ASSIGNMENT FOR RESEARCH METHODS AND DATA ANALYSIS
Exercise 1a
Case Processing Summary  
Cases  
Valid  Missing  Total  
N  Percent  N  Percent  N  Percent  
cholesterol values in mmol/L  44  100.0%  0  0.0%  44  100.0% 
As all the variables have same value which indicates the null missing value in the statistics in the field of normality of the following distribution of cholesterol values.
Descriptives  
Statistic  Std. Error  
cholesterol values in mmol/L  Mean  5.9932  .23706  
95% Confidence Interval for Mean  Lower Bound  5.5151  
Upper Bound  6.4713  
5% Trimmed Mean  6.0162  
Median  5.7500  
Variance  2.473  
Std. Deviation  1.57250  
Minimum  3.00  
Maximum  8.50  
Range  5.50  
Interquartile Range  2.50  
Skewness  .184  .357  
Kurtosis  .980  .702 
From the descriptive values, it has been analysed that the mean of the cholesterol value is 5.99 with standard error of 0.24 and 5% trimmed mean is reflected as 6.01. The median, variance and standard deviation for cholesterol values are 5.75, 2.473 and 1.572 respectively.
On the other hand, the values of skewness and kurtosis is need to be approximately zero for constructing the table using normal distribution. The kurtosis is 0.980 with standard error of 0.702 which reflects the pattern of normal distribution.
Tests of Normality  
KolmogorovSmirnov^{a}  ShapiroWilk  
Statistic  df  Sig.  Statistic  df  Sig.  
cholesterol values in mmol/L  .105  44  .200^{*}  .959  44  .121 
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.  
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

ShapiroWilk test highlights if the random sample is obtained from normal distribution and it is a test of normality (Hanusz, et al., 2016). Kolmogorov–Smirnov test (KS test) helps to determine if the datasets vary significantly or not (Hassani & Silva, 2015). The normal distribution test or test of normality has been conducted through following ShapiroWilk test and KS test.
The value of statistical significant differs with that of normal distribution. The nullhypothesis of the normal distribution is rejected if the value is less than 0.05 which has also reflected the nonnormal distribution. The significant value of cholesterol is 0.20 which indicates that it is distributed normally with having nullhypothesis.
From the ShapiroWilk test, it has been found that the significant value for cholesterol is 0.121 which is greater than 0.05. So, the cholesterol values are stated to be normally distributed. ShapiroWilk test is also considered as very useful in the cases where the number of observations is very much less in relation with the same value.
ShapiroWilk test is also considered as very useful in the cases where the number of observations is very much less in relation with the same value.
From the histogram, it has been stated that the range of the value lies in between 3 to 9 which reflects the continuous measurement of variables. The results have shown that the standard deviation is 1.57 for the sample size 44 and the histogram also reflects the standard median of 5.75.
The normal QQ plot of cholesterol values reflects that the observed values of the limit will be hugging with the line which indicates the normal distribution of the variables. By checking each section of the variable category, it has been stated that the cholesterol values are approximated normally distributed.
The difference in outliers is demonstrated through the detrended normal QQ plot which reflects that the observed values have differed with that of the standard one. The pattern of QQ curve helps to showcase the approximated normal distribution of identified cholesterol values.
From the figure of Boxplot, it has been identified that the line across the summary plot indicates its median of 5.75 and outliers belong to the range of 3 to 8.5.
Exercise 1b
Statistics  
cholesterol values in mmol/L  
N  Valid  44 
Missing  0  
Mean  5.9932  
Median  5.7500  
Mode  5.50  
Std. Deviation  1.57250  
Variance  2.473  
Range  5.50  
Minimum  3.00  
Maximum  8.50 
From the statistics, it has been analysed that the null hypothesis is not included in the cholesterol values and the mean, mode and median of the dataset are identified as 5.99, 5.50 and 5.75 respectively.
