Page 277 - DMGT404 RESEARCH_METHODOLOGY

Unit 12: Hypothesis Testing

Notes
70 62 60
s = = 17.5, s = = 15.5, s = = 12
2
2
2
1
4 2 4 3 5
i
5. Within column variance s 2 = å æ ç è n - 1ö ÷ s 1 2
n - ø
k
i
-
-
-
æ 5 1 ö æ 5 1 ö æ 6 1 ö
= ç è 16 3 ø ÷ ´ 17.5 + ç è 16 3 ø ÷ ´ 15.5 + ç è 16 3 ø ÷ ´ 12
-
-
-
æ 4 ö æ 4 ö 5
= ç è 13 ø ÷ ´ 17.5 + ç è 13 ø ÷ ´ 15.5 + 13 ´ 12
192
Within column variance = = 14.76
13
Between column variance 20
6. F = = = 1.354
Within column variance 14.76
7. d.f. of Numerator = (3 - 1) = 2.
8. d.f. of Denominator = Sn – k = (5 - 1) + (5 - 1) + (6 - 1) = 16 - 3 = 13.
1
9. Refer to table using d.f. = 2 and d.f. = 13.
10. The value is 3.81. This is the upper limit of acceptance region. Since calculated value 1.354
lies within it we can accept H , the null hypothesis.
0
Conclusion: There is no significant difference in the effect of the three training methods.

Example: Let us now frame a problem to study the effects of incentive and gain sharing and
level of technology (independent variables) on productivity rate (dependent variable).
Productivity Rate Data of Workers of M/s. XYZ & Co.

Level of Technology Incentive and gain sharing
A B C
W 4 3 3
X 5 3 2
Y 1 1 1
Z 6 5 2

Solution:
1. Total values (T) of individual item = 36, n = 12
´
(T) 2 36 36
2. Correction factor = =
n 12
= 108

3. Total ss = (16 + 9 + 9 + 25 + 9 + 4 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 36 + 25 + 4)
= 140 – 108 = 32

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 271