A statistics question- " A psych interested in relationship between job satisfaction and stress. He takes a random sample of workers- 2 questions- 1 how satisfied workers were with job and had them rate satisf. on scale 1- 50. Second question was how stressfull they found job on a given week. Again rated on a scale of 1 -50. Best test to assess rellationship between job satisf. and level of stress??? WOULD THIS BE A PEARSON CORR.COEFF. Or a SPEARMAN RHO??? WHY? THANKS SO MUCH!!!
132787
I would use spearman's rho.  The only difference between spearman's rho and pearson's correlation coefficient is that the spearman's rho is computed after ranking the numbers in sort order.
314855
Go to Barnes & Noble.  Get someone to help you pick out the correct SPARK CHARTS for the subjects you will be tested on.  Good Luck!
53992
Oh my gosh, did you work at the same place I did?  Your story sounded exactly like the situation I had.  Management and supervisory positions had changed at my work and from then on, the nightmare began.  The witch who rose to power was a narcissitic, egotistical backstabber who made it so unbearable for everyone. She continuously found it amusing to berate, belittle and degrade each and every employee in the company by telling us that we were underworked and so grossly over-paid (we all made more $$$$ than her). Someone who is in the psychology field said that this supervisor's had low self-esteem issues (she weighs close to 300 lbs.)and it is satisfying to her to put others down in order to feel better about herself.  She can't control her weight so she tried to control others.  Unfortunately, confronting this supervisor only compounded to the problem, as she could not take constructive criticism from ANY employee...and talking to the owner of the company proved to be useless, as he always avoided any type of problem or confrontation issue.  Since I did not have an advocate or anyone I could really turn to, the stress of going to work every day was taking it's toll on my health.  For peace of mind and sanity, I gave them my two weeks notice but did not burn my bridges upon my resignation. It is a good idea to have something lined up to go to, especially if you need the income and medical benefits.  You really don't want to be at the mercy of your current employer when it comes to recommendations or verifications.  Good luck.....
647688
The best thesis that one can undertake today is "Stress in the Workplace" Because we live in a society, that wants thing's done yesterday and not today, this type of environment places un- believable stress on people to compete in a modern workplace, especially the Hotel & Restaurant Management, where one is dealing with Stressed out customers, who themselves are on a short fuse. This is why a lot of top Hotels now provide  leisure and relaxation packages to de-stress their clients. Top hotels will furnish you with information and will show an interest in your Thesis. Stress, is a major health hazard in  today's society and more people die of stress related illnesses, than any other type of illness. Go out and speak to the people, who have been in the business  for years, i.e. from the Kitchen Porter to the  Manager.\nThis is also a great  learning process for life. Good Luck\nTom "M".Rep' Ireland
389300
For a Psychology Major \n1. What made them decide to be a psychology major?\n2. Do they have any idea what they would like to do with a degree in Psychology?\n3. Do they plan on furthering their education once they have completed their bachelor degree?\n4. What interests them most about psychology?\n5. Do they plan on doing research? And if so, what do they want to research?\n\nFor a Psychiatrist\n1. What made them decide to choose this profession?\n2. Where did they recieve their education?\n3. What is a regular day like for them in or out of the office?\n4. Did they do a lot of research during their education?\n5. Have they published any case studies, etc.?\n6. What do they find most enjoyable about their job?\n7. What would they recommend for a future therapist?\n8. What has been the funniest and/or most challenging experience while on the job?\n\nHope this helps! Enjoy! Let me know if you have any other questions!
636831
Of course, it is better to take some theory as background first, before investigation, for orderly analysis of things.\n\nYou have to ask questions to get a view who takes decisions, on what  they are based, what is the level of collaboration between workers and its type, how spread are non-conventional relations (present much in badly managed organisations), which is satisfaction of employees, how they perceive elements of organisation, etc. \n\nThe same questions in essence should be formulated differently for different people taking into account their position, education level, language used, also type of organisation - a thing suitable for hospital may be not suitable for trading company.\n\nAnd it is good to have several questions for testing the same.\n\nE.g. involvment into decision-making. \nYou may ask the employer and chief management: do they get feedback from employees, were opinions of employees useful, how often meetings are held. \nAnd questions of the same section for employees may look so: do management asks their opinion, do they feel that their feedback is used, do meetings are held too often/to rarely.
