Table 5. Significant pairwise post hoc...

Table 5.

Significant pairwise post hoc comparisons by class year

Dependent variable	Year in school	Pairwise comparison	Mean difference	Sig.
Optimistic reception	Senior	Woman transactional-Man transformational	17.21	0.007**
		Woman transformational-Man transformational	−16.10	0.005**
		Man transactional-Man transformational	13.36	0.038*
	Junior	Woman transactional-Woman transformational	14.27	0.040*
	Junior	Woman transactional-Man transformational	13.03	0.045*
Improve cadet performance	Senior	Woman transactional-Man transformational	17.18	0.006**
	Senior	Woman transformational-Man transformational	−14.00	0.013*
	Junior	Woman transactional-Woman transformational	9.75	0.039*
		Woman transactional-Man transformational	17.07	0.001**
		Man transactional-Man transformational	13.47	0.023*

Dependent variable	Year in school	Pairwise comparison	Mean difference	Sig.
Optimistic reception	Senior	Woman transactional-Man transformational	17.21	0.007**
		Woman transformational-Man transformational	−16.10	0.005**
		Man transactional-Man transformational	13.36	0.038*
	Junior	Woman transactional-Woman transformational	14.27	0.040*
	Junior	Woman transactional-Man transformational	13.03	0.045*
Improve cadet performance	Senior	Woman transactional-Man transformational	17.18	0.006**
	Senior	Woman transformational-Man transformational	−14.00	0.013*
	Junior	Woman transactional-Woman transformational	9.75	0.039*
		Woman transactional-Man transformational	17.07	0.001**
		Man transactional-Man transformational	13.47	0.023*

Note(s):

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Each row tests the null hypothesis that the Sample 1 and Sample 2 distributions are the same. Asymptotic significances (2-sided tests) are displayed. The significance level is 0.050. Dunn’s method showing only signficant relationships

[ViewLarge]

Sharing Unavailable