Question

Results Hypothesis 1: A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a significant effect of perceived threat level on pre-emptive aggression, F(df) = XX.XX, p < .05. Post-hoc analyses using Tukey's HSD test indicated that participants in the high perceived threat condition exhibited significantly higher levels of pre-emptive aggression (M = XX.XX, SD = XX.XX) compared to both the medium (M = XX.XX, SD = XX.XX) and low (M = XX.XX, SD = XX.XX) threat conditions, ps < .05. However, there was no significant difference in pre-emptive aggression between the medium and low threat conditions, p > .05. Hypothesis 2: An independent samples t-test revealed that participants who had oneway points2rev threat, tabulate Summary of points2rev threat Mean Std. dev. Freq. Low 11.39 4.5679936 100 Medium 10.39 4.705241 100 High 11.26 4.4006887 100 Total 11.013333 4.5661056 300 Analysis of variance Source SS df MS F Prob > F Between groups 59.1266667 2 29.5633333 1.42 0.2429 Within groups 6174.82 297 20.7906397 Total 6233.94667 299 20.84932 2 Bartlett's equal-variances test: chi2(2) = 0.4420 Prob>chi2 = 0.802

          Results
Hypothesis 1:
A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a significant effect
of perceived threat level on pre-emptive aggression, F(df) = XX.XX, p
< .05. Post-hoc analyses using Tukey's HSD test indicated that
participants in the high perceived threat condition exhibited
significantly higher levels of pre-emptive aggression (M = XX.XX, SD
= XX.XX) compared to both the medium (M = XX.XX, SD = XX.XX)
and low (M = XX.XX, SD = XX.XX) threat conditions, ps < .05.
However, there was no significant difference in pre-emptive
aggression between the medium and low threat conditions, p > .05.
Hypothesis 2:
An independent samples t-test revealed that participants who had
oneway points2rev threat, tabulate
Summary of points2rev
threat Mean Std. dev. Freq.
Low 11.39 4.5679936 100
Medium 10.39 4.705241 100
High 11.26 4.4006887 100
Total 11.013333 4.5661056 300
Analysis of variance
Source SS df MS F Prob > F
Between groups 59.1266667 2 29.5633333 1.42 0.2429
Within groups 6174.82 297 20.7906397
Total 6233.94667 299 20.84932
2 Bartlett's equal-variances test: chi2(2) = 0.4420 Prob>chi2 = 0.802

Results
Hypothesis 1:
A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a significant effect
of perceived threat level on pre-emptive aggression, F(df) = XX.XX, p
< .05. Post-hoc analyses using Tukey's HSD test indicated that
participants in the high perceived threat condition exhibited
significantly higher levels of pre-emptive aggression (M = XX.XX, SD
= XX.XX) compared to both the medium (M = XX.XX, SD = XX.XX)
and low (M = XX.XX, SD = XX.XX) threat conditions, ps < .05.
However, there was no significant difference in pre-emptive
aggression between the medium and low threat conditions, p > .05.
Hypothesis 2:
An independent samples t-test revealed that participants who had
oneway points2rev threat, tabulate
Summary of points2rev
threat Mean Std. dev. Freq.
Low 11.39 4.5679936 100
Medium 10.39 4.705241 100
High 11.26 4.4006887 100
Total 11.013333 4.5661056 300
Analysis of variance
Source SS df MS F Prob > F
Between groups 59.1266667 2 29.5633333 1.42 0.2429
Within groups 6174.82 297 20.7906397
Total 6233.94667 299 20.84932
2 Bartlett's equal-variances test: chi2(2) = 0.4420 Prob>chi2 = 0.802

Added by Aaron T.

Question

Please give Ace some feedback