Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
PREPARED FOR:
PREPARED BY:
GROUP: CS241 5A
1|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents 1
1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction 4
1.4 Objectives 5
2 Literature Review
3 Methodology
4 Data Analysis
4.1.2 Normality 11
4.1.4 Independence 13
2|Page
4.2 Analysis Of Variance (ANOVA) 14
5 Conclusion 22
References 23
Appendix 24
3|Page
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
4|Page
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
Personality traits have been emerged in the recent years as one of the predictors of
important health outcomes (Hampson & Friedman, 2008). Associations between personality and
health have been hold across decades as childhood personality traits will predict the self-rated
health during the middle age (Hampson, Goldberg, Vogt, & Dubanoski, 2007). Personality is
define as a collection of mental characteristics that consistently exists within individuals and
influences their behaviors and thoughts.
5|Page
1.2 Data Description
This study involved the use of data about distinct connection between personality and
health under three different personality types. Basically, the three different personality types are
listed as the independent variables (X) and the general health scores for each of these three groups
is listed as the dependent variable (Y). This study involved thirty observations with ten replications
for each treatments.
The three different personality types mentioned in the study are alphas, betas and gammas.
The first one is alphas which the people are cautious and steady. The second personality type is
betas which the people are carefree and outgoing. Meanwhile, the third personality type is gammas,
who tend toward extremes of behavior such as being overly cautious or very careless. The data
representing the general health scores for each of these three groups where a low score indicates
poorer health is attached at the appendix.
1.4 Objectives
Kewly & RR Jr. in their study proves that personality may be a reliable predictor of health
behavior patterns. In addition, personality factors have been found to be related to various health
outcomes (Deary et al., 2010).
According to a dissertation by Sirois (2015), people with high agreeableness and low
neuroticism tend to continue health promoting behaviors, which is a key for disease management.
This is because they incline to view their future health positively. The study also indicates that
positive expectations for the future can be motivated by the current health behaviors.
Many personality problems contribute to the level of health problem (Sinaj, 2015). The
study reflects that person who show stable humor qualities tend to have depression and more likely
to develop a low quality of life. Hence, they are more risked to have health problem. Sinaj (2015)
in his study also concludes that there is a strong connection between personality traits and health
behaviors. In his study, the result shows that there exists positive association between compliance
and healthy behaviors health.
7|Page
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
A completely randomized design (CRD) is a design where the treatments are assigned to
the experimental units completely at random. Each experimental unit has the same chance of
receiving any one of the treatment. Hence, CRD is appropriate when the experimental units are
homogeneous. CRD is used in this study to analyze the data since the data has one factor with
three levels. The levels are the three personality types which are (i) alphas, who are cautious and
steady; (ii) betas, who are carefree and outgoing; and (iii) gammas, who tend toward extremes of
behavior.
where:
8|Page
3.3 Assumption Testing
Before proceed to further analysis, the assumption must be fulfilled to make sure that the data does
not violate any of the assumptions. If one of the assumptions is violated, the conclusion made
based on the analysis is not valid to be used. The assumptions for Completely Randomized Design
are:
1. The model errors are assumed to be normally and independently distributed random
variables with mean zero and variance.
4. ∑𝛼𝑖=1 𝜏𝑖 = 0
9|Page
3.4 Experimental Design
Response Variable : The general health scores for each of the personality types
10 | P a g e
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS
Certain assumptions need to be formerly satisfied in order to proceed with the test for difference
in the treatment means.
Figure 1 shows that there might be two potential outliers exist in the data. However, since the
outliers are not considered to be as extreme outliers as well as did not affect the analysis, therefore
the outliers are not being removed from the data.
11 | P a g e
4.1.2 Normality
Figure 2 – Histogram of Health Scores Figure 3 – Normal P-P Plot of Health Scores
Figure 2 shows a histogram with a slight bell-shaped curve. Meanwhile, Figure 3 shows a P-P plot
where the points lie approximately along the straight line. These figures indicate that the residuals
might be assumed to be normally distributed. In order to confirm for the normality assumption,
therefore Shapiro-Wilk Test is conducted.
Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
The null hypothesis for this test is that the distribution of the residuals is normal, while the
alternative hypothesis is that the distribution of the residuals is not normal. Since the significance
value (0.218) is greater than the alpha (0.05), therefore there is no enough evidence to reject the
null hypothesis. This indicates that the distribution of the residuals is normal.
12 | P a g e
4.1.3 Constant Variance
Figure 4 shows that there is no pattern in the distribution of the plots. Therefore, by analyzing the
pattern of the plot, it can be concluded that the residuals have a constant variance. The homogeneity
of variance can also be checked by using Levene’s Test.
.661 2 27 .524
The null hypothesis for this test is that the variance is equal across groups, while the alternative
hypothesis is that the variance is unequal across groups. Since the significance value (0.524) is
greater than the alpha (0.05), therefore there is no enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
This indicates that the variance is equal across groups.
13 | P a g e
4.1.4 Independence
Figure 5 shows that the distribution of the error term has no pattern over time. Therefore, it can be
concluded that the residual is independent and has no potential problem with dependency.
Since all of the assumptions for the error terms, which are normality, constant variance and
independence are not violated, therefore the test for difference in the treatment means can be
developed.
14 | P a g e
4.2 Analysis Of Variance (ANOVA)
The objective of the ANOVA is to identify whether there is a significance difference between the
types of personalities.