Having the variance of the sample as 2.47, the maximum and minimum sample is also identified as 8.5 and 3 respectively. Moreover, 95% of the distributed sample of cholesterol are included under confidence interval which is also reflected from the below figure.
From the histogram, it has been stated that the range of the value lies in between 3 to 9 which reflects the continuous measurement of variables. The results have shown that the standard deviation is 1.57 for the sample size 44 and the histogram also reflects the standard median of 5.75.
The original or true value must lie in between the upper and lower limit of 95% confidence interval which reflects the normal distribution.
Paired Samples Statistics  
Mean  N  Std. Deviation  Std. Error Mean  
Pair 1  aerobic capacity for group 1  46.3462  13  8.13794  2.25706 
aerobic capacity for group 2  34.3692  13  6.86590  1.90426  
Pair 2  systolic blood pressure for group 1  122.7692  13  3.72276  1.03251 
systolic blood pressure for group 2  136.5385  13  5.79677  1.60774  
Pair 3  body fat for group 1  21.5000  13  5.13566  1.42438 
body fat for group 2  32.1154  13  3.68077  1.02086 
For developing the hypothesis, the group of participants is distributed on the basis of three pairs which are aerobic capacity, systolic blood pressure and body fat. For the constant sample size of 13, the mean and standard deviation for thehealthy weight group is 46.34 and 8.13 respectively. The mean and standard deviation forthe overweight group for SBP are 136.53 and 5.79 respectively.
Paired Samples Correlations  
N  Correlation  Sig.  
Pair 1  aerobic capacity for group 1 & aerobic capacity for group 2  13  .087  .778 
Pair 2  systolic blood pressure for group 1 & systolic blood pressure for group 2  13  .134  .663 
Pair 3  body fat for group 1 & body fat for group 2  13  .179  .559 
From the paired samples correlations, it has been identified that the significant values for aerobic capacity for group 1 & aerobic capacity for group 2 along with systolic blood pressure for group 1 & systolic blood pressure for group 2 are 0.778 and 0.663 respectively. On the other hand, the correlation and significant value of body fat for group 1 & body fat for group 2 are 0.179 and 0.559 respectively.
Paired Samples Test  
Paired Differences  t  df  Sig. (2tailed)  
Mean  Std. Deviation  Std. Error Mean  95% Confidence Interval of the Difference  
Lower  Upper  
Pair 1  aerobic capacity for group 1 – aerobic capacity for group 2  11.97692  10.18194  2.82396  5.82404  18.12981  4.241  12  .001 
Pair 2  systolic blood pressure for group 1 – systolic blood pressure for group 2  13.76923  6.45696  1.79084  17.67113  9.86733  7.689  12  .000 
Pair 3  body fat for group 1 – body fat for group 2  10.61538  6.83177  1.89479  14.74378  6.48699  5.602  12  .000 
Paired sample test are normally carried out to evaluate if the mean difference between two data sets is zero or not (Skyttberg, et al., 2018).From the paired sample test, it has been identified that the difference between two datasets have been equivalent from the value of t in Ttesting.
The standard error mean of three dataset is identified as 2.82, 1.79 and 1.894 respectively. The original or true value must lie in between the upper and lower limit of 95% confidence interval which reflects the normal distribution.
Paired Samples Statistics  
Mean  N  Std. Deviation  Std. Error Mean  
Pair 1  aerobic capacity for group 2  34.3692  13  6.86590  1.90426 
group 2 retest for AC  36.4077  13  5.14546  1.42709 
For the group of overweight, it has been identified that the standard deviation has been changed from 6.86 to 5.14 which demonstrates the slight change after training.
Paired Samples Correlations  
N  Correlation  Sig.  
Pair 1  aerobic capacity for group 2 & group 2 retest for AC  13  .912  .000 
For the sample size of 13, the correlation of the aerobic capacity for group 2 is demonstrated as 0.912.
