This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: 11/23/09 M idterm 2 Review Session Exam 2 focuses on what was not covered on exam 1. From factorial designs onward. NOT CU MU LAT IVE. Factorial Designs Have 2 or more IVs that cross. Then you can see if each IV has an effect: Main effects Also you can see if the IVs interact to form an Interaction . Hypothetical prayer study: o Does the power of prayer heal? Is there a psychological component? o 2 IVs: Prayer/No prayer Told prayed for/Not told prayed for o DV: did symptoms reduce? Results Actual praying/Told prayed for: 68% Actual praying/Not told prayed for: 50% No actual praying/Told prayed for: 53% No actual praying/Not told prayed for: 48% Main effects o Told youre prayed for: 60.5% o Not told youre prayed for: 49% o Actual praying: 59% o No actual praying: 50.5% Categorical so bar graph. The line graph helps to see if there is an interaction. In this case, there is. Draw a line parallel to the x axis from the midpoint of the lines....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 03/07/2011 for the course PSYCH 100B taught by Professor Staff during the Fall '01 term at UCLA.
- Fall '01