15 Jun In Week 3, you used the same variables as in Week 2 to perform a descriptive analysis of the data. For this Assignment, you will calculate a confidence inte

Assignment: Introduction to Quantitative Analysis: Confidence Intervals

In your Week 2 Assignment, you displayed data based on a categorical variable and continuous variable from a specific dataset. In Week 3, you used the same variables as in Week 2 to perform a descriptive analysis of the data. For this Assignment, you will calculate a confidence interval in SPSS for one of the variables from your Week 2 and Week 3 Assignments.

To prepare for this Assignment:

· Review the Learning Resources related to probability, sampling distributions, and confidence intervals.

· For additional support, review the Skill Builder: Confidence Intervals and the Skill Builder: Sampling Distributions, which you can find by navigating back to your Blackboard Course Home Page. From there, locate the Skill Builder link in the left navigation pane.

· Using the SPSS software, open the Afrobarometer dataset or the High School Longitudinal Study dataset (whichever you chose) from Week 2.

· Choose an appropriate variable from Weeks 2 and 3 and calculate a confidence interval in SPSS.

· Once you perform your confidence interval, review Chapter 5 and 11 of the Wagner text to understand how to copy and paste your output into your Word document.

For this Assignment:

Write a 2- to 3-paragraph analysis of your results and include a copy and paste of the appropriate visual display of the data into your document. If you are using the Afrobarometer Dataset, report the mean of Q1 (Age). If you are using the HS Long Survey Dataset, report the mean of X1SES.

Based on the results of your data in this confidence interval Assignment, provide a brief explanation of what the implications for social change might be.

By Day 7

Submit your Introduction to Quantitative Analysis: Confidence Intervals Assignment.

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

· Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK4Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.

· Click the Week 4 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.

· Click the Week 4 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.

· Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK4Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.

· If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.

· Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.

REFERENCES

Frankfort-Nachmias, C., Leon-Guerrero, A., & Davis, G. (2020). Social statistics for a diverse society (9th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

· Chapter 5, “The Normal Distribution” (pp. 151-177)

· Chapter 6, “Sampling and Sampling Distributions” (pp. 179-209)

· Chapter 7, “Estimation” (pp. 211-240)

Wagner, III, W. E. (2020). Using IBM® SPSS® statistics for research methods and social science statistics (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

· Chapter 3, “Selecting and Sampling Cases”

· Chapter 5, “Charts and Graphs”

· Chapter 11, “Editing Output”

·

http://rpsychologist.com/index.html

http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/rsch8210

http://onlinestatbook.com/2/estimation/ci_sim.html

Skill Builders:

· Confidence Intervals

· Sampling Distributions

To access these Skill Builders, navigate back to your Blackboard Course Home page, and locate “Skill Builders” in the left navigation pane. From there, click on the relevant Skill Builder link for this week.

,

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.

