Sunteți pe pagina 1din 5

Please refer to the attached spss output file for the corresponding spss results.

1. Crosstab: Please refer to the pet-adoption example that is discussed in detail in the class
slides and the data was shared.
2. T-tests:
a. One sample t- test:
i. Determine which stores have familiarity rating higher than 3.

One-Sample Test
Test Value = 3
t df Sig. (2- Mean 95% Confidence Interval of
tailed) Difference the Difference
Lower Upper
Kohl_Familiarity -8.398 270 .000 -.911 -1.13 -.70
Parisian_Familiarity 33.827 270 .000 2.343 2.21 2.48
Kmart_Familiarity 14.467 270 .000 1.380 1.19 1.57
Nieman_Familiarity 1.587 270 .114 .181 -.04 .41
JCPenney_Familiari
6.733 270 .000 .716 .51 .93
ty
Macys_Familiarity 41.155 270 .000 2.480 2.36 2.60
Marshalls_Familiari
12.398 270 .000 1.251 1.05 1.45
ty
Saks_Familiarity .967 270 .334 .114 -.12 .35
Sears_Familiarity 16.076 270 .000 1.524 1.34 1.71
Walmart_Familiarit
-7.813 270 .000 -.793 -.99 -.59
y

As sig. for Nieman and Saks is more than 0.05, we can’t say anything about their mean
familiarity levels. For others, we can say they are different from 3. Whether it is higher or
lower, can be estimated based on the mean difference (-ve mean lower than test value of
3 and otherwise for +ve).

b. Paired Sample:
i. Determine if number of saving a/c is higher than checking a/c.
As p value is less than 0.05 (=0.017), we can say they differ. Based on the mean paired
difference being -ve or +ve, we can conclude which one is higher. Here it is -ve and
therefore saving a/cs are higher.
a. Independent Sample:
a. Determine if familiarity of Macys differ for male and female respondents.
As the p value for Macys is under 0.1, we can conclude the familiarity rating differs for male and
female respondents. Male is higher than female as the mean difference is positive (0.227).

3. Correlations:
a. Bi-variate correlations:
What is the correlation between macy and nieman’s familiarity rating.
Correlation is .232 and significant
b. Partial correlations:
What is the correlation between macy and nieman’s familiarity rating while
controlling for Parisian familiarity.
Correlation is .155 and significant at 0.011
c. Part correlation: Example not needed, as not discussed in detail in class.
d. Non-metric correlations:
What is the correlation between the occupation of the male and female household
heads.
Kendall’s tau Correlation is .103 and significant at 0.037
Spearsman rho Correlation is .122 and significant at 0.044

4. Regression:
First Run:

Variables Entered/Removeda

Model Variables Entered Variables Method


Removed

Num_Children_N
ot_Living_Home,
Num_Children_O
1 ver_6yrs, . Enter
Your_Education,
Num_Children_U
nder_6yrsb

a. Dependent Variable: Walmart_Familiarity


b. All requested variables entered.

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the


Square Estimate

1 .290a .084 .070 1.612

a. Predictors: (Constant), Num_Children_Not_Living_Home,


Num_Children_Over_6yrs, Your_Education, Num_Children_Under_6yrs

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 63.270 4 15.817 6.088 .000b

1 Residual 691.158 266 2.598

Total 754.428 270

a. Dependent Variable: Walmart_Familiarity


b. Predictors: (Constant), Num_Children_Not_Living_Home, Num_Children_Over_6yrs, Your_Education,
Num_Children_Under_6yrs

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.


Coefficients

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 3.945 .629 6.274 .000

Your_Education -.127 .038 -.204 -3.350 .001

Num_Children_Under_6yrs .345 .178 .119 1.942 .053


1
Num_Children_Over_6yrs .259 .091 .169 2.840 .005

Num_Children_Not_Living_Ho
-.039 .078 -.031 -.496 .620
me

a. Dependent Variable: Walmart_Familiarity

As the sig. for Num_Children_Not_Living_Home is higher than 0.1 (0.620) there fore we
need to drop it out of the analysis and re-run the regression.
Second Run:

Variables Entered/Removeda

Model Variables Entered Variables Method


Removed

Num_Children_O
ver_6yrs,
1 Num_Children_U . Enter
nder_6yrs,
Your_Educationb

a. Dependent Variable: Walmart_Familiarity


b. All requested variables entered.

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the


Square Estimate

1 .288a .083 .073 1.610

a. Predictors: (Constant), Num_Children_Over_6yrs,


Num_Children_Under_6yrs, Your_Education

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 62.631 3 20.877 8.057 .000b

1 Residual 691.797 267 2.591

Total 754.428 270

a. Dependent Variable: Walmart_Familiarity


b. Predictors: (Constant), Num_Children_Over_6yrs, Num_Children_Under_6yrs, Your_Education

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.


Coefficients

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 3.849 .598 6.441 .000

1 Your_Education -.124 .037 -.199 -3.318 .001


Num_Children_Under_6yrs .365 .173 .126 2.108 .036
Num_Children_Over_6yrs .265 .091 .172 2.924 .004

a. Dependent Variable: Walmart_Familiarity

Now, as all the IVs have sig lesser than 0.05, therefore, we include all of them in the final
regression model and we can write the standardized or un-std. regression equations based on the
beta or B values given the above table. Note the adj-R square is higher in the second run
compare to the first run. We shall report that.

5. Logistic regression: Example not needed, as not discussed in detail in class.

S-ar putea să vă placă și