Spring A 2025

M6 Assignment

Name

Course

Institution

Date
 Spring A 2025

Q1. Perform and Interpret a Bivariate Linear Regression (9 points total, if SPSS output

file is missing for this analysis, 50% of the total number of earned points will be deducted)

This data set contains cognitive function scores and demographics from a group of older adults.

The focus of this question set is the executive function (Executive). Create an SPSS data file by

importing the Q1Q2 data. Configure the “measure” for each variable.

A . Perform exploratory bivariate correlations in SPSS.

1. Perform bivariate (Pearson’s) correlations among all the variables in the data set. Paste

the correlation matrix (table) here. (1 point for the table)

2. Report the correlation result in APA format (including r and p) for each of the following

pairs of variables: (1.5 points: .5 for each correlation, both r and p must be correct to

earn .5 point)

Education and Executive:

 The correlation between Education and Executive function was not statistically

significant, r = .275, p = .053.

 Spring A 2025

MMSE and Executive:

 The correlation between MMSE and Executive function was positive and statistically

significant, r = .282, p = .048.

Age and Executive:

 The correlation between Age and Executive function was negative and statistically

significant, r = -.305, p = .031.

B. Perform a bivariate (simple) linear regression.

The regression model should contain the following:

Outcome variable - Executive

Predictor - Variable with the strongest correlation with Executive (regardless of direction)

1. Create a scatter plot between the predictor variable (X axis) and outcome variable (Y

axis). Make sure the scatter plot has labels for the X and Y axes, and a title. Paste the

scatter plot here. (1 point: Deduct .5 for each error up to a total of 1. No point is earned

is the graph is not pasted here. )

 Spring A 2025

2. Perform the bivariate regression analysis in SPSS. Report the omnibus test result in

APA style on the regression model, including F, p, and adjusted-R2. Be sure to paste the

relevant output tables here to support your answer. (1.5 points: .5 for each statistic, both

value and APA format must be correct to earn the credit for each statistic. No credit is

earned if no table is pasted.)

 Spring A 2025

Regression Analysis: A simple linear regression was conducted to predict executive function

scores based on MMSE scores.

Significance of Model: The regression model was statistically significant.

 F(1, 48) = 4.133

 p = .048

Variance Explained: The adjusted R-squared was .060, indicating that 6.0% of the variance in

executive function scores is explained by the model.

3. Discuss the regression result. Is the null hypothesis rejected? What does the result

mean?

(1 point: .5 for each answer)

Yes, the null hypothesis is rejected. The significance value (p = .048) is less than .05, which

indicates that the results are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.

The rejection of the null hypothesis means that there is a statistically significant relationship

between MMSE scores and executive function scores. This suggests that MMSE scores do have

a predictive value for executive function among the sample studied.

4. Report the coefficient test on the predictor variable in APA format, including t and p. Be

sure to paste the relevant output tables if they have not been pasted above.
 Spring A 2025

(1 point: .5 for each statistic, both value and APA format must be correct to earn the credit for

each statistic)

 The unstandardized coefficient (B) for MMSE is 2.380, with a standard error of 1.171.

 The standardized coefficient (Beta) is .282.

 The t-value for MMSE is 2.033, with a significance (p-value) of .048, indicating that the

effect of MMSE on Executive function is statistically significant at the 95% confidence

level.

5. Explain the coefficient test result. Is the null hypothesis rejected? What does that mean?

(1 point: .5 for each answer)

Is the Null Hypothesis Rejected?

 Yes, the null hypothesis is rejected. The significance (p-value) of the coefficient for

MMSE is .048, which is less than the commonly used threshold of .05. This indicates

statistical significance.

What Does That Mean?

 The rejection of the null hypothesis means that there is a statistically significant linear

relationship between MMSE scores and Executive function scores. Specifically, the

positive coefficient (B = 2.380) suggests that as MMSE scores increase, Executive

function scores also tend to increase.

 Spring A 2025

6. How much of the variance in the outcome variable can be predicted by the predictor

variable? (1 point)

R-squared Value: 0.079.

Interpretation: This means that 7.9% of the variance in Executive function scores can be

explained by variations in MMSE scores. This indicates a relatively small amount of the total

variability in Executive function scores is accounted for by the predictor, suggesting other

factors may also play significant roles in predicting Executive function that are not included in

this model.

