Annotated Output from the Correlation/Regression SPSS Lesson [DataSet1] C:\Users\Vati\Desktop\Cyberloaf_Consc_Age.sav Statistics Cyberloafing Age Conscientiousn ess N Valid 51 51 51 Missing 0 0 0 Mean 22.67 37.82 39.76 Median 23.00 33.00 41.00 Std. Deviation 9.195 12.995 5.989 Skewness .008 .941 -.269 Std. Error of Skewness .333 .333 .333 Kurtosis -.691 -.091 -.882 Std. Error of Kurtosis .656 .656 .656 Minimum 4 22 28 Maximum 43 71 50 The skewness statistics above as well as the plots below show that the cyberloafind and Conscientiousness variables are close to normal in their distribution but that there is a distinct positive skew in the ages – but not quite large enough for me to worry about. Histogram
14
Embed
Annotated Output from the Correlation/Regression SPSS Lessoncore.ecu.edu/psyc/wuenschk/SPSS/Corr-Regr-SPSS-Output.pdf · 2015-06-07 · The plots above reveal no problems with normality
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Annotated Output from the Correlation/Regression SPSS Lesson [DataSet1] C:\Users\Vati\Desktop\Cyberloaf_Consc_Age.sav
Statistics
Cyberloafing Age Conscientiousn
ess
N Valid 51 51 51
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 22.67 37.82 39.76
Median 23.00 33.00 41.00
Std. Deviation 9.195 12.995 5.989
Skewness .008 .941 -.269
Std. Error of Skewness .333 .333 .333
Kurtosis -.691 -.091 -.882
Std. Error of Kurtosis .656 .656 .656
Minimum 4 22 28
Maximum 43 71 50
The skewness statistics above as well as the plots below show that the cyberloafind and Conscientiousness variables are close to normal in
their distribution but that there is a distinct positive skew in the ages – but not quite large enough for me to worry about. Histogram
Pearson Correlations
Cyberloafing Age Conscientious
ness
Cyberloafing
Pearson Correlation 1 -.462** -.563
**
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .000
N 51 51 51
Age
Pearson Correlation -.462** 1 .143
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .317
N 51 51 51
Conscientiousness
Pearson Correlation -.563** .143 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .317
N 51 51 51
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Spearman Correlations
Cyberloafing Age Conscientious
ness
Spearman's rho
Cyberloafing
Correlation Coefficient 1.000 -.431** -.551
**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .002 .000
N 51 51 51
Age
Correlation Coefficient -.431** 1.000 .110
Sig. (2-tailed) .002 . .442
N 51 51 51
Conscientiousness
Correlation Coefficient -.551** .110 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .442 .
N 51 51 51
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Regression
Model Summaryb
Model R R Square Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .563a .317 .303 7.677
a. Predictors: (Constant), Conscientiousness
b. Dependent Variable: Cyberloafing
ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1
Regression 1339.801 1 1339.801 22.736 .000b
Residual 2887.532 49 58.929
Total 4227.333 50
a. Dependent Variable: Cyberloafing
b. Predictors: (Constant), Conscientiousness
Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 57.039 7.288 7.826 .000
Conscientiousness -.864 .181 -.563 -4.768 .000
Residuals Statisticsa
Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation N
Predicted Value 13.82 32.84 22.67 5.176 51
Residual -17.056 18.859 .000 7.599 51
Std. Predicted Value -1.709 1.965 .000 1.000 51
Std. Residual -2.222 2.457 .000 .990 51
a. Dependent Variable: Cyberloafing
The largest absolute standardized residual has value 2.22. It might be wise to investigate this case. Charts
The residuals appear to be distributed pretty close to normally. Cyberloafing was significantly negatively correlated with Conscientiousness, Cyberloafing = 57.04 - .864*Conscientiousness, t(49) = 4.768, p < .001, r = -.563, 95% CI [ -.725,