Fall 1998
Answers for Assignment 2
This file contains some introductory comments on Assignment 2. Following that are suggested responses to the different parts, along with some comments on the assignments that Social Studies 306 students handed in.
Introductory Comments
GET FILE='O:\STUDENTS\PUBLIC\306DATA\746r.sav'. EXECUTE .
FREQUENCIES VARIABLES=social meet .
N | ||
---|---|---|
Valid | Missing | |
Socializing | 615 | 131 |
Meet New People | 614 | 132 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Not Important | 155 | 20.8 | 25.2 | 25.2 |
2 Somewhat Important | 368 | 49.3 | 59.8 | 85.0 | |
3 Very Important | 92 | 12.3 | 15.0 | 100.0 | |
Total | 615 | 82.4 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | 9 No response | 5 | .7 | ||
System Missing | 126 | 16.9 | |||
Total | 131 | 17.6 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Not Important | 386 | 51.7 | 62.9 | 62.9 |
2 Somewhat Important | 204 | 27.3 | 33.2 | 96.1 | |
3 Very Important | 24 | 3.2 | 3.9 | 100.0 | |
Total | 614 | 82.3 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | 9 No response | 5 | .7 | ||
System Missing | 127 | 17.0 | |||
Total | 132 | 17.7 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Similarities and Differences. Large percentages of respondents who said they used alcohol said that socializing was somewhat or very important as a reason for using alcohol. All together, 75% of these respondents said socializing was a somewhat or very important reason for consuming alcohol. In contrast, only 37% of these respondents gave meeting new people as a somewhat or very important reason. Almost two-thirds of these respondents (63%) said that meeting people was not an important reason for using alcohol, whereas only one-quarter said that socializing was not an important reason. The two distributions are thus quite different with respondents generally considering socializing to be much more important as a reason for using alcohol than is meeting people.
The percentages in the table in the Report were obtained by grouping together the percentage of respondents (under valid percent) who reported the reason as somewhat or very important. As noted above, the 31% figure for meeting people appears to be a typo.
FREQUENCIES VARIABLES=rgrade12 rgpa drinks /NTILES= 4 /STATISTICS=STDDEV MEAN MEDIAN .
N | Mean | Median | Std. Deviation | Percentiles | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Missing
| 25 | 50 | 75 | ||||
Grade 12 grade | 695 | 51 | 80.73 | 82.00 | 8.91 | 77.00 | 82.00 | 90.00 |
UR grade point average | 504 | 242 | 74.09 | 72.00 | 7.87 | 67.00 | 72.00 | 77.00 |
Number of drinks per week | 605 | 141 | 8.21 | 5.00 | 9.43 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 11.00 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 55 | 12 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.7 |
62 | 22 | 2.9 | 3.2 | 4.9 | |
67 | 46 | 6.2 | 6.6 | 11.5 | |
72 | 90 | 12.1 | 12.9 | 24.5 | |
77 | 117 | 15.7 | 16.8 | 41.3 | |
82 | 151 | 20.2 | 21.7 | 63.0 | |
90 | 257 | 34.5 | 37.0 | 100.0 | |
Total | 695 | 93.2 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | System Missing | 51 | 6.8 | ||
Total | 51 | 6.8 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 55 | 10 | 1.3 | 2.0 | 2.0 |
62 | 39 | 5.2 | 7.7 | 9.7 | |
67 | 89 | 11.9 | 17.7 | 27.4 | |
72 | 146 | 19.6 | 29.0 | 56.3 | |
77 | 97 | 13.0 | 19.2 | 75.6 | |
82 | 80 | 10.7 | 15.9 | 91.5 | |
90 | 43 | 5.8 | 8.5 | 100.0 | |
Total | 504 | 67.6 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | System Missing | 242 | 32.4 | ||
Total | 242 | 32.4 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 0 | 70 | 9.4 | 11.6 | 11.6 |
1 | 53 | 7.1 | 8.8 | 20.3 | |
2 | 56 | 7.5 | 9.3 | 29.6 | |
3 | 43 | 5.8 | 7.1 | 36.7 | |
4 | 50 | 6.7 | 8.3 | 45.0 | |
5 | 37 | 5.0 | 6.1 | 51.1 | |
6 | 36 | 4.8 | 6.0 | 57.0 | |
7 | 22 | 2.9 | 3.6 | 60.7 | |
8 | 30 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 65.6 | |
9 | 18 | 2.4 | 3.0 | 68.6 | |
10 | 36 | 4.8 | 6.0 | 74.5 | |
