(Apologies for the ASCII tables, Stackexchange doesn't allow HTML tables and since I'm not supposed to link to an image, this is the only way I know of showing the data)
I'm learning about ANOVA F-testing and stumbled upon this problem:
There exists the following set of data regarding four teaching methods and the scores of students who were subject to each teaching method:
Method 1 Method 2 Method 3 Method 4 ---------------------------------------- 65 75 59 94 87 69 78 89 73 83 78 80 79 81 62 88 81 72 83 69 79 76 90 ------------------------------------
$\bar{x} = 75.67$ $78.43$ $70.83$ $87.75$
$s = 8.17$ $7.11$ $9.58$ $5.80$
Where $\bar{x}$ is the mean of all scores for each teaching method and $s$ is the standard deviation for each method.
After conducting an ANOVA, I derive the following ANOVA table:
Source | Deg. Freedom | SS | MS | F | ------------------------------------------------------------- Treatment | 3 | 712.59 | 237.53 | 3.77 | Error | 19 | 1196.63 | 62.98 | - | Total | 22 | 1909.22 | - | - |
Now the question is: Test a level $\alpha = 0.05$ The null hypothesis is that there is no difference in mean achievement for the four teaching techniques.
So to restate:
$H_0$: Teaching technique does not have an influence on mean achievement of students
$H_1$: Teaching technique does have an influence
I work out the critical f value to be $f_{3,19;0.95}$ from an F-distribution table to be $3.1274$
The next step is what I don't understand.
We can claim that the teaching technique does have an influence on the mean achievement of the students (with less than 5% chance of being wrong)
The associated p-value is:
$p = P(X>3.77) = 0.0281$
and indeed, p < $0.05$ (hence reject of $H_0$)
But now where is this $0.0281$ from? It looks to be the probability that X > 3.77. If I'm not wrong, in this case $X ~ F_{3,19} = 3.1274$ (as calculated before) and so the p value should be the probability that 3.1274 is greater than 3.77. Now how can 3.1274 ever be greater than 3.77?