“Some Things You Learn Aren't So”: Cohen's Paradox, Asch's Paradigm, and the Interpretation of Interaction
- 1 January 1995
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Science
- Vol. 6 (1), 3-9
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00297.x
Abstract
When interpreting an interaction in the analysis of variance (ANOVA), many active researchers (and, in turn, students) often ignore the residuals defining the interaction Although this problem has been noted previously, it appears that many users of ANOVA remain uncertain about the proper understanding of interaction effects To clear up this problem, we review the way in which the ANOVA model enables us to take apart a table of group means or the individual measurements contributing to the means to reveal the underlying components We also show how (using only published data) to compute a contrast on the question that may be of primary interest and illustrate strategies for interpreting tables of residuals We conclude with an exercise to check on students' understanding of ANOVA and to encourage increased precision in the specification of research resultsKeywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Contemporary Issues in the Analysis of Data: A Survey of 551 PsychologistsPsychological Science, 1993
- If you're looking at the cell means, you're not looking at only the interaction (unless all main effects are zero).Psychological Bulletin, 1991
- Things I have learned (so far).American Psychologist, 1990
- Judgment StudiesPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1987
- Reactive effects of pretesting in attitude research.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970
- Analyzing data: Sanctification or detective work?American Psychologist, 1969