Tests of Hypotheses for Unbalanced Factorial Designs Under Various Regression/Coding Method Combinations

Author:

Blair R. Clifford1,Higgins J.J.1

Affiliation:

1. University of South Florida

Abstract

The controversy surrounding regression methods for unbalanced factorial designs is well known and well documented in articles by Overall and Spiegel (1969), Rawlings ( 1972), Gocka (1973), Overall and Spiegel (1973a), Overall and Spiegel (1973b), Appelbaum and Cramer (1974), Overall, Spiegel and Cohen (1975), and Rock, Werts and Linn (1976) to name just a few. Since it is possible to use any one of several popular systems for coding independent classification variables (Kerlinger and Pedhazur, 1973) with any one of the proposed regression methods, it is not surprising that some controversy has arisen concerning these coding schemes as well (Wolf and Cartwright, 1974; Bogartz, 1975; Overall, Spiegel, and Cohen, 1975). To add to the confusion of the applied researcher, "canned" computer programs employ different regression methods (Golhar and Skillings, 1976) in conjunction with different coding schemes with little (or even worse, incorrect) documentation (Francis, 1973). This is important because, as will be shown below, different regression methods when used in combination with different coding schemes yield tests of different hypotheses. Some of these hypotheses seem quite useful, while others do not. Noteworthy also is the fact that these hypotheses as functions of regression/coding method combinations have not been explicitly delineated in the educational literature. Implicit in this paper then is the assumption that researchers assessing unbalanced factorial designs should be aware of the statistical hypotheses which they are bringing under test. This is true when the researcher designs his or her own regression model as well as when packaged computer programs are being used. In order to aid the applied researcher through this maze, then, the purposes of this paper are as follows: (1) to present the statistical

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Applied Mathematics,Applied Psychology,Developmental and Educational Psychology,Education

Cited by 8 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3