Q2. Perform and Interpret a Multiple Linear Regression (8 points total, if SPSS output

file is missing for this analysis, 50% of the total number of earned points will be

deducted) In Q1 above, we examined the relationship between executive function and one

predictor variable. Here we are interested in how multiple predictors may be combined to

predict executive function even better. Specifically, we would like to build a regression model

for executive function with two predictor variables that have the highest and second highest

correlations with Executive.

A. Perform a multiple linear regression according to the research question above and answer the

following questions. Use “ENTER” (the default in SPSS) as the method of adding the predictor

variables to the regression model.

1. Report the omnibus F test result for the regression model, in APA format, including F, p,

and adjusted-R2. Be sure to paste the relevant table(s) here to support your answers.

(1.5 points total. .5 for each statistic. Both value and format must be correct to earn the point.

No credit is earned if no relevant table is pasted.)

 Spring A 2025

Regression Analysis: A multiple linear regression was conducted to predict executive function

scores based on MMSE and Education scores.

Significance of Model: The regression model was statistically significant.

 F(2, 47) = 3.680

 p = .033

Variance Explained: The adjusted R-squared was .099, indicating that 9.9% of the variance in

executive function scores is explained by the model.

2. Interpret the test result by answer the following questions: (2 points total)

a. What was the null hypothesis (in words) tested by this multiple regression analysis?
 Spring A 2025

The null hypothesis for this multiple regression analysis stated that there is no significant

relationship between the predictor variables (MMSE and Education) and the dependent variable

(executive function scores).

b. What was the hypothesis test result? (Do you reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis?

The hypothesis test result indicated that the p-value is .033, which is less than the commonly

used significance level of .05. Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis, concluding that there is a

statistically significant relationship between the predictors (MMSE and Education) and

executive function scores.

c. What is the effect size of this regression model?

The effect size of the regression model is indicated by the Adjusted R-squared, which is .099.

d. What does the effect size mean?

The effect size of .099 means that approximately 9.9% of the variance in executive function

scores can be explained by the combined effects of MMSE and Education scores. This suggests

that while there is a significant relationship, the predictors explain a relatively small proportion

of the variability in executive function scores, indicating that other factors not included in this

model may also play significant roles.

3. Report the statistics on each predictor variable in APA format, including β, t, and p.

MMSE as Predictor:

 Unstandardized coefficient (B) = 2.088, Standard Error = 1.159

 Standardized coefficient (Beta) = .247

 t-value = 1.802, p = .078

 Spring A 2025

 Interpretation: The coefficient for MMSE suggests that for each unit increase in MMSE

score, executive function scores increase by 2.088 units, although this effect is not

statistically significant (p = .078).

Education as Predictor:

 Unstandardized coefficient (B) = .858, Standard Error = .492

 Standardized coefficient (Beta) = .239

 t-value = 1.746, p = .087

 Interpretation: The coefficient for Education indicates that each additional year of

education is associated with an increase of .858 units in executive function scores, but

this effect is also not statistically significant (p = .087).

4. Discuss the relative contributions of the predictors in the model. (2 points total)

a. Which predictor is significant?

Neither MMSE nor Education is statistically significant as predictors in this model. Both

predictors have p-values greater than the conventional threshold of .05 (MMSE p = .078,

Education p = .087).

b. Which is the strongest predictor?

MMSE is the strongest predictor in this model, based on the standardized coefficients (Beta).

MMSE has a Beta of .247 compared to Education, which has a Beta of .239.

c. Which is the weakest predictor?

Education is the weakest predictor based on its slightly lower Beta value compared to MMSE.

d. How do you know?

The strength of each predictor is determined by comparing the standardized coefficients (Beta),

which measure the amount of change in the dependent variable associated with a one-standard
 Spring A 2025

deviation change in the predictor. A higher absolute value of Beta indicates a stronger influence.

In this case, MMSE has a Beta of .247, which is slightly higher than Education's Beta of .239,

indicating a stronger relative influence on the dependent variable, Executive function scores.

B. Compare this current multiple regression model with the bivariate regression model in

Q1.

Does the model with two predictors predict the outcome variable better than the model

with only one predictor? How do you know?

Yes, the model with two predictors predicts the outcome variable better than the model with

only one predictor.

This is because the adjusted R-squared value in the multiple regression model is .099, which is

higher than the adjusted R-squared value of .060 in the bivariate regression model. The adjusted

R-squared value considers the number of predictors in the model and provides a more accurate

measure of how well the predictors explain the variability in the outcome variable.

