ISN403 : Data Analysis - Djarin and Grogu Case Study - Management Assignment Help

Assignment Task:

Task:

Question 1
Question 1: Background

Djarin and Grogu (2021) wanted to examine whether an 8-week mental and physical (MAP) training program would reduce psychological stress in a sample of tertiary education students. The MAP training program involved 10 minutes of mindfulness meditation per day in combination with 20 minutes of moderate intensity running training three days per week. To assess the effectiveness of this intervention, Djarin and Grogu (2021) recruited a sample of N = 140 tertiary education students from a variety of disciplines and randomly allocated them to one of four groups (n = 35 per group): (1) the MAP training program (MAP), (2) mindfulness training alone (MIN), (3) running training alone (RUN), or (4) a no-treatment control group (CON). Psychological stress was assessed using the Perceived Stress Scale 10-item version (PSS-10), which gives a total stress score ranging from 0 to 40 (higher scores indicate higher psychological stress). Djarin and Grogu (2021) only collected measures of psychological stress following the training intervention (i.e., at post-test) and did not take any measurements before the intervention (pre-test). This makes the research design a randomized posttest-only control group study.

Djarin and Grogu (2021) were interested in two specific hypotheses. First, they predicted that individuals in the MAP training group would report lower psychological stress compared to the no-treatment control (MAP vs. CON). Second, they predicted that individuals in the MAP training group would report lower psychological stress compared to the average stress score of the mindfulness training group and exercise training group together (MAP vs. Average of MIN and RUN).

Question 1: Dataset

Djarin and Grogu’s (2021) data set is available in an SPSS save file called: question1.sav

Question 1: Task Instructions

Perform a one-factor between-groups ANOVA on the posttest scores. Follow this up with the two planned contrasts that will evaluate Djarin and Grogu’s (2021) two specific hypotheses. If these contrasts are not orthogonal, use the Bonferroni adjustment to maintain the familywise error rate at α = .05 (this includes reporting Bonferroni corrected confidence intervals). Your write-up should address all the following:

Results
1. What were your test assumptions and were they satisfied? Begin by first checking for outliers followed
by the two additional testable assumptions of the one-factor between-groups ANOVA design.
2. What statistical test was performed on the data?
3. What were the results of the statistical test?

4. What were the results of the follow-up tests (if relevant)? (Abridged) Discussion
1. Provide a statement of support or non-support for each study hypothesis
2. Provide a brief interpretation of the results, focusing on the effect size estimate and confidence intervals.

Question 2
Question 2: Background

Fett and Shand (2020) wanted to evaluate the effectiveness of a 12-week exercise intervention for improving affective wellbeing among individuals currently experiencing severe work stress (mode = cycle ergometer training; frequency = three sessions per week; duration = 60 minutes per session; intensity = moderate to vigorous intensity). To this end, the researchers recruited a sample of 72 full-time workers who were referred into the program by their company doctor. These individuals were randomly allocated to one of two groups: (1) exercise training (n = 36), or (2) a no-treatment control (n = 36). Affective wellbeing was measured using the World Health Organization Wellbeing Index 5 (WHO-5), which gives a total score ranging from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicate higher affective wellbeing). Fett and Shand (2020) administered this measure at two time points: one week prior to the intervention (pre-test) and one week following completion of the intervention (post-test). This makes the research design a randomized pretest-posttest control group study.

Question 2: Data

Fett and Shand’s (2020) data set is available in an SPSS save file called: question2.sav.

Question 2a: Task Instructions

There was attrition in Fett and Shand’s (2020) study in both the exercise group and the no-treatment control. Perform a missing values analysis for each group, separately, using all the available variables in the data set to determine a plausible missingness mechanism of the posttest data for each group. If it is plausible that missing data are MCAR or MAR, impute missing data separately for each group using the fully conditional specification (maximum of 50 iterations) and predictive mean matching for scale variables with a total of 50 imputations. Set the starting point for the random number generator in SPSS to be a fixed value of 900. In your write-up identify:

1. What software was used to evaluate patterns of missing data
2. What variable(s) have missing data and how much missing data is there?
3. What are your assumptions regarding the missingness mechanism and why is this assumption plausible?
4. What software and procedures were used to impute the missing data, identifying your auxiliary variables (if appropriate)?
5. The mean and standard deviation of the variable(s) with missing data before and after imputation.

This ISN403  Management Assignment has been solved by our Management Experts at onlineassignmentbank. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.

Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment Experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.