In general, these graphs are relatively flat with high “wings” on
either side, with these wings being around the same height. Eachgraph can be interpreted further using the surface tests. Surface
tests 1 and 2 (the slope and curvature of the line of agreement,
respectively) refer to Hypothesis 2, surface test 3 (the curvature of
the line of disagreement) refers to Hypothesis 3, and surface test 4
(the slope of the line of disagreement) refers to Hypothesis 4. For
both Samples 1 and 2, the slope along the line of agreement was
significant, as seen by the slight downward curve of the graph in
the north-south direction. In support of Hypothesis 2, when PE and
WE facets were in agreement at a low level, work-related pain was
higher than when they were in agreement at a high level. The
curvature along the line of agreement was non-significant, meaning
that this relationship is linear.
The curvature of the line of disagreement was significant in
Sample 1, and almost significant in Sample 2 (p ¼ .054), partially
supporting Hypothesis 3. This suggests that the degree of
discrepancy between PE and WE facets is related to work-related
pain, such that the larger the discrepancy, the more pain
employees reported. These are the “wings” seen in the eastewest
direction of the graph; in the middle where PE and WE facets are
similarly rated, pain is lower than when you move towards either
side of the graph, when one facet is higher than the other. The slope
of the line of disagreement was non-significant for both samples,
indicating that the direction of this discrepancy was not important
in predicting pain. This can be seen in the graph where the “wings”
on either side are at relatively the same level on the vertical plane.
Therefore, Hypothesis 4 was not supported.