1. The researchers found a significant difference between the two groups (control and treatment) for change in mobility of the women with osteoarthritis (OA) over 12 weeks with the results of F(1,22) = 9.619,p = 0.005. Discuss each aspect of these results.
2. State the null hypothesis for the Baird and Sands (2004) study that focuses on the effect of the GI with PMR treatment on patients’ mobility level. Should the null hypotheses be rejected for the difference between the two groups in change of mobility scores over 12 weeks? Provide rationale.
3. The researchers stated that the participants in the intervention group reported a reduction in mobility difficulty at week 12. Was this result statistically significant, and if so at what probability?
4. If the researchers had set the level of significance or a = 0.01, would the results of p = 0.001 still be statistically significant? Provide rationale.
5. If F(30,60)= 4.13, p = 0.04, and a = 0.01, is the result statistically significant? Provide rationale. Would the null hypothesis be accepted or rejected?
6. Can ANOVA be used to test proposed relationships or predicted correlations between variables in a single group? Provide rationale.
7. If a study had a result of F(2,147) = 4.56, p= 0.003, how many groups were in the study , and what was the sample size?
8. The researchers state that the sample for their study was 28 women with a diagnosis of OA, and that 18 were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 10 were randomly assigned to the control group. Discuss the study strengths and/ or weaknesses in this statement.
9. In your opinion, have the researchers established that guided imagery with progressive muscle relaxation reduces pain and decreases mobility functions in women with OA?
10. The researchers stated that this was a 12 week longitudinal, randomized clinical pilot study with 28 women over 65 Years of age with the diagnosis of OA. What are some possible problems or limitations that might occur with this type of study?