a. CONFIDENCE INTERVAL FOR ONE POPULATION MEAN.

INTERPRET
YOUR RESULT.
Wages is an important value to worker and economic growth. As we know wages are affected
by many type of variable such as occupation, , industry, age, gender, education and
experience. In this paper we want to know whether wages have relationship with occupation.
Before we proceed to this objective, firstly we want to know the range of wages at the period
2012. The way to know the range of wages at the end period 2012 is by conduct a confidence
level method for the mean amount of wages in period 2012. From a one organisation we
randomly select a sample of 80 workers has been selected, with 5% significant level for each
analysis. Based on SPSS output below conduct this analysis and interpret the result.
One-Sample Statistics

Wages2012

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

80

30533.09

16782.760

1876.370

One-Sample Test
Test Value = 30000
95% Confidence Interval of the

Wages2012

Mean

Difference

df

Sig. (2-tailed)

Difference

Lower

Upper

.284

79

.777

533.088

-3201.73

4267.91

b. CONFIDENCE INTERVAL FOR MEAN DIFFERENCE. INTERPRET YOUR

RESULT.
Confidence level for wages 2012 has been calculated, now by using SPSS output for
independent test. Find confidence level for mean difference in wages 2012 and occupation
with 95% confidence interval and interpret the answer.
Group Statistics

Wages2012

occupation

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

Clerical

17

27310.94

8056.002

1953.867

Service

17

21107.94

6830.495

1656.638

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances

t-test for Equality of Means

95%
Interval

Sig.
(2F
Wages2012

Equal

Sig.

1.473 .234

df

2.421 32

Confidence

Mean

of

the

Std. Error Difference

tailed) Difference Difference Lower

Upper

.021

6203.000

2561.650

985.091 11420.909

2.421 31.166 .021

6203.000

2561.650

979.612 11426.388

variances
assumed
Equal
variances
not
assumed

c. T-TEST FOR ONE SAMPLE

For the further analysis, in 2012 a lot of people say that the salaries among worker are more
than RM30000 per worker. A sample of wages is selected from a one organisation, at the 5%
significant level there is enough evidence to support the claim.
One-Sample Statistics

Wages2012

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

80

30533.09

16782.760

1876.370

One-Sample Test
Test Value = 30000
95% Confidence Interval of the

Wages2012

Mean

Difference

df

Sig. (2-tailed)

Difference

Lower

Upper

.284

79

.777

533.088

-3201.73

4267.91

d. T-TEST FOR INDEPENDENT SAMPLE

The next analysis, in 2012 there a lot of worker say that clerical occupation wages is more
than service occupation wages. A sample of worker from clerical and service occupation has
been selected to conduct this analysis. At the 5% significant level, is there enough evidence
to support the claim.
Group Statistics

Wages2012

occupation

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

Clerical

17

27310.94

8056.002

1953.867

Service

17

21107.94

6830.495

1656.638

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances

t-test for Equality of Means

95%
Interval

Sig.
(2F
Wages2012

Equal

Sig.

1.473 .234

df

2.421 32

Confidence

Mean

of

the

Std. Error Difference

tailed) Difference Difference Lower

Upper

.021

6203.000

2561.650

985.091 11420.909

2.421 31.166 .021

6203.000

2561.650

979.612 11426.388

variances
assumed
Equal
variances
not
assumed

e. T-TEST FOR PAIRED SAMPLE

Next, in 2007 Malaysian economic was strong enough, to maintain this economic growth
government had been implement many policies such as give increasing government
expensive, decreasing the tax and so on . The wages in 2007 had been check and compare
with wages in 2012 to see whether the policy that government launch is effective in economic
growth in 2012. At the 5% significant level, is there enough evidence to support the claim
that is a difference between mean in wages 2007 and 2012.
Paired Samples Statistics
Std.
Std.

Error

Deviation

Mean

Pair Wages2012 30533.09 80

16782.760

1876.370

15248.712

1704.858

Mean

Wages2007 29228.45 80

Paired Samples Correlations

N
Pair Wages2012
1

& 80

Correlation Sig.
.990

.000

Wages2007

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95%

Mean
Pair Wages2012
1

Wages2007

Confidence

Std.

Interval

Std.

Error

Difference

Deviation

Mean

Lower

305.759

696.040 1913.235 4.267 79

- 1304.638 2734.789

of

Upper

the
Sig. (2t

df

tailed)
.000

f. ANOVA.
CONDUCT THE MULTIPLE COMPARISON
APPLICABLE. IF NOT APPLICABLE, STATE YOUR REASON.

TESTS

IF

a. ONE WAY ANOVA

Before we proceed to the final analysis that is examine the relationship between wages and
occupation. We wish to see whether there is a significant difference among wages (RM) it
takes by six occupations in 2012. In analysis if exist at least one of the mean is significantly
different, we will determine which one is by conduct post-hoc bonferroni analysis.
ANOVA
Wages2012
Sum

of

Squares

df

Mean Square F

Sig.