11 | 9 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 76.0 | |
12 | 25 | 3.4 | 4.1 | 80.2 | |
13 | 11 | 1.5 | 1.8 | 82.0 | |
14 | 13 | 1.7 | 2.1 | 84.1 | |
15 | 9 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 85.6 | |
16 | 9 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 87.1 | |
17 | 6 | .8 | 1.0 | 88.1 | |
18 | 9 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 89.6 | |
19 | 2 | .3 | .3 | 89.9 | |
20 | 9 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 91.4 | |
21 | 5 | .7 | .8 | 92.2 | |
23 | 3 | .4 | .5 | 92.7 | |
24 | 7 | .9 | 1.2 | 93.9 | |
25 | 5 | .7 | .8 | 94.7 | |
26 | 5 | .7 | .8 | 95.5 | |
27 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 95.7 | |
29 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 95.9 | |
30 | 5 | .7 | .8 | 96.7 | |
32 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 96.9 | |
33 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 97.0 | |
34 | 2 | .3 | .3 | 97.4 | |
35 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 97.5 | |
36 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 97.7 | |
37 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 97.9 | |
38 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 98.0 | |
40 | 2 | .3 | .3 | 98.3 | |
42 | 2 | .3 | .3 | 98.7 | |
43 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 98.8 | |
45 | 2 | .3 | .3 | 99.2 | |
47 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 99.3 | |
54 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 99.5 | |
60 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 99.7 | |
66 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 99.8 | |
67 | 1 | .1 | .2 | 100.0 | |
Total | 605 | 81.1 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | System Missing | 141 | 18.9 | ||
Total | 141 | 18.9 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Answer
The mean grade twelve average is 81 and the mean GPA for U of R is 74, a difference of 7 points. Note that the median and quartiles generally differ by 10 points, with the U of R average the lower of the two. The standard deviation for the two sets of grades is similar, so the variation in grades is much the same in Grade 12 and at the U of R, but with the distribution for U of R shifted to a considerably lower average. Note that just under 60% of students reported Grade 12 grades of 80 or more, while only about one-quarter said that their U of R average was this high. A similar percentage, 2 per cent, reported grades of 60 or less. Almost one-half of U of R grades were in the 70s, as opposed to only about 30% of grade 12 grades.
Some of you noted that there were a lot of missing case for the U of R GPA. But this was as requested in question 42 of the questionnaire. Those students who were in their first semester were not to report a U of R GPA, and this accounts for most of the missing cases.
For alcohol consumption, the number of drinks per week averaged just over eight. Note that the median was only 5 drinks per week, and while there were several students who reported 20 or more drinks per week (about 10%), just over one-half of those who used alcohol reported 5 or less drinks per week.
In the question, there was no intention of relating grades to alcohol consumption, as some of you tried to do. These were just different frequency distributions.
These values may differ from the actual values because (i) the sample was not representative of all undergraduates, (ii) people do not report their responses honestly, but exaggerate or minimize, and (iii) respondents do not know the correct answer (cannot recall or cannot quickly estimate the values). There may be other possible reasons but these would be the main ones.
Question 1.c.
DESCRIPTIVES
VARIABLES=rgpa drinks
/STATISTICS=MEAN STDDEV MIN MAX .
N | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | Std. Deviation | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
UR grade point average | 504 | 55 | 90 | 74.09 | 7.87 |
Number of drinks per week | 605 | 0 | 67 | 8.21 | 9.43 |
Valid N (listwise) | 426 |
Answer.
