For the study regarding mean cadence (see Problem 1), two-way ANOVA was used.
Recall that the two factors were walking device (none, standard walker,
rolling walker) and dual task (being required to respond vocally to a signal
or no dual task required). Results of two-way ANOVA showed that there was no
evidence of interaction between the factors. However, according to the
article, "the ANOVA conducted on the cadence data reyealed a main effect of
walking device." When the hypothesis regarding no difference in mean cadence
according to which, if any, walking device was used, the sample \(F\) was
\(30.94\), with d.f. \(\mathrm{N}=2\) and \(d . f \cdot \mathrm{D}=18\). Further,
the \(P\) -value for the result was reported to be less than \(0.01\). From this
information, what is the conclusion regarding any difference in mean cadence
according to the factor "walking device used"?