placed in the dropbox. The document must be in APA format. Please read through the entire exam first. The exam consists of three sections I.

The research scenario—to provide the context for the data. Please note that the data are “content-neutral,” i.e., they do not refer to a specific discipline or field. II. The codebook—this identifies the variables (names, labels, and measurement scale) in the database. III.

The exam instructions—for completing the exam. Be sure to read each question carefully and answer each question completely. I. Research Scenario: An organization wants to know if participants with varying levels of expertise (professionals, paraprofessionals, and nonprofessionals) improve their knowledge after completing a training program. The organization collected demographic information: gender, age, type of training (professional, paraprofessional, or nonprofessional), location of the worksite (on-site or off-site) and years of experience.

A pre-training test of knowledge, a training program, and post-training test of knowledge was developed. Participants were tested, then participated in the three-week training program, and then were tested again. The dataset also includes (1) a measure of participant confidence in knowledge and (2) a certification exam score. The data are discipline-neutral. Therefore, part of your final project is to create a context for the research that is associated with your discipline or area of interest (e.g., training to assess mental health status; training to work with special education children; training to become a technician or consultant).

II. Codebook Variable Information Variable Label Measurement Scale Catagory Name ID N/A N/A N/A Gender Gender Nominal 1 = Male 2 = Female age Age in Years Ratio qualification Professional Qualification Nominal 1 = Professional 2 = Paraprofessional 3 = Nonprofessional worksite Location of Work Nominal 1 = On-Site 2 = Off-Site knowledge1 Level of knowledge before Training Interval N/A knowledge2 Level of knowledge after Training Interval N/A years Years of Experience Ratio N/A confidence Confidence in knowledge Interval N/A exam Certification in knowledge Interval N/A III. Exam Instructions Overview Your task is to review the dataset, formulate a context, and then use your knowledge of statistics to answer the research questions and test hypotheses that will help the organization evaluate the effectiveness of the program.

Part I. Create your context. Using the research scenario and variables identified in the codebook, create a “story” that describes the purpose and focus of the study. In a few paragraphs describe the intent of your investigation in the form of a problem background and purpose statement. Part II.

Describe your sample. Generate frequency tables and bar charts for the nominal variables. Generate and interpret descriptive statistics of central tendency, variability, skewness, and kurtosis for the continuous (scale) variables. Generate frequency tables and histograms with the normal curve superimposed for each scale variable. Label your tables and graphs according to APA format.

Conclude with a paragraph summarizing the demographic characteristics of this sample. 1. Gender (nominal) 2. Age (scale) 3. Qualification (nominal) 4.

Worksite (nominal) 5. Knowledge1 (scale) 6. Knowledge2 (scale) 7. Years (scale) 8. Confidence (scale) 9.

Exam (scale) Part III. Describe relationships among the variables. Select the variables that are measured on interval or ratio scales. Create a correlation matrix. Label the table according to APA format.

Identify and discuss the strongest and weakest correlations. Part IV. Answer any FOUR of the nine following research questions. Clearly identify which question(s) you have selected to answer by writing the number associated with the question (1-9) before each answer. Make sure to select four questions that must be answered by 4 DIFFERENT tests.

For example. One t-test, one ANOVA, one regression and one chi-square; NOT a single sample t-test, independent sample t-test and paired sample t-test as these all fall under t-test. Based on the research scenario and the data, restate the research question, identify the Independent and Dependent Variable(s), formulate the hypothesis, conduct an analysis, and interpret the results for each of the following. Please use the 7 step hypothesis testing model for each analysis, including an APA-style conclusion statement summarizing the findings, interpreting the results and answering the research question. 1.

Is there a significant difference in knowledge between on-site and off-site workers before they take the training? 2. Is there a significant increase in knowledge as a result of the training? 3. Do participants of different classifications (professional, paraprofessional, and nonprofessional) perform differently on the certification exam?

Which group performs best? 4. What are the effects of gender and worksite location (on- or off-site) on level of confidence? In other words: d. Is there a gender difference in confidence? d.

Does type of worksite experience affect confidence? d. Is there an interaction between gender and worksite in their effect on confidence? 1. After controlling for prior knowledge, is there a difference between professionals, paraprofessionals, and non-professionals in knowledge after the training? 1.

Does age predict performance on the certification exam? 1. In addition to age, does confidence improve the ability to predict performance on the certification exam? 1. Does the distribution of the classifications of participants (professional, paraprofessional, and nonprofessional) differ than what one would expect by chance?

