librarygirl
New member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2010
- Messages
- 6
As part of a larger study, Speed and Gangestad (1997) collected ratings and nominations on a number of characteristics for 66 fraternity men from their fellow fraternity members. The following paragraph is taken from their results section:
. . .men's romantic popularity significantly correlated with several characteristics: best dressed (r = .48), most physically attractive (r = .47), most outgoing (r = .47), most self-confident (r = .44), best trendsetters (r = .38), funniest (r = .37), most satisfied (r = .32), and most independent (r = .28). Unexpectedly, however, men's potential for financial success did not significantly correlate with romantic popularity (r = .10). (p. 931)
1.) Explain what is meant by correlation coefficient using one of the correlations as an example.
My understanding- Does this mean that best dress correlates with most physically attractive?
2.) Speculate on the meaning of the pattern of results, taking into account the issue of direct causality.
My understanding – The pattern means that even though the guys may be well dressed, independent, and physically attractive it does not mean that they have romantic popularity. Is that right???
3.) What statistical technique did the authors use?
I have no idea please help here..
. . .men's romantic popularity significantly correlated with several characteristics: best dressed (r = .48), most physically attractive (r = .47), most outgoing (r = .47), most self-confident (r = .44), best trendsetters (r = .38), funniest (r = .37), most satisfied (r = .32), and most independent (r = .28). Unexpectedly, however, men's potential for financial success did not significantly correlate with romantic popularity (r = .10). (p. 931)
1.) Explain what is meant by correlation coefficient using one of the correlations as an example.
My understanding- Does this mean that best dress correlates with most physically attractive?
2.) Speculate on the meaning of the pattern of results, taking into account the issue of direct causality.
My understanding – The pattern means that even though the guys may be well dressed, independent, and physically attractive it does not mean that they have romantic popularity. Is that right???
3.) What statistical technique did the authors use?
I have no idea please help here..