Paired Samples Test  
Paired Differences  t  df  Sig. (2tailed)  
Mean  Std. Deviation  Std. Error Mean  95% Confidence Interval of the Difference  
Lower  Upper  
Pair 1  aerobic capacity for group 2 – group 2 retest for AC  2.03846  3.02587  .83923  3.86698  .20995  2.429  12  .032 
The original or true value must lie in between – 3.86 to 0.209 of 95% confidence interval which reflects the normal distribution. The mean of the group is also identified as 2.03 with standard deviation of 3.025.
Correlations  
systolic bp  diastolic bp  age  
systolic bp  Pearson Correlation  1  .725^{**}  .223 
Sig. (2tailed)  .000  .124  
N  49  49  49  
diastolic bp  Pearson Correlation  .725^{**}  1  .365^{**} 
Sig. (2tailed)  .000  .010  
N  49  49  49  
age  Pearson Correlation  .223  .365^{**}  1 
Sig. (2tailed)  .124  .010  
N  49  49  49  
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2tailed). 
Based on the Bivariate relationship table above, it is seen that diastolic blood pressure and systolic blood pressure has the highest correlation with 0.725, followed by the diastolic blood pressure and age with 0.365 and systolic blood pressure and age with 0.223.
Descriptives  
N  Mean  Std. Deviation  Std. Error  95% Confidence Interval for Mean  Minimum  Maximum  
Lower Bound  Upper Bound  
Atkins Diet  25  2  54.50  36.062  25.500  269.51  378.51  29  80 
32  1  37.00  .  .  .  .  37  37  
36  1  40.00  .  .  .  .  40  40  
39  1  48.00  .  .  .  .  48  48  
40  1  65.00  .  .  .  .  65  65  
41  1  66.00  .  .  .  .  66  66  
49  2  57.00  4.243  3.000  18.88  95.12  54  60  
50  1  58.00  .  .  .  .  58  58  
51  1  63.00  .  .  .  .  63  63  
52  1  57.00  .  .  .  .  57  57  
58  2  55.00  7.071  5.000  8.53  118.53  50  60  
60  1  70.00  .  .  .  .  70  70  
61  1  70.00  .  .  .  .  70  70  
72  1  73.00  .  .  .  .  73  73  
Total  17  57.65  13.527  3.281  50.69  64.60  29  80  
5:2 Diet  25  2  39.00  29.698  21.000  227.83  305.83  18  60 
32  1  25.00  .  .  .  .  25  25  
36  1  28.00  .  .  .  .  28  28  
39  1  44.00  .  .  .  .  44  44  
40  1  45.00  .  .  .  .  45  45  
41  1  59.00  .  .  .  .  59  59  
49  2  46.00  5.657  4.000  4.82  96.82  42  50  
50  1  54.00  .  .  .  .  54  54  
51  1  68.00  .  .  .  .  68  68  
52  1  47.00  .  .  .  .  47  47  
58  2  55.50  .707  .500  49.15  61.85  55  56  
60  1  63.00  .  .  .  .  63  63  
61  1  55.00  .  .  .  .  55  55  
72  1  75.00  .  .  .  .  75  75  
Total  17  49.65  15.137  3.671  41.86  57.43  18  75 
ANOVA  
Sum of Squares  df  Mean Square  F  Sig.  
Atkins Diet  Between Groups  1559.382  13  119.952  .263  .963 
Within Groups  1368.500  3  456.167  
Total  2927.882  16  
5:2 Diet  Between Groups  2751.382  13  211.645  .694  .724 
Within Groups  914.500  3  304.833  
Total  3665.882  16 
Null hypothesis: There is no difference in the preference of a particular diet.
Alternate hypothesis: There is a significant difference in the preference of a particular diet.
One–way Anova test helps to find out if there is a variance between the means of independent variables (Kim, 2017). Based on one–way Anova test result, the significance value for both Atkins diet and 5:2 diet with relation to lowcalorie diet is higher than the significance value of 0.05.
