> Hi! I have never used SPSS before because I didn´t have to make
> statisics. Now thinks changed and I am fighting with a sample of
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> 0 - incorrect answer, 1 - "less incorrect" answer, 0 - I don't know,
> 1- "less correct" answer, 2 - corret answer
Do you mean: 0 - incorrect answer, 1 - "less incorrect" answer,
2 - I don't know, 3 - "less correct" answer, 4 - correct answer ?
The Kruskal-Wallis test is for data collected in a simple one-way
design, but your design is more complicated. You have two crossed
nests: subjects within groups, crossed with items within conditions;
a further complication is that different conditions have different
numbers of items (just as different groups could, but do not, have
different numbers of subjects). An analysis of variance is possible,
but I do not know how to tell SPSS what the design is.
[... data deleted; see the original post ...]
Bruce Weaver - 12 Mar 2010 22:05 GMT
> > Hi! I have never used SPSS before because I didn´t have to make
> > statisics. Now thinks changed and I am fighting with a sample of
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> [... data deleted; see the original post ...]
Nesting can be indicated in two ways in SPSS:
1. ID within group
item within condition
2. ID(group)
item(condition)
So I think you could do something like the following:
UNIANOVA Answer BY Group Item Condition ID
/RANDOM=ID
/EMMEANS=TABLES(Group)
/EMMEANS=TABLES(Condition)
/EMMEANS=TABLES(Group*Condition)
/DESIGN=Group ID within group
condition item within condition
group*condition group*item within condition .
Or equivalently:
UNIANOVA Answer BY Group Item Condition ID
/RANDOM=ID
/EMMEANS=TABLES(Group)
/EMMEANS=TABLES(Condition)
/EMMEANS=TABLES(Group*Condition)
/DESIGN=Group ID(group)
condition item(condition)
group*condition group*item(condition) .
Am I missing any terms, Ray? Bear in mind that one has to omit the
last error term, because SPSS will try to compute a residual, so if
all terms (including the last error term) are included, the residual
will equal 0, and the model won't run.
There's probably a way to run this model via the MIXED procedure too
(i.e., as a multilevel model).
GLM Repeated Measures might work too, but the data would have to be
restructured to have one row per person. However, I think the
different number of items per condition might make that approach
problematic.
--
Bruce Weaver
bweaver@lakeheadu.ca
http://sites.google.com/a/lakeheadu.ca/bweaver/Home
"When all else fails, RTFM."
Ray Koopman - 13 Mar 2010 01:12 GMT
>>> Hi! I have never used SPSS before because I didn´t have to make
>>> statisics. Now thinks changed and I am fighting with a sample of
[quoted text clipped - 67 lines]
> bwea...@lakeheadu.cahttp://sites.google.com/a/lakeheadu.ca/bweaver/Home
> "When all else fails, RTFM."
Not having used SPSS since the maroon-manual days, I'm in no position
to say anything about the code.
I organize the sources of variance in crossed-nest designs by making a
table with one nest pair as row labels and the other as column labels.
The interactions are at the intersections.
In the present case the nest pairs are G, S|G and C, I|C,
where G = group, S = subject, C = condition, I = item.
It's arbitrary which pair goes down the side and which goes across
the top. (For completeness, I put the grand mean µ in the corner.)
µ C I|C
G GC GI|C
S|G SC|G SI|GC
I assume G and C are fixed, and S is random. If I is fixed then each
term involving S is the error terms for those above it in the table.
If I is random then things are messier. For instance, one form of the
test of G would be F' = MS(G)/[MS(S|G) + MS(GI|C) - MS(SI|GC)].
Another would be F" = [MS(G) + MS(SI|GC)]/[MS(S|G) + MS(GI|C)].
In both cases the degrees of freedom would be found using the Welch-
Satterthwaite approximation. See your favorite text that covers
combined mean squares and quasi-Fs.
Bruce Weaver - 15 Mar 2010 13:49 GMT
> >>> Hi! I have never used SPSS before because I didn´t have to make
> >>> statisics. Now thinks changed and I am fighting with a sample of
[quoted text clipped - 93 lines]
> Satterthwaite approximation. See your favorite text that covers
> combined mean squares and quasi-Fs.
OK, so I omitted SC|G term, or in SPSS syntax, condition*ID(group).
Here's the syntax with that term included:
UNIANOVA Answer BY Group Item Condition ID
/RANDOM=ID
/EMMEANS=TABLES(Group)
/EMMEANS=TABLES(Condition)
/EMMEANS=TABLES(Group*Condition)
/DESIGN=Group ID(group)
condition item(condition) condition*ID(group)
group*condition group*item(condition) .
The SI|GC term is omitted, and shows up as the residual.
--
Bruce Weaver
bweaver@lakeheadu.ca
http://sites.google.com/a/lakeheadu.ca/bweaver/Home
"When all else fails, RTFM."