# Hlt-362v Exercise 36

1067 Words5 Pages
Exercise 26 Kristin James EXERCISE 36 1. The researchers found a significant difference between the two groups (control and treatment) for change in mobility of the women with osteoarthritis (OA) over 12 weeks with the results of F(1, 22) = 9.619, p = 0.005. Discuss each aspect of these results. F(1, 22) = 9.619, p = 0.005, where F is the statistic for ANOVA and the group df=1 and the error df=22. The F ratio or value = 9.619, which is significant at p = 0.005. To be statistically significant, the p -value must be less than the a-value. In this case, p = 0.005 is less than the a = 0.05. So it is significant. 2. State the null hypothesis for the Baird and Sands (2004) study that focuses on the effect of the GI with PMR treatment on patients’ mobility level. Should the null hypothesis be rejected for the difference between the two groups in change in mobility scores over 12 weeks? Provide a rationale for your answer. The null hypothesis is: Women with OA receiving guided imagery (GI) have no greater improvement in their mobility scores than those in the control group at 12 weeks. The study results indicated a significant improvement in the mobility scores of women with OA who received the treatment of guided imagery (F(1, 22) = 9.619, p = 0.005). Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected. 3. The researchers stated that the participants in the intervention group reported a reduction in mobility difficulty at week 12. Was this result statistically significant, and if so at what probability? Yes, F(1, 22) = 9.619, p = 0.005 is statistically significant at p = 0.005. The level of significance for this study was set at α = 0.05, and since p is < this value, the study results are statistically significant. 4. If the researchers had set the level of significance or α = 0.01, would the results of p = 0.001 still be statistically significant? Provide a rationale for your