Sample Research Paper
Introduction
Furniture
assembly is a difficult task which and needs special attention, cognitive and
spatial abilities. Individual differences in cognitive functioning are
universal; in particular, male found to have better cognitive abilities when
performing any performance or verbal task. In contrast, a female was reported
to have less cognitive abilities in furniture assembly task as compared to
males. Sex
difference in future assembly or Nanoblock assembly has been studied widely by the researchers. Winking et al., (2015) conducted a study to investigate the sex disparities in future assembly task by controlling the availability of instruction. The male and females were divided into two groups and asked to assemble a kitchen trolley from IKEA.
difference in future assembly or Nanoblock assembly has been studied widely by the researchers. Winking et al., (2015) conducted a study to investigate the sex disparities in future assembly task by controlling the availability of instruction. The male and females were divided into two groups and asked to assemble a kitchen trolley from IKEA.
The instruction
was given to one group for assembling the trolly; in contrast, the other group
was only given a diagram of the finished product. Furthermore, the spatial
ability of the participants was assessed using an MRT (mental rotation test).
The results of the analysis indicated that men showed good performance in
assembling the furniture faster (d=0.78) as compared to women (d= 0.65). Also,
the participant who was given instructions performed better than those who
haven’t received any instructions (d=0.61). A negative correlation was found
between the time spent on instructions and scores of MRT, r= .428, p=.006. The
male was significantly higher n spatial ability in performing the task as
compared to females. The literature is enriched with the study that highlights
the significance of male superiority for furniture assembly task over female.
Similarly, the current study aimed at investigating the difference between male
and female in the Nanoblock Assembly Performance. For achieving the above aim, the
25 participants (Female, 11 and male 14) have been selected in the study. The
participants were divided into four categories
•
Male
indulged in building the Nanoblock model with no Instructions
•
female
indulged in building the Nanoblock model with no instruction
•
male
indulge in building the Nanoblock with instructions
•
Female
indulged in building the Nanoblock with instructions
Objectives
The current study has the
following objectives.
•
To
investigate the sex difference in Nanoblock Assembly Performance Task, either
male perform well or female.
•
To
explore the performance of Nanoblock Assembly Performance in two groups i.e.,
the o, one who received the instruction to complete the task and the one who
did not receive it.
•
To
assess the time differences between male and female, who take less time to
complete their Nanoblock model?
•
To
explore the quality of task between male and female n score 1 and score two
sheets concerning with and without instructions.
Hypothesis
The current study has the following hypothesis.
•
Furniture
assembly is based on spatial activity. Therefore, men SHOULD perform better
than women
•
Women
usually score lower on MRT (mental rotation test) the difference should be more
significant when there is no instruction
Methods
The following modes and modalities have been used in the study.
Participants
The 25 males and females were selected for the experiment. The
participants were selected almost with the equal ration where a male was 14 in
numbers and females were 11.
Material
In the study,
the Nanoblock model, stopwatch, score sheet, a picture of complete Nanoblock
model, and consent form was used. Two experimenters in the laboratory
experimented. The one was observer/participant and the second was experimenter
or manipulator.
Procedure
The
experimenter and participant experimented with assessing the sex difference in
the Nanoblock assembly performance task, which was conducted with or without
instruction. The experiment was carried out in the lab between two groups. After
taking the informed consent by the participant the participants who received
the instructions and those who did not receive, any instructions were divided
into two groups. The 30 minutes were given to each participant for completing
his or her assembly task — the group who did not receive the instructions
comprised of 6 females and seven males.
In contrast,
the participants who received the instruction were composed of 5 females and
seven males. The male and female were rated on a scores sheet for how much time
they took for completing their task. According to the observer, the females
were taking more time in completing their model.
Furthermore, females were found to be anxious as compared to males.
According to the observer, the females were having pressure and distractions,
which was affecting their performance.
In contrast,
males were more attentive and relaxed and took less time to complete their
Nanoblock model. According to the observer, the mental rotation of females was
also found to be weak as compared to males. On the other hand, men showed a
great spatial and cognitive skill and performed well concerning, quality and
times domains of the experiment (Kim, 2015).
According to a scores sheet, the experimenter with and without
instruction has assessed the diversities in the time consumption. The quality
of the Nanoblock model was assessed in a 10-point rating scale. The variation
in score one and score two sheets has also been observed. The gender difference
was also assessed by the observer. The data scores were entered into the SPSS
model for further analysis. The following analysis was carried out to assess
the output of the data.
