Individual Differences: Data Collection, Hypothesis Testing and Analysis

This report discusses the collection and analysis of individual differences data, including filling out questionnaires, creating hypotheses, and performing tests in SPSS. The report covers topics such as personality, self-management, and Freudian theory.

Individual Differences

Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................3
Portfolio A: Fill the Data entry Sheet..........................................................................................3
Portfolio B: Fill the personality Questionnaire............................................................................4
Portfolio C: Fill out the Freud Questionnaire..............................................................................4
Portfolio D: Create the hypothesis and perform the Test in SPSS..............................................7
Portfolio E: Multiple Regression.................................................................................................8
Portfolio F: ANNOVA TEST:.....................................................................................................9
CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................10
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................11

INTRODUCTION
Individual differences data is collected for valuing the data and finding out the significant
differences (Aziz, Abdelbary and Elassasy, 2019). In this report, by making the hypothesis
according to the data, correlation and ANNOVA test is performed in SPSS.
MAIN BODY
Portfolio A: Fill the Data entry Sheet
Student Number 2
Sex Female
Religious No
Relationship Yes
OnTime Yes
Big_5_E 24
Big_5_A 81
Big_5_C 30
Big_5_N 33
Big_5_O 76
EPQ_E 7
EPQ_N 3
EPQ_P 4
EPQL 5
FREUD 76
SelfEsteem 27
LOC 6
NeedCog 69
CFC 41
BDEF1_4 11
BDEF5_8 5
BDEF9_12 5

BDEF13_16 7
BEDF17_20 6
BDEF_total 34
Portfolio B: Fill the personality Questionnaire.
Part 1 – Basic Information
1. Sex (please tick a box) X Male Female
2. Your age 24 Years
3. Do you have any children? Yes X No
Part 2 – The Garrulosity Questionnaire
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
1. I often need extensions for project deadlines. X
2. I tap in with my ID card every lesson X
3. I often use online journals and ebooks. X
4. I participate in extra curricular activities. X
5. I access blackboard daily. X
6. I enjoy attending lectures X
7. I ✓
8. I’m a little reserved except with people I know well ✓
Portfolio C: Fill out the Freud Questionnaire.
How Freudian are you? A questionnaire. ©Bob Lockie 2021
Student no.:__________5_______ Total Freud score (qu’s 1-12) ___82______

Circle the extent to which you agree with each of the following claims from 1
to 10:
Question 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Universal bisexuality.
Talk-cure is a very important therapeutic method for treating psychiatric illness.
Single participant clinical interviews can uncover scientific truths about the
mind that mass-statistical science is going to miss.
Dreams have hidden (latent) meaning behind their surface (manifest) content.
These hidden meanings reveal things about our inner nature.
Action slips and slips of the tongue have hidden (latent) meaning. These slips
reveal things about our inner nature.
Failures to remember something may have hidden (latent) meaning. What we
forget may be a product of an active process of repression or censorship.

Question 7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 11
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
Question 12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Disagree Agree
“The degree and kind of a man’s sexuality reach up into the ultimate pinnacle of
his spirit” (Nietzsche BGE #75).
The ‘iceberg’ model of the mind: what is above the surface is a small fraction of
what is below.
We do not have a unitary self, we have a self of parts – one part may deceive or
conceal things from the other parts, we may be ‘strangers to ourselves’.
Powerful inner drives shape our lives, our control mechanisms often give us
only the illusion of being in control.
The origin of mental illness is commonly trauma that has not been satisfactorily
dealt with from one’s early life.
Infantile sexuality. Freud stated that it is “an obvious error” to claim that “the
sexual impulse .. is absent in childhood and .. first appears in .. puberty”.

Portfolio D: Create the hypothesis and perform the Test in SPSS.
1. Hypothesis: Finding out that the extraversion of EPQ and Big 5 are related or not.
H0: There is no relationship between the extraversion data of Big 5 and EPQ.
H1: There is a relationship between the extraversion data of Big 5 and EPQ.
2. Hypothesis: Finding out that the extraversion and Neuroticism of Big 5 are related or not.
H0: There is no relationship between the extraversion and Neuroticism of Big 5.
H1: There is a relationship between the extraversion and Neuroticism of Big 5.
3. Hypothesis: To find out the extraversion and Neuroticism of Big 5 and EPQ are related
or not.
H0: There is no relationship between the extraversion and Neuroticism of Big 5 and EPQ.
H1: There is a relationship between the extraversion and Neuroticism of Big 5 and EPQ.
Correlationsb
Big 5 E Big 5 N EPQ E EPQ N
Big 5 E Pearson Correlation 1 -.250** .686** -.358**
Sig. (2-tailed) .003 .000 .000
Big 5 N Pearson Correlation -.250** 1 -.278** .520**
Sig. (2-tailed) .003 .001 .000
EPQ E Pearson Correlation .686** -.278** 1 -.346**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .001 .000
EPQ N Pearson Correlation -.358** .520** -.346** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
b. Listwise N=139
Results: The value of correlation is 0.686, it means extraversion of Big 5 and EPQ are
moderately correlated. Although, the significant value is 0 which is less than the standard value
which is 0.05. So, on the basis of this, it can be stated that the alternative hypothesis should be
accepted and null hypothesis will be rejected.
On the other hand, the correlation between extraversion and Neuroticism of Big 5 is -
0.250 which means it is negative correlated. It means that both the variables have an inverse