Q3. Perform and Interpret a Bivariate Linear Regression (9.5 points total, if SPSS output

file is missing for this analysis, 50% of the total number of earned points will be deducted)

This analysis will be performed on a data set collected by a national company on their 27 chain

stores. The marketing department would like to know how various factors contribute to the net

sales (Netsales) amount for a chain store. Create an SPSS data file by importing the Q3Q4 data.

Configure the “measure” for each variable.

A . Perform exploratory bivariate correlations in SPSS.

1. Perform bivariate (Pearson’s) correlations among all the variables in the data set. Paste

the correlation matrix (table) here.

 Spring A 2025

2. Report the correlation result in APA format (including r and p) for each of the following

pairs of variables: (2 points: .5 for each correlation, both r and p must be correct to earn .5

point)

Storesize and Netsales:

 The correlation between store size and net sales was very strong and statistically

significant, r = .895, p < .001.

Adcost and Netsales:

 The correlation between advertising cost and net sales was very strong and statistically

significant, r = .913, p < .001.

Area and Netsales:

 The correlation between area and net sales was very strong and statistically significant, r

= .951, p < .001.

Competitor and Netsales:

 Spring A 2025

 The correlation between the number of competitors and net sales was not statistically

significant, r = .139, p = .490.

B. Perform a bivariate (simple) linear regression.

The regression model should contain the following:

Outcome variable - Netsales

Predictor - Variable with the strongest correlation with Netsales (regardless of direction)

1. Create a scatter plot between the predictor variable (X axis) and outcome variable (Y

axis). Make sure the scatter plot has labels for the X and Y axes. Paste the scatter plot

here.
 Spring A 2025

2. Perform the bivariate regression analysis in SPSS. Report the omnibus test result in

APA style on the regression model, including F, p, and adjusted-R2. Be sure to paste the

relevant output tables here to support your answer.

Regression Analysis: A simple linear regression was conducted to predict Netsales based on the

area of the stores.

Significance of Model: The regression model was statistically significant.

 F(1, 25) = 236.700

 p < .001

Variance Explained: The adjusted R-squared was .901, indicating that 90.1% of the variance in

Netsales is explained by the area of the stores.

3. Discuss the regression result. Is the null hypothesis rejected? What does the result

mean?
 Spring A 2025

Since p < .001, the null hypothesis is rejected. The p-value in the regression model is less

than .001, which is well below the conventional alpha level of .05. This indicates that the results

are statistically significant.

The rejection of the null hypothesis suggests that there is a statistically significant relationship

between the area of the stores and the Netsales. This finding implies that changes in the store

area are associated with changes in Netsales.

4. Report the coefficient test on the predictor variable in APA format, including t and p. Be

sure to paste the relevant output tables if they have not been pasted above.

Coefficient Test for Area in Predicting Netsales:

 Unstandardized Coefficient (B): 35.052

 Standard Error: 2.278

 Standardized Coefficient (Beta): .951

 t-Value: 15.385

 Significance (p-value): < .001

5. Explain the coefficient test result. Is the null hypothesis rejected? What does that mean?

Yes, the null hypothesis is rejected as the p-value is less than .001, indicating a statistically

significant relationship between store area and Netsales. The result means that every unit
 Spring A 2025

increase in store area significantly increases Netsales by about 35.052 units, highlighting the

critical impact of store size on sales.

6. How much of the variance in the outcome variable can be predicted by the predictor

variable?

The variance in the outcome variable, Netsales, that can be predicted by the predictor variable,

Area, is represented by the Adjusted R-squared value in the regression model. The Adjusted R-

squared value is .901. This indicates that 90.1% of the variance in Netsales can be explained by

changes in the area of the stores. This high percentage signifies a very strong relationship

between store area and sales, suggesting that store area is a dominant factor influencing Netsales.

Q4. Perform and Interpret a Multiple Linear Regression (8.5 points total, if SPSS output

file is missing for this analysis, 50% of the total number of earned points will be deducted)

In Q3 above, we examined the relationship between Netsales and one predictor variable. Here

we are interested in how multiple predictors may be combined to predict Netsales even better.

Specifically, we would like to build a regression model for Netsales with four predictor

variables: Storesize, Adcost, Area, Competitor.

