Assignment 5:

Statistical treatments for factor affecting…. When group according to civil status and length of service.
Educ. 201: Advanced Statistics
Submitted to: Engr. Elda C. Aranilla

Submitted by: Hylenly S. Balisa

Maed Physical Science -2

Table 1: Factors affecting the …….

Indicators WAM Qualitative Index

4 3 2 1
A. PERSONAL FACTOR
1. 4 3 1 2 2.90 Agree
2. 4 2 3 1 2.90 Agree
3. 5 2 3 0 3.20 Agree
4. 4 2 3 1 2.90 Agree
5. 2 1 3 4 2.10 Disagree
B. EMOTIONAL FACTOR
1. 5 1 2 2 2.90 Agree
2. 6 1 1 2 3.10 Agree
3. 5 2 3 0 3.20 Agree
4. 5 2 3 0 3.20 Agree
5. 2 2 1 5 2.10 Disagree
C.SOCIAL FACTOR
1. 3 2 2 3 2.50 Disagree
2. 6 3 1 0 3.50 Strongly Agree
3. 5 1 1 3 2.80 Agree
4. 5 1 2 2 2.90 Agree
5. 5 4 0 1 3.30 Strongly Agree
Overall WAM 2.90 Agree
Table 1 : Source for WAM for :
1.1 Category A or Personal Factor
1.2 Category B or Emotional Factor

1.3 Category C or Social Factor

TABLE 2
Test of Normality for the Factors affecting …. when grouped according to Civil Status

Shapiro-Wilk Impression at 0.05

CATEGORY Decision level of
Statistics Df p-value
significance
x1 (Single)
x2 (Married)
X3 (Separated)
x2 (Widowed)
A. PERSONAL FACTOR
x1 (Single) 3
x2 (Married) 0.927 4 0.577 Failed to reject Ho Normal
X3 (Separated)
x2 (Widowed)
B. EMOTIONAL FACTOR
x1 (Single) 1.00 3 1.00 Failed to reject Ho Normal
x2 (Married) 0.945 4 0.638 Failed to reject Ho
X3 (Separated)
x2 (Widowed)
C. SOCIAL FACTOR
x1 (Single) 0.750 3 0.00 Reject Ho Not Normal
x2 (Married) 0.729 4 0.024 Reject Ho
X3 (Separated)
x2 (Widowed)
D. OVERALL WAM
x1 (Single) 0.750 3 0.00 Reject Ho Not Normal
x2 (Married) 0.956 4 0.754 Failed to reject Ho
X3 (Separated)
x2 (Widowed)

Results showed that Personal factor (M=2.80, SD=0.44) is statistically significant to the x 2 (Married) (M=2.60,
SD=0.43), 0.93 df=4, p=0.577; and no values to x1(Single) (M=3.20, SD=0.00), F df=3, p=0.00, x 3 (Separated)
(M=2.70, SD=0.71), 0.00 df=0, p=0.00 and x4(Widowed) (M=2.60, SD=0.00), F df=0, p=0.00. The decision is
Failed to Reject the null hypothesis of x 2 (Married) thus the distribution of Length of Service are Not Normal.

Results showed that Emotional factor (M=2.90, SD=0.37) is statistically significant to the x 2 (Married) (M=2.80,
SD=0.16), 0.95 df=3, p=0.64; x1(Single) (M=3.20, SD=0.20), 1.00 df=3, p=1.00; and x 3 (Separated) (M=2.40,
SD=0.00), 0.00 df=0, p=0.00 and x4(Widowed) (M=3.40, SD=0.00), F df=0, p=0.00. The decision is Failed to
Reject the hypothesis null thus the distribution of Length of Service are Normal.

