Free Critical Thinking On The Interpretation Of Results

7 Paper
The t-test sample of the amount of food per pounds consumed by each person in a week. The t-test showed that the group consumed an average food of 32.5 pounds in a week. After the intervention the amount of food consumed reduced averagely to 22.7. In this case, one can determine that there was a significant difference between the mean of food consumed before intervention and the food consumed after intervention. In comparing the two means we can get the significant difference whereby t(17) = 1.904, p<0.05. From the result one can tell that one method was more effective compared to the other.
The t-test sample for before intervention and after no intervention. The mean for the group before intervention is at 32.5 and the mean for the group after a week of no intervention is at 28.3. There is no significant difference between the two groups because, t(9) = 0.711, p>0.05. These showed that there was no intervention between the two groups and could not show a big difference.
According to the Anova test the first group (before intervention) consumed an average of 32.5 pounds of food. The second column showing the consumption after the intervention indicates an average consumption of 22.7. The third group representing a week without intervention shows consumption of 28.3 pounds of food. The variance is at the highest at a point where there is a high mean. Since F(2,27) = 1.807, p > .05 (p value is greater than .05), one cannot imply that there were significant differences between the techniques used in the exercise.

There is a positive relationship between the weight of the person and the amount of food consumed. It means that the rate of consumption depended on the weight of an individual and the interventions made shows a slow reduction of consumption in the people with more weight than the people with less weight.
There is a strong correlation between the group 2 and weight, which means that the intervention was determined by the age factor of the group members. The members responded to the intervention in relation to the amount of pounds they weighed.
There is a negative correlation between the group three and weight, which means that the weight of an individual was not crucial if there was no intervention taken in relation to the level of consumption in pounds.

References

Berthold R. M., Hand D. (2007) Intelligent Data Analysis. New York. Springer Publishers.