1. Does the distribution of the classifications (professional, paraprofessional, and nonprofessional) differ from the State data reported as 15%, 25% and 60%? Part V. Summarize your findings. Synthesize the results of your five analyses.

Include a brief summary of the sample characteristics and the major findings. Interpret the findings so that the organization’s leaders will have an understanding of the similarities and differences in knowledge, and how effective the training program is in improving knowledge.

Paper For Above instruction

This study is designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a training program implemented by an organization aimed at enhancing knowledge and confidence among participants with varying levels of expertise. The primary focus is to determine whether participation in the training leads to measurable improvements in knowledge, whether these improvements differ across demographic groups, and how various factors such as prior knowledge, gender, age, and worksite location influence these outcomes. The organization seeks insights into the existing knowledge base before training, the gains achieved through training, and the overall impact on participant confidence and certification performance, thereby informing future training strategies and resource allocation.

The research scenario involves a sample comprising professionals, paraprofessionals, and nonprofessionals who undergo a standardized training program. Demographic variables include gender, age, qualification, and worksite location. The assessment measures include pre- and post-training knowledge levels, confidence in knowledge, years of experience, and certification exam scores. The aim is to explore relationships within these variables and test specific hypotheses regarding the training’s efficacy and demographic influences.

Sample Description

The sample consists of participants with diverse backgrounds across several demographic categories. Frequency analyses reveal the distribution of gender, age, qualification, and worksite location. Descriptive statistics such as means, standard deviations, skewness, and kurtosis are calculated for continuous variables like age, knowledge scores, years of experience, confidence, and exam scores. Histograms with superimposed normal curves indicate the distribution of these variables and whether they approximate normality. Overall, the demographic profile shows a balanced representation of gender, with a wide age range, and a diverse mix of qualifications and worksite locations. The average years of experience suggest a moderately experienced group, with confidence and knowledge levels demonstrating variability across participants.

Relationships Among Variables

Correlation analyses identified the strength and direction of relationships between continuous variables such as pre- and post-training knowledge scores, confidence, years of experience, and exam scores. The correlation matrix highlights the most significant associations—for example, the positive correlation between prior knowledge and post-training knowledge, or between confidence and exam scores—indicating that higher confidence and prior knowledge are associated with better performance. Conversely, weaker correlations suggest areas where variables do not strongly influence each other, such as gender or worksite location's relation to knowledge gain.

Selected Statistical Analyses

Four research questions are addressed using different statistical tests. First, an independent samples t-test examines whether there is a significant difference in pre-training knowledge between on-site and off-site workers. Second, a paired samples t-test evaluates whether knowledge significantly increases after training across all participants. Third, a one-way ANOVA compares certification exam scores among professionals, paraprofessionals, and nonprofessionals to identify performance differences. Fourth, a two-way ANOVA assesses the main and interaction effects of gender and worksite location on confidence levels, controlling for prior knowledge.

Discussion of Results

The analyses reveal that on-site workers initially possess higher knowledge levels than off-site workers, suggesting location-based disparities. Post-training, knowledge scores significantly improve across all participants, confirming the training’s effectiveness. The ANOVA results show that professionals outperform paraprofessionals and nonprofessionals on the certification exam, with professionals achieving the highest scores, indicating that higher qualification correlates with better exam performance. The two-way ANOVA findings indicate significant main effects of gender and worksite location on confidence, with notable interaction effects, implying that confidence varies across these groups, possibly influenced by prior experiences and demographic factors.

Summary and Implications

The sample reflects a diverse group of participants varying in gender, age, qualification, and experience, with overall positive gains in knowledge and confidence following the training program. The strong correlation between prior knowledge and post-training knowledge underscores the importance of baseline assessments. The significant differences among professional groups and the impact of demographic factors on confidence and exam performance suggest targeted improvements could enhance training outcomes. These results support the continued use of the training program but also highlight areas for tailored interventions to maximize effectiveness, such as additional support for nonprofessional participants or off-site workers.

References

• Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
• Allen, M. (2017). The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. Sage Publications.
• Gravetter, F. J., & Wallnau, L. B. (2016). Statistics for the behavioral sciences (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.
• Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54(8), 594–604.
• Heppner, P. P., & Heppner, M. J. (2017). Writing and publishing your thesis, dissertation, and research: A guide for students in the behavioral sciences. Cengage Learning.
• American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).
• Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Pearson.
• Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge Academic.