The values for the mean and standard deviation are identical to those obtained from the frequencies procedure. This is just an alternative way to obtain these statistics, one that does not produce the whole table. This might be an advantage for DRINKS, the number of drinks per week, since this is such a large table.
Question 1.d.
(i) The following are the frequency distributions for the seven variables concerning handling alcohol at the top of the second page of the Report. The valid per cents have been rounded to the nearest integer, but other than that these frequency distributions are the ones shown in the Report.
FREQUENCIES
VARIABLES=regret suffer relation actions blackout violent law .
N | ||
---|---|---|
Valid | Missing | |
Regret Drinking so Much? | 591 | 155 |
STUDIES SUFFER FROM ALCOHOL? | 588 | 158 |
RELATIONSHIPS SUFFER FROM ALCOHOL? | 587 | 159 |
Regret Actions | 589 | 157 |
Had Blackouts | 589 | 157 |
Became Violent | 588 | 158 |
Trouble with law | 588 | 158 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Not at all | 189 | 25.3 | 32.0 | 32.0 |
2 Sometimes | 368 | 49.3 | 62.3 | 94.2 | |
3 Often | 34 | 4.6 | 5.8 | 100.0 | |
Total | 591 | 79.2 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | 9 No response | 5 | .7 | ||
System Missing | 150 | 20.1 | |||
Total | 155 | 20.8 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Not at all | 435 | 58.3 | 74.0 | 74.0 |
2 Sometimes | 146 | 19.6 | 24.8 | 98.8 | |
3 A lot | 7 | .9 | 1.2 | 100.0 | |
Total | 588 | 78.8 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | System Missing | 158 | 21.2 | ||
Total | 158 | 21.2 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Not at all | 473 | 63.4 | 80.6 | 80.6 |
2 SOMETIMES | 108 | 14.5 | 18.4 | 99.0 | |
3 A LOT | 6 | .8 | 1.0 | 100.0 | |
Total | 587 | 78.7 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | System Missing | 159 | 21.3 | ||
Total | 159 | 21.3 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Not at all | 228 | 30.6 | 38.7 | 38.7 |
2 Sometimes | 332 | 44.5 | 56.4 | 95.1 | |
3 A lot | 29 | 3.9 | 4.9 | 100.0 | |
Total | 589 | 79.0 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | System Missing | 157 | 21.0 | ||
Total | 157 | 21.0 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Not at all | 417 | 55.9 | 70.8 | 70.8 |
2 Sometimes | 149 | 20.0 | 25.3 | 96.1 | |
3 A lot | 23 | 3.1 | 3.9 | 100.0 | |
Total | 589 | 79.0 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | System Missing | 157 | 21.0 | ||
Total | 157 | 21.0 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Not at all | 496 | 66.5 | 84.4 | 84.4 |
2 Sometimes | 83 | 11.1 | 14.1 | 98.5 | |
3 A lot | 9 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 100.0 | |
Total | 588 | 78.8 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | System Missing | 158 | 21.2 | ||
Total | 158 | 21.2 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Not at all | 534 | 71.6 | 90.8 | 90.8 |
2 Sometimes | 46 | 6.2 | 7.8 | 98.6 | |
3 Often | 8 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 100.0 | |
Total | 588 | 78.8 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | System Missing | 158 | 21.2 | ||
Total | 158 | 21.2 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
(ii) Frequency distributions for the diagrams on the third page, pressure from personal expectations and pressure from competing with other students. In all cases the missing responses have been excluded from the diagrams, so the percentages in the diagrams correspond to the percentages in the valid percent column.
FREQUENCIES
VARIABLES=personal compete .
