Two-Way Anova

16/12/2016
BSC201
Psychology: Measurement, Design and Analysis
Unit Coordinator: Andrea Steele
BSC201
Two-Factor ANOVA
Reading: G&W, Ch. 14
Learning objectives
To understand the theory of Two-Factor
ANOVA (also called two-way ANOVA)
Purposes
Logic
Hypotheses
Assumptions
To learn how to perform Two-Factor

ANOVAs
Equations and calculations
Work through examples
Conducting and interpreting in SPSS
Interpreting interactions
1
16/12/2016
Moving beyond a one-factor world

So far, we have examined the effects of
one factor (i.e. one independent variable)
but two or more independent variables may

have important effects on our DV
these independent variables may also

interact in affecting the DV
i.e. their effects on the DV may depend on a
particular combination of IVs

Example
Peoples ratings of their satisfaction with their
boss may be affected by
the management style of the boss (e.g.
directive, democratic)
likely to be more satisfied with democratic styles
the gender of the boss (male, female)
likely to be more satisfied with female bosses
an interaction between these factors
likely to be least satisfied when a boss is both
directive and female
i.e. particular combinations of factors may have strong
effects

Example: Effectiveness of treatments for mental
illness may vary with
type of illness (e.g. schizophrenia, chronic anxiety)
type of treatment (e.g. drug-based, Cognitive-behavioural
Therapy [CBT])
DV: clinicians ratings of improvement
1 no improvement to 10 major improvement
we could expect that

one treatment works better than the other (independently
of the type of illness)
one illness is likely to improve more than the other with
treatment (independently of the type of treatment)
improvement may vary with BOTH the type of illness and
the type of treatment
e.g. drugs might lead to more improvement for people with
schizophrenia, but CBT might lead to more improvement for
those with chronic anxiety
2
16/12/2016

Possible effects of the IVs on the DV
one treatment works better than the other (regardless of

the illness)
- this is called a Main effect for treatment
one illness is likely to improve more than the other

(regardless of the treatment)
- this is called a Main effect for illness
improvement may vary with BOTH the type of illness and

the type of treatment
- this is called a Interaction effect between treatment
and illness
i.e. the effect of one factor may depend on the level of the
other factor
Two-factor ANOVA: Purposes

Two examine the effects of two
independent variables on a dependent
variable
identifying the effects of each independent

variable in isolation
identifying whether the independent variables

interact to produce effects on the dependent
variable
Two-factor ANOVA: Logic

The logic of analysis of variance
We need to divide up the variation between

groups into three components
attributable to Factor A (one of the IVs)
attributable to Factor B (the other IV)
attributable to the interaction between Factors
A and B
in practice, this is the between groups variation left
over after we have found the variance attributed
separately to Factor A and Factor B
3
16/12/2016

The logic of analysis of variance:
Total variability
Variance between Variance within

treatments treatments
Main Effect Main Effect Interaction

for A for B between
A and B
Numerator Numerator Numerator Denominator (bottom)

(top) of F (top) of F (top) of F of F equation

Hence, for two-way ANOVA we need the following
measures of variability
total variability (SStotal)

between-treatments variability (SSbetween)
but this needs to be divided further, into
variability due to Factor A (SSFactor A)
variability due to Factor B (SSFactor B)
variability due to the interaction of A & B (SSAxB)
within-treatments variability (SSwithin)

We also need to calculate the degrees of freedom
for each component
dftotal = N-1 (N is the total number of scores)
dfbetween = k-1 (k is the total number of groups, or

cells)
but this needs to be divided further, into
dfFactor A = kA 1 (kA = number of levels in Factor A)
dfFactor B = kB 1 (kB = number of levels in Factor B)
dfAxB = dfbetween - dfFactor A - dfFactor B
dfwithin = N-k
4
16/12/2016
Two-factor ANOVA: Hypotheses

We have three statistical tests, therefore we can
have three types of hypotheses
1. About Factor A
H0: There is no difference in means between the
levels of Factor A (A1= A2 = A3 = )
H1: there is a difference in means between levels of
Factor A (A1 A2 or A1 A3 or A1 A2 A3 or
)
2. About Factor B
H0: There is no difference in means between the
levels of Factor B (B1= B2 = B3 = )
H1: there is a difference in means between levels of
Factor B (B1 B2 or B1 B3 or B1 B2 B3 or
)
Two-factor ANOVA: Hypotheses
3. About the interaction between A and B

