/
SPSS S tatistical  P ackage for SPSS S tatistical  P ackage for

SPSS S tatistical P ackage for - PowerPoint Presentation

thousandnike
thousandnike . @thousandnike
Follow
347 views
Uploaded On 2020-06-16

SPSS S tatistical P ackage for - PPT Presentation

S ocial S ciences Multiple Regression Department of Psychology California State University Northridge wwwcsunedu plunk Multiple Regression Multiple regression predictsexplains variance in a criterion dependent variable from the values of the predictor independent variables ID: 778815

regression multiple 001 quality multiple regression quality 001 life variance intelligence depression beta hierarchical box move significant variables click

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download The PPT/PDF document "SPSS S tatistical P ackage for" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

SPSS

S

tatistical

P

ackage for

S

ocial

S

ciences

Multiple Regression

Department

of Psychology

California State University Northridge

www.csun.edu

/

plunk

Slide2

Multiple Regression

Multiple

regression predicts/explains

variance in a criterion (dependent) variable from the values of the predictor (independent) variables.

R

egressions also explain the strength and direction of the relationship between each IV and the DV (taking into consideration the shared variance between the IVs).

Slide3

Multiple Regression

Go

to “Analyze”,

then “Regression”

, and then

“Linear”

Slide4

Multiple Regression

Move “Quality of Life” into the “Dependent” box, and move “Intelligence”

and

“Depression” into the “Block 1 of 1” box. Then click “OK”.

Slide5

Multiple Regression

Intelligence and depression accounted for significant variance in quality of life,

R

2

= .28,

F

(2,2670) = 524.85,

p

< .001. The standardized beta coefficients indicated that intelligence (

Beta

= -.19,

p < .001) and depression (Beta = -.41, p < .001) were significantly and negatively related to quality of life.

Note: Another way this could have been reported is that intelligence and depression accounted for 28% of the variance in quality of life,

F

(2,2670) = 524.85,

p

< .001

Slide6

Hierarchical Multiple Regression

A

form of multiple regression in which the contribution toward prediction of each IV is assessed in some predetermined hierarchical order

.

Researchers may put in ‘control variables’ first to determine if a set of variables account for significant variance in the DV after controlling for the ‘control variables’.

Or the researchers may have a theoretical or methodological reason to determine the order entry.

In this example, the researcher is going to assess whether intelligence and depression account for significant change

in quality of life after controlling for certain demographic variables.

Slide7

Hierarchical Multiple Regression

Move

“Quality of Life” into the “Dependent” box, and move

“gender”, “age”,

and

“maritalsts

into the “Block 1 of 1” box.

Then

click

“Next”

.

Slide8

Hierarchical Multiple Regression

Move

“Intelligence” and “Depression”

into the “Block

2 of 2”

box.

Then

click

“Statistics”

.

Slide9

Hierarchical Multiple Regression

Select “R squared change”, then “Continue” and then “OK”

Slide10

Hierarchical Multiple Regression

In the first step, the demographic variables did not account for significant variance in quality of life

R

2

=

.00

F

(3,2658)

=

.12,

p = .95. In step 2, intelligence and depression accounted for significant variance

in quality of life, R2 = .28, F(2,2656)

=

526.94,

p

< .001. The standardized beta coefficients indicated that intelligence (

Beta

= -

.20,

p

< .001) and depression (

Beta

= -.

42,

p

< .001) were significantly and negatively related to quality of life.