N | ||
---|---|---|
Valid | Missing | |
PERSONAL | 738 | 8 |
COMPETE | 739 | 7 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 No Pressure | 6 | .8 | .8 | .8 |
2 | 26 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 4.3 | |
3 | 142 | 19.0 | 19.2 | 23.6 | |
4 | 362 | 48.5 | 49.1 | 72.6 | |
5 Extreme Pressure | 202 | 27.1 | 27.4 | 100.0 | |
Total | 738 | 98.9 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | 6 | 2 | .3 | ||
9 No response | 4 | .5 | |||
System Missing | 2 | .3 | |||
Total | 8 | 1.1 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 No Pressure | 151 | 20.2 | 20.4 | 20.4 |
2 | 180 | 24.1 | 24.4 | 44.8 | |
3 | 238 | 31.9 | 32.2 | 77.0 | |
4 | 126 | 16.9 | 17.1 | 94.0 | |
5 Extreme Pressure | 44 | 5.9 | 6.0 | 100.0 | |
Total | 739 | 99.1 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | 9 No response | 5 | .7 | ||
System Missing | 2 | .3 | |||
Total | 7 | .9 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
(iii) Frequency distribution for the respondents' self reported ethnic or national identity. Note that the numbers in the report have been rounded a bit, for example, the 76.4% who reported themselves as Canadian has been rounded to "three-quarters" in the text at the bottom of the third page.
FREQUENCIES
VARIABLES=identity .
N | ||
---|---|---|
Valid | Missing | |
Ethnic Self Identity | 734 | 12 |
Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | 1 Own Ethnic Origin | 68 | 9.1 | 9.3 | 9.3 |
2 Ethnic-Canadian | 58 | 7.8 | 7.9 | 17.2 | |
3 Canadian | 561 | 75.2 | 76.4 | 93.6 | |
4 Other | 46 | 6.2 | 6.3 | 99.9 | |
6 | 1 | .1 | .1 | 100.0 | |
Total | 734 | 98.4 | 100.0 | ||
Missing | 9 No response | 11 | 1.5 | ||
System Missing | 1 | .1 | |||
Total | 12 | 1.6 | |||
Total | 746 | 100.0 |
Question 2. a.
MEANS
TABLES=drinks cigday BY year
/CELLS MEAN COUNT STDDEV .
Cases | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Included | Excluded | Total | ||||
N | Percent | N | Percent | N | Percent | |
Number of drinks per week * Year of Program | 603 | 80.8% | 143 | 19.2% | 746 | 100.0% |
No. of cigarettes per day * Year of Program | 734 | 98.4% | 12 | 1.6% | 746 | 100.0% |
Year of Program | Number of drinks per week | No. of cigarettes per day | |
---|---|---|---|
1 First | Mean | 8.77 | 1.91 |
N | 237 | 298 | |
Std. Deviation | 9.12 | 4.51 | |
2 Second | Mean | 7.92 | 1.55 |
N | 143 | 175 | |
Std. Deviation | 9.10 | 4.23 | |
3 Third | Mean | 7.97 | 1.10 |
N | 139 | 166 | |
Std. Deviation | 9.42 | 3.54 | |
4 Fourth | Mean | 8.33 | 1.69 |
N | 66 | 75 | |
Std. Deviation | 12.04 | 4.63 | |
5 Fifth or more | Mean | 5.00 | 3.85 |
N | 18 | 20 | |
Std. Deviation | 4.38 | 7.74 | |
Total | Mean | 8.23 | 1.67 |
N | 603 | 734 | |
Std. Deviation | 9.44 | 4.39 |
Answer
The number of fifth year students is very small, so they will be excluded from this comment. For the others, there is little difference between the mean number of drinks consumed for each year of university. However, first year is highest at 8.8 drinks per week, fourth year is next at 8.33 drinks per week, and second and third year are virtually identical at just under 8.0 drinks per week.
Rather than saying that there is no significant difference in consumption by year, it would be better to say that the differences in consumption by year are small differences, and there is no consistent pattern of change in consumption by year.
A similar pattern does exist for cigarette consumption, with first year highest, followed by fourth year, and with second and third year lower. In this case though, third year is quite a bit lower.
While these patterns do not indicate much difference, it might be worth further investigation to see how or why the years might either differ or not differ.
Question 2.b.
MEANS
TABLES=sthours exthours dephours hwhours volhours relhours BY job
/CELLS MEAN COUNT STDDEV .