H0: There is no interaction between A and B - all
differences in group/treatment means can be explained
by main effects
H1: There is an interaction between A and B

differences in group/treatment means are different
from what would be predicted by the main effects
alone
Two-factor ANOVA: Assumptions

Same three assumptions as for
univariate ANOVA
1. Independence of observations
2. Normality - samples drawn from

populations with a normal distribution
on the DV
3. Homogeneity of variance
5
16/12/2016
Two-factor ANOVA: Strategy

1. Compute SS and df
Phase 1: Calculate SS and df -> total, within, &
between
Phase 2: Divide SSbetween and dfbetween into
SSFactor A and dfFactor A
SSFactor B and dfFactor B
SSAxB and dfAxB
2. Find critical values of F
3. Complete ANOVA table and determine

significance
Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Is satisfaction with the boss related to their
management style and their gender?
DV: subordinate rating of satisfaction with

supervisor
1 not at all satisfied 5 extremely satisfied
IVs:
Factor A: supervisor gender (2 levels)
male, female
Factor B:management style (2 levels)
directive, democratic
Use = .05

Hypotheses
Factor A (Main effect for Gender)
H0 : there is no difference in satisfaction ratings for
male and female bosses (A1= A2)
H1 : there is a difference in satisfaction ratings for
male and female bosses (A1 A2)
Factor B (Main effect for management style)

H0 : there is no difference in satisfaction ratings for
bosses with directive or democratic management
styles (B1= B2)
H1 : there is a difference in satisfaction ratings for
bosses with directive or democratic management
styles (B1 B2)
6
16/12/2016

Hypotheses
A x B interaction
H0 : There is no interaction between management style
and gender in their effects on satisfaction with the
boss - all differences in mean satisfaction ratings
across treatments can be explained by main effects
H1 : There is an interaction between management

style and gender in their effects on satisfaction with
the boss - differences in mean satisfaction ratings
across treatments are different from what would be
predicted by the main effects alone
Errors Errors
No audience Audience No audience Audience

The logic of analysis of variance:
Total variability
Variance between Variance within

treatments treatments
Main Effect Main Effect Interaction

for A for B between
A and B
Numerator Numerator Numerator Denominator (bottom)

(top) of F (top) of F (top) of F of F equation
7
16/12/2016

Gender of boss: Factor A
Management style: Factor B
Gender of Boss
Style Male Female

Directive 2 1
3 2
3 1
2 1
Democratic 3 4
3 3
4 5
5 5

Summing for levels of Factor A
Gender of Boss
Style Male Female

Directive 2 1
3 2
3 1
2 1
Democratic 3 4
3 3
4 5
5 5
X XA1 = 25 XA2 = 22

Summing for levels of Factor B
Gender of Boss
Style Male Female X

Directive 2 1 XB1 = 15
3 2
3 1
2 1
Democratic 3 4 XB2 = 32
3 3
4 5
5 5
8
16/12/2016

Computing SStotal
G2
X
2
X2
4
SStotal X 2
3 9 N
3 9
2 4
47 2
3
3
9
9 167
4
5
16
25
16
1
2
1
4
167 138
1 1
1
4
1
16
29
3 9
5 25
dftotal = N-1
5 25
X=47 (=G) X2=167

= 15

Computing SSbetween Note: treat each combination
of factors separately e.g. for
Gender of Boss a 2x2 design, there are four
treatments (groups)
Style Male Female
T 2 G2
SSbetween
Directive 2 1
3 2
3 1 n N
2 1 10 2 52 152 17 2 47 2

4 16
M = 2.5 M = 1.25
T = 10 T=5 4 4 4
Democratic 3 4 (25 6.25 56.25 72.25) 138
3 3
(159.75) 138
4 5
5 5 21.75
M = 3.75 M = 4.25
T = 15 T = 17 dfbetween = k 1 = 4-1 = 3

