Step 1: Open the Installed Packages

library(readxl)
library(ggpubr)
## Loading required package: ggplot2
library(dplyr)
## 
## Attaching package: 'dplyr'
## The following objects are masked from 'package:stats':
## 
##     filter, lag
## The following objects are masked from 'package:base':
## 
##     intersect, setdiff, setequal, union
library(effectsize)
library(effsize)

Step 2: Import and Name Dataset

Dataset6.1 <- read_excel("D:/SLU/APPLIED ANALYTICS/ASSIGNMENT 6/Dataset6.1.xlsx")

Step 3: Calculate Descriptive Statistics for Each Group

Dataset6.1 %>%
  group_by(Group) %>%
  summarise(
    Mean = mean(Exam_Score, na.rm = TRUE),
    Median = median(Exam_Score, na.rm = TRUE),
    SD = sd(Exam_Score, na.rm = TRUE),
    N = n()
  )
## # A tibble: 2 × 5
##   Group        Mean Median    SD     N
##   <chr>       <dbl>  <dbl> <dbl> <int>
## 1 No Tutoring  71.9   71.5  7.68    40
## 2 Tutoring     78.4   78.7  7.18    40

Step 4: Create Histograms for Each Group

hist(Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "Tutoring"],
     main = "Histogram of Tutoring Scores",
     xlab = "Value",
     ylab = "Frequency",
     col = "lightblue",
     border = "black",
     breaks = 10)

hist(Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "No Tutoring"],
     main = "Histogram of No Tutoring Scores",
     xlab = "Value",
     ylab = "Frequency",
     col = "green",
     border = "black",
     breaks = 10)

For the Tutoring histogram, the data appears symmetrical (normal). The kurtosis also appears bell-shaped (normal).

For the No Tutoring histogram, the data appears symmetrical (normal). The kurtosis also appears bell-shaped (normal).

We may not need to use a Mann-Whitney U test.

Step 5: Create Boxplots for Each Group

ggboxplot(Dataset6.1, x = "Group", y = "Exam_Score",
          color = "Group",
          palette = "jco",
          add = "jitter")

The Tutoring Group boxplot appears normal. There are no dots past the whiskers.

The No Tutoring Group boxplot appears normal. Although there is one outlier, it does not impact.

We may not need to use a Mann-Whitney U test.

Step 6: Shapiro-Wilk Test of Normality

shapiro.test(Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "Tutoring"])
## 
##  Shapiro-Wilk normality test
## 
## data:  Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "Tutoring"]
## W = 0.98859, p-value = 0.953
shapiro.test(Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "No Tutoring"])
## 
##  Shapiro-Wilk normality test
## 
## data:  Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "No Tutoring"]
## W = 0.98791, p-value = 0.9398

The data for Tutoring was normal (p > .05).

The data for No Tutoring was normal (p > .05).

After conducting all three normality tests, it is clear we must use an Independent T-test.

Step 7: Conduct Inferential Test

t.test(Exam_Score ~ Group, data = Dataset6.1, var.equal = TRUE)
## 
##  Two Sample t-test
## 
## data:  Exam_Score by Group
## t = -3.8593, df = 78, p-value = 0.000233
## alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group No Tutoring and group Tutoring is not equal to 0
## 95 percent confidence interval:
##  -9.724543 -3.105845
## sample estimates:
## mean in group No Tutoring    mean in group Tutoring 
##                  71.94627                  78.36147

p < .05, (less than .05), this means the results were SIGNIFICANT. Now we calculate the Effect Size.

Step 8: Calculate the Effect Size

cohens_d_result <- cohens_d(Exam_Score ~ Group, data = Dataset6.1, pooled_sd = TRUE)
print(cohens_d_result)
## Cohen's d |         95% CI
## --------------------------
## -0.86     | [-1.32, -0.40]
## 
## - Estimated using pooled SD.

The size of the effect is large. There is a large difference between the group averages.

Step 8: Independent T-Test Results

Tutoring (M = 78.4, SD = 7.18) was significantly different from No Tutoring (M = 71.9, SD = 7.68), in exam scores, t(78) = -3.8593, p = 0.000233. The effect size was large (Cohen’s d = -0.86).

library(rmarkdown)