Therefore, null hypothesis is accepted. Since the significance value as suggested by Anova test is above 0.05 for both the variables, therefore there is no need for post hoc tests.
Descriptives  
systolic BP  
N  Mean  Std. Deviation  Std. Error  95% Confidence Interval for Mean  Minimum  Maximum  
Lower Bound  Upper Bound  
6 weeks  10  187.4000  12.94604  4.09390  178.1390  196.6610  170.00  210.00 
12 weeks  7  179.0000  14.23610  5.38074  165.8338  192.1662  159.00  200.00 
24 weeks  6  163.5000  4.96991  2.02896  158.2844  168.7156  155.00  169.00 
Total  23  178.6087  15.06271  3.14079  172.0951  185.1223  155.00  210.00 
ANOVA  
systolic BP  
Sum of Squares  df  Mean Square  F  Sig.  
Between Groups  2143.578  2  1071.789  7.527  .004 
Within Groups  2847.900  20  142.395  
Total  4991.478  22 
Post Hoc Tests
Multiple Comparisons  
Dependent Variable: systolic BP  
Tukey HSD  
(I) Group  (J) Group  Mean Difference (IJ)  Std. Error  Sig.  95% Confidence Interval  
Lower Bound  Upper Bound  
6 weeks  12 weeks  8.40000  5.88062  .346  6.4779  23.2779 
24 weeks  23.90000^{*}  6.16214  .003  8.3099  39.4901  
12 weeks  6 weeks  8.40000  5.88062  .346  23.2779  6.4779 
24 weeks  15.50000  6.63887  .074  1.2962  32.2962  
24 weeks  6 weeks  23.90000^{*}  6.16214  .003  39.4901  8.3099 
12 weeks  15.50000  6.63887  .074  32.2962  1.2962  
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. 
From the results of the Anova test, it can be said that there is a statistical significant difference between the levels of the independent variables i.e. difference is observed in systolic blood pressure due to the exercise lasting for 24 weeks, 12 weeks and 6 weeks.
The significant difference in the Anova test can be found out through Post hoc where except the significance value of 24 weeks and 6 weeks, all other values have more than 0.05 significance. Therefore all the values except the significance value of 24 weeks and 6 weeks have a nonstatistically significant difference.
BetweenSubjects Factors  
Value Label  N  
Main Sport participated in  1  Runner  8 
2  Rower  8 
Multivariate Tests^{a}  
Effect  Value  F  Hypothesis df  Error df  Sig.  
heartrate  Pillai’s Trace  .971  37.635^{b}  7.000  8.000  .000 
Wilks’ Lambda  .029  37.635^{b}  7.000  8.000  .000  
Hotelling’s Trace  32.931  37.635^{b}  7.000  8.000  .000  
Roy’s Largest Root  32.931  37.635^{b}  7.000  8.000  .000  
heartrate * sport  Pillai’s Trace  .641  2.038^{b}  7.000  8.000  .170 
Wilks’ Lambda  .359  2.038^{b}  7.000  8.000  .170  
Hotelling’s Trace  1.783  2.038^{b}  7.000  8.000  .170  
Roy’s Largest Root  1.783  2.038^{b}  7.000  8.000  .170  
a. Design: Intercept + sport
Within Subjects Design: heartrate 

b. Exact statistic 
Mauchly’s Test of Sphericity^{a}  
Measure: MEASURE_1  
Within Subjects Effect  Mauchly’s W  Approx. ChiSquare  df  Sig.  Epsilon^{b}  
GreenhouseGeisser  HuynhFeldt  Lowerbound  
heartrate  .001  81.311  27  .000  .411  .565  .143 
Tests the null hypothesis that the error covariance matrix of the orthonormalized transformed dependent variables is proportional to an identity matrix.  
a. Design: Intercept + sport
Within Subjects Design: heartrate 

b. May be used to adjust the degrees of freedom for the averaged tests of significance. Corrected tests are displayed in the Tests of WithinSubjects Effects table. 
