Two types of medication for hives are being tested. The manufacturer claims that the new medication A is more effective than the standard medication B and undertakes a comparison to determine if medication A produces relief for a higher proportion of adult patients within a 40-minute time window. In a random sample of 40 adults given medication A, 34 were symptom-free after 40 minutes. In a random sample of 34 adults given medication B, 28 were symptom-free after 40 minutes. The hypothesis test is to be carried out at a 1% level of significance.1. State the null and alternative hypotheses in words and in statistical symbols.2. What statistical test is appropriate to use? Explain the rationale for your answer.3. Would the test be right-tailed, left-tailed or two-tailed? Explain the rationale for your answer.4. Describe an outcome that would result in a Type II error. Explain the rationale for your answer.5. Describe an outcome that would result in a Type I error. Explain the rationale for your answer.

8579PLEASE SURE AND USE SPSS FOR THIS ASSIGNMENTApplication: Results Section (I attached all the information so far for the assignment add to it and incorporate it in the necessary areas I also added the EXCEL data you can convert back to SPSS in case you could not open the SPSS link below)In Week 2, you were asked to select a measure of job satisfaction and indicate why it was an appropriate measure of job satisfaction. In Week 3, you were asked to critically evaluate the Meyer and Allen (1991) three-dimensional measure of organizational commitment. In Week 4, you were asked to develop Part 1 of your Methods section, in which you discuss the instruments selected to measure job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and job involvement. In Week 7, you were asked to select three antecedent variables and an appropriate instrument to measure each of those variables.This week, you analyze a dataset that includes measures of job attitudes and a variety of antecedents to job attitudes and complete the Results section for your Final Project.In a previous course, I/O Testing and Measurement, you used IBM SPSS Statistics software to perform statistical analyses; you will need to do that here as well.Review the Job Attitudes Survey Codebook document located in this week’s Learning Resources. The codebook provides a detailed list of each of the variables that exist in the dataset provided. Select the three job attitudes measures (overall job satisfaction; affective, normative, and continuance commitment; and job involvement) and the three antecedent variables you identified in Week 7.Review the variables listed in the codebook and the dataset.Note: The instruments selected and contained in the codebook and dataset may not correspond with the instruments you selected in Week 7.Open the dataset in SPSS. Compute coefficient alpha estimates of reliability on the items of the three job attitude instruments and on the items of the instruments associated with the three job antecedent variables you selected in Week 7.Note: Some of the antecedent instruments contain subscales. Be sure to 1) compute your analyses on all subscales of the instrument and 2) save the output files and attach them as an appendix to the Final Project.Compute an overall score for each of the separate instruments selected. Please compute the mean of a set of items, rather than the sum: (e.g., Compute JobSat = mean (JS01 to JS03). The computation of the mean allows for better interpretation of scale scores than does the sum.Compute the mean and standard deviation associated with each instrument’s overall score (and subscales, if appropriate).Compute the frequency of responses for each item associated with each of the selected scales (e.g., Job Satisfaction: JS01, JS02, JS03). A frequency analysis will provide you with the number and percentage of respondents who selected each of the scale anchors for each item (e.g., how many individuals answered 1 [strongly disagree] on JS01?). Frequency analyses provide you with further information as to how people actually responded to the job attitude and diagnostic questions.Compute Pearson’s Product Moment correlations all of your variables (the overall [mean] scale score) and subscales (if appropriate).The Assignment (5–7 pages including tables)Submit your summary of data results in an APA-formatted Results section. Include a narrative of findings (descriptive statistics and correlations).Create two tables (using data from SPSS but rendered in APA formatting): Table 1 includes the overall means and standard deviations for each instrument, a correlation matrix showing the correlation coefficients between each pair of instruments, and the coefficient alpha estimates of reliability (on the diagonal). Table 2 contains the frequency data.References Readings Diefendorff, J. M., Brown, D. J., Kamin, A. M., & Lord, R. G. (2002). Examining the roles of job involvement and work centrality in predicting organizational citizenship behaviors and job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(1), 93–108. Edwards, B. D., Bell, S. T., Arthur, W., Jr., & Decuir, A. D. (2008). Relationships between facets of job satisfaction and task and contextual performance. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57(3), 441–465. Ilies, R., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Leader-member exchange and citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 269–277. LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 52–65. Motowidlo, S. J. (2000). Some basic issues related to contextual performance and organizational citizenship behavior in human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 10(1), 115–126. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3), 513–563. Document: Job Attitudes Survey Codebook (Word document) Document: Job Attitudes Dataset (SPSS document) Optional Resources The articles listed below are optional, yet recommended. Chughtai, A. A. (2008). Impact of job involvement on in-role job performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 9(2), 169–183. Fassina, N. E., Jones, D. A., & Uggerslev, K. L. (2008) Meta-analytic tests of relationships between organizational justice and citizenship behavior: Testing agent-system and shared-variance models. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(6), 805–828. Iaffaldano, M. T., & Muchinsky, P. M. (1985). Job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 97(2), 251–273. Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3), 376–407. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2), 85–97. Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dis-positional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775–802. Schleicher, D. J., Watt, J. D., & Greguras, G. J. (2004). Reexamining the job satisfaction-performance relationship: The complexity of attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 165–177. Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653–663. Further References Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee “citizenship.” Academy of Management Journal, 26(4), 587–595. Becker, T. E., Billings, R. S., Eveleth, D. M., & Gilbert, N. L. (1996). Foci and bases of employee commitment: Implication for job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 464–482. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71–98). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10(2), 99–109. Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710–725. Harrison, D. A., Newman, D. A., & Roth, P. L (2006). How important are job attitudes? Meta-analytic comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 305–325. Jones, M. D. (2006). Which is a better predictor of job performance: Job satisfaction or life satisfaction? Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 8(1), 20–42. Keller, R. T. (1997). Job involvement and organizational commitment as longitudinal predictors of job performance: A study of scientists and engineers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(4), 539–545. Lee, K., Carswell, J. J., & Allen, N. J. (2000). A meta-analytic review of occupational commitment: Relations with person and work-related variables. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 799–811. Meyer, J. P., Paunonen, S. V., Gellatly, I. H., Goffin, R. D., & Jackson, D. N. (1989). Organizational commitment and job performance: It’s the nature of the commitment that counts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(11), 152–156. Miller, K. I., & Monge, P. R. (1986). Participation, satisfaction, and productivity: A metaanalytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 29(4), 727–753. Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter,. J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475–480. Ostroff, C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(6), 963–974. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2), 85–97. Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775–802. Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Impact of organizational citizenship behavior on organizational performance: A review and suggestions for future research. Human Performance, 10, 133–151. Schappe, S. P., (1998) The influence of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and fairness perceptions on organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 132(3), 277–290. Suliman, A., & Iles, P. (2000). Is continuance commitment beneficial to organizations? Commitment-performance relationship: A new look. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15(5), 407–422. Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17(3), 601–617. Williams, S., & Shiaw, W. T. (1999). Mood and organizational citizenship behavior: The effects of positive affect on employee organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Psychology, 133, 656–668. Wright, T. A., Cropanzano, R., & Bonett, D. G. (2007). The moderating role of employee positive wellbeing on the relation between job satisfaction and job performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(2), 93–104. Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (2000). Psychological well-being and job satisfaction as predictors of job performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1), 84–94. Yousef, D. A. (2000). Organizational commitment: A mediator of the relationships of leadership behavior with job satisfaction and performance in a non-Western country. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15(1), 6–28. Van Dyne, L., Cummings, L. L., & Parks, J. M. (1995). Extra-role behaviors: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (a bridge over muddied waters). In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 11, pp. 43–103). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 765–802. Van Dyne, L., & Pierce, J. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(4), 439–459.

RubricDQR 100 Mini-Project 1 RubricDQR 100 Mini-Project 1 RubricCriteriaRatingsPts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome1. Completed tables and created graphs on Sheets 2 and 3. (DQR 100.3)DQR 100 Mini-Project 1 threshold: 14.9 pts20 ptsWith no mistakes or omissions16.9 ptsWith some mistakes or omissions14.9 ptsWith many mistakes or omissions12.9 ptsAttempted but mostly incorrect0 ptsDid not attempt20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome2. Answered questions 1 – 4 on Sheet 4 (DQR 100.1)DQR 100 Mini-Project 1 threshold: 22.35 pts30 ptsAll correct25.35 pts3 out of 4 correct22.35 pts2 out of 4 correct19.35 ptsAttempted but mostly incorrect0 ptsDid not attempt30 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome3. Answered questions 5 – 8 on Sheet 4. (DQR 100.2 & DQR 100.4)DQR 100 Mini-Project 1 threshold: 22.35 pts30 ptsAll correct25.35 pts3 out of 4 correct22.35 pts2 out of 4 correct19.35 ptsAttempted but mostly incorrect0 ptsDid not attempt30 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome4. Answered reflection questions 9 and 10 on Sheet 4DQR 100 Mini-Project 1 threshold: 14.9 pts20 ptsAnswered both with thoughtful answers16.9 ptsAnswered both with minimal effort14.9 ptsAttempted but too far off topic12.9 ptsAttempted but mostly incorrect0 ptsDid not attempt20 ptsTotal Points: 100PreviousNext