Results showed that Social factor (M=3.00, SD=0.28) is statistically significant to the x 1 (Single) (M=3.33,
SD=0.075), 0.75 df=3, p=0.00; x2(Married) (M=2.80, SD=0.23), 0.73 df=4, p=0.024; and x 3 (Separated)
(M=2.90, SD=0.41), 0.00 df=0, p=0.00 and x4(Widowed) (M=3.00, SD=0.00), F df=0, p=0.00. The decision is to
reject the hypothesis null thus the distribution of Length of Service are Not Normal.
Results showed that Overall WAM (M=2.90, SD=0.37) is statistically significant to the x 1 (Single) (M=3.24,
SD=0.075), 0.75 df=3, p=0.00; x2(Married) (M=2.74, SD=0.12), 0.96 df=4, p=0.754; and x 3 (Separated)
(M=2.67, SD=0.19), 0.00 df=0, p=0.00 and x4(Widowed) (M=3.00, SD=0.00), F df=0, p=0.00. The decision is to
reject the hypothesis null thus the distribution of Length of Service are Not Normal.

TABLE 2 : TEST OF NORMALITY WHEN GROUP BY CIVIL STATUS

TABLE 2
Test of Homogeneity of Variances for the Factors affecting …. when grouped according to Civil Status
Lavene Impression at 0.05
Category Df1 Df2 p-value Decision
Statistics level of significance
Personal Factor 4.83 2 6 0.056 Failed to Reject Ho Homogeneous
Emotional Factor 1.00 2 6 0.422 Failed to Reject Ho Homogeneous
Social Factor 25.75 2 6 0.001 Reject Ho Not homogeneous
Overall WAM 3.63 2 6 0.093 Failed to Reject Ho Homogeneous

The Test revealed that Personal Factor 4.83 (2,6)=0.056, Emotional Factor 1.00(2,6)=0.422,and Overall WAM
3.63(2,6)= 0.093, thus the decision failed to reject the null hypothesis. The variance for the distribution of civil
status is therefore Homogenous.

The Test revealed Social Factor 25.7= (2,6)= 0.001, thus the decision is to reject the null hypothesis. The
variance for the distribution of civil status is therefore not Homogenous.
 Table 3 Summary of the Test of Normality and Homogeneity
Category Test of Normality Test of Homogeneity Test of Hypothesis
Personal Factor Normal Homogeneous Parametric
Emotional Factor Normal Homogeneous Parametric
Social Factor Not Normal Not Homogenous Non Parametric
Overall WAM Not Normal Homogenous Non Parametric

The test revealed that Personal Factor (Normal, Homogeneous) and Emotional(Normal, Homogeneous)is
parametric test of hypothesis hence, one Way ANOVA will be administered. While social Factor (Not Normal,
Not Homogenous) and overall WAM (Not Normal, Homogenous) is Non Parametric test of Hypothesis thus
Kruskal-Wallis Test will be administered on finding the significant differences.
Table 4
F test / Kruskal-Wallist Test Result on finding the significanct difference on Factors affecting… when group by
CIVIL STATUS.

Variables being Df Mean F- value/H- p-Value Decision Impression at

compared value 0.05 level of
significance
X1 =single
X2 = Married
X3= Separated
X4= Widowed
Personal factor dfB = 3 X1 = 3.20 1.321 0.352 Failed to Not
dfW = 6 X2 = 2.60 Reject Ho significant
dfT = 9 X3= 2.70
X4 = 2.60
Emotional factor dfB = 3 X1 = 3.20 13.250 0.005 Reject Ho Significant
dfW = 6 X2 = 2.80
dfT = 9 X3= 2.40
X4 = 3.40
Social Factor 3 X1 = 3.33 6.574 0.087 Failed to Not
X2 = 2.80 Reject Ho Significant
X3= 2.90
X4 = 3.00
Overall WAM 3 X1= 3.24 7.143 0.067 Failed to Not
X2 = 2.73 Reject Ho significant
X3= 3.00
X4 = 2.90

