Chapter 14: Factorial Designs Flashcards
Factorial Design (ANOVA)
when an experiment has two or more categorical independent variables
used to compare the means of different groups to make judgments about the effects of the different IVs and possible interactions b/w the IVs
linear model
independent factorial design
several independent variables and each has been measured using different entities (between group)
every group consists of different people
compare means
used when you expect a manipulation to have a long lasting effect
repeated measures design
several independent variables have been measured, but the same entities have been used in all conditions
everyone exposed to every condition
more powerful since it takes away individual differences when everyone is their own control
mixed design
several independent variables have been measured, with different entities, whereas others used the same entities
one factor is repeated measures and one factor is independent
why use factorial designs?
examine the influence of 2 independent variables simultaneously: like in the real world which is complex and multifaceted
greater statistical power: if both variables don’t correlate highly and both actually do relate to the DV, for any 1 IV, you are gonna have a greater ability to find the effect that exists
test for interactions: testing for main effects does not allow you to catch everything going on
main effect
statistical significance between the means (column/row)
interaction
observed (cell) means are different than what you can expect if you were to just add the effect of factor a and the effect of factor b
what is total variability (SSt) made up of ?
variance explained by the model/experimental manipulation (SSm) and residual/unexplained variance (SSr)
what is the model variability (SSm) made up of ?
variable A variance (SSa), variable B variance (SSb), and variance explained by interaction of AxB (SSab)
systematic variance attributed to the model
why do we use mean squares instead of sum squares?
mean squares adjusts for DF to undo the bias of SS. SS is affected by the number of people / groups
the bigger the MS, the bigger the F statistics, meaning that the null us much less tenable)
why are follow up analyses needed?
main effects for 3 or more groups… which groups are different?
interactions… what type are they?
the follow up approach you should use depends on…
- whether you have an interaction or not
- whether you have hypotheses on which groups are different
- sample size
- if you want a liberal/conservative p value
- type of error that is most important for you not to make
- if there is an interaction present, do not interpret the main effects, even if they’re statistically significant
*ONLY interpret main effects if the interaction is trivial
graph + simple effects analysis
used when a significant interaction is present and you need to describe that interaction
looks at the effect of one IV at individual levels of the other IV
graph + planned comparisons
used when there is no interaction, but there are a priori hypotheses about which groups are different
restricts the number of tests, so FW alpha stays less than .05 and there is greater power
graph + post hoc tests
there is no interaction and you’re unsure which groups will differ. tests for sig main effects (if they are stat sig main effect, then do post hocs)