Comparison of Quantitative Variables from Physical and Cognitive Areas
The present study aimed to investigate the physical and cognitive performance of children. Twenty-six students with a mean age of 8.04 (SD = 1.97) years participated. The students were involved in different activities, including writing, reading, solving math problems, and testing communication skills. Additionally, students’ large and fine motor skills were measured on continuous scales: the higher the final score was, the more developed a particular skill attribute is in students.
It was shown that for large motor skills, the mean score was 13.38 (SD = 1.75) points, whereas, for fine motor skills, the same score was 8.73 (SD = 1.43). This implies that coarse motor skills were more developed among students than fine motor skills. Notably, this difference was statistically significant, (t(50) = -10.517, p =.000), which implies that the students’ scores on the fine motor indicator were about one and a half times lower than those on the coarse motor indicator.
Additionally, the variables were examined using regression and correlation analysis. As Figure 1 suggests. There appears to be a weak bottom-up relationship between the variables, with the regression model covering only up to 15.7% of the variance in the set. Moreover, the Pearson correlation coefficient is r = 0.40, confirming the presence of moderate-level positive power. In other words, both variables are related, and when one grows, the other is also expected to grow.
Data were also collected on the time (in minutes) it took students to complete the first and second activities. It was shown that the mean time required for the first activity was 11.08 (SD = 4.25) minutes, whereas for the second activity, a similar time took 18.48 (SD = 10.69) minutes. In other words, this implied that the second activity required more time on average from the students than the first activity. The construction of the scatter plot (Figure 1) also indicates a linear ascending relationship with a coverage factor of up to 11.2% of the variance and a correlation relationship of r = 0.33, indicating a moderate positive relationship. From the results of the two studies, the reliability of these relationships is not very high, as most of the variance in both cases remains unexplained, and the variables are only moderately related.
Comparing Qualitative and Quantitative Variables and Analyzing the Relationship
Two variables were also selected for comparison: the total number of words in the exercise (quantitative) and the activity in which the students were involved (qualitative). Analysis of the qualitative variable shows that 23% of the children (n = 6) were involved in play activity, which is the maximum among the sample. Analysis of the quantitative variable shows that as many as 29% (n = 14) of the students exercised between 200 and 300 words per activity, indicating a low level compared to the maximum possible (x = 1000). Thus, it is shown that the students were characterized by predominantly playful activities with low numbers of words exercised.
Comparing Age with Two Different Quantitative Variables
The two quantitative variables were also compared in an analogy of age distribution. For the total number of words, it was shown that six-year-olds had the maximum variation in the number of words studied (n = 4), with children aged 8 (N = 900) and 10 (N = 1000) words exercising the most in the activities. The correlation coefficient for this relationship was r = 0.21, indicating a weak positive relationship between age and the number of words practiced. The relationship between age and the number of minutes required for the second activity was slightly stronger, r = 0.30. The variation in the data was maximum for the ten-year-old students, who took an average of 7 to 45 minutes. On average, the data showed that the older the child, the more time was required to complete the tasks.
Choosing a Theorist to Explain Results
The analysis results could be analyzed from the perspective of Jean Piaget’s theory. Specifically, Piaget postulated that children go through different stages of cognitive maturation during development (Sanghvi, 2020). The fact that large motor skills were, on average, more developed in children than fine motor skills may indicate the formation of a type of thinking in the sample that determines increased needs for large motor skills. In addition, the relationship found with age can also be explained through Piaget’s position, as it shows that different skills are formed differentially at different levels of a child’s maturation.
Reference
Sanghvi, P. (2020). Piaget’s theory of cognitive development: A review. Indian Journal of Mental Health, 7(2), 90-96.
Appendix – Initial Cases Data
