Relationship between the Two Variables - Assignment Example

Table 3: Correlations

Number of times cited by other authors

Overall quality as an instructor

Number of times cited by other authors

Pearson Correlation

1

.312*

Sig. (2-tailed)

.028

N

50

50

Overall quality as an instructor

Pearson Correlation

.312*

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

.028

N

50

50

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

PART TWO (2)

Table 4 clearly shows that there is a positive relationship between the anxious behavior rating and the interview. P-value=0.000<0.01 (level of significance).  We reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there exists a relationship between the two variables. The Pearson correlation is 0.881 which implies a strong relationship.

Table 4: Correlations

Anxious Behavior Rating (Range 0 to 25)

Interview (Range 0 to 9)

Anxious Behavior Rating (Range 0 to 25)

Pearson Correlation

1

.881**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

N

28

28

Interview (Range 0 to 9)

Pearson Correlation

.881**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

N

28

28

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 5 clearly shows that there is a negative relationship between the number of mistakes on maze tasks and the dysfunction core. For instance, as the number of mistakes on maze task increases the dysfunction score decreases. This can be explained by the p-value, from table 5, the p-value=0.000<0.01 (level of significance). We reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there exists a relationship between the two variables. At the same time, the Pearson correlation is -0.944 implying a strong negative relation.

Table 5: Correlations

Number of Mistakes on Maze Task

Dysfunction Score

Number of Mistakes on Maze Task

Pearson Correlation

1

-.944**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

N

14

14

Dysfunction Score

Pearson Correlation

-.944**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

N

14

14

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).