Design and Analysis
The General Linear Model, t-test, Anova was used to interpret the
results.
Results
The results of the experiment are as follow. The general linear
model was used to assess te difference between two group, the one who received
instructions and the one who didn’t received the instruction. Which group took
less time to accomplish their task. Furthermore to investigate the significant
relationship between gender, time and Instructions.
General Liner Model
General Linear
Model was used to analyze the difference between male and female performance in
the Nanoblock completing with and without instruction. General Liner model
better explains the result of the data when the data set has more than one
dependent variable (Beard, Magee, Suchard, Lemey, & Scotch 2014).
Table 1
The following table depict the male and female task completing
duration with and without instructions.
Instruction
|
|||
Gender
|
Instructions
|
No Instructions
|
Overall Mean
|
Male (time)
|
15.71
|
20.43
|
18.07
|
Female (time)
|
20.80
|
25.33
|
23.27
|
Overall Mean
|
17.83
|
22.69
|
20.36
|
The
results of the analysis indicated that without instructions male took more time
(20.43) to complete the Nanoblock task as compared to the time (15.71) when
they were given no instructions. Similarly, the female took more time to
complete their task 25.33 minutes when they were not given instructions. In
short, in both cases with or without instructions male completed their task
earlier as compared to female.
Test
Between-Subjects Effects
Table
2
The
following table depicts the results of the Dependent Variable Time
Source
|
Type III Sum
of Square
|
df
|
Mean Square
|
F
|
Sig.
|
Partial Eta Squared
|
Corrected Model
|
300.484a
|
3
|
100.161
|
53.554
|
.000
|
.884
|
Intercept
|
10376.409
|
1
|
10376.409
|
5.548E3
|
.000
|
.996
|
Instructions
|
131.087
|
1
|
131.087
|
70.089
|
.000
|
.769
|
Gender
|
152.993
|
1
|
152.993
|
81.801
|
.000
|
.796
|
Instructions* Gender
|
.050
|
1
|
.050
|
.027
|
0.05
|
.001
|
Error
|
39.276
|
21
|
1.870
|
|||
Total
|
10703.000
|
25
|
||||
Corrected Total
|
339.760
|
24
|
a.
R
Squared = .884(Adjusted R Squared = .868)
Is there a significant effect of ‘’Instructions’’?
According to the above table, a significant effect of instruction
among both gender p< 000 was found.
Report the results of analysis using the correct values for F, df
and p.
The above table indicated that the gender, instruction and gender*
instructions have a statistically significant interactions p = 0.05 with the
degree of freedom 1 and F 0.27.
What does this mean regarding the time that was taken to complete
the model when instruction are used? Clue, look at the descriptive statistics.
The male and female took less time (M= 15.71, F= 20.80) to build
the Nanoblock model with instructions.
Is there a significant effect of Gender?
Yes, Male took less time with and without instructions to complete
the Nanoblock model with a significant difference of p>000.
Report the results of the analysis using the correct values for F,
df and P?
There was a significant difference between male and female task
completion with the F= 81.801, df 1 and p> 0.05.
What does this main effect means regarding the time taken to
complete the Nanoblock model when male and females are compared?
Male and female took less time to complete the task after they revved
the instructions, but males took the least time as compared to female.
Is there a significant (Instructions * Gender) interaction.
Yes, there was a significant (Instructions * Gender) interaction
with the significance level of 0.05.
Report the results of the analysis using the correct value for F,
df and p.
The instruction and gender* instructions have statistically
significant interactions p = 0.05 with the degree of freedom 1 and F 0.27
Interpret the interaction based on what you can see in the post.
Independent Sample t-test
The independent sample t-test was used to assess if male and female
differ in performance before and after giving instruction.
Table 3
The following table depicts the results of the t-test
Factor
|
Gender
|
M
|
SD
|
t
|
p
|
Without Instruction (time)
|
Male
|
20.43
|
.976
|
-8.588
|
.002
|
Female
|
25.33
|
2.160
|
|||
With Instructions (time)
|
Male
|
15.71
|
1.113
|
-5.425
|
.000
|
Female
|
20.80
|
.837
|
Is there a significant difference between males and females in
terms of their time taken to build the Nanobkock model when an instruction is
used.
