Peer Review of t-test Results

Your report is clear and the interpretation makes sense. I agree that the result is not statistically significant because the p-value is greater than .05, so the two groups seem comparable at the pre-test stage. It is also good that you included Levene’s test and Cohen’s d. One small suggestion is to format the final APA sentence a little more consistently, especially the spacing around p and d, to make it look cleaner.

I think your analysis is mostly accurate and clearly presented. The interpretation of Levene’s test is correct (p = .429 > .05), so using the “equal variances assumed” row makes sense. Your reporting of the t-test is also appropriate—t(79) = −0.39, p = .697 correctly shows that there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups. The conclusion that the groups had similar ability at pre-test is reasonable.

For the effect size, your calculation of Cohen’s d (−0.09) also seems correct and the interpretation as a negligible effect is appropriate. However, one small suggestion is to mention whether the negative sign has any practical meaning here (since it only reflects the direction, not the magnitude).

In terms of APA style, your final sentence is mostly correct, but you might want to standardize formatting slightly (e.g., include leading zeros: *p = .697*, *d = −0.09* is fine, but ensure consistency throughout). Overall, your work is solid, just minor clarification and formatting improvements could make it even stronger.

our report is clear, well-structured, and demonstrates a solid understanding of statistical analysis. You correctly interpreted Levene’s test and appropriately used the “equal variances assumed” results. The presentation of the t-test, confidence interval, and effect size is accurate, and your APA-style summary is concise and meaningful.

To strengthen your answer, you could make the explanation of Cohen’s d more concise, as including the full formula is not always necessary. In addition, briefly explaining that the confidence interval includes zero would further support your conclusion about the non-significant result. Minor improvements in formatting and consistency would also make the report more polished. Overall, this is a strong and accurate analysis that meets academic expectations very well

Your t-test results are clearly presented and easy to follow. I think your APA-style reporting is mostly accurate. However, you might want to double-check whether your effect size (Cohen’s d) was calculated using the correct pooled standard deviation. Also, it could be helpful to briefly mention the direction of the difference to make your interpretation clearer.

You did a great job on this report. It’s well-organized and shows you really know your way around statistical analysis. I’m impressed that you correctly identified when to use the 'equal variances assumed' row after checking Levene’s test. Your presentation of the t-test and effect sizes is spot-on, and the APA summary is both clear and effective.