Tests of WithinSubjects Effects  
Measure: MEASURE_1  
Source  Type III Sum of Squares  df  Mean Square  F  Sig.  
heartrate  Sphericity Assumed  15918.094  7  2274.013  87.152  .000 
GreenhouseGeisser  15918.094  2.876  5535.544  87.152  .000  
HuynhFeldt  15918.094  3.956  4023.623  87.152  .000  
Lowerbound  15918.094  1.000  15918.094  87.152  .000  
heartrate * sport  Sphericity Assumed  190.844  7  27.263  1.045  .405 
GreenhouseGeisser  190.844  2.876  66.366  1.045  .381  
HuynhFeldt  190.844  3.956  48.240  1.045  .392  
Lowerbound  190.844  1.000  190.844  1.045  .324  
Error(heartrate)  Sphericity Assumed  2557.063  98  26.092  
GreenhouseGeisser  2557.063  40.259  63.516  
HuynhFeldt  2557.063  55.386  46.168  
Lowerbound  2557.063  14.000  182.647 
Tests of WithinSubjects Contrasts  
Measure: MEASURE_1  
Source  heartrate  Type III Sum of Squares  df  Mean Square  F  Sig. 
heartrate  Linear  3043.006  1  3043.006  42.968  .000 
Quadratic  30.006  1  30.006  2.137  .166  
Cubic  6436.031  1  6436.031  148.967  .000  
Order 4  .274  1  .274  .017  .899  
Order 5  2849.144  1  2849.144  133.314  .000  
Order 6  16.751  1  16.751  4.524  .052  
Order 7  3542.881  1  3542.881  271.684  .000  
heartrate * sport  Linear  17.357  1  17.357  .245  .628 
Quadratic  44.024  1  44.024  3.135  .098  
Cubic  62.546  1  62.546  1.448  .249  
Order 4  24.961  1  24.961  1.516  .238  
Order 5  6.322  1  6.322  .296  .595  
Order 6  5.046  1  5.046  1.363  .263  
Order 7  30.587  1  30.587  2.346  .148  
Error(heartrate)  Linear  991.494  14  70.821  
Quadratic  196.613  14  14.044  
Cubic  604.862  14  43.204  
Order 4  230.485  14  16.463  
Order 5  299.203  14  21.372  
Order 6  51.839  14  3.703  
Order 7  182.566  14  13.040 
Tests of BetweenSubjects Effects  
Measure: MEASURE_1  
Transformed Variable: Average  
Source  Type III Sum of Squares  df  Mean Square  F  Sig. 
Intercept  3292819.531  1  3292819.531  5790.345  .000 
sport  3549.031  1  3549.031  6.241  .026 
Error  7961.437  14  568.674 
Based on the significant value provided in Tests of WithinSubjects Contrasts table, it is seen that for eight separate heart rate variables, the significance value is less than 0.05. But heartrate * sport source leads to the significance values of higher than 0.05. Test of betweensubjects effects also showed that the significance value of sport is less than 0.05. From the above graph between heart rate and estimated marginal means, it is observed that the rowers showed higher heart rates in comparison to runners.
References
Hanusz, Z., Tarasinska, J. & Zielinski, W., 2016. ShapiroWilk test with known mean. REVSTATStatistical Journal, 14(1), pp. 89100.
Hassani, H. & Silva, E., 2015. A KolmogorovSmirnov based test for comparing the predictive accuracy of two sets of forecasts. Econometrics, 3(3), pp. 590609.
Kim, T., 2017. Understanding oneway ANOVA using conceptual figures. Korean journal of anesthesiology, 70(1), p. 22.
Skyttberg, N., Chen, R. & Koch, S., 2018. Man vs machine in emergency medicine–a study on the effects of manual and automatic vital sign documentation on data quality and perceived workload, using observational paired sample data and questionnaires. BMC, 18(1), p. 54.
Academic Research Writing Arm of Global Research Services.