What Is The Value For The Relationship Between Hamstring
What Is Thervalue For The Relationship Between Hamstri
12 Exercise 231: What is the r value for the relationship between Hamstring strength index 60% and the shuttle run test? Is this r value significant? Provide rationale. The r-value is -0.149, listed on Table 5 as the relationship between the two variables. It is not considered significant since p=0.424 and the value exceeds α=0.01. Consider r=1.00 and r=-1.00. Which r value is stronger? Provide rationale. Both are the strongest possible relationships, either positive or negative, so neither is stronger than the other. Describe the direction of the relationship between the Hamstring strength index 60% and the shuttle run test. A weak relationship exists between these two variables, indicating that as hamstring strength increases or decreases, the shuttle run performance shows little or no consistent change, as supported by r=0.149, p=0.424, which is not significant.
Without using numbers, describe the relationship between the Hamstring strength index 120% and the Triple hop index. The result suggests a strong direct relationship, indicating that increases or decreases in hamstring strength at 120% are associated with similar changes in the triple hop index. The relationship is significant, although specific statistics are not provided. Which variable has the weakest relationship with the Quadriceps strength index 120s? Provide rationale. Both the Hop index and Triple hop index have an r=0.00, indicating no relationship with the Quadriceps strength index 120s.
Which of the following sets of variables has the strongest relationship? a. Hamstring strength index 120s and the hop index, b. Quadriceps strength index 60s and the carioca test, c. Quadriceps strength index 120s and the side step test, d. Quadriceps strength index 60s and the triple hop index. Based on the data, the pair with the strongest relationship is variable a, with a higher correlation coefficient.
In table 5, two r values are reported as r=-0.498 and r=-0.528. Describe each r value in words, indicating which would be more statistically significant and provide a rationale. The r=-0.498 corresponds to the shuttle run test, and the r=-0.528 corresponds to the side step test. Since p-values are not provided, but both r values are negative and relatively close, the one with the higher absolute value (-0.528) generally indicates a slightly stronger relationship, possibly more statistically significant depending on p-value.
The researchers stated that the study showed a positive, significant correlation between Quadriceps strength indices and pre- and postoperative functional stability. Based on table 5 data, do you agree? Provide rationale. The data shows numerous p-values at 0.00, suggesting significant correlations. Therefore, the statement about positive, significant correlations is supported by the data, assuming significance at the 0.01 level.
The statement that no significant relationship exists between Hamstring strength indices at 60s and functional stability is made. Based on table 5, explain why not. The p-values associated with these correlations are not statistically significant (greater than 0.01), and the r values are low, indicating weak or no relationship. Hence, the data supports the statement of no significant correlation.
Consider the relationship between Quadriceps strength index 120s and the Hop index (r=0.744**, p=0.000). What do these values indicate about statistical significance and clinical importance? The high r-value (0.744) indicates a strong positive correlation, and the p-value (0.000) confirms statistical significance. Clinically, this suggests that higher quadriceps strength at 120s is associated with better hop performance, which is relevant for functional assessments.
What is the r value listed for the relationship between variables 4 and 9? The r=0.32, p
Describe the correlation r=0.32** using words. Is this a statistically significant correlation? Provide rationale. The r=0.32 indicates a moderate positive correlation, and the p
Calculate the percentage of variance explained for r=0.53. Is the correlation clinically important? Provide rationale. (0.53)^2 * 100 = 28.09%. The variance explained suggests a moderate to strong relationship, which is considered clinically important as it exceeds the commonly accepted threshold of 9% for clinical relevance.
According to table 2, r=0.15 is listed between which two items? Describe the relationship, the effect size, and the sample size needed to detect this in future studies. The relationship is between variables 3 and 7, with a very weak correlation (r=0.15). The effect size (variance explained) is 2.25%, indicating a trivial relationship. To detect this small effect size with adequate power, a large sample size would be necessary, typically several hundred participants.
Calculate the percentage of variance explained for r=0.15. Describe the importance. (0.15)^2 * 100= 2.25%. This small percentage indicates a negligible relationship, not clinically important, and unlikely to be meaningful in practice.
Which two variables in Table 2 have the weakest correlation? Which relationship is closest to this r value? Variables 6 and 7 have r=-0.02, which is the weakest correlation, closest to zero, indicating almost no relationship. The relationship is trivial and practically insignificant.
Is the correlation between LOT-R total scores and avoidance-distraction coping style statistically significant? Is it relevant to practice? Provide rationale. With r=-0.20 and p
Is the correlation between variables 9 and 4 significant? Is this relevant? Provide rationale. The r=-0.32 and p
Describe the relationship between r=0.08 and r=-0.58. Discuss the clinical importance. The r=0.58 is a moderate to strong negative correlation, with 33.64% variance explained, indicating a meaningful relationship. The r=0.08 is very weak, explains only 0.64%, and is not clinically significant. Together, they demonstrate the difference between a negligible and a substantial relationship.
Examine the Pearson r for LOT-R total (r=-0.58, p