Results showed that Personal factor (M=2.80, SD=0.44),F Social Factor (M=3.00, SD=0.28) and Overall Factor
(M=2.90, SD=0.27) are statistically not significant. The Emotional Factor (M=2.90, SD=0.39),
6.574(df=3),p=0.087 is statistically significant.
Table 5 LSD TEST RESULT ON EMOTIONAL FACTOR
Group Being Compared p-value Decision Impression at 0.05 level
of significance
Emotional Factor
X1(Single) vs X2(Married)
X1(Single) vs X3(Separated)
X1(Single) vs X4(Widowed)
X2(Married) vs X3(Separated)
X2(Married) vs X3(Widowed)
X3(Separated) vs X4(Widowed)
TABLE 2
Test of Normality for the Factors affecting …. when grouped according to LENGTH OF SERVICE

Shapiro-Wilk Impression at 0.05

CATEGORY Decision level of
Statistics Df p-value
significance
Length of Service
x1 (5 yrs & Below)
x2 (6-10 yrs)
X3 (above 10 yrs)
A. Personal Factor
x1 (5 yrs & Below) 0.630 4 0.001 Reject Ho
x2 (6-10 yrs) 0.750 3 0.00 Reject Ho Not Normal
X3 (above 10 yrs) 1.00 3 1.00 Failed to Reject Ho
B. Emotional Factor
x1 (5 yrs & Below) 0.993 4 0.972 Failed to Reject Ho Normal
x2 (6-10 yrs) 1.00 3 1.00 Failed to Reject
X3 (above 10 yrs) 0.987 3 0.780 Failed to Reject Ho
C. Social Factor
x1 (5 yrs & Below) 0.863 4 0.272 Failed to Reject Ho Not Normal
x2 (6-10 yrs) 0.750 3 0.00 Reject ho
X3 (above 10 yrs) 3
D. Overall WAM
x1 (5 yrs & Below) 0.798 4 0.099 Failed to Reject Ho Normal
x2 (6-10 yrs) 0.928 3 0.482 Failed to Reject Ho
X3 (above 10 yrs) 0.993 3 0.836 Failed to Reject Ho

Results showed that Personal factor (M=2.80, SD=0.44) is statistically significant to the x 1 (5 yrs & Below)
(M=2.95, SD=0.50), 0.63 df=4, p=0.001; x2 (6-10 yrs) (M=3.00, SD=0.35), 0.75 df=3, p=0.00; and insignificant to
x3 (above 10 yrs) (M=2.40, SD=0.20), 1.00 df=3, p=1.00. The decision is to Reject the hypothesis of x 1 (5 yrs &
below) and x2 (6-10 yrs); and failed to reject x3 (above 10 yrs) thus the distribution of Length of Service are Not
Normal.

Results showed that Emotional factor (M=2.90, SD=0.37) is statistically significant to the x 1 (5 yrs & Below)
(M=3.10, SD=0.25), 0.99 df=4, p=0.97; x 2 (6-10 yrs) (M=2.60, SD=0.20), 1.00 df=3, p=1.00; x 3 (above 10 yrs)
(M=2.93, SD=0.50), 0.99 df=3, p=0.78. The decision is to Reject the hypothesis thus the distribution of Length
of Service are Normal.

Results showed that Social factor (M=3.00, SD=0.28) is statistically significant to the x 1 (5 yrs & Below)
(M=3.25, SD=2.67), 0.86 df=4, p=0.27; x2 (6-10 yrs) (M=2.67, SD=0.12), 0.75 df=3, p=0.00; x3 (above 10 yrs)
(M=3.00, SD=0.00), F (df)=3, p=0.00. The decision is to Reject the hypothesis of x 2 (6-10 yrs); and failed to
reject x1 (5 yrs & below) thus the distribution of Length of Service are Not Normal.

