Question

After the headlines reporting hundreds or thousands laid off by large employers, what
happens to the people who have lost their jobs? A recent study has tried to find out.
Often, companies will set up “employment centres” that they say will help people find
new employment. The centres provide job hunting advice, counselling, help with writing
and producing resumes, and so on. The authors of the study, from the University of
Winnipeg, decided to find out whether using these centres made any difference. They
compared the cases of 500 people laid off by large Canadian employers in 2006 and 2007
who had access to an employment centre to 500 people laid off who did not have access to such a centre. The researchers looked at two things: did people find a job with a
comparable level of pay, and did they find any job at all. They checked both after six
months and again after a year. “We were surprised to see how little difference this seemed to make,” said Professor Bill Abel, one of the authors of the study. The percentage of people who found comparable jobs were the same, after both six months and a year, whether or not they had access to an employment centre. People who did not have such access were slightly more likely to find a job (73% after six months) than those who did (65%), but the difference was in acquiring jobs that involved a significant loss of income.
“When we looked back at the data a second time, we did notice something else that made
a difference,” said Dr Abel. “If the workplace was unionized, the employment centres did
seem to make a difference. But even then it wasn’t large.”
1. This report includes a number of claims about whether or not a correlation exists. For
two of them: (a) identify the population,(b) identify both variables and their relevant
values, and (c) explicitly state the correlation claim.

Answer 1

After the headlines reporting hundreds or thousands laid off by large employers, what
happens to the people who have lost their jobs? A recent study has tried to find out.
Often, companies will set up “employment centres” that they say will help people find
new employment. The centres provide job hunting advice, counselling, help with writing
and producing resumes, and so on. The authors of the study, from the University of
Winnipeg, decided to find out whether using these centres made any difference. They
compared the cases of 500 people laid off by large Canadian employers in 2006 and 2007 who had access to an employment centre to 500 people laid off who did not have access to such a centre.

The researchers looked at two things: did people find a job with a comparable level of pay, and did they find any job at all. They checked both after six
months and again after a year. “We were surprised to see how little difference this seemed to make,” said Professor Bill Abel, one of the authors of the study. The percentage of people who found comparable jobs were the same, after both six months and a year, whether or not they had access to an employment centre. People who did not have such access were slightly more likely to find a job (73% after six months) than those who did (65%), but the difference was in acquiring jobs that involved a significant loss of income.

“When we looked back at the data a second time, we did notice something else that made a difference,” said Dr Abel. “If the workplace was unionized, the employment centres did seem to make a difference. But even then it wasn’t large.”

1. This report includes a number of claims about whether or not a correlation exists. For
two of them: (a) identify the population,(b) identify both variables and their relevant
values, and (c) explicitly state the correlation claim.

Answer 2

Yeah I don't know why it does that..

Answer 3

First and foremost, do you know what a population is?

Answer 4

Yes. I can't exactly explain it, but I understand. I think the population would be employees, correct?

Answer 5

Close. A population is all of the individuals who can qualify for your sample that you're observing. So if I were studying a chimpanzees ability to grow without a mother, my population would be all chimpanzees without a mother. But my sample would just be the five or 10 chimpanzees that I actually looked at.

Answer 6

Oh, so it would be Jobless Employees?

Answer 7

Essentially, yes

Answer 8

So now we have to find their variables?

Answer 9

They said 'both' so I'll assume they are referring to the most important, independent (IV) and dependent (DV) variables (we can ignore control and extraneous variables). Do you know what IVs and Dvs are?

Answer 10

Look at my boys working hard :')

Answer 11

IV is the variable that is being changed DV is the one being tested

Answer 12

That is one way to put it. However the best way to think of it is:
IV: the variable whose effects are observed
DV: the effect itself

Going back to my chimpanzee example, my IV would be the absence of mother, and the DV would be their growth. I would have a control sample of chimpanzees who grew up with mothers, and I would be observing the effects of the IV and subsequently the lack thereof.

Answer 13

Always think of it as what is truly causing the DV, as if the AP exam/college course you're in gets tricky, the IV can be hard to spot.

Answer 14

Ok, so institutes/places getting shut down?

Answer 15

that would be the IV? right?

Answer 16

They compared the cases of 500 people laid off by large Canadian employers in 2006 and 2007 who had access to an employment centre to 500 people laid off who did not have access to such a centre. The researchers looked at two things: did people find a job with a
comparable level of pay, and did they find any job at all.