Cases | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Included | Excluded | Total | ||||
N | Percent | N | Percent | N | Percent | |
Study Hours * Hold a job? | 708 | 94.9% | 38 | 5.1% | 746 | 100.0% |
Extracurricular Hours * Hold a job? | 708 | 94.9% | 38 | 5.1% | 746 | 100.0% |
HOUSEHOLD WORK HOURS * Hold a job? | 704 | 94.4% | 42 | 5.6% | 746 | 100.0% |
DEPENDENT HOURS * Hold a job? | 707 | 94.8% | 39 | 5.2% | 746 | 100.0% |
VOLUNTARY WORK HOURS * Hold a job? | 708 | 94.9% | 38 | 5.1% | 746 | 100.0% |
RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES HOURS * Hold a job? | 710 | 95.2% | 36 | 4.8% | 746 | 100.0% |
Hold a job? | Study Hours | Extracurricular Hours | HOUSEHOLD WORK HOURS | DEPENDENT HOURS | VOLUNTARY WORK HOURS | RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES HOURS | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 No | Mean | 17.29 | 1.90 | 8.23 | 5.66 | 1.67 | 1.22 |
N | 317 | 320 | 318 | 316 | 321 | 321 | |
Std. Deviation | 13.77 | 6.78 | 29.24 | 12.57 | 6.28 | 5.88 | |
2 Yes | Mean | 14.51 | 1.49 | 3.15 | 4.25 | 1.57 | .75 |
N | 391 | 388 | 386 | 391 | 387 | 389 | |
Std. Deviation | 10.63 | 3.60 | 13.19 | 5.12 | 3.29 | 1.81 | |
Total | Mean | 15.76 | 1.67 | 5.44 | 4.88 | 1.62 | .96 |
N | 708 | 708 | 704 | 707 | 708 | 710 | |
Std. Deviation | 12.21 | 5.28 | 22.08 | 9.25 | 4.88 | 4.18 |
Answer
In all cases, the respondents without a job reported higher mean hours spent at the various activities. The largest difference reported was in housework, 8.2 hours per week for those without a job and 3.2 hours per week for this with a job. Those without a job also reported approximately 2.8 hours more study hours per week than those with a job. The other means did not differ greatly, although those without a job averaged higher hours at all activities than did those with a job.
Question 3.a.
CROSSTABS
/TABLES=msupport BY sex
/FORMAT= AVALUE TABLES
/STATISTIC=CHISQ
/CELLS= COUNT COLUMN .
Cases | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Missing | Total | ||||
N | Percent | N | Percent | N | Percent | |
MSUPPORT * SEX OF RESPONDENT | 696 | 93.3% | 50 | 6.7% | 746 | 100.0% |
SEX OF RESPONDENT | Total | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 MALE | 2 FEMALE
| ||||
MSUPPORT | 1 Strongly disagree | Count | 10 | 9 | 19 |
% within SEX OF RESPONDENT | 3.9% | 2.1% | 2.7% | ||
2 Disagree | Count | 15 | 4 | 19 | |
% within SEX OF RESPONDENT | 5.8% | .9% | 2.7% | ||
3 Neither | Count | 70 | 118 | 188 | |
% within SEX OF RESPONDENT | 27.2% | 26.9% | 27.0% | ||
4 Agree | Count | 118 | 199 | 317 | |
% within SEX OF RESPONDENT | 45.9% | 45.3% | 45.5% | ||
5 Strongly agree | Count | 43 | 109 | 152 | |
% within SEX OF RESPONDENT | 16.7% | 24.8% | 21.8% | ||
6 | Count | 1 | 1 | ||
% within SEX OF RESPONDENT | .4% | .1% | |||
Total | Count | 257 | 439 | 696 | |
% within SEX OF RESPONDENT | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
Value | df | Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |
---|---|---|---|
Pearson Chi-Square | 23.013(a) | 5 | .000 |
Likelihood Ratio | 23.027 | 5 | .000 |
Linear-by-Linear Association | 10.556 | 1 | .001 |
N of Valid Cases | 696 | ||
a 2 cells (16.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .37. |
Answer
Note that there are quite different numbers of males than females in the survey. In terms of numbers of University of Regina undergraduates, males were underrepresented by about 3 percentage points, so that is a problem with the Survey as a whole. But that should not be a particularly greater problem for this cross-classification than for any other part of the survey. What is needed in order to make the analysis of the table easier are row or column percentages. In general, if a variable has only two or three categories, I put this variable in the column and the other variable in the row. Then I request column percentages. This is how I will describe this table. In this case, sex has only two categories, male and female, so this variables is placed in the columns and view of multiculturalism is placed in the rows.
