is group was much larger than the athletes. This shows that self esteem is not consistent in non athletes. It completely depends on the person you happen to pick as to whether or not they will have a good self esteem. Whereas the athletes had a much smaller range, making there scores more consistent. What we derived from this is that athletes are more likely to score the same as other athlete’s. Non athlete’s may have lacked that certain something that provides you with a good basis to develop a healthy self esteem while growing up. If I child has nothing to provide confidence and self worth then its very difficult to develop a good self esteem. The athletes obviously excelled in there sports and this gives you a feeling of self worth. This is why athletes may have scored higher than non athletes.For interest purposes we also decided to take a look at the difference between male and females. Females scored higher, but only by 2 points. This is probably not a significant difference given there is a 5 percent error allowed. If we had to give a reason why the females scored higher, it might be because females tend to mature faster. If they mature faster then they are likely to develop a self esteem faster than males. Also the group sizes were not even. There were 70 females and only 30 males, this would definitely cause some differences in the scores. In reviewing how we approached this project there are a few steps we could have taken to made our results a little better. We could have gathered a larger sample group from each category. This would have made the data stronger. Instead of just simply comparing the means of the two groups, we could have performed a one-way anova test. This would have proved or disproved the null hypothesis indefinably. A one-way anova determines whether there is a significant difference between two variables. The self esteem evaluation could have been more specific in its questioning and instructio...