36131
First off, I want to complement you on giving your readers information.  However, before I give my anwer, I want all viewers to pay no attention to either article (or to take them both "with a grain of salt," as the saying goes).  Look at the source for each article: the stress article was written by Psychology Today (experts in the field, but would definately/obviously be biased) and the smoking article was written by RJR (not exactly the most reliable source, if you know what I mean).\n\n     So, as you know, both stress and smoking are bad for you.  Yes, I know I tend to be long winded, but I like to make sure I get each point across in a clear and understandable manner.  The dangers of smoking are well recognized, but two words are often left out: preventable and predictable.  People can prevent themselves from smoking, versus stress, which is a part of life.  Smoking is predictable (and measurable): if 10 45 year olds smoke 30 cigarettes a day for 5 years, the outcome is predictable and measureable.  \n\n     10 45 year olds have different thresholds/ideas of what is stressful, so smoking is worse, much worse.
505555
As shogunly said, compared.\n\nWhy? The reason for that answer is in bold below-\n\nRe-written, the sentence would read...\n\nThe results are compared to those of a national Demographic and Health survey to give a <b>comparative</b> impression of the socio-economic and health situation on Nias.\n\n(though, looking at the original sentence, shouldn't it be "weighted against"? ::frowns:: Then again, I dropped out of school, so I can't really be sure.)
258990
Losing one's job is right up there at the top of the list of causes for depression.  He's had his foundation ripped out from under him.  He wants to claim something of his, thus the paycheck issue.  Motivation + attitude = success.  Get into counseling fast.
664742
As to part one, I can not recommend any acceptable, known test for such data (perhaps what I've written below might work).\n\nAs to part two, this is a horrid approximation since the midrange as the mean is a major assumption (even more far-reaching than assuming something about the populations' probability distributions).\n\nFor part 3 and also part 1:\n\nThe first problem you run into is that you do not know anything about the nature of the population distribution (normal, uniform, etc).  Thus, a nonparametric test would be required.  I know of no nonparametric tests for any of the statistics you have (minimum, maximum or range).\n\nIf it is possible to obtain the actual values for each of the samples in each set, the Kruskal-Wallis test should suffice.  It is nonparametric, so there are no problems with the requirement of assumptions about population distributions.\n\nFurther, its job is to determine if two samples are far enough apart such that the null hypothesis that the population distributions are the same can be rejected.  This would give you what you desire.\n\nAs far as your problem is concerned, the only statistics you have are minimum, maximum and range.   Perhaps one could derive a test to test the minima or maxima of each set, but one still runs into the problem that there can be no parameter placed on the population distribution.\n\nIf you can make an assumption about the distributions of the populations of interest (normal or whatnot), then it would be possible to derive such a test.  This would be a tedious task, however, as it would require thorough knowledge of order statistics and distribution functions.\n\nOne would need to use a test statistic based of off the difference in the two statistics that you use (I would use the maxima since they are further apart than the minima and probability distributions for ranges are uncharted territory unless you're a Ph.D.).  Thus, your test statistic is based off of the difference between the maxima (Y(n) - Z(n) where the (n) are subscripts, which is 2 in this case).\n\nTo perform this test, you would need to derive the probability distribution of the difference of the two maxima and use that to find the probability of the difference being two or greater.  This is quite a task for anyone and requires a large amount of knowledge in mathematical statistics.  I believe I could perform such a task, but it would likely take some time to complete.\n\nRemember though that you must make a critical assumption about the population before you can even do this.  I would recommend using the assumption of uniformity if you are unsure of the populations' distributions.  This is because the derived test would then be least likely to give a type I error, where you reject the data improperly, because the test is less likely to reject.
276132
Unfortunately for the profession, "studies have shown" that there is almost no correlation between the degree to which someone feels helped by the person they go see.....and the letters after their name.\n\n  At the same time, the nature and quality of what is called "The Theraputic Alliance" has been shown to make the most difference. Whether you feel safe and understood by the individual who you see.\n\n   And unfortunately that seems to be a personal quality, and simply not something they can teach in school.\n\n   I guess the point I want to make is that while those who have more schooling may indeed have more training, at the same time.....all the training in the world is not going to help if you don't feel safe or connected with the person you are putting your trust in.\n\n  When it comes to something as personal as you mental health, generally your best bet is to "interview" several therapists first, and go with the one who feels like the best fit for you.\n\n   Just my two cents,\n\n   Bob J.
