Descriptive StatisticsDoug and David are researchers who examine youth health.  Numerous recent studies have suggested that youth in the 10- to 15-year-old range are increasingly engaged in many hours of video game playing, they are not active enough (as defined by at least one hour of exercise per day), and they are disconnected to their family units.  However, in some of their own previous research Doug and David found that although students play a lot of video games they remain active and engage in sufficient exercise.  In their current study they asked children to keep a log and then to report for a given week the number of hours of video game playing an exercise that they engage in an also to report the number of dinners that their families eat together as a measure of family connection.  They also collected gender and age as demographic data.This is the data for Doug and David’s study.IDAGEGenderHoursExerciseDinner1121314521311410331221222411167351112.58.536122156271311451812216649121683101228931112181231214151431313213123141311232151228.572161217.7564171118.255.56181419821914212712012216.511.253211225.75104221229.75452313212.53612411111.2543251218.2541261222402271411.514.53281224121291212.7512330132142.54311312.5137321429.25102331118.75833412111.57.7533512112.56.53361318.2572371227.512.252381215.75144391326.2511.51401126.510.521.Generate one descriptive research question that can be addressed by Doug and David’s data.2.Generate one relationship research question that can be addressed by these data.3.State one null hypothesis that can be tested with these data.4.Identify the level of measurement for each of the following variables: a.Age (reported in years), b.Gender (reported as Female=1; Male =2)c.Hours of video game playing in the week (reported to the quarter hour)d.Exercise time (reported to the quarter hour)e.Dinners taken together as a family (0-7 dinners in the week).5.Please enter the data into a file after double-checking for accuracy. (Excel file.)6.Please provide descriptive information for each of the variables above (age, gender, hours of video game watching, exercise time, and number of dinners taken together).  Which is the best measurement of central tendency for each variable? Why?7.Are there more girls than boys in the sample? On average, do youth in the sample spend more time playing video games or exercising? Do boys or girls spend more time playing video games? Exercising?Extra Credit: Graph the dinners (as a pie chart) and gender (as a histogram) data.  Graph the age, hours of game playing, and hours of exercise data with frequency distributions. (You can do all of these things with Excel graphing. Team up or check with one another if you have troublePart II Metacognition DataThese are the summary statistics for the dataset you generated from taking the Metacognition Scale two weeks ago. (See the excel data file Metcognition_Data.xls and Metacognition_Data2.xls in the Wiki Tool for this assignment for actual datasets.)Descriptive StatisticsNRangeMinimumMaximumMeanStd. DeviationVarianceStatisticStatisticStatisticStatisticStatisticStd. ErrorStatisticStatisticKnowledge of Cognition208.009.0017.0013.6000.483412.161874.674Regulation of Cognition2015.0018.0033.0028.15001.005974.4988320.239Metacog_Total2019.0030.0049.0041.75001.196215.3496228.618Valid N (listwise)208.Verify that the standardized (z-scores) reported in the data set are correct for: MB, DD, and AN. (The formula for Z-score found on p.40 of Riverside_Testing_Web_Glossary. The Standard deviation is reported in the table of Descriptive Statistics under Part Two.)9.Which of the students appears to have greater strength in Metacognition Knowledge Score as compared to his/her Regulation score?10.Which of the students seems to have nearest the same Metacognition Knowledge and Regulation scores?11.Which of the students has the Metacognition Total score closest to the group mean score?Part III – Using Standardized Scores and Testing HypothesesNameGroupKnowledge of CognitionRegulation of CognitionMetacognition TotalKnowledge Z-ScoreRegulation Z-ScoreTotal Z-ScoreMB1112940-1.2026620.188938-0.32713AA11628441.11015-0.0333420.420591SA1113344-1.2026621.0780580.420591AI11531460.6475870.6334980.794449Finally, If we wondered whether there was a difference between the Metacognition “level” or “ability” of two groups of students (Groups 1 and 2) then the Hypotheses we would be testing would look like this:Ho1: there is no difference between the Knowledge of Cognition average score in Groups 1 and 2.Ho2: there is no difference between the Regulation of Cognition average score in Groups 1 and 2.Ho3: there is no difference in the Total Metacognition Score for Groups 1 and 2.12)Based on results of the Hypotheses testing above (using a nonparametric statistical test called the Mann-Whitney test of Independent Means):a.Was there a difference between groups in Knowledge of Cognition? What decision of the Hypothesis Test was posted for the result? (reject or retain the null hypothesis?) What does this mean?b.Was there a difference between groups in Regulation of Cognition? What was the level of significance determined in this hypothesis test? What decision was posted for the result of this hypothesis test? What does this mean?c.Was there an overall difference between Metacognition Total group means? What was the level of significance reported for this test?d.What conclusions can you draw from the results posted for this sample of students?

What do you think you did well?Where did you improve most?What would you like to continue to improve?How has the feedback you received from your Instructor on the Tasks and the Expository Overview been helpful, and how will you use it to improve your writing process for Project 3?How will you use what you have learned about writing, about your writing process, and about yourself?Do you have any final questions for your Instructor?RubricHolistic Rubric for Attached AssignmentsHolistic Rubric for Attached AssignmentsCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of criterion15.0 ptsHolistic Score for Excellent PerformanceA writer demonstrates excellent performance by meeting and exceeding the assignment structure through highly innovative strategies.12.0 ptsHolistic Score for Very Good PerformanceA writer demonstrates very good performance by meeting and exceeding the assignment structure through innovative strategies.10.0 ptsHolistic Score for Good PerformanceA writer demonstrates good performance by meeting the assignment structure in competent ways.8.0 ptsHolistic Score for Average PerformanceA writer demonstrates average performance by meeting the assignment structure. However, some areas of improvement are needed.5.0 ptsHolistic Score for Poor PerformanceThe writer has demonstrated poor performance. A number of areas of improvement are needed.2.0 ptsHolistic Score for Failing PerformanceThe writer has demonstrated failing performance. Because many areas of improvement are needed, the writer should contact the instructor for guided support.0.0 ptsNo SubmissionThe writer has not submitted the assignment.1