A. Perform a multiple linear regression according to the research question above and answer the

following questions. Use “ENTER” (the default in SPSS) as the method of adding the predictor

variables to the regression model.

1. Report the omnibus F test result for the regression model, in APA format, including F, p,

and adjusted-R2. Be sure to paste the relevant table(s) here to support your answers.
 Spring A 2025

Regression Analysis: A multiple linear regression was conducted to predict Netsales based on

the variables Competitor, Adcost, Storesize, and Area.

Significance of Model: The regression model was statistically significant.

 F(4, 22) = 386.228

 p < .001

Variance Explained: The adjusted R-squared was .983, indicating that 98.3% of the variance in

Netsales is explained by the model.

2. Interpret the test result by answer the following questions: (2 points total)
 Spring A 2025

a. What was the null hypothesis (in words) tested by this multiple regression analysis? (.5

point)

The null hypothesis for this multiple regression analysis asserted that there is no significant

relationship between the predictor variables (Competitor, Adcost, Storesize, Area) and the

dependent variable (Netsales). It posited that the predictors do not explain any of the variability

in Netsales.

b. What was the hypothesis test result? (Do you reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis?)

(.5 point)

The hypothesis test result indicated a highly significant model with a p-value less than .001 (p

< .001). This result leads us to reject the null hypothesis, confirming that there is a statistically

significant relationship between the predictor variables and Netsales.

c. What is the effect size of this regression model? (.5 point)

The effect size of the regression model is represented by the Adjusted R-squared value, which

is .983 in this case.

d. What does the effect size mean? (.5 point)

The effect size, as indicated by an Adjusted R-squared of .983, means that 98.3% of the

variability in Netsales can be explained by the combination of the predictors used in the model.

3. Report the statistics on each predictor variable in APA format, including β, t, and p.

(2 points total. .5 for each predictor, both value and format must be correct to earn points.)

Results for each predictor:

 Area: The predictor Area was statistically significant, β = .459, t(22) = 8.751, p < .001.

 Storesize: The predictor Storesize was statistically significant, β = .221, t(22) = 4.480, p

< .001.
 Spring A 2025

 Adcost: The predictor Adcost was statistically significant, β = .383, t(22) = 8.529, p

< .001.

 Competitor: The predictor Competitor was not statistically significant, β = .013, t(22) =

0.496, p = .625.

4. Discuss the relative contributions of the predictors in the model. (2 points total)

a. Which predictor is significant? (.5 point)

The significant predictors in the model are Area (p < .001), Storesize (p < .001), and Adcost (p

< .001), as their p-values are below the conventional threshold of .05.

Competitor (p = .625) is not significant because its p-value is greater than .05.

b. Which is the strongest predictor? (.5 point)

Area is the strongest predictor with the highest standardized coefficient (β = .459), indicating

the largest effect on Netsales.

c. Which is the weakest predictor? (.5 point)

Competitor is the weakest predictor with the smallest standardized coefficient (β = .013) and a

high p-value (.625), meaning it has little to no influence on Netsales.

d. How do you know? (.5 point)

 The relative strength of each predictor is determined by the standardized coefficient (β).

A higher absolute β value means a stronger contribution to predicting Netsales.

 Area (β = .459) has the largest impact, followed by Adcost (β = .383) and Storesize (β

= .221).

 Competitor (β = .013) has the smallest standardized coefficient and is not statistically

significant (p = .625), confirming it as the weakest predictor.

B. Compare this current multiple regression model with the bivariate regression model in Q3.
 Spring A 2025

Does the model with four predictors predict the outcome variable better than the model with

only one predictor? How do you know? (1 point. .5 for each answer. Deduct .5 if the results are

not pasted but the answers are correct.)

Does the model with four predictors predict the outcome variable better than the model

with only one predictor?

 Yes, the multiple regression model with four predictors (Area, Storesize, Adcost, and

Competitor) predicts Netsales better than the bivariate model, which only included Area.

How do you know?

Adjusted R-squared Comparison:

 The bivariate model (Q3) had an Adjusted R² = .901, meaning that 90.1% of the

variance in Netsales was explained by Area alone.

 The multiple regression model (Q4) has an Adjusted R² = .983, meaning that 98.3% of

the variance in Netsales is explained by the four predictors combined.

 The increase in Adjusted R² from .901 to .983 indicates that adding more predictors

improved the model's explanatory power.