Any one here use SPSS?

[evilgenius]

I have a question relating to my practical im doing. Just a simple one. If anyone has any experience with Anova gimme a bell please.

[SeanT]

I don't use it for anything, but I support it (as part of my job) - what are you trying to achieve / stuck with?

[jassco]

i've used it a good few times in the past, although i'm now mostly qualitative. what are you stuck with?

[evilgenius]

Sorry for the late reply, I got help on another forum by 2 spsss guys. Basically my practical report for my advanced research meethods class. I have to analyse some data and report it.

I had some trouble identifying the Anovas in the data file but got there in the end. But ill be back, I still have to work out how to do the 2x2x3 ones and some regression which I hate.

[JonnyTester]

No, but I do get the odd feeling of "deja-vu" every so often.

[evilgenius]

Heres the thread on another forum, Id be happy to discuss this here too if you guys wish to participate. And why does people hate SPSS? I get a real buzz discovering the hidden data within the datasets. I really do enjoy it.

weird. Anyways, im kinda stuck at regression, looking at this image as I right to say:

There is no correlation between gender and Mature defense style,
There is a correlation between gender and Neurotism defense style
There is none between gender and Immature defense style?

[jassco]

i'll admit i'm no good with regression analysis, but yup you're right that:


There is no correlation between gender and Mature defense style,
There is a correlation between gender and Neurotism defense style
There is none between gender and Immature defense style (there is a negative relationship, however it isn't statistically significant)

are you only looking at gender differences, or also looking at the validity of the questionnaire (i assume that's what you're using).

something that's quite unusual is that immature is positively correlated with mature.

[evilgenius]

Brief ( NO abstract, NO intro - given a data set and was told to analyse )

Participants and procedure

The data used in this study was collected and initial findings reported by Elklit (2002). The data in this study were collected from a questionnaire survey with a national representative probability sample of 390 school children age 13 to 15. The sex distribution was 50 percent females and 50 percent males. Seventy-four percent of the pupils lived with both parents, 25 percent lived with one parent, and 1 percent had other arrangements. The difference between the parents’ education was not significant (fathers vs. mothers, respectively: primary school 28 percent vs. 25 percent, high school 18 percent vs. 25 percent, ‘college’ (3-4 years professional education after high school) 34 percent vs. 35 percent, and ‘university’ (5-8 years professional education after high school) 21 percent vs. 15 percent). There were no significant differences in the participation from the various regions of the country. Full details of the sample, sampling procedures, and recruitment were presented in Elklit (2002).

Measures
The first part of the questionnaire contained questions about the participant, their family, and their living arrangements. Specifically details were recorded on
1. Sex
2. Age
3. Highest level of parental education. Information on the highest educational level achieved (primary, high school, college, or university) by the respondents mother and father was recorded.
4. Living arrangements: Respondents were asked whether they lived with one parent, two parents, or others such as grandparents or within an institution. This information was recoded into one variable that identified whether the child lived with both parent or not.

The second part of the questionnaire contained questions about traumatic events and life events they had experienced. The events were

1. Death of a loved one
2. Threats of physical assault
3. Accident
4. Near-drowning
5. Life threatening situation
6. Illness
7. Robbery/theft
8. Attempted suicide
9. Physical assault
10. Physical abuse
11. Severe childhood neglect
12. Abortion/pregnancy
13. Rape
14. Sexual abuse

Responses for each participant were summed to create a variable which represented the total amount of traumas experienced.

The third part of the questionnaire included The Harvard Trauma Questionnaire Part IV (HTQ: Mollica, Caspi-Yavin, Bollini, Truong, Tor, & Lavelle, 1992) and the Defense Style Questionnaire (Andrews, Singh & Bond, 1993).

The HTQ assess both DSM-IV (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) symptoms and culture-specific symptoms associated with PTSD. The scale yields both a PTSD diagnosis according to DSM-IV criteria and a measure of posttraumatic stress severity. The respondents were asked how much each symptom bothered them at the time when the event most distressing to them happened.

The items are answered on a four-point Likert scale (‘not at all’ (1), ‘a little’ (2), ‘quite a bit’ (3), and ‘all the time’ (4)). The summed score provides a score for posttraumatic symptom severity. The first sixteen items were derived directly from the seventeen DSM-III-R (American Psychiatric Association, 1987) criteria for PTSD. The HTQ uses one item to assess both psychological and physiological reactions to events that symbolize or resemble aspects of the traumatic event (in accordance with DSM-IV this item is part of the re-experiencing cluster).

The items are divided into three subscales that were used in this study. These subscales correspond to the three main symptom groups of PTSD: re-experiencing, avoidance, and arousal. Similar to Mollica et al. (1992), the present study had good estimates of reliability for each of the subscales (re-experiencing (α= .74), avoidance (α= .79), and arousal (α= .78)) and the scale as a whole (α= .90). In this study the summed subscale scores were used to model the posttraumatic stress severity latent variable.

The DSQ measure is a 40-item self-report questionnaire on which participants rate on a 9-point Likert scale the degree they agree with the statements. The statements relate to 20 defense mechanisms which are aggregated into three defense styles: Mature, Neurotic, and Immature. Previous studies have reported high levels of reliability for the entire scale (α= .80: Watson & Sinha, 1998). The present study found lower levels of reliability for each of the subscales (Mature (α= .53), Neurotic (α= .52), and Immature (α= .76)) and the scale as a whole (α= .77).

For this piece of coursework you will be required to submit the Results and Discussion sections of a practical report. The practical report should be based on your analysis of the dataset ‘PTSD_1.sav’. You are required to carry out an appropriate analysis to examine the unique contributions of demographic variables, traumatic events, and defense styles to posttraumatic stress severity.
The Method section is already prepared for you and can be copied and pasted into your final submission. The file is called ‘Method’. This piece of coursework should not exceed 1,500 words.

There is no 'right' way to analyse the data - the important part of this assignment is how you choose to conduct the analysis. The assignment should include a Results and Discussion section – the Discussion does not have to be very long, just enough to demonstrate that you understand what your results mean. Look at the marking scheme to get an idea of what aspects of the report you should focus on in order to get the best possible mark.

Data view within SPSS

What ive done so far on the left of screen panel.