81377
Yeah you see relief in the future, so your current high stress job seems even more stressful than normal.  Just keep focusing on your future plans knowing how good they are.
278411
thats gonna be a toughy.  i had my three personal time outs in school leading up to my clinicals, but not in clinicals.  why the misfire?  its a stressful occupation, a lot of work for too few people.  and being around sick, tired, and depressed people all the time.  as long as the school is only giving you a hard time stick it out and let them know you've dealt with whatever it was that got you down. we need good people........are you good enough?  only you can answer this question.
199305
what do you do as a job? i found that i had to change my attitude in a lot of different areas of my life. i don't know exactly what i'd suggest for you since i'm not sure what type of work you do. are you religious at all? that is something i got away from and i found myself sinking deeper and deeper into anger and despair. have you talked to your doctor about it? i have had to stay on an antidepressant. my family has a history of depression. sometimes we just have chemicals in our brains that are out of whack. it is hard to deal with life if your brain isn't working properly. i have made myself always look on the bright side. i dont' know you, but as a starter, you can be happy that you have a roof over your head and at least some type of employment. i honestly know how you feel. please don't consider killing yourself. i don't know how many times i made passive/aggressive attempts to harm myself. i was wreckless and i did not care at all. it's an awful feeling. i really suggest you talk to a doctor. psychological sickness is the same as physical sickness. some people do not understand that. there are methods to heal yourself. please talk to someone. i'll say a prayer for you.
99191
In the experiment of testing for the number of students out of 37 who consider statistics exciting\n\nNo. of trials made \n==> No. of students tested = 37\n==>n = 37\n\nLet the event of a student tested being intersted in the subject of statistics be a success\n\nProbability of success in each trial\n= probability that a student tested is interested in the subject of statistics\n==> p = 0.75\n[Given that 75% of the population of all business statistics 1 students consider statistics exciting]\n\nTherefore, \nq = 1 - p ==> q = 1 - 0.75 ==> q = 0.25\n\nLet "x" indicate the number of successes in "n" trials\nsince the number of students who are interested in statistics can be either 0, 1, 2, .... 37\nThe values "x" can carry are 0, 1, 2, .... 37\n==> "X" is a discrete random variate with range = {0, 1, 2, .... 37}\n\nThe probability distribution of "x" is a binomial distribution..\n\n[Since there a number of trials all of which are identical and independent with only two possible outcomes in each trial either a success i.e. the student being interested or a failure i.e. the student not being interested, with the probability of success in each trial remaining the same all throught]\n\nThe probability function of a binomial distribution\n==> P(X=x) = nCx * p^x * q^(n-x)\n\nTherefore, for the above distribution\nP(X=x) = 37Cx * (0.75)^x * (0.25)^(37-x)\n==>P(X=x) = 37Cx * (0.75)^x * (0.25)^(37) * (0.25)^(-x)\n==>P(X=x) = 37Cx * (0.75)^x * (0.25)^(37) * 1/(0.25)^(x)\n==>P(X=x) = 37Cx * (0.75/0.25)^x * (0.25)^(37)\n==>P(X=x) = 37Cx * (3)^x * (0.25)^(37)\n\nTherefore, \nProbability of observiing 36 or more of the students who consider statistics to be an exciting subject\n==> P(X >= 36) = P(X=36) + P(X=37)\n\n\nP(X = 36) = C(37,36) * (3)^36 * (0.25)^(37)\nP(X = 37) = C(37,37) * (3)^37 * (0.25)^(37)\n\n\n\nhttp://www.futureaccountant.com/probability/study-notes/\n\nhttp://www.schoolingkids.com/
669739
http://www.psych.umn.edu/psylabs/vpr/msqinf.htm
358112
Let me tell you one thing.  I have reported to 13 females and 2 males in my career.  I had the least stress on the job when I worked for the males.  Is it sexist to say this?\n\nI don't believe so.  Males and females often do things differently simply by their nature.  Blacks and whites do often do things differently simply by their nature.  Old bosses and young bosses often do things differently simply by their nature.