First note that while there are not major differences in the male and female column percentages, there is a statistically very significant chi-square statistic. This means that there is a statistically significant difference in the distribution of male and female responses.
Next note that the middle categories of neither and agree have very similar column percentages. But there are 3.9 + 5.8 = 9.7% of the males who disagree or strongly disagree. This contrasts with only 2.1 + 0.9 = 3.0% of the females who strongly disagree. So there is a greater likelihood of a male disagreeing than there is of a female disagreeing. At the other end of the spectrum, only 16.7% of males strongly agree with multiculturalism, while 24.8% of females strongly agree.
In summary, while there is not a large difference in the distribution of male and female views on multiculturalism, females are generally more supportive of multiculturalism than are males.
Question 3.b.
CROSSTABS
/TABLES=health BY smoke meals
/FORMAT= AVALUE TABLES
/STATISTIC=CHISQ
/CELLS= COUNT COLUMN .
Cases | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Missing | Total | ||||
N | Percent | N | Percent | N | Percent | |
State of Health * Do Your Smoke? | 742 | 99.5% | 4 | .5% | 746 | 100.0% |
State of Health * Regular Balanced Meals | 744 | 99.7% | 2 | .3% | 746 | 100.0% |
Do Your Smoke? | Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 Never | 2 Used to | 3 Smoke now
| ||||
State of Health | 1 Poor | Count | 3 | 4 | 7 | |
% within Do Your Smoke? | .6% | 2.9% | .9% | |||
2 Fair | Count | 48 | 11 | 24 | 83 | |
% within Do Your Smoke? | 9.5% | 11.1% | 17.1% | 11.2% | ||
3 Good | Count | 164 | 44 | 71 | 279 | |
% within Do Your Smoke? | 32.6% | 44.4% | 50.7% | 37.6% | ||
4 Very Good | Count | 217 | 34 | 25 | 276 | |
% within Do Your Smoke? | 43.1% | 34.3% | 17.9% | 37.2% | ||
5 Excellent | Count | 71 | 10 | 16 | 97 | |
% within Do Your Smoke? | 14.1% | 10.1% | 11.4% | 13.1% | ||
Total | Count | 503 | 99 | 140 | 742 | |
% within Do Your Smoke? | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
Value | df | Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |
---|---|---|---|
Pearson Chi-Square | 44.091(a) | 8 | .000 |
Likelihood Ratio | 45.295 | 8 | .000 |
Linear-by-Linear Association | 25.774 | 1 | .000 |
N of Valid Cases | 742 | ||
a 3 cells (20.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .93. |
Regular Balanced Meals | Total | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 Never | 2 Sometimes | 3 Often | 4 Always
| ||||
State of Health | 1 Poor | Count | 4 | 3 | 7 | ||
% within Regular Balanced Meals | 1.6% | .8% | .9% | ||||
2 Fair | Count | 6 | 52 | 21 | 4 | 83 | |
% within Regular Balanced Meals | 35.3% | 20.7% | 5.9% | 3.4% | 11.2% | ||
3 Good | Count | 6 | 117 | 132 | 25 | 280 | |
% within Regular Balanced Meals | 35.3% | 46.6% | 36.9% | 21.2% | 37.6% | ||
4 Very Good | Count | 2 | 56 | 157 | 61 | 276 | |
% within Regular Balanced Meals | 11.8% | 22.3% | 43.9% | 51.7% | 37.1% | ||
5 Excellent | Count | 3 | 22 | 45 | 28 | 98 | |
% within Regular Balanced Meals | 17.6% | 8.8% | 12.6% | 23.7% | 13.2% | ||
Total | Count | 17 | 251 | 358 | 118 | 744 | |
% within Regular Balanced Meals | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
Value | df | Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | |
---|---|---|---|
Pearson Chi-Square | 104.154(a) | 12 | .000 |
Likelihood Ratio | 104.426 | 12 | .000 |
Linear-by-Linear Association | 73.957 | 1 | .000 |
N of Valid Cases | 744 | ||
a 6 cells (30.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .16. |
Answer
For these tables, I placed smoking and well balanced meals in the columns, because these two variables each had fewer categories than did state of health (in the rows). Then I requested column percentages. Note that the chi-square statistic is highly statistically significant in each case, supporting the view that there is a relationship between the two variables in each of the tables. But with so many cells in each table, these tables are more difficult to analyze.
