Hypothesis Testing Of The Observation AblitiesDif Essay

, Research Paper

Hypothesis testing of the observation ablities/differences of males/femalesWhat is true in the eyes of one, can be seen as a delusion inanother. We, as a society, are made up of a dramatically diverse amalgamof cultures and abilities. Finding out what those differences are can help us reach a better understanding of each other, thus a more equitablerelationship can be developed. Therefore, finding the observationalabilities of a given group may help yield some interesting and valuableinformation. In the following study several groups were tested on theirobservational abilities. In order to develop such a test, it was necessaryto devise a structured approach for gathering and interpreting theinformation. Therefore, the scope of the test was formulated based onhypothesis testing. The following hypothesis was established as the criterion for the test:Null hypothesis (Ho): Males and females do not have different observational abilities Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Males and females do have different observational abilitiesEXPERIMENTAL DESIGNThe study consisted of 3 groups of varying size and structure. During the initial phase, the members of the study were unaware thatany test was being conducted. The locations of the test were WilfordHall Medical Center : Primary Care Meeting, University of the Incarnate Word : World Literature Class, and University of Texas at San Antonio : Business Statistics Class. The sample sizes and constructs were asfollows:Wilford Hall Medical Center:30 people – 19 (F) 11 (M)University of the Incarnate Word:19 people – 9 (F) 10 (M)University of Texas at San Antonio:32 people – 11 (F) 21 (M) The test subjects were all presented with the same scenario, given thenormal degree of variation. The procedure of the test was as follows:+ The instructor/manager was advised that a test would be conducted sometime during the period. + A male messenger with black hair and wearing a blue shirt and slacks, would enter the room unannounced.+ The messenger would hand an envelope to the instructor. + The messenger would then say, “This is from Debbie”. + The messenger would then exit the room. The instructor/manager had been asked to wait 10 minutes, then theinstructor/manager would pass out a form for the respondents to fillout (Results: Sample Form). All the data was compiled and corrected, then the data was inputtedinto the SPSS statistical program for analysis. Each correct answer on the form was given a value of 10 and each incorrect answer was givena value of 0. The male and female respondents were analyzed individuallyby sex and group (Results: Descriptives), Then the relevant scores anddata of the groups were evaluated against each other (Results: Observation Test – Mean Scores). RESULTSThe following pages contain a sample test and the output of dataretrieved from the study. The programs used to evaluate and display the data were the SPSS Professional Statistical Software and Microsoft Excel. SAMPLE TEST FORMPlease answer the following questions about the messenger that hadpreviously entered the room. If you do not know the correct response

then choose the “unknown” option, please do not guess. Thank You!1) Was the messenger male or female? Male Female Unknown2) What color was the messengers clothing? Red Black Tan Blue Gray Unknown3) What was the messengers hair color? Blond Brown Auburn Black Unknown4) What did the messenger say to the instructor/manager? How are you today This is from the Dean This is a nice day This is from Debbie Unknown5) What did the messenger hand the instructor/manager? An envelope A large/thick book Nothing A folder A pen and pencil Unknown+ Upon completion of this evaluation, please return it to theinstructor/manager. This has been a study to evaluate the observational abilities of men and women. All information will be for the sole usethis study. Thank you for your assistance. CONCLUSIONAccording to the analyzed data from this study, the Ho: Malesand Females do not have different observational abilities, would be false. Therefore, the H1: Males and Females do have different observationalabilities, would be true. The basis for this conclusion are as follows:+ All the mean scores of the female respondents were higher than that of the male respondents. + Individually, the majority of the female respondents answered more of the questions correctly.+ Individually, the majority of the male respondents answered more of the questions incorrectly. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDYIn any study it is equally important to understand the limitations, as well as prove the hypothesis. Therefore, it is necessary to outline the potential shortcoming of this study. The primary limitation of thisstudy is the sweeping generalization of observation abilities, based solelyon one scenario. In order to develop a more accurate conclusion, many more scenarios and elements would need to be implemented. The element ofsurprise could also be considered a possible limitation, for the participants may not have been in the frame of mind to be tested. Havingonly one trial per group and taking into account the small population size,these elements could lend themselves to skewing the results adversely. Theelement of bias was not a consideration in the overall conclusions. Therefore, several potential bias could enter the study, such as that men may not normally notice personal attire, nor that any degree of attention may be paid to another male. The male may take more notice of a female messenger than that of a male messenger, and vise versa for the female. The test in itself was limited in scope and application. The test was anall or nothing scoring system, not allowing for “coming close”. Thepossibility of visual restrictions of the respondents (i.e. poor sight,color blindness) was not taken into account. Also, the test only had fivequestions, all of which were very specific, not allowing for furtherobservations. Finally, the groups studied all had some degree of highereducation and were all involved in a structured scenario, a classroom or a meeting. Therefore, this may not represent a proper cross-section of the general population. As for the general reliability of the study, it would serve as a good basis for further investigation. Also, it must be takeninto account that the developer and administer of the study is not a professionally trained researcher. The study unto itself could not be held to absolute accuracy, nor could it be an integral part of a larger study, rather it would be best utilized as a point of reference.

36c