1

HW4: Inferential Statistics

HW4: Inferential Statistics

Master of Education

Khilola Alihon

2021005221

Walid El-Jammal

EDUC 685: Analytics for Data-Driven Leadership | Fall 2023

October 18, 2023

 2
HW4: Inferential Statistics

Task Guidance: A political consultant wanted to judge the impact of speech. The consultant

recruited a group of registered votes and asked them to indicate their voting intentions on a 1-

to 7 scale (1=absolutely will not vote for this candidate, 7=absolutely will vote for this

candidate). Next, the candidate delivered the speech. Finally the consultant readmisters the

one- question survey to each participants.

Research Question: What is the effect of the candidate's speech on registered voters' voting

intentions, as measured by changes in their responses on a 1-to-7 scale from before to after

the speech?

Null Hypothesis (H0): The candidate's speech will have no significant effect on registered

voters' voting intentions, as measured by changes in their responses on a 1-to-7 scale from

before to after the speech.

Alternative Hypothesis (H1): The candidate's speech will have a significant effect on

registered voters' voting intentions, as measured by changes in their responses on a 1-to-7

scale from before to after the speech.

 3
HW4: Inferential Statistics

Pretest Checklist

Figure 1 Criterion of Normality; data score of pretest and posttest diff

diff
Frequenc Valid Cumulative
y Percent Percent Percent
Valid -5.00 2 3.8 3.8 3.8
-3.00 4 7.5 7.5 11.3
-2.00 5 9.4 9.4 20.8
-1.00 5 9.4 9.4 30.2
.00 6 11.3 11.3 41.5
1.00 6 11.3 11.3 52.8
2.00 14 26.4 26.4 79.2
3.00 2 3.8 3.8 83.0
4.00 7 13.2 13.2 96.2
5.00 1 1.9 1.9 98.1
6.00 1 1.9 1.9 100.0
Total 53 100.0 100.0

Figure 2 Histogram of pretest and posttest diff

 4
HW4: Inferential Statistics

T-Test

Figure 3 Paired-Samples (summary)statistics for pretest and posttest.

Paired Samples Statistics

Std. Std. Error
Mean N Deviation Mean
Pair 1 pretest 3.68 53 1.578 .217
posttest 4.47 53 1.908 .262

The Paired Sample Test table (Figure3) focused on the difference between the mean of the

pretest (µ=3.68) and the mean of the posttest (µ=4.47) scores. Which is -0.79(3.68-

4.47=.079) The last column, Sig showed that p value is .026 is less than the specified α level

of .05. We could conclude that there is a statistically significant difference between pretest

and posttest scores.

Figure 4 Paired-Samples Test Result.

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences Significance
95% Confidence
Std. Interval of the
Deviatio Std. Error Difference One- Two-
Mean n Mean Lower Upper t df Sided p Sided p
Pair pretest - -0.79 2.522 .346 -1.488 -.097 -2.288 52 .013 .026
1 posttest
 5
HW4: Inferential Statistics

Hypothesis Resolution

REJECT H0: The candidate's speech will have no significant effect on registered voters'

voting intentions, as measured by changes in their responses on a 1-to-7 scale from before to

after the speech.

ACCEPT H1: The candidate's speech will have a significant effect on registered voters'

voting intentions, as measured by changes in their responses on a 1-to-7 scale from before to

after the speech.

Since the p value (.026) is less than the specified α level (.05) this suggest that the .079-point

degree in pulse rate (3.68 to 4.47) statistically significant. In terms of hypothesis, we can

reject H0 and not reject H1.

Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test

Figure 5 Wilcoxon p Value=.028

Test Statisticsa
posttest - pretest
Z -2.192b
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .028

a. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test

b. Based on negative ranks.

Result
 6
HW4: Inferential Statistics

The Wilcoxon test result is found in the test statistics table (Figure5) the Asymp, Sig (2-tailed)

statistic rendered a p value.028; since this is less than α (.05) we could conclude that there is

a statistically significant difference between the score of pretest and posttest.

Conclusion:

The political consultant conducted a study to assess the influence of a candidate's speech on

registered voters. The consultant gathered a group of registered voters and had them express

their voting intentions on a 1-to-7 scale, with 1 indicating absolute unwillingness to vote for

the candidate and 7 representing a strong inclination to vote for the candidate. Subsequently,

the candidate delivered a speech to the participants. Following the speech, the consultant re-

administered the same one-question survey to each participant to evaluate any changes in

their voting intentions.

Referring, remember that the paired t-test produced a p value .026. The difference in this p

value is due to the internal transformation. The Wilcoxon test conducted on the data.