Prior to assessment of the outcome, the researchers did a manipulation check. Members of Groups 1 and 2 rated the attractiveness (on a 1 to 9 scale, with 9 being the most attractive) of the person in the photo. They reported that for the attractive photo, M = 7.53; for the unattractive photo, M = 3.20, F(1,108)= 184.29. Was this difference statistically significant (using α = .05)? b)What was the effective size for the difference in 2A c)Was their attempt to manipulate perceived attractiveness successful

Sigall and Ostrove (1975) did an experiment to assess whether the physical attractiveness of a defendant on trial for a crime had an effect on the severity of the sentence given in a mock jury trials. Each of the participants in this study was randomly assigned to one of the following three treatment groups; every participant received a package that described a burglary and gave background information about the accused person. The three treatment groups differed in the type of information that they were given about the accused person’s appearance. Members of Group 1 were showing a photo of an attractive person; members of Group 2 were shown a photograph of an unattractive person; members of Group 3 saw no photograph. Some of their results are described here. Each participant was asked to assign a sentence (in years) to the accused person; the researchers predicted that more attractive persons would receive shorter sentences.

a)Prior to assessment of the outcome, the researchers did a manipulation check. Members of Groups 1 and 2 rated the attractiveness (on a 1 to 9 scale, with 9 being the most attractive) of the person in the photo. They reported that for the attractive photo, M = 7.53; for the unattractive photo, M = 3.20, F(1,108)= 184.29. Was this difference statistically significant (using α = .05)?

b)What was the effective size for the difference in 2A

c)Was their attempt to manipulate perceived attractiveness successful

d)Why does the F ratio in 2A have just DF equals one in the numerator

e)The mean length of the sentence given in the three groups was following

Group 1: Attractive photo, M = 2.80

Group 2: Unattractive photo, M = 5.20

Group 3: No photo, M = 5.10

They did not report a single overall F comparing all three groups; instead, they reported selected pairwise comparisons. For Group 1 versus Group 2, F(1,108) = 6.60, ρ <. 025.

f)Was this difference statistically significant? If they had done an overall F to assess the significance of differences of means among all three groups, do you think this overall F would have been statistically significant? Was the difference in mean length of sentence in part (2e) in the predicted direction?

g)Calculate and interpret an effect-size estimate for this obtained F.

h)What additional information would you need about these data to do a Tukey honestly significant difference test to see whether Group 2 and 3, as well as 1 and 3, differed significantly?