all if it please 6) There is some evidence that high school students justify cheating in class on the basis of poor teacher skills or low levels of teacher caring (Murdock, Miller, & Kohlhardt, 2004). Students appear to rationalize their illicit behavior based on perceptions ofhow their teachers view cheating. Poor teachers are thought not to know or care whether students cheat, so cheating in their classes are OK. Good teachers, on the other hand, do care and are alert to cheating, so students tend not to cheat in their classes. The following data are similar to the actual research results. The score represent judgments of the acceptability of cheating for the students in each sample. Is there a difference in the scores for students of differently skilled teachers? Use an e .05 and Bonferonni for post-hoc tests Teacher Skills For this hypothesis test, what is: Good Average Poor Teacher Teacher Teacher Step 1) H0: null hypothesis 4 4 uPoorTeacher 4 C 4 9 H1: research hypothesis 2 7 The judgn C 7 4 4 dfBetwee Step 2) C dWithi 2 Step 3) For this hypothesis test, what is: Step 1) H0: null hypothesis uPoorTeacher= HAverageTeacher = uGoodTeacher H1: research hypothes is The judgments of cheating scores are different for at least one level of teacher skills. dfBetween-Treatments Step 2) Within-Treatments Step 3) Step 4) pa accept/reject Step 5) H0: null hypothesis accept/reject H1: research hypothesis Step 5B) Is there a significant difference in the judgment of cheating scores between the Yes/No students of "Poor Teachers" and "Average Teachers"? Yes/No students of "Average Teachers" and "Good Teachers"? Yes/No students of "Poor Teachers" and "Good Teachers"? 6) There is some evidence that high school students justify cheating in class on the basis of poor teacher skills or low levels of teacher caring (Murdock, Miller, & Kohlhardt, 2004). Students appear to rationalize their illicit behavior based on perceptions ofhow their teachers view cheating. Poor teachers are thought not to know or care whether students cheat, so cheating in their classes are OK. Good teachers, on the other hand, do care and are alert to cheating, so students tend not to cheat in their classes. The following data are similar to the actual research results. The score represent judgments of the acceptability of cheating for the students in each sample. Is there a difference in the scores for students of differently skilled teachers? Use an e .05 and Bonferonni for post-hoc tests Teacher Skills For this hypothesis test, what is: Good Average Poor Teacher Teacher Teacher Step 1) H0: null hypothesis 4 4 uPoorTeacher 4 C 4 9 H1: research hypothesis 2 7 The judgn C 7 4 4 dfBetwee Step 2) C dWithi 2 Step 3) For this hypothesis test, what is: Step 1) H0: null hypothesis uPoorTeacher= HAverageTeacher = uGoodTeacher H1: research hypothes is The judgments of cheating scores are different for at least one level of teacher skills. dfBetween-Treatments Step 2) Within-Treatments Step 3) Step 4) pa accept/reject Step 5) H0: null hypothesis accept/reject H1: research hypothesis Step 5B) Is there a significant difference in the judgment of cheating scores between the Yes/No students of "Poor Teachers" and "Average Teachers"? Yes/No students of "Average Teachers" and "Good Teachers"? Yes/No students of "Poor Teachers" and "Good Teachers"?

SOLUTION: (2) Null hypothesis (H): There is no significant difference between the mean effects due to the three treatments ie. 4 Alternative hypothesis (H): At least two of the three treatments differ significantly in their mean effects. i.e Given a 0.05 (3) The decision rule is, reject H, if calculated F> F-table value (4) Number of treatments (k) 3 (5) From the given data, N 24 Grand (G)72 Also Given that x =393 105 ニ=35 3 k Ex 393 =196.6 2 -1 F taldel 196.6 35 = 5.614 Since F-cal >The critical value of the test is, F-1) = Foospan reject our H = 4.4199 So we At least two of the three treatments differ significantly in their mean effects .