Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
From the Literature Box 12.1 Robert J. Homant explored the question of whether altruism was a predictor of criminal victimization.
From the Literature Box 12.1 Robert J. Homant explored the question of whether altruism was a predictor of criminal victimization. Data came from a survey distributed to four samples (college students, and residents of low-, medium-, and high-crime neighborhoods). Among other things, items on the survey, combined into scale scores, measured different types of altruism (safe and risky) and how many times they had been victims of various kinds of crime. The author used analysis of variance, t tests, and Pearson's r, as well as multiple correlation analyses. The following are excerpts from the research report. The correlations reported in the excerpts are for the altruism scale scores and the number of victimizations of all types. (Note: We have reversed the order of the first two excerpts in order to make the research report more understandable for our purposes.) figure The primary measure for this research, for the most direct test of the hypotheses, was the total victimization score, found by adding together the reported property and personal victimizations. For the total group, this gave a mean victimization score of 3.3. Seventy- nine percent of the sample (n = 212) reported at least 1 victimization. Ten percent of the sample (n = 27) had 8 or more victimizations, with 2 respondents reporting 20 total victimizations. (The total victimization score was later recoded to reduce the positive skew by compressing the scores of the top 10%; in effect, this reduced the range from 0 to 20 down to 0 to 10. This recoded variable correlated .96 with the raw scores and made no difference in any analysis.) . . . A statistical test was done on the victimization variable to determine whether respondents were indeed representative of significantly different crime areas. The overall analysis of variance was significant (F = 6.42, df 3/264, p < .001). Post hoc comparisons (Scheffe) showed that the high-crime sample experienced significantly more crime than either the student or low-crime groups (p < .01), but other group comparisons were not significant. Because the low- and moderate-crime samples had been specifically selected from the same city to represent areas that differed in crime rates, these two samples were also compared by t test. The t showed that respondents from the moderate-crime area did indeed report a higher level of victimization than did those from the low crime area: t = 2.01; df 142; p = .05, two-tailed.
In the second paragraph of From the Literature Box 12.1, the authors refer to an analysis of variance (ANOVA). Discuss why ANOVA is appropriate here. Discuss the correlations in Table 4. Is risky or safe altruism more closely associated with crime victimization? Discuss the correlations in Table 7. What do the multiple Rs represent? What would the coefficient of multiple determination be in each case?