Yes, a significant difference p< .000 was found among both sexes
in terms of their time taken to complete the task when instruction are used.
Report the results of the analysis using the correct values for t,
df, and p.
There was a significant difference between male and female before
and after reviving the instruction and Nano model completion with the df =1,
level of a sig. 000 and t-8.588.
Now that you have performed the post hoc test, formally write up
the results of the two-way between subjects ANOVA.
Correlation
Table 4
The following table shows the correlation between variables
Factors
|
Score
1
|
Score
2
|
Group
1
|
.591
|
.591
|
Group
2
|
.775
|
.775
|
The above table depicted the correlation between score 1 and score
2. Therefore the
Average scores were computed for Mean Rater Scores for further
analysis. The mean rater scores depicted how much average time each group took
in accomplishing their task and what was the quality of their task using score
1 and score 2 sheet.
Table 5
The following table represent the results of the mean rater scores,
gender, instructions and time.
Instruction
|
|||
Gender
|
Instructions
|
No Instructions
|
Overall Mean
|
Male
|
6.57
|
6.07
|
6.32
|
Female
|
6.70
|
5.67
|
6.13
|
Overall Mean
|
6.62
|
5.88
|
6.24
|
The
above table indicated the male and female who received instructions were higher
on mean scores. The overall results also indicated that the group who received
instructed showed high scores on mean.
Table
6
The
following table represent the results
Sources
|
Type III sum of square
|
df
|
Mean Square
|
F
|
Sig.
|
Partial Eta Squared
|
Correct Model
|
3.998a
|
3
|
1.333
|
2.650
|
0.75
|
.275
|
Intercept
|
958.759
|
1
|
958.759
|
1.906E3
|
.000
|
.989
|
Gender
|
.117
|
1
|
.117
|
.232
|
.635
|
.011
|
Instructions
|
3.604
|
1
|
3.604
|
7.166
|
.014
|
.05
|
Gender*Instructions
|
.436
|
1
|
.436
|
.867
|
.362
|
.040
|
Error
|
10.562
|
21
|
.503
|
|||
Total
|
988.000
|
25
|
||||
Corrected
|
14.560
|
24
|
a.
R Squared =.275 (Adjusted Squared =.171)
According to the above table, there was a significant effect of
instruction among both gender p= 0.05. The above table indicated that the
gender, instruction and gender* instructions have a statistically significant
interactions p = 0.40 with the degree of freedom 1 and F .867. There was a
significant difference between male and females in terms of completing their
Nanoblock model with a significance level of 0.11. There was a significant
difference between male and female task completion with the F= 7.166, df 1 and
p> 0.05. There was a significant (Instructions * Gender) interaction with
the significance level of 0.05.
Discussion
The experiment
was carried out to assess the sex differences in Nanoblock assembly
performance. The participants were divided in two-group, i.e., the one who
received the instructions and those who did not receive. The Nanoblock model
picture, Nanoblock model, stopwatch, and scoring sheet was used in the
experiment. Each participant was given 30 minutes to complete the task, and the
scores were recorded into SPSS version 21. The analysis was carried out such as
General Liner Model, which depicted the significant statistical difference
between gender, time and instruction. The male took more time to complete the
Nanoblock model as compared to females.
Similarly,
those male and female who received the instruction took less time to complete
their task as compared to those who did not receive any instructions.
Literature supported the findings of the current study as according to Winking
et al., (2015) the males perform better in the furniture assembly task with
instructions as compared to females. The
t-test results analysis indicated that male was significantly higher on scores
in completing their task within the minimum time as compared to females.
Substantial studies indicated that the females take more time in completing
their tasks and secure fewer scores in MRT as compared to males (Suzuki
Imashiro Sakata Yamamoto, 2017).
General Liner
Model was carried out to assess the effect of Mean rator scores on the gender
and instruction to complete the Nanoblock assembly task. The results indicated
that the males were significantly higher in completing the Nanoblock model as
compared to girls. Overall the findings of the current experiment indicated
that the male was better than female concerning time, and instructions. Male
completed their task within less amount of time as compared to female. With and
without instructions male were significantly higher on scores than men. The
results of the current study support the literature, as the literature is
enriched with similar studies(Winking et al., 2015: Suzuki Imashiro Sakata
Yamamoto, 2017). Further studies would be carried out to assess the gender
learning ability in furniture assembly tasks.