Okay, fuck all this stupid relationship advice always posted

http://www.biostathandbook.com/testchoice.html
Might help you. I think you have a problem in that you have such a small sample size though, you should have at least 30 in each group.

>>16523960

I agree, if I could conduct the study again I would find more participants, but the study is concluded and now I'm just compiling and examining the data.

File: image.jpg (250KB, 879x1280px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 879x1280px

Bump

Pleading bump

>>16523951
Guess you should have picked a different answering format then.
But really, I don't understand your problem. You know it's significant, you know which group thought more that animal testing is wrong, what else do you want?
Do an ANOVA or whatever idk senpai desu

>>16524031

I need to actually conduct a test, whether it be ANOVA, t test, or chi square, to show that there is a statistical significant difference.

Just because with my eyes I can see 0 ppl marking morally right, 6 marked morally wrong, and 14 marked depends compared to 3 marking morally right, 3 marking morally wrong, and 14 marking depends doesn't mean I can just put that down. I need to show statistically with p < .05 that the differences are significant, and I've never really worked with nominal values before. There is no mean, only ratios of like 0/20 or 3/20 and I'm hopelessly confused.

>>16524041
Well, then how do you know it's significant in the first place?
Are you using SPSS btw?

>>16524045
I don't think OP knows if it's significant at all, I think they're just guessing. If they're confused about which test to use, there's no way they know if it's significant or not.

OP, what the fuck are you doing? Go and ask a professor

>>16524045

I am using SPSS, and I don't necessarily know it is statistically significant, I'm just saying based on looking at the numbers it seems that it is. That is my entire point though, I need to confirm whether or not these differences are significant. I also technically have another question along the same principle in which I asked participants whether they would approve of non invasive, moderate, invasive, or no animal testing at all and got varied results between the two groups. But again, with it being nominal values I'm confused but know if i can figure out this problem I could apply it to test one.

You made me think I was on /out/

>>16524054
Yeah, you don't seem to have much of a clue what you're doing. How did you manage it this far in your statistics class?

>>16524057

I took stats over a year ago and passed just fine. This is for a psychology class in research and experimental methods.

>>16524061
Did they not teach you what you need to do? Seriously when I did research methods classes for psychology, it was so dumbed down they were basically doing the work for you

>>16524061
Obviously it's for a psychology class, the other anons responding here are probably psy students or finished as well.
But you clearly didn't pay attention.
Anyway, I did a crosstab and a t-test on your stuff and there is nothing significant. Tough luck, pal.

>>16524063

No, sadly we had literally a 30 minute tutorial which was just how to input your data for idiots who haven't used excel before. The teacher is young and seems way over her head so there hasn't been much guidance. I've been figuring out SPSS by myself with YouTube and the Internet but am stuck on how to solve this problem.

This will be the last time I won't be using actual values for conducting any type of study. SPSS is so nice in calculating all sorts of things that it was such a breeze to find my variability and measure other questions on my study that were actually ordinal.

>>16524069

There's no tough luck at all, I'm fine if there isn't a significant difference just as long as I can show that.

The study is a bit of a joke anyways thanks to having 3 female group members but it is what it is.

Can you explain how you performed your test though? I haven't even heard of a crosstab.

>>16524078
Analyze->Descriptive stats->Crosstabs
Some additional statistics to your liking, be sure to tick "expected" in "cells"
Other than that, add in a non-parametric test, Whitney's U is standard, I hope you know how that works? If not, Analyze->Non-Parametric->Legacy Dialogs->2 Independent Samples

>>16524090

Thank you so much, I'll be doing this first thing tomorrow morning. I've carried this study basically by myself in writing the paper but thankfully we wrote a group contract that pretty much guarantees my groupies won't be sharing the same grade as me as I have proof I've done almost all of the work. I hate psychology that it's infested with females who are only taking classes so their parents keep giving them dough.

This was my only hurdle and now I just need to get up in 5 hours and test this question along with the other one I mentioned. So again, thanks, you really saved my ass.

For future reference, does anyone know a good guide to using SPSS? I'm almost overwhelmed with all the options available

>>16524106
No problem. Male psy student here as well, so I know what you mean. Good luck with the rest of your studies mate.

>>16524109
All I know of are books, cheapest is 25$ or something. Might be worth it though.