5.231E9

1.046E9

.001

Within Groups

1.702E10

74

2.300E8

Total

2.225E10

79

Between
Groups

4.549

Multiple Comparisons
Wages2012
Bonferroni
95% Confidence Interval

Mean
(I) occupation (J) occupation

Difference (I-J) Std. Error

Sig.

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

Others

Management

-10659.912

6113.463

1.000

-29204.94

7885.11

Sales

732.521

7259.995

1.000

-21290.48

22755.52

Clerical

649.746

5282.422

1.000

-15374.34

16673.83

Service

6852.746

5282.422

1.000

-9171.34

22876.83

Education

-16509.313

5550.054

.059

-33345.25

326.63

Others

10659.912

6113.463

1.000

-7885.11

29204.94

Sales

11392.433

7831.500

1.000

-12364.21

35149.08

Clerical

11309.659

6043.911

.979

-7024.38

29643.70

Service

17512.659

6043.911

.074

-821.38

35846.70

Education

-5849.400

6279.170

1.000

-24897.09

13198.29

Others

-732.521

7259.995

1.000

-22755.52

21290.48

Management

-11392.433

7831.500

1.000

-35149.08

12364.21

Clerical

-82.775

7201.524

1.000

-21928.40

21762.85

Service

6120.225

7201.524

1.000

-15725.40

27965.85

Education

-17241.833

7400.072

.338

-39689.75

5206.08

Others

-649.746

5282.422

1.000

-16673.83

15374.34

Management

-11309.659

6043.911

.979

-29643.70

7024.38

Sales

82.775

7201.524

1.000

-21762.85

21928.40

Service

6203.000

5201.770

1.000

-9576.43

21982.43

5473.347

.037

-33762.31

-555.81

Management

Sales

Clerical

Service

Education

Education

-17159.059

Others

-6852.746

5282.422

1.000

-22876.83

9171.34

Management

-17512.659

6043.911

.074

-35846.70

821.38

Sales

-6120.225

7201.524

1.000

-27965.85

15725.40

Clerical

-6203.000

5201.770

1.000

-21982.43

9576.43

5473.347

.001

-39965.31

-6758.81

Education

-23362.059

Others

16509.313

5550.054

.059

-326.63

33345.25

Management

5849.400

6279.170

1.000

-13198.29

24897.09

Sales

17241.833

Clerical

17159.059

Service

23362.059

7400.072

.338

-5206.08

39689.75

5473.347

.037

555.81

33762.31

5473.347

.001

6758.81

39965.31

b. TWO WAY ANOVA

After done with one way anova and multiple comparison analysis for wages period 2012 and
six difference occupation, now can we conclude that there is another factor that affects wages
that is industry?. To see which factor effect wages for period 2012, a research has been done
with aim to study the effect of occupation in the four difference industry as block.

Between-Subjects Factors

occupation

industry

Value Label

Others

16

Management

10

Sales

Clerical

17

Service

17

Education

14

Others

56

Manufacturing

13

Construction

Transportation and Telecommunication

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Dependent Variable:Wages2012
Source

Type III Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

Sig.

Corrected Model

5.790E9

7.238E8

3.122

.004

Intercept

1.977E10

1.977E10

85.253

.000

occupation

5.391E9

1.078E9

4.651

.001

industry

5.586E8

1.862E8

.803

.496

Error

1.646E10

71

2.318E8

Total

9.683E10

80

Corrected Total

2.225E10

79

a. R Squared = .260 (Adjusted R Squared = .177)

g. CHI-SQUARE TEST (INDEPENDENCE TEST)

Now to see whether wages and six type of occupation have a relationship, we will conduct
chi-square analysis. A random of sample 80 worker was chosen and classified according to
what occupation they work on. At the 5% significant level test whether there is a relationship
between wages at the end period 2012 and the type of occupation they work on.

Wages2012 * occupation Cross tabulation

Count
occupation
Total
Others Management

Sales

Clerical

Service

Education

10997

11186

11451

11702

11780

12285

13162

13312

13318

13787

15013

15160

15234

15957

16667

16789

16796

16817

17694

18121

18752

19227

19306

19388

19452

19879

Wages2012

19981

20852

21716

21994

22133

22485

23027

24509

25166

26614

26795

26820

28168

28219

28440

29191

29390

29407

29736

29977

30006

30133

31304

31702

31799

32094

32138

33389

33411

33461

33959

34484

34746

35185

36178

37664

37771

39888

44543

45976

49898

49974

50171

50235

52762

55777

57623

60152

66738

68573

75165

83443

83601

16

10

17

17

14

80

Total

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

390

.352

278.296

390

1.000

.629

.428

400.000

80

a. 474 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is
.08.