HealthScores
(43+⋯+36)2 (1281)2
SSTotal = (432 + ⋯ + 362 ) − = 56 955 − = 2256.300
30 30
1 (43+⋯+36)2
SSPersonalities = 10 (4422 + 4712 + 3682 ) − = 564.200
30
564.200
MSPersonalities = = 282.100
2
1692.100
MSError = = 62.670
27
282.100
F= = 4.501
62.670
15 | P a g e
1. Hypothesis
H1: μi ≠ 0; for at least one i (There is a significance difference between the types of
personalities)
2. α = 0.05
3. P-value = 0.021
4. Decision rule
Reject H0 if p-value ≤ α
5. Conclusion
Since the ANOVA is significant, thus proceed to multiple comparison test to determine which
pairs of personalities differ by using Tukey Test and Fisher LSD Test.
16 | P a g e
4.3 Post Hoc Tests
The objective of the post hoc tests is to determine which pairs of personalities differ.
Dependent Variable:HealthScores
Mean Std.
(I) Groups (J) Groups Difference (I-J) Error Sig.
17 | P a g e
4.3.1 Tukey Test
1. Hypothesis
2. α = 0.05
3. Critical value
62.670
𝑇∝ = 𝑞0.05 (3,27)√
10
62.670
𝑇∝ = 3.505√
10
𝑇∝ = 8.7744
4.
18 | P a g e
5. Conclusion
Hence, there are difference in the general health score for the Betas personality and the Gammas
personality. Meanwhile, there are no difference in the general health score for the Alphas
personality and the Betas personality as well as for the Alphas personality and the Gammas
personality.
19 | P a g e
4.3.2 Fisher LSD Test
1. Hypothesis
2. α = 0.05
3. Critical value
2(62.670)
𝐿𝑆𝐷 = 𝑡0.025,27 √
10
2(62.670)
𝐿𝑆𝐷 = 2.052√
10
𝐿𝑆𝐷 = 7.2648
4.
20 | P a g e
5. Conclusion
Hence, there are difference in the general health score for the Betas personality and the Gammas
personality as well as for the Alphas personality and the Gammas personality. Meanwhile, there
are no difference in the general health score for the Alphas personality and the Betas personality.
21 | P a g e
4.4 Homogeneous Subsets
The objective of the homogeneous subsets is to identify the best type of personality.
HealthScores
Subset for alpha =
0.05
Groups N 1 2
Betas 10 47.10
Based on the Table 6, the mean of Alphas personality does not differ from the mean of Gammas
and Betas personality. On the other hand, the mean of Betas personality differs from the mean of
Gammas personality since the mean score is in a different subset. To conclude, Betas personality,
the one who are carefree and outgoing has the best personality as it has the highest mean health
score since higher health score indicates a better health.
22 | P a g e
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION
Completely Randomized Design (CRD) is used in this study to analyze the data since the data has
one factor with three levels. The levels are the three personality types which are (i) alphas, who
are cautious and steady; (ii) betas, who are carefree and outgoing; and (iii) gammas, who tend
toward extremes of behavior such as being overly cautious or very careless. All of the assumptions
for the model adequacy checking are fulfilled. Next, ANOVA is used to test if there is a
significance difference between the types of personalities. The result shows that there is a
significance difference between the types of personalities. Future test are done to identify which
pair of personalities are differ by using Tukey Test and Fisher LSD Test. Tukey Test shows that
the general health score of Betas personality is differ from Gammas personality. On the other hand,
the Fisher LSD Test show that Gammas personality differs from both of Alphas and Betas
personality. To conclude, Betas personality, the one who are carefree and outgoing has the best
personality as it has the highest mean health score since higher health score indicates a better
health.
23 | P a g e
REFERENCES
Deary, I. J., Weiss, A., & Batty, G. D. (2010). Intelligence and personality as predictors of illness
and death: How researchers in differential psychology and chronic disease epidemiology
are collaborating to understand and address health inequalities. Psychological science in
the public interest, 11(2), 53-79.
Hampson, S. E., & Friedman, H. S. (2008). Personality and health: A lifespan perspective.
Hampson, S. E., Goldberg, L. R., Vogt, T. M., & Dubanoski, J. P. (2007). Mechanisms by which
childhood personality traits influence adult health status: educational attainment and
healthy behaviors. Health psychology, 26(1), 121.
Kewly, B., & RR Jr. Associations between major domains of personality and health behavior.
Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7965560.
Mousavi Moghadam, S. R., Malekian, S., & Karamshahi, M. (2016). Investigating the relationship
between personality characteristics, self-control, and general health among the students of
public and clinical psychology in Islamic Azad University of Ilam. Journal of Basic
Research in Medical Sciences, 3(2), 20-25.
Sinaj, D. S. E. (2015). Associations between the five-factor model of personality and health
behaviors among adult in Albania. European Journal of Psychological Research Vol, 2(3).
Sirois, F. M. (2015). Who Looks Forward to Better Health? Personality Factors and Future Self-
Rated Health in the Context of Chronic Illness. International journal of behavioral
medicine, 22(5), 569-579.
Young, J. K., & Beaujean, A. A. (2011). Measuring personality in wave I of the national
longitudinal study of adolescent health. Frontiers in psychology, 2, 158.
24 | P a g e
APPENDIX
25 | P a g e