Smoking and Health. In general, there is a tendency for those tho never smoked to report better health. In order to see this, note that 43.1 + 14.1 = 57.2% of those who never smoked report very good or excellent health. For those who used to smoke, but no longer do, 10.1 + 34.3 = 44.4% report very good or excellent health. Finally, of those who smoke now, only 17.9 + 11.4 = 29.3% report very good or excellent health.
Around the middle of the table the differences in column percentages are smaller. But of those who smoke now, 20.0% report poor or fair health, 11.1% of those who used to smoke report poor or fair health, and of those who never smoked, 10.1% report poor or fair health.
In summary, those who smoke now generally report better health than those who used to smoke, and the latter generally consider themselves in better health than those who smoke now. This is a fairly clear relationship between the two variables, with more smoking associated with reports of poorer health.
Well Balanced Meals and Health. This table is even more difficult to analyze but the same approach shows that those who say they eat well balanced meals generally report better health. Note the large percentages in the upper left of the table, with large percentages of those who never or only sometimes each well balanced meals reporting only poor or fair health. In contrast, the upper right of the table has few cases, so that those who often or always eat well balanced meals are unlikely to report poor or fair health.
The respondents who report often or always eating well balanced meals are concentrated in the middle and bottom of the table, reporting good, very good or excellent health. While many of those who never or sometimes eat well balanced meals report themselves in good health, relatively few on these respondents say they are in very good or excellent health.
For this table, do not eliminate categories that have few cases in them, but merge them with adjacent categories. In order to do this on the computer, the RECODE procedure in SPSS will help.
Question 4.a.
Number of drinks per week by faculty as reported on the first page of the 1997 Report. Note that I used the MEANS procedure. The frequency distribution for drinks in question 1 was very long, and if CROSSTABS were to be used here, this would produce a very large table. Again, the RECODE procedure can be used to produce a table that will not have so many cells.
MEANS
TABLES=drinks BY faculty
/CELLS MEAN COUNT STDDEV .
Cases | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Included | Excluded | Total | ||||
N | Percent | N | Percent | N | Percent | |
Number of drinks per week * FACULTY | 604 | 81.0% | 142 | 19.0% | 746 | 100.0% |
1 ADMIN | Mean | 9.18 |
---|---|---|
N | 78 | |
Std. Deviation | 12.22 | |
2 ARTS | Mean | 7.75 |
N | 146 | |
Std. Deviation | 8.16 | |
3 EDUCATION | Mean | 6.95 |
N | 57 | |
Std. Deviation | 6.58 | |
4 ENGINEERING | Mean | 10.09 |
N | 47 | |
Std. Deviation | 10.81 | |
5 ENTRANCE | Mean | 7.00 |
N | 7 | |
Std. Deviation | 3.92 | |
7 FINE ARTS | Mean | 11.22 |
N | 32 | |
Std. Deviation | 16.00 | |
8 GRAD | Mean | 3.50 |
N | 2 | |
Std. Deviation | .71 | |
9 PAS | Mean | 8.08 |
N | 38 | |
Std. Deviation | 8.63 | |
10 SCIENCE | Mean | 7.48 |
N | 147 | |
Std. Deviation | 7.62 | |
11 SW - HJ | Mean | 7.42 |
N | 43 | |
Std. Deviation | 7.83 | |
12 SPECIAL | Mean | 3.00 |
N | 2 | |
Std. Deviation | 2.83 | |
13 OTHER | Mean | 14.20 |
N | 5 | |
Std. Deviation | 17.21 | |
Total | Mean | 8.17 |
N | 604 | |
Std. Deviation | 9.38 |
Question 4.b.