Computing SSwithin Male and directive
Gender of Boss T2
Style Male X2 SS within X 2
Directive 2 4
n
3 9 10 2
3 9 26
2 4 4
26 25
T = 10 X2 = 26
1
9
16/12/2016

Computing SSwithin Female and directive
Gender of Boss T2
Style Female X2 SS within X 2
Directive 1 1
n
2 4 52
1 1 7
1 1 4
7 6.25
T=5 X2 = 7
.75

Computing SSwithin Male and democratic
Gender of Boss T2
Style Male X2 SS within X 2
Democratic 3 9
n
3 9 152
4 16 59
5 25 4
59 56.25
T = 15 X2 = 59
2.75

Computing SSwithin Female and democratic
Gender of Boss T2
Style Female X2 SS within X 2
Democratic 4 16
n
3 9 17 2
5 25 75
5 25 4
75 72.25
T = 17 X2 = 75
2.75
10
16/12/2016

Combine SSwithin for all treatment groups
SSwithin 1 .75 2.75 2.75

7.25
dfwithin =Nk
= 16 4
= 12

Phase 2: Partition SSbetween into its components
Factor A (gender of boss)
T 2 G2
SS FactorA
Gender of Boss
Male Female
n N
2 1
252 22 2 47 2
3 2
3 1 8 8 16
2 1
78.1 60.5 138
3 4
3 3 138.6 138
4 5 .6
5 5
dfFactorA = kA 1
T = 25 T = 22
= 2-1 = 1

Factor B (management style)
T 2 G2
Directive 2 1 Tdir = 15 SS FactorB
3 2 n N
3 1 152 32 2 47 2

8 16
2 1
8
Democratic 3 4 Tdem = 32 28.1 128 138
156.1 138
3 3
4 5
5 5 18.1
dfFactorB = kB 1
= 2-1 = 1
11
16/12/2016

Interaction A x B
SS AxB SSbetween SS FactorA SS FactorB

21.75 .6 18.1
3.05
dfAxB = dfbetween - dfFactorA - dfFactorB
= 3-1-1
=1

Calculate F-statistics (ANOVA table)
Source SS df MS F
Gender of boss
(Factor A)
.6 1 = .6 1.0
+
Management style 18.1 1 = 18.1 30.2
(Factor B)
+
Gender of boss x
Management style 3.05 1 = 3.05 5.1
(Interaction)
+
Within (Error) 7.25 12 = .6
=
Total 29 15

Determining critical values of F (df = 1,12)
F-critical = 4.75
2
12
16/12/2016

Assessing significance
Gender of boss (Main effect)
F-obtained = 1.0
F-critical = 4.75
Is F-obtained larger than F-critical? NO
no significant main effect for gender of boss
On the whole, there is no difference in

subordinate satisfaction with male and
female bosses

Management style (Main effect)
F-obtained = 30.2
F-critical = 4.75
Is F-obtained larger than F-critical? YES
a significant main effect for management style
How do we know which means are different?

if there are more than 2 groups post hoc tests
if there are only 2 groups, compare means
Mdirective = 15 / 8 = 1.9
Mdemocratic = 32 / 8 = 4
mean is higher for democratic management style

Interaction
F-obtained = 5.1
F-critical = 4.75
a significant interaction between gender of boss and
management style

we may need to perform post-hoc tests
e.g. simple effects analysis
however, we can graph the means to give us a better idea
about the interaction
13
16/12/2016

Gender of boss (Main effect)
F-obtained = 1.0
F-critical = 4.75
Is F-obtained larger than F-critical? NO
no significant main effect for gender of boss
On the whole, there is no difference in

subordinate satisfaction with male and
female bosses

Management style (Main effect)
F-obtained = 30.2
F-critical = 4.75
a significant main effect for management style

if there are more than 2 groups post hoc tests
if there are only 2 groups, compare means
Mdirective = 15 / 8 = 1.9
Mdemocratic = 32 / 8 = 4
mean is higher for democratic management style

Interaction
F-obtained = 5.1
F-critical = 4.75
a significant interaction between gender of boss and
management style

we may need to perform post-hoc tests
e.g. simple effects analysis
however, we can graph the means to give us a better idea
about the interaction
14
16/12/2016
Two way ANOVA: SPSS

