3
$\begingroup$

I'm new to statistics and have a query:

I have been given a scenario: An experimenter set out to test the hypothesis that high-drive participants would be able to learn a simple task much more quickly than would low-drive participants. That hypothesis further stated that on a difficult task the opposite would be found – low-drive participants would learn the task more quickly. The experimenter’s operational definition of drive was each participant’s score on the Manifest Drive Scale. Twenty people who scored high on the scale (high drive) and 20 people who scored low on the scale (low drive) were given a difficult task to learn. The low-drive group learned the task more quickly than did the high-drive group, and the experimenter concluded that the hypothesis was correct.

The question: Is the conclusion of the scenario justified?

I am unsure how to determine whether or not the conclusion is justified because there is no more information and no statistical data in the scenario.

I have searched books and the internet, but they have not managed to shed any light for me, all help and answers would be much appreciated! :)

Improve this question
$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5
$\begingroup$

Since part of the hypothesis deals specifically with simple tasks, and the participants did not learn any such tasks during the experiment, the conclusion is clearly unjustified.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.