correlation. The significance value of it is 0.03 which is also less than the p value which is
standard 0.05. It depicts that the alternative hypothesis will be accepted.
Moreover, the relation of the extraversion and Neuroticism of Big 5 and EPQ is -3.58, it
means it also negative correlated and shows and inverse correlation between both the factors.
The significance value is 0 which is lower than the p value which is 0.05. It shows that the null
hypothesis is rejected and alternative will be accepted.
Portfolio E: Multiple Regression
Hypothesis: To find out the relationship between the extraversion and neuroticism of the Big 5
and EPQ data.
H1: There is no significant relationship between the extraversion and neuroticism of the Big 5 ad
EPQ data.
H0: There is a significant relationship between the extraversion and neuroticism of the Big 5 and
EPQ.
Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .714a .510 .499 18.364
a. Predictors: (Constant), EPQ P , EPQ E , EPQ N
ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1
Regression 47297.872 3 15765.957 46.753 .000b
Residual 45524.488 135 337.218
Total 92822.360 138
a. Dependent Variable: Big 5 E
b. Predictors: (Constant), EPQ P , EPQ E , EPQ N
Results: The relationship between the Big 5 and EPQ exits with the positive moderate
correlation being 0.714. Also the influence of EPQ factors on the Big 5 data is approximately 50
% which is moderately equal. The significance value is Zero which is less than 0.05. It depicts

that there is a relationship between the EPQ and Big 5, through which the alternative hypothesis
will be accepted.
Portfolio F: ANNOVA TEST:
Hypothesis: To find out the difference between all the information of the self-management
related to times, problem solving, motivation and emotion and Self- esteem which is an
independent factor.
H0: There is no significant difference between BDEF data and self – esteem.
H1: There is a significant difference between BDEF data and self – esteem.
ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
BDEF1-4 deficits in self-
management to time
Between Groups 300.474 24 12.520 1.565 .072
Within Groups 632.055 79 8.001
Total 932.529 103
BDE5-8 deficits in self-
organisation + problem-
solving
Between Groups 8630.119 24 359.588 1.903 .018
Within Groups 14931.410 79 189.005
Total 23561.529 103
BDEF9-12 deficits in self-
restraint
Between Groups 128.208 24 5.342 1.118 .346
Within Groups 377.638 79 4.780
Total 505.846 103
BDEF13-16 deficits in self-
motivation
Between Groups 238.692 24 9.946 1.523 .085
Within Groups 515.769 79 6.529
Total 754.462 103
BDEF17-20 deficits in self-
regulation of emotions
Between Groups 409.372 24 17.057 1.544 .078
Within Groups 872.474 79 11.044
Total 1281.846 103
Results: The above table shows that the self- management and time has a significant value of
0.72 which is more than 0.05. It means that the null hypothesis will be accepted, by rejecting the
alternative hypothesis.
Further, BDEF self-organization and problem-solving by considering the self-esteem factor
having the significant value of 0.18. It also has the value which is greater than 0.05, it represents

that the null hypothesis will be accepted. It interprets that the problem solving quality of an
individual is dependent on the factor of self-esteem.
The significant value is 0.305, 0.085 and 0.078 of all the other three factors difference with
the self – esteem. In the hypothesis all the significant value is more than the standard value
which is 0.05. It represents that the null hypothesis will be accepted and shows that there is no
significant difference in the factors of self – esteem and self - management.
CONCLUSION
From the above report it can be concluded that the ANNOVA is used to find out the
difference between the dependent and one independent variable. On the other hand, correlation is
calculated to find out the relationship between to dependent variables.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Aziz, D.E., Abdelbary, A.A. and Elassasy, A.I., 2019. Investigating superiority of novel
bilosomes over niosomes in the transdermal delivery of diacerein: in vitro
characterization, ex vivo permeation and in vivo skin deposition study. Journal of
liposome research. 29(1). pp.73-85.
Basiri, S. and et.al., 2018. Flaxseed mucilage: A natural stabilizer in stirred
yogurt. Carbohydrate Polymers. 187. pp.59-65.
Ezati, P. and et.al., 2019. Intelligent pH-sensitive indicator based on starch-cellulose and alizarin
dye to track freshness of rainbow trout fillet. International journal of biological
macromolecules, 132, pp.157-165.
Kiumarsi, M. and et.al., 2019. Relation between structural, mechanical and sensory properties of
gluten-free bread as affected by modified dietary fibers. Food chemistry. 277. pp.664-
673.