Galambos N Analysis Of Survey Results

284
-1

Published on

Analysis of Survey Results

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
284
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Galambos N Analysis Of Survey Results

  1. 1. Nora Galambos, PhDOffice of Institutional Research Stony Brook University
  2. 2. » What hypotheses are being tested?» What types of analyses are planned to test the hypotheses?» Look over the instrument and create a map or outline of possible analysis methods» What is the magnitude of the differences you would like to detect?
  3. 3. » The most obvious reason for pilot testing is to be able to estimate the sample size.» Find potential sources of bias» Assists in power calculations» Discover possible distribution problems prior to surveying the entire sample
  4. 4. » A Type I error occurs when a true null hypothesis is rejected. The probability of a Type I error is denoted by α, and is the significance level of the hypothesis test, with 0.05 being a common value for α.» On the other hand, a Type II error occurs when the null hypothesis is false and it is not rejected. A Type II error is denoted by β and is often set to 0.20.
  5. 5. True ResultsExperimental Results Ho is true Ho is falseReject Ho α (Type I error rate) Power = 1 - βAccept Ho β (Type II error rate)
  6. 6. » Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences—Jacob Cohen» The power of a significance test is the probability of rejecting a false null hypothesis, and is equal to 1 - β. If β is 0.20, the power = 0.80.» 0.80 is generally considered to be adequate level for the power» Since sample size and power are related, a small sample size results in less power, or reduced probability of rejecting a false null hypothesis.
  7. 7. d = 0.2, 0.5, 0.8 (small, medium, and large effects)n (for each group) 0.2 0.5 0.8 30 0.03 0.24 0.66 40 0.04 0.35 0.82 50 0.06 0.45 0.91 60 0.07 0.55 >0.995 80 0.12 0.82 >0.995 100 0.29 0.99 >0.995 200 0.29 >0.995 >0.995 500 0.72 >0.995 >0.995
  8. 8. » Missing Completely at Random (MCAR) ˃ Given two variables X and Y, the missingness is unrelated to either. The missing values in X are independent of Y and vice versa. ˃ If the data are MCAR, then listwise deletion is appropriate» Missing at Random (MAR) ˃ Given two variables X and Y, the missingness is related to or dependent upon X, but not Y. Suppose X = age and Y = income and income is more often missing in certain age groups, but within each age group, no income group is missing more often that any others, then the data are MAR.» Nonignorable ˃ Given two variables X and Y, the missingness is related to X, but may also be related to Y. In our age-income example, certain income groups within an age group may be less likely to respond.
  9. 9. » Select items with a missing percentage greater than 1% or 2%.» Recode them into binary variables where with 1=missing and 0=non-missing.» Analyze these variables by the demographic variables using t-tests or chi-square, as appropriate.» Significant results indicate that missingness is associated with one or more of the demographic variables.
  10. 10. » Used to uncover relationship patterns among a group of variables with the goal of reducing the variables to a smaller group» Two types of data reduction methods-- confirmatory and exploratory» Exploratory factor analysis does not assume any particular structure prior to the analysis and is used to “explore” relationships between variables» Confirmatory factor analysis is used to test hypotheses regarding the underlying structure of a group of variables» Traditional factor analysis and principal components analysis are exploratory data reduction methods
  11. 11. » Principal components analysis a method often used for reducing the number of variables» Principal components analysis is part of the factor analysis procedures in SAS and SPSS» Although factor analysis (FA) and principal components analysis (PCA) have mathematical differences the results are often similar» Many authors loosely use the term “factor analysis” to refer to data reduction methods, in general
  12. 12. » Finds groups that are correlated with each other, possibly measuring the same construct.» Reduces the variables in the data to a smaller number of items that account for most of the variance of all of the variables in the data» The first component accounts for the greatest amount of variance. Then second one accounts for the greatest amount not accounted for by the first component and is uncorrelated with the first component.
  13. 13. » Suggested sample size: at least 100 subjects and 10 observations per variable» A correlation analysis of the variables should result in most correlations greater than 0.3» Bartlett’s test of sphericity is significant (p < 0.05)» Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test of sampling adequacy ≥ 0.6» Determinant >0.00001 which indicates that multicollinearity is not a problem
  14. 14. » In SPSS select principal components under “extraction method”» Select varimax rotation. ˃A rotation uses a transformation to aid in the interpretation of the factor solution ˃A varimax rotation is orthogonal, so the components are uncorrelated, which maximizes the column variance
  15. 15. » Kaiser criterion—choose components with eigenvalues greater than one.» Scree plot—plot of eigenvalues ˃ Retain the eigenvalues before the leveling off point of the plot.» Want the proportion of variance accounted for by each factor (or component) to be 5% to 10%» Cumulative variance accounted for should be 70% to 80%
  16. 16. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared LoadingsComponent Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1 14.26 47.53 47.53 14.26 47.53 47.53 7.22 24.06 24.06 2 2.55 8.49 56.02 2.55 8.49 56.02 5.79 19.31 43.37 3 1.37 4.56 60.58 1.37 4.56 60.58 4.41 14.70 58.07 4 1.09 3.64 64.22 1.09 3.64 64.22 1.84 6.15 64.22 5 0.98 3.26 67.48 6 0.86 2.86 70.33 7 0.80 2.67 73.00 8 0.75 2.51 75.51 9 0.68 2.25 77.76 10 0.62 2.06 79.82 11 0.58 1.93 81.75 12 0.56 1.88 83.63 13 0.49 1.64 85.27 14 0.48 1.59 86.85
  17. 17. » There should be at least three items with significant loadings on each component» Check the conceptualization of the component items» With an orthogonal rotation the factor loadings = correlation between variable and component» A communality is the proportion of variance in a variable that is accounted for by the retained components or factors. A communality is large if it loads heavily on at least one component.
  18. 18. » Factor score ˃Save the regression scores as variables ˃Standardize the survey responses ˃For each subject’s response, multiply the standardized survey response by the corresponding regression weights—add the results» Factor-based score ˃Average the responses of the items in the component ˃Check for reverse codings and missing data.
  19. 19. » Cronbach’s Alpha is used to measure the reliability or the internal consistency of the factors or components.» The variables in a scale are all entered into the calculation to obtain the alpha score.» A Cronbach’s alpha > 0.7 is considered to be sufficient for demonstrating internal consistency for most social science research, while values > 0.6 are marginably acceptable
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×