Results showed that Overall WAM (M=2.90, SD=0.37) is statistically significant to the x 1 (5 yrs & Below)
(M=3.10, SD=0.29), 0.80 df=4, p=0.099; x2 (6-10 yrs) (M=2.76, SD=0.14), 0.93 df=3, p=0.48; x3 (above 10 yrs)
(M=2.78, SD=0.24), 0.99 df=3, p=0.84. The decision is to Reject the hypothesis thus the distribution of Length
of Service are Normal.
TABLE 3
Test of Homogeneity of Variances for the Factors affecting …. when grouped according to Length of Service
Lavene Impression at 0.05
Category Df1 Df2 p-value Decision
Statistics level of significance
Personal Factor 1.456 2 7 0.296 Failed to Reject Ho Homogeneous
Emotional Factor 1.421 2 7 0.303 Failed to Reject Ho Homogeneous
Social Factor 5.882 2 7 0.032 Reject Ho Not homogeneous
Overall WAM 0.670 2 7 0.542 Failed to Reject Homogeneous
The Test revealed that Personal Factor 1.46 (2,7)=0.296, Emotional Factor 1.42(2,7)=0.303,and Overall WAM
0.67(2,7)= 0.542, thus the decision failed to reject the null hypothesis. The variance for the distribution of civil
status is therefore Homogenous.

The Test revealed Social Factor 5.882= (2,7)= 0.032, thus the decision is to reject the null hypothesis. The
variance for the distribution of civil status is therefore not Homogenous.
Table 4
Parametric or Non-parametric
Category Test of Normality Test of Homogeneity Procedure
Personal Factor Not Normal Homogeneous Non Parametric
Emotional Factor Normal Homogeneous Parametric
Social Factor Not Normal Not Homogenous Non Parametric
Overall WAM Normal Homogenous Parametric

The test revealed that Personal Factor (Not Normal, Homogeneous) and social Factor (Not Normal, Not
Homogenous) is non parametric hence, Kruskal-Wallis Test will be administered on finding the significant
differences. While Emotional Factor(Normal, Homogeneous) and overall WAM (Not Normal, Homogenous) is
Parametric test of Hypothesis hence one way anova will be administered.

Table 5
F test / Kruskal-Wallist Test Result on finding the significanct difference on Factors affecting… when group by
Length of Service

Variables being Df Mean F- value p-Value Decision Impression at

compared 0.05 level of
significance
X1 = 5 yrs & below
X2 = 6-10 yrs
X3= above 10 yrs
Personal factor X1 = 2.95 3.417 0.181 Failed to Not
X2 = 3.00 Reject Ho Significant
X3= 2.40
Emotional factor dfB = 2 X1 = 3.10 1.928 0.215 Failed to Not
dfW = 7 X2 = 2.60 Reject Ho Significant
dfT = 9 X3=2.93
Social Factor 2 X1 = 3.25 7.566 0.023 Reject Ho Significant
X2 = 2.67
X3=3.00
Overall WAM dfB = 2 X1 = 3.10 2.291 0.172 Failed to Not
dfW = 7 X2 = 2.76 Reject Ho Significant
dfT = 9 X3= 2.78

Results showed that Personal factor (M=2.80, SD=0.44) 3.42(df)=2,7,9, p=0.18, Emotional Factor (M=2.90,
SD=0.39) 1.93(df)=2,7,9, p=0.22, and Overall Factor (M=2.90, SD=0.27) 2.29(df)=2,7,9, p=0.17are statistically
not significant. The Social Factor (M=3.00, SD=0.28) 7.566(df=2),p=0.023 is statistically significant.
 Table 5
LSD Test Result on Social Factor
Group Being Compared p-value Decision Impression at 0.05 level
of significance
Social Factor
X1(5 yrs and below) vs X2( 6-10 yrs) 0.001 Reject Ho Significant
X1(5 yrs and below) vs X3(above 10yrs) 0.052 Failed to Reject Ho Not significant
X2(6 -10 yrs) vs X3(above 10yrs) 0.022 Reject Ho Significant

Result showed that Social factor (M=3.00, SD=0.28) is statistically significant to the X 1(M=3.25, SD=2.67) vs
X2 (M=2.67, SD=0.12), p= 0.001; and X2(M=2.67, SD=0.12) vs X3(M=3.00, SD=0.00), F (df)=3, p=0.00.) are
statistically significant.

This means that between all the three groups Being compared the group between 6 to 10 yrs old is greatly
affecting the difference between the factors affecting….