Content

Name: RSCH_8210_Week4_Assignment_Rubric

• Grid View
• List View

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Analysis and Results	Points: Points Range: 36 (60%) – 40 (66.67%) Paper includes a clear description of the chosen variables, their unit of analysis, and their levels of measurement. A clear visual display of the data (if appropriate) is also provided, and a detailed description is given about how these quantitative reasoning and analysis skills will translate into the ability to enact positive social change. Overall, the paper demonstrates an excellent understanding of the chosen variables and their utility. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 32 (53.33%) – 35 (58.33%) Paper includes a description of the chosen variables, their unit of analysis, and their levels of measurement. A visual display of the data (if appropriate) is also provided, and a description is given about how these quantitative reasoning and analysis skills will translate into the ability to enact positive social change. Overall, the paper demonstrates a good understanding of the chosen variables and their utility. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 28 (46.67%) – 31 (51.67%) Paper includes a description of the chosen variables, but the description is missing one or more of the following details: their unit of analysis, their levels of measurement, and/or a visual display of the data (if appropriate). A description is given about how these quantitative reasoning and analysis skills will translate into the ability to enact positive social change, but the description is vague. Overall, the paper demonstrates a fair understanding of the chosen variables and their utility. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 27 (45%) Paper includes a description of the chosen variables, but the description is missing several of the following details: their unit of analysis, their levels of measurement, and/or a visual display of the data (if appropriate). A description is not given about how these quantitative reasoning and analysis skills will translate into the ability to enact positive social change. Overall, the paper demonstrates a poor understanding of the chosen variables and their utility. Feedback:
Writing	Points: Points Range: 18 (30%) – 20 (33.33%) Paper is well organized, uses scholarly tone, follows APA Style, uses original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate-level writing style. Paper contains multiple, appropriate and exemplary sources expected/required for the assignment. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 16 (26.67%) – 17 (28.33%) Paper is mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style. Paper may have some small or infrequent organization, scholarly tone, or APA Style issues, and/or may contain a few writing and spelling errors, and/or somewhat less than the expected number of or type of sources. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 14 (23.33%) – 15 (25%) Paper is somewhat below graduate-level writing style, with multiple smaller or a few major problems. Paper may be lacking in organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and/or contain many writing and/or spelling errors, or shows moderate reliance on quoting versus original writing and paraphrasing. Paper may contain inferior resources (number or quality). Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 13 (21.67%) Paper is well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and writing, or relies excessively on quoting. Paper may contain few or no quality resources. Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Analysis and Results–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 36 (60%) – 40 (66.67%) Paper includes a clear description of the chosen variables, their unit of analysis, and their levels of measurement. A clear visual display of the data (if appropriate) is also provided, and a detailed description is given about how these quantitative reasoning and analysis skills will translate into the ability to enact positive social change. Overall, the paper demonstrates an excellent understanding of the chosen variables and their utility. Good 32 (53.33%) – 35 (58.33%) Paper includes a description of the chosen variables, their unit of analysis, and their levels of measurement. A visual display of the data (if appropriate) is also provided, and a description is given about how these quantitative reasoning and analysis skills will translate into the ability to enact positive social change. Overall, the paper demonstrates a good understanding of the chosen variables and their utility. Fair 28 (46.67%) – 31 (51.67%) Paper includes a description of the chosen variables, but the description is missing one or more of the following details: their unit of analysis, their levels of measurement, and/or a visual display of the data (if appropriate). A description is given about how these quantitative reasoning and analysis skills will translate into the ability to enact positive social change, but the description is vague. Overall, the paper demonstrates a fair understanding of the chosen variables and their utility. Poor 0 (0%) – 27 (45%) Paper includes a description of the chosen variables, but the description is missing several of the following details: their unit of analysis, their levels of measurement, and/or a visual display of the data (if appropriate). A description is not given about how these quantitative reasoning and analysis skills will translate into the ability to enact positive social change. Overall, the paper demonstrates a poor understanding of the chosen variables and their utility. Feedback:

Writing–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 18 (30%) – 20 (33.33%) Paper is well organized, uses scholarly tone, follows APA Style, uses original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate-level writing style. Paper contains multiple, appropriate and exemplary sources expected/required for the assignment. Good 16 (26.67%) – 17 (28.33%) Paper is mostly consistent with graduate-level writing style. Paper may have some small or infrequent organization, scholarly tone, or APA Style issues, and/or may contain a few writing and spelling errors, and/or somewhat less than the expected number of or type of sources. Fair 14 (23.33%) – 15 (25%) Paper is somewhat below graduate-level writing style, with multiple smaller or a few major problems. Paper may be lacking in organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and/or contain many writing and/or spelling errors, or shows moderate reliance on quoting versus original writing and paraphrasing. Paper may contain inferior resources (number or quality). Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (21.67%) Paper is well below graduate-level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA Style, and writing, or relies excessively on quoting. Paper may contain few or no quality resources. Feedback:

Total Points: 60

Name: RSCH_8210_Week4_Assignment_Rubric