Answer 17

The IV and DV are in there. And whilst I see what you're saying, try putting yourself in the place of one of those individuals. What is being observed about me? And what is causing that effect?

Answer 18

IV is easy pickings when they have a control group like in this case.

Answer 19

So there are two IV's?

Answer 20

had access to an employment centre
who did not have access to such a centre.

Answer 21

That's the IV, but I think the distinction is what you'd call the value that they're referencing.

Answer 22

I'm personally unfamiliar with ascribing a 'value' to IV/DVs so I'm inferring that.

Answer 23

I am confident you can pick out the DV as well.

Answer 24

DV =
did people find a job with a comparable level of pay
did they find any job at all.

Answer 25

Right?

Answer 26

Correct

Answer 27

Awesomee! What's next?

Answer 28

c, correlation claim, which honestly just sounds like they don't know what a hypothesis is...

Answer 29

sec, google

Answer 30

I have some notes from my lectures, would you like that?

Answer 31

To be honest, I'm pretty sure you just need to draw an arrow from the population, to the IV, to the DV...but with words.

Answer 32

Married men are more likely than unmarried men to live past 70
What’s correlated in this case is being married and living past age 70. That’s what the claim is about. And what those things are are what we call values of variables. We got two technical terms. A variable is a general property which every member of the population has. Notice then the variable in this case isn’t being married because it is not right to say every men is married. The variable in this case is marital status, the variable has to be something that everyone in the population have. But what varies from one part of the population to another is the values of the variables in this case the two values would be married and unmarried for that variable.

In a correlation your always gonna have two variables. In this case marital status and the other longevity. The two values in the case of marital status are married and unmarried and in the case of longevity is living past age 70 and not living past age 70. What we have there are variables which can have various values and as it happens the way these correlations are set out each variable has two values.

That's from my lecture. If that may help

Answer 33

Nice notes,

I believe I see what it is. You essentially need to look at the data, the variables, and establish the correlation that they are claiming based on what they've provided you.

You can derive such from this portion: “We were surprised to see how little difference this seemed to make,” said Professor Bill Abel, one of the authors of the study. The percentage of people who found comparable jobs were the same, after both six months and a year, whether or not they had access to an employment centre. People who did not have such access were slightly more likely to find a job (73% after six months) than those who did (65%), but the difference was in acquiring jobs that involved a significant loss of income.
“When we looked back at the data a second time, we did notice something else that made
a difference,” said Dr Abel. “If the workplace was unionized, the employment centres did
seem to make a difference. But even then it wasn’t large.

Answer 34

Hmm

Answer 35

People who did not have such access were slightly more likely to find a job

Answer 36

IV's :
had access to an employment centre
who did not have access to such a centre.
DV's:
did people find a job with a comparable level of pay
did they find any job at all.

Did not have access to an employment centre were slightly more likely to find a job

Answer 37

Those who did not have access to an employment centre were slightly more likely to find a job*

Answer 38

isn't that what I said?

Answer 39

You can abbreviate the IV to: access to an employment centre
DV: a job and comparable level of pay

Answer 40

Yes, just stating it in clearer terms. You have to submit this right?

Answer 41

Yes

Answer 42

Well you seem to be in good shape then.

Answer 43

;-; I'm still a bit confused how to put it in the format thoughh

Answer 44

What format

Answer 45

I understand the way you're putting it, but it says I need to have the population, identify both variables and their relevant
values, and (c) explicitly state the correlation claim.

Answer 46

and I have to have two, right?

Answer 47

Two of what?

Answer 48

This report includes a number of claims about whether or not a correlation exists. For
two of them: (a) identify the population,(b) identify both variables and their relevant
values, and (c) explicitly state the correlation claim.

Answer 49

relevant values..

Answer 50

When they say two they mean their relevant values or two populations (aka a), two question b's and two question c's?

Answer 51

Just for the IV and DV

Answer 52

aka b

Answer 53

Aha, I see. How about c?

Answer 54

What would the correlation statement be?

Answer 55

The connection between the presence of an employment centre and if they got a job.

Answer 56

You stated that already.

Answer 57

Aha, I see. Okie dokiee, thank you so so so so much. And sorry if I got you at a bad time. (:

Answer 58

All good.

Answer 59

Have a good game!