How do we enter this data
Gender of Boss into SPSS?
Style Male Female Remember, in general,

1 line per person
Directive 2 1
3 2 We need a variable for the DV
3 1 (which contains the scores from
2 1 16 people)
Democratic We need a variable for Factor A
3 4 (gender of boss)
3 3 We need a variable for Factor B
4 5 (management style)
5 5 We need 3 variables
(and 16 lines)
Two way ANOVA: SPSS
Two way ANOVA: SPSS
15
16/12/2016
Two way ANOVA: SPSS
put IVs into

Fixed factors
Descriptives
&
Homogeneity
tests
1
Two way ANOVA: SPSS
a
Levene's Test of Equality of Error Vari ances
Dependent Variable: sat isf action

F df 1 df 2 Sig.
1. 421 3 12 .285
Tes ts the null hy pothes is t hat the error v ariance of t he
dependent v ariable is equal ac ross groups .
a. Des ign: Int ercept+bossgen+manst y le+bos sgen
* manst y le
Two way ANOVA: SPSS
No significant main effect for gender of boss
16
16/12/2016
Two way ANOVA: SPSS
Significant main effect for management style
Two way ANOVA: SPSS
Significant interaction between gender of boss and

management style
Two way ANOVA: SPSS

What might the interaction mean?
We can get an idea by looking at a graph (plot) of the
means for each combination of the IVs
17
16/12/2016
Estimated Marginal Means of satisfaction
Style
Directive
Democratic
4
Estimated Marginal Means
female bosses tend to

be rated higher than
males when democratic
3
female bosses tend to

be rated lower than
males when directive
2
Lines with markedly

1
different slopes point
to interaction effects
Male Female
Gender
Two way ANOVA: Interpretation

When there is a significant interaction, we
have to be careful when interpreting main
effects
an interaction suggests that the main effect is
not telling the whole story
If an interaction is significant, place most

emphasis on interpreting this effect
you can also do further analyses to explain the
interaction
Two way ANOVA: Interpretation

A further step in interpreting interactions
Simple effects
analyse the effects of one Factor (IV) separately for each
level of the other Factor (IV)
this allows you to isolate where differences occurred
e.g. analyse the effects of gender of boss separately for
those with directive management styles and democratic
management styles
for bosses with democratic management styles, test for
differences in ratings of male and female bosses
for bosses with directive management styles, test for
differences in ratings of male and female bosses
compare patterns, e.g. is their a difference in satisfaction for
male and female directive bosses, but not between male and
female democratic bosses?
analyse using t-tests or ANOVAs (ANOVA if > two levels)
18
16/12/2016
Simple Effects
To set up the file for simple effects, split the file using one of
the factors
SPSS will perform analyses separately for each level of that factor
Simple Effects
Then perform a t-test/ANOVA on the other factor

in this case, gender of boss (Gender) 1
Simple Effects
Style = Directive
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Mean Std. Error Difference
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Difference Difference Lower Upper
SatisfactionEqual variances
1.000 .356 3.273 6 .017 1.250 .382 .316 2.184
assumed
Equal variances
3.273 5.880 .017 1.250 .382 .311 2.189
not assumed
Style = Directive
19
16/12/2016
Simple Effects
Style = Democratic
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of
Mean Std. Error the Difference
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
DifferenceDifference Lower Upper
satisfactionEqual variances
.000 1.000 -.739 6 .488 -.500 .677 -2.157 1.157
assumed
Equal variances
-.739 6.000 .488 -.500 .677 -2.157 1.157
not assumed
Style = Democratic
Two way ANOVA: Write-up

Without simple effects analysis:
Subordinates satisfaction ratings with their bosses were
compared for combinations of the gender of the boss (male
or female), and the managerial style of the boss (democratic
or directive), with four participants in each condition. The
mean ratings for each condition were: male democratic
bosses (M = 3.75, SD = .96), male directive bosses (M =
2.50, SD = .58), female democratic bosses (M = 4.25, SD =
.96), and female directive bosses (M = 1.25, SD = .50). A
two-factor analysis of variance using = .05, showed no
significant main effect for the gender of the boss, F(1,12) =
.93, p = .354, but a significant main effect for management
style, F(1,12) = 29.90, p < .001, indicating that satisfaction
was higher with democratic bosses than with directive
bosses. There was also a significant interaction between boss
gender and management style, F(1,12) = 5.07, p = .044,
with inspection of the means indicating that satisfaction with
democratic female bosses was higher than for democratic
male bosses, but satisfaction with directive female bosses
was lower than for directive male bosses.
you could also show the graph and describe it, or put means in tables

