Scribd
Upload
118 views8 pages

How To Analyze Data Using ANOVA in SPSS

There were three treatments compared using one-way ANOVA: 1) sardine head and tail, 2) goatfish bone meal, and 3) milkfish bone meal. Descriptive statistics and ANOVA results showed a significant difference between treatments (p<0.05). Post hoc DMRT analysis revealed treatment 3 (milkfish bone meal) had the highest hedonic rating and was liked extremely, followed by treatment 2 (goatfish bone meal) which was liked moderately, and treatment 1 (sardine head and tail) had the lowest rating and was liked moderately.

Uploaded by

Gaily Jubie Hontiveros
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
118 views8 pages

How To Analyze Data Using ANOVA in SPSS

There were three treatments compared using one-way ANOVA: 1) sardine head and tail, 2) goatfish bone meal, and 3) milkfish bone meal. Descriptive statistics and ANOVA results showed a significant difference between treatments (p<0.05). Post hoc DMRT analysis revealed treatment 3 (milkfish bone meal) had the highest hedonic rating and was liked extremely, followed by treatment 2 (goatfish bone meal) which was liked moderately, and treatment 1 (sardine head and tail) had the lowest rating and was liked moderately.

Uploaded by

Gaily Jubie Hontiveros
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 8

How to Analyze Data Using One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) in SPSS

GSHontiveros

One-way ANOVA is a statistical test used to compare three or more treatments.

Null hypothesis (Ho): There is no significant difference between the treatments.


Alternate hypothesis (Ha): There is a significant difference between the treatments.

1. Tabulate the results of the sensory evaluation in MS Excel.


Refer to file: Dry Lab- Acceptability scores

2. Run SPSS and choose Type in Data.


3. Make sure that you are in Data View (buttons in bottom screen) and paste all the scores from
MS Excel.
You may use the keyboard shorts Ctrl + C or V here. Leave the first column blank.

Arrange all scores in one column. Clear other columns that are not in use (right-click option).

4. In the first column, indicate the treatment assignments: 1 for sardine head and tail, 2 for
goatfish bone meal, and 3 for milkfish bone meal.
5. Shift to Variable View and specify parameters, such as Name, Decimals, and Measure.
“Name” of Columns should have no special characters and spaces.
Selection of decimals depends on the data. Reflect the maximum number of decimal places used in
your data.
For this example, we use a Likert scale (hedonic rating), which is an ordinal measurement. Other
options are nominal (categories like height, gender, color, etc.) and scale (infinite numbers: negative,
zero, or positive).

6. Click Analyze > Compare Means > One-Way ANOVA


Define the Dependent Variable. In this case, we have the Acceptability of Flavor scores.
Define the Factor (Independent Variable). In this case, it is the Treatment.
You can specify the parameters by dragging them to their respective boxes or by clicking the arrows.
Click Post Hoc to choose a test for multiple comparisons.
Usually, Tukey’s Test is used for treatments with unequal number of replicates and Duncan’s Multiple
Range Test (DMRT) is for when replicates among all treatments are equally sized. In our case, we will
use Duncan (DMRT) at α=0.05 (significance level).

Click Options and check Descriptive.


This will include the descriptive statistics in our analysis and results.
Click Continue and then OK.

7. SPSS will now show you a new window with the results of the One-way ANOVA.
You may select which data you need and copy this to and MS Word document.
8. Make the necessary edits and add discussion to your results.

Oneway
Descriptives

Acceptability of Flavor

Treatment N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Minimum Maximum

Lower Bound Upper Bound

1 (Sardines head and tail) 40 6.53 .506 .080 6.36 6.69 6 7

2 (Goatfish bone meal) 40 7.13 .757 .120 6.88 7.37 6 8

3 (Milkfish bone meal) 40 8.23 .577 .091 8.04 8.41 7 9

Total 120 7.29 .938 .086 7.12 7.46 6 9

Descriptives show how many treatments there are, number of replicates per treatment, treatment
means, group standard deviation (SD), standard error of the mean (SEM), the confidence intervals, as
well as the minimum and maximum scores given per treatment.

ANOVA
Acceptability of Flavor
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 59.467 2 29.733 76.752 .000
Within Groups 45.325 117 .387
Total 104.792 119

Sig. or the p-value is needed to conclude if there is a significant difference in treatment means. Go back
to the question:
Is there a significant difference on the acceptability of the flavor of spread from sardines
(Sardinella fimbriata) head and tail, goatfish (Upeneoides sulphureus) bone meal, and milkfish
(Chanos chanos) bone meal?
Sig > 0.05: no sig diff
Sig < 0.05: sig diff

Since p= 0.00, we reject the Ho and accept the Ha. We can conclude that:
There is a significant difference between the treatments (p<0.05).

Because we have multiple groups to compare, we will need to interpret the results of the post-hoc as
well. DMRT, in this case, will classify homogeneous subsets based on the significance of their
differences.
Post Hoc Tests

Homogeneous Subsets

Acceptability of Flavor
Duncan
Treatment N Subset for alpha = 0.05
1 2 3
1 (Sardines head and tail) 40 6.53
2 (Goatfish bone meal) 40 7.13
3 (Milkfish bone meal) 40 8.23
Sig. 1.000 1.000 1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 40.000.

Reflected in the DMRT table are the groupings of the treatments and their respective means. Since a
higher hedonic rating is preferred in this case, we will assign all treatments that fall under Column 3 as
Group a. Groups with lower scores shall be assigned as b and so on. This will give us the following
groupings:
a: Treatment 3 (Milkfish bone meal)
b: Treatment 2 (Goatfish bone meal)
c: Treatment 1 (Sardines head and tail)

In tabular form, this can be shown as:

Flavor Acceptability of Spread Using Different Fishery By-Products


Treatment Hedonic Rating* Interpretation**
1 (Sardines head and tail) 6.53 ± 0.51c Like moderately
2 (Goatfish bone meal) 7.13 ± 0.76b Like moderately
3 (Milkfish bone meal) 8.23 ± 0.58a Like extremely
*Means in the same column with the same superscript are not significantly different (p>0.05).
**Interpretations are based on a 9-point hedonic scale.

You can present more detailed results in this manner:


There was a significant difference between the treatments (p<0.05). Results show that flavor of
the spread with milkfish bone meal (Treatment 3) was extremely liked by the panelists. It scored
the highest hedonic rating (8.23 ± 0.58), which was significantly higher than the rest of the
treatments. The addition of goatfish bone meal to the spread (Treatment 2) resulted to a
remarkably inferior flavor as shown by a significantly lower score (7.13 ± 0.76) versus samples
with milkfish bone meal. This was, however, significantly better in flavor compared to the spread
with the sardines head and tail (Treatment 1). The inclusion of sardines head and tail the
formulation was observed to cause a further decrease in the acceptability, with scores that are
significantly lowest among all three treatments (6.53 ± 0.51).

You can then discuss further the reasons why and how the treatments (quality and properties of raw
material used) affected the flavor of the product. You could add here the description/remarks of the
panelists.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy