Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ...
Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ... Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ...
Table 20 Chi-Square (Ҳ 2 ) Test for Independence between Children’s Gender and CBVS Action Choices Action Choices Count Male Female Total Responses Prosocial 68 76 144 Aggressive 49 27 488 Total 284 348 632 Pearson Chi-Square (1, N=632) = 5.27 , p = .0217 Cramer’s V = 0.1645 100
Figure 4. Chi-Square (Ҳ2) Test for Independence Test and Difference of Proportions for CBVS Action Choices vs. Children’s Gender A test for the Difference in Proportions tested the following null hypothesis: There is no difference between the proportions of males and females who chose Prosocial Actions. 101
- Page 63 and 64: Other research suggests that childr
- Page 65 and 66: their behaviors, which may explain
- Page 67 and 68: Aggressive) and Justification Choic
- Page 69 and 70: Cohen-Posey, 1995; Coloroso, 2003;
- Page 71 and 72: children’s arrival, answered ques
- Page 73 and 74: esponse to either being bullied or
- Page 75 and 76: Peers (7 items) and the Aggressive
- Page 77 and 78: Children’s Social Experience Ques
- Page 79 and 80: Standard Deviations, ranges, and Cr
- Page 81 and 82: Prosocial with Peers and CBS Aggres
- Page 83 and 84: Choices (e.g., Prosocial, Aggressiv
- Page 85 and 86: CHAPTER IV: RESULTS The purpose of
- Page 87 and 88: for Prosocial Actions and victim ch
- Page 89 and 90: Table 4 Psychometric Properties for
- Page 91 and 92: all four stories. Bystander charact
- Page 93 and 94: Victim character / relational victi
- Page 95 and 96: Table 8 Psychometric Properties for
- Page 97 and 98: Prosocial/Care justification or Jus
- Page 99 and 100: Figure 1. Chi-Square (Ҳ2) Test for
- Page 101 and 102: Figure 2. Chi-Square (Ҳ2) Test for
- Page 103 and 104: Table 11 CBVS Chi-Square (Ҳ 2 ) Te
- Page 105 and 106: Of the 187 responses to Prosocial/C
- Page 107 and 108: of children’s Prosocial Action Ch
- Page 109 and 110: Table 15 Predicting Action Choices
- Page 111 and 112: Table 18 Predicting Action Choices
- Page 113: participant child variable such as
- Page 117 and 118: A test for the Difference in Propor
- Page 119 and 120: Figure 5. Chi-Square (Ҳ2) Test for
- Page 121 and 122: Table 24 CBVS Test and Confidence I
- Page 123 and 124: Therefore, I reject the null hypoth
- Page 125 and 126: Figure 6. Chi-Square (Ҳ 2 ) Test f
- Page 127 and 128: Table 28 CBVS Test and Confidence I
- Page 129 and 130: Justice/Fair) on bystander and vict
- Page 131 and 132: A test for the Difference in Propor
- Page 133 and 134: of children’s Aggressive/Retribut
- Page 135 and 136: Story Form of Victimization The nex
- Page 137 and 138: A test for the Difference in Propor
- Page 139 and 140: hypothesis and I conclude that ther
- Page 141 and 142: Figure 9. Chi-Square (Ҳ 2 ) Test f
- Page 143 and 144: Table 38 CBVS Test and Confidence I
- Page 145 and 146: Justice/Fair Justification Choice r
- Page 147 and 148: Figure 10. Chi-Square (Ҳ 2 ) Test
- Page 149 and 150: Figure 11. Chi-Square (Ҳ 2 ) Test
- Page 151 and 152: Action Choices in this study varied
- Page 153 and 154: CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION How people ju
- Page 155 and 156: y administering the measure in a in
- Page 157 and 158: get what they deserve.” It is lik
- Page 159 and 160: engaging in high rates of aggressiv
- Page 161 and 162: ability. The lack of variance in te
- Page 163 and 164: lie in the lack of variability in C
Table 20<br />
Chi-Square (Ҳ 2 ) Test for Independence between Children’s Gender and CBVS Action Choices<br />
Action Choices Count Male Female Total Responses<br />
Prosocial 68 76 144<br />
Aggressive 49 27 488<br />
Total 284 348 632<br />
Pearson Chi-Square (1, N=632) = 5.27 , p = .0217<br />
Cramer’s V = 0.1645<br />
100
Change language