Please help me with the attached cases. Thanks!
(See attached file for full problem description)
FROM THE ATTACHED FILE:
1. In their discussion of the literature on hostility as a risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD),, Weeks and Waterhouse suggested that the relationship between hostility and CHD may be moderated by another variable. What is this variable?
2. Weeks and Waterhouse suggested that the association between and hostility that emerges in retrospective studies may be reduced by another variable. What is this variable?
3. Weeks and Waterhouse included a measure of depression in their study. Was this measure incorporated in the stated aims of the study or in their hypothesis/ Should it have been? Why? State a hypothesis that would be consistent with their arguments in the introduction regarding depression, hostility and CHD.
4. There may be a problem with Weeks and Waterhouse's control group. What do you think this may be?
5. Weeks and Waterhouse reported the test-retest reliability of the HOS. Is the same size for this adequate? If not, why not? What would be a reasonable sample size?
6. Weeks and Waterhouse defended using the JAS to measure Type A personality on the grounds that theirs is a 'survey design"? What is a "survey design"?
7. Do you think the design of the Weeks and Waterhouse's study adequately addressed the theoretical and methodological issues raised by these authors in their introduction.
8. According tot he authros, a total of 88 participants were used in the study. What do you think would account for the error degrees of freedom being discrepant between tables 1 and 2? Is either of the reported error degrees of the freedom consistent with the total of 88 participants used? What essential information is missing that would allow you to determine whether the reported error degrees of freedom are correct?
9. What critical comments would you make about the reported correlation fo .27 between BDI and the HOS scale for the whole sample? What implication has this, if any, for any conclusions drawn about the relationship between hostility and CHD or depression and CHD?
10. How appropriate are the analyzes for answering the questions posed by the investigators? Do they relate directly to the hypothesis stated at thee and of the Introduction? Do they adequately address the methodological flaws raised by the authors in their Introduction? (In your answer, keep in mind your answers to question 1 and 2.)
Thank you.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com June 3, 2020, 6:08 pm ad1c9bdddf
Please see response attached (also presented below) I hope this helps and take care.
I wonder where you are having problems with these types of assignments, as it is important for you to learn to do these types of assignments. There is often some difficult material, but it is just a matter of reading the article with questions in hand and locating the material referred to in each question. I will go through the questions, and please refer back to the page provided and read the material so you get some practice at doing these types of assignments. Take the time to read the article and go through the questions and responses looking up the information. Now then, let's look closer at these 10 questions:
1. The authors suggest that the relationship between hostility and CHD may be moderated by the tendency toward suppressing the negative expression of hostility as aggressive behaviors (see p. 3, column 2 of attached article)
2. The authors suggested that the association between hostility in retrospective studies might be mediated by depression via stressful life events (see p. 3, column 3)
3. Yes, the authors did include a measure of depression in the study, but did not include it in the aims of the study or in their hypothesis. In fact, the authors put forward the following two hypothesis and predicted:
i) That CHD patients would report a greater frequency of hostile attitudes than subjects from either the serious illness group, or the disease free group.
ii) That type A subjects would report a greater frequency of hostile attitudes than type B subjects (see p.4 column 1)
It should have been included in the aim and hypothesis, because a measure of depression was used in the study (BDI) to rule out depression as a mediating factor, but yet there was no corresponding hypothesis.
One hypothesize that could be ...
Based on the article "Hostile Attitudes and Coronary Prone Personality" (Weeks & Waterhouse, 1991), this solution answers the ten case questions through discussion. It also references the answers by page and paragraph for easy referencing.