Relationship between reported family income and grade point average. Again the MEANS procedure is used so the table does not have so many cells. Note that while there may be a small positive relationship (correlation of +0.21) it is not statistically significant and is not apparent in the means procedure. The hypothesis that higher family income is associated with higher grade point average is not supported by these data.
MEANS
TABLES=rgrade12 rgpa BY income
/CELLS MEAN COUNT STDDEV .
Cases | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Included | Excluded | Total | ||||
N | Percent | N | Percent | N | Percent | |
Grade 12 grade * Parents Income | 695 | 93.2% | 51 | 6.8% | 746 | 100.0% |
UR grade point average * Parents Income | 504 | 67.6% | 242 | 32.4% | 746 | 100.0% |
Parents Income | Grade 12 grade | UR grade point average | |
---|---|---|---|
0 Uncertain/Other | Mean | 79.50 | 77.00 |
N | 4 | 4 | |
Std. Deviation | 5.00 | 5.77 | |
1 Less than $20,000 | Mean | 79.09 | 73.13 |
N | 34 | 23 | |
Std. Deviation | 9.85 | 8.31 | |
2 $20,000-39,999 | Mean | 78.61 | 73.19 |
N | 122 | 91 | |
Std. Deviation | 10.07 | 8.46 | |
3 $40,000-59,999 | Mean | 81.52 | 74.48 |
N | 143 | 108 | |
Std. Deviation | 7.90 | 7.60 | |
4 60,000-79,999 | Mean | 81.80 | 74.31 |
N | 143 | 108 | |
Std. Deviation | 8.23 | 8.11 | |
5 $80,000-99,999 | Mean | 80.79 | 73.72 |
N | 80 | 57 | |
Std. Deviation | 9.02 | 8.31 | |
6 $100,000-149,999 | Mean | 81.83 | 74.24 |
N | 54 | 42 | |
Std. Deviation | 7.99 | 6.55 | |
7 $150,000-199,999 | Mean | 81.47 | 76.00 |
N | 19 | 14 | |
Std. Deviation | 10.07 | 9.26 | |
8 $200,000 plus | Mean | 76.00 | 74.82 |
N | 13 | 11 | |
Std. Deviation | 10.91 | 9.67 | |
9 No response | Mean | 81.16 | 74.26 |
N | 83 | 46 | |
Std. Deviation | 9.09 | 6.64 | |
Total | Mean | 80.73 | 74.09 |
N | 695 | 504 | |
Std. Deviation | 8.91 | 7.87 |
CORRELATIONS
/VARIABLES=inc rgrade12 rgpa
/PRINT=TWOTAIL NOSIG
/MISSING=PAIRWISE .
Income in dollars | Grade 12 grade | UR grade point average | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Pearson Correlation | Income in dollars | 1.000 | .021 | .048 |
Grade 12 grade | .021 | 1.000 | .358(**) | |
UR grade point average | .048 | .358(**) | 1.000 | |
Sig. (2-tailed) | Income in dollars | . | .598 | .306 |
Grade 12 grade | .598 | . | .000 | |
UR grade point average | .306 | .000 | . | |
N | Income in dollars | 644 | 608 | 454 |
Grade 12 grade | 608 | 695 | 491 | |
UR grade point average | 454 | 491 | 504 | |
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). |
Paul Gingrich
October 13, 1998