The Attention Dataset
Please double check this data table below to make sure I have the
same data with you.
|
ID
|
ExecutiveNetworks
|
Depression
|
Anxiety
|
Stress
|
ADHD
|
|
SADP01
|
149.55
|
18
|
14
|
18
|
35
|
|
SADP05
|
187.46
|
23
|
25
|
26
|
56
|
|
SADP09
|
125.05
|
31
|
28
|
41
|
60
|
|
SADP11
|
124.16
|
22
|
16
|
27
|
62
|
|
SADP13
|
182.02
|
40
|
38
|
47
|
63
|
|
SADP14
|
218.83
|
20
|
28
|
26
|
49
|
|
SADP15
|
152.98
|
14
|
15
|
14
|
48
|
|
SADP18
|
179.28
|
14
|
14
|
20
|
54
|
|
SADP25
|
116.82
|
42
|
18
|
27
|
36
|
|
SADP27
|
216.76
|
48
|
44
|
42
|
53
|
|
SADP29
|
287.74
|
25
|
28
|
31
|
57
|
|
SADP30
|
170.71
|
19
|
16
|
15
|
36
|
|
SADP36
|
78.94
|
15
|
19
|
21
|
40
|
|
SADP37
|
216.64
|
18
|
18
|
22
|
31
|
|
SADP40
|
78.42
|
14
|
14
|
14
|
36
|
|
SADP42
|
160.49
|
34
|
25
|
29
|
38
|
|
SADP43
|
136.10
|
14
|
16
|
16
|
36
|
|
SADP44
|
363.52
|
23
|
46
|
51
|
73
|
|
SADP45
|
242.28
|
33
|
34
|
45
|
68
|
|
SADP46
|
88.30
|
11
|
15
|
18
|
53
|
|
SADP47
|
146.93
|
9
|
7
|
11
|
67
|
|
SADP49
|
266.71
|
18
|
28
|
17
|
58
|
|
SADP50
|
102.96
|
17
|
24
|
22
|
70
|
PEARSON Correlation Matrix between ALL Variables
NOTE: if p value is LESS than 0.05 –> SIGNIFICANT CORRELATION at
alpha = 0.05
|
Variable 1
|
Variable 2
|
Coefficent r
|
p value
|
|
ExecutiveNetworks
|
Depression
|
0.2322450
|
0.2862601
|
|
ExecutiveNetworks
|
Anxiety
|
0.6634253
|
0.0005587
|
|
Depression
|
Anxiety
|
0.6719103
|
0.0004460
|
|
ExecutiveNetworks
|
Stress
|
0.5188460
|
0.0111884
|
|
Depression
|
Stress
|
0.7465526
|
0.0000429
|
|
Anxiety
|
Stress
|
0.8856759
|
0.0000000
|
|
ExecutiveNetworks
|
ADHD
|
0.3768153
|
0.0763346
|
|
Depression
|
ADHD
|
0.0924598
|
0.6747818
|
|
Anxiety
|
ADHD
|
0.4732357
|
0.0225634
|
|
Stress
|
ADHD
|
0.4984014
|
0.0154973
|
Based on the result table, there is a SIGNIFICANT CORRELATION
between Executive Networks and (1) Anxiety, and (2) Stress.
(After adding the recent datapoint for participant SADP50, ADHD is
NO LONGER SIGNIFICANTLY CORRELATED with Executive)
However, we NOTICE that: Anxiety and Stress are VERY VERY VERY
correlated with each other.
Therefore, I would recommend NOT using multiple linear regression
because it would result an INSIGNIFICANT MODEL due to COLLINEARITY
causing variant inflation.
Multiple Linear Regression
##
## Call:
## lm(formula = ExecutiveNetworks ~ Stress + Anxiety, data = attention)
##
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -84.865 -48.800 0.793 37.945 90.978
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) 72.172 29.266 2.466 0.0228 *
## Stress -1.939 2.148 -0.903 0.3775
## Anxiety 6.596 2.463 2.678 0.0145 *
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 54.43 on 20 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared: 0.462, Adjusted R-squared: 0.4083
## F-statistic: 8.589 on 2 and 20 DF, p-value: 0.00203
|
|
Estimate
|
Std. Error
|
t value
|
Pr(>|t|)
|
|
(Intercept)
|
72.171705
|
29.266116
|
2.466050
|
0.0228261
|
|
Stress
|
-1.938507
|
2.147616
|
-0.902632
|
0.3774643
|
|
Anxiety
|
6.595858
|
2.463328
|
2.677621
|
0.0144686
|
As you can see here, Stress is NOT significant at all in the model
result even though our pairwise Pearson results are significant.