20
16/12/2016



21
16/12/2016

WITH simple effects analysis:
gender and management style, F(1,12) = 5.07, p = .044. ,
Simple effects analyses revealed that for directive bosses,
participants were significantly less satisfied with females than
males, t(6) = 3.27, p = .017, but for democratic bosses
there were no differences in satisfaction with females and
males, t(6) = -.74, p = .488.
Two way ANOVA: Graphs

Interpreting results
using graphs
Factor B
Sat
Dir
Dem
Mal Fem
Dir L L
Dem H H
Factor A
Male Female
Main effect for management style, no main effect for

gender, no interaction

using graphs
Factor B
DV
Dir
Dem
Mal Fem
Dir L H
Dem L H
Factor A
Male Female
Main effect for gender, no main effect for

management style, no interaction
22
16/12/2016

using graphs
Factor B
DV
Dir
Dem
Mal Fem
Dir L H
Dem H L
Factor A
Male Female
No main effect for gender, no main effect for

management style, interaction

using graphs
Factor B
DV
Dir
Dem
M
Mal Fem
M Dir L-M H
Dem L L
Factor A
Male Female
Main effect for management style, possible main

effect for gender, interaction

using graphs
Factor B
DV
Dir
Dem
Mal Fem
Dir M M
Dem M M
Factor A
Male Female
No main effect for gender, no main effect for

management style, no interaction
23
16/12/2016
Two-factor ANOVA: Fixed and random factors

The levels of a factor may not always be
categorical variables such as male/female
It is common to create levels by dividing a
continuous/interval variable into groups
if we use predefined criteria (these remain the
same when we conduct the study with different
samples), these are called fixed factors
e.g. people who score above/below 5 on a scale
if the criteria are determined by characteristics of

the sample (and may vary from sample to
sample), these are called random factors
e.g. the score on a variable that divides a sample into 2
equal groups (e.g. relatively high and low anxiety)
Two-factor ANOVA: Fixed and random factors
24

Two-Way Anova

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Two-Way Anova

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

16/12/2016

Unit Coordinator: Andrea Steele

To learn how to perform Two-Factor

Moving beyond a one-factor world

but two or more independent variables may

these independent variables may also

Moving beyond a one-factor world

Moving beyond a one-factor world

we could expect that

Moving beyond a one-factor world

one treatment works better than the other (regardless of

one illness is likely to improve more than the other

improvement may vary with BOTH the type of illness and

Two-factor ANOVA: Purposes

identifying the effects of each independent

identifying whether the independent variables

Two-factor ANOVA: Logic

We need to divide up the variation between

Two-factor ANOVA: Logic

Variance between Variance within

Main Effect Main Effect Interaction

Numerator Numerator Numerator Denominator (bottom)

Two-factor ANOVA: Logic

total variability (SStotal)

within-treatments variability (SSwithin)

Two-factor ANOVA: Logic

dftotal = N-1 (N is the total number of scores)

dfbetween = k-1 (k is the total number of groups, or

Two-factor ANOVA: Hypotheses

Two-factor ANOVA: Hypotheses

3. About the interaction between A and B

H1: There is an interaction between A and B

Two-factor ANOVA: Assumptions

2. Normality - samples drawn from

Two-factor ANOVA: Strategy

2. Find critical values of F

3. Complete ANOVA table and determine

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

DV: subordinate rating of satisfaction with

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Factor B (Main effect for management style)

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

H1 : There is an interaction between management

No audience Audience No audience Audience

Two-factor ANOVA: Logic

Variance between Variance within

Main Effect Main Effect Interaction

Numerator Numerator Numerator Denominator (bottom)

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Style Male Female

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Style Male Female

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Style Male Female X

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

X=47 (=G) X2=167

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

Two-factor ANOVA: Example

SSwithin 1 .75 2.75 2.75