BRM

Q1.

Objective: To understand the age profile of the respondents

Justification: Since age group is in nominal scale we will apply frequency distribution.

Age
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 10-20 24 48.0 48.0 48.0
21-30 10 20.0 20.0 68.0
>30 16 32.0 32.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

Interpretation: As we can observe that 48% of the total respondent i.e 24 no. are in the age group
of 10-20 years, while 20% of the total respondents i.e 10 no. are in the age group of 21-30 years and
32% of the total respondent i.e 16 no. are in the age group of above 30 years.
Q2.

Objective: To find out the relationship between age group and gender and the association of their
relationship

Justification: Since both the age group and gender are nominal scale we will use chi-square test to
find the objective (i.e relationship)

Age * Gender Crosstabulation

Gender
Female Male Total
Age 10-20 Count 17 7 24
% of Total 34.0% 14.0% 48.0%
21-30 Count 5 5 10
% of Total 10.0% 10.0% 20.0%
>30 Count 5 11 16
% of Total 10.0% 22.0% 32.0%
Total Count 27 23 50
% of Total 54.0% 46.0% 100.0%

Interpretation:

From the above table we can interpret that out of 48% of the people in the age group of 10-20 years,
34% are female while, 14% are male.
Similarly out of the 20% people in the age group of 21-30 years, there is equal distribution i.e 10%
each of male and female.
While out of the 32% of the people in the age category above 30 years, 22% are male and 10%
female.
Out of the total sample, 54% are female and 46% are male.

Ho: We assume that there is significant relationship between age group and gender
H1: There is a no significant relationship between age group and gender.
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymptotic
Significance (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.136a 2 .047
Likelihood Ratio 6.282 2 .043
Linear-by-Linear Association 6.010 1 .014
N of Valid Cases 50
a. 1 cells (16.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is 4.60.

Since p value is less than α (0.05) we reject Ho i.e there is significant relationship between age group
and gender.
Since the table is not a square matrix we use Cramer’s V test to find out
Strength of relationship between 2 variables

Symmetric Measures
Approximate
Value Significance
Nominal by Nominal Phi .350 .047
Cramer's V .350 .047
Contingency Coefficient .331 .047
N of Valid Cases 50

There exists only 35% relationship between age group and gender.
Q3

Objective: Identify the favourable and unfavourable perception of the respondent towards adidas
products availability.

Justification: Sibnce the availability variable is on interval scale we will use t-test sample to solve the
objective.

Data Analysis:

Assumptions

Ho : There is no perception of the respondent towards the products availability i.e. µ = 4

H1 : There is perception of the respondent i.e favourable/unfavourable towards the availability i.e. µ
≠4

One-Sample Statistics
N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Availability of Adidas Products 50 3.38 1.828 .259

One-Sample Test
Test Value = 0
95% Confidence Interval of the
Mean Difference
t df Sig. (2-tailed) Difference Lower Upper
Availability of Adidas 13.073 49 .000 3.380 2.86 3.90
Products

Parameter Hypothesis P-value Decision(α=0.05)

Availability Ho= µ=4 0.000 P<α
H1 = µ ≠ 4 Reject Ho

Interpretation:
Since the value of p less than α, we reject the null hypothesis i.e Ho because the general
perception Is different from neutral and it can be favourable or unfavourable.
And to identify it we will refer to the above table.

Parameter Mean Decision

Availability 3.38 Unfavourable
Q4.

Objective: To identify whether males and female differ in their loyalty regarding adidas products

Justification: Loyalty parameter are on interval scale and male and female is on nominal scale with 2

Options, so we can use two independent sample t-test to solve the objective.

Data Analysis:

Assumptions

Ho : There is no significance difference in the loyalty of male and female towards adidas product’s
i.e. µ Male = µ Female

H1 : There is a significance difference in the loyalty of male and female towards adidas product’s

i.e. µ Male ≠ µ Female

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Difference
F Sig. t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper
Loyalty for Equal .015 .904 2.103 48 .041 1.077 .512 .047 2.107
Adidas variances
Products assumed
Equal 2.112 47.397 .040 1.077 .510 .051 2.103
variances not
assumed

Table: Levene’s table for equality of variance

Parameter Hypothesis P-value Decision(α=0.05)

Loyalty σ2
Ho= male= female σ2 0.904 p>α
H1= σ2male≠σ2female Do not reject Ho
Interpretation:
Since the value of p is greater than alpha(0.05) hence we do not reject the hypothesis we can say
that There is no significance difference in the loyalty of male and female towards adidas product’s.

So for the two independent sample test, the significant value that we will consider will be for the
category of equal variances assumed for such parameters.

Table: Independent Sample test

Parameter Hypothesis P-value Decision(α=0.05)

Loyalty Ho= µmale= µfemale 0.041 P<α
Ho= µmale≠ µfemale reject Ho

Now for the independent sample test p< α (0.05) and hence we reject the null hypothesis.
So there is significant difference in loyalty of males and female for favourable and
unfavourable response we will refer the group data.

Group Statistics
Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Loyalty for Adidas Products Female 27 4.56 1.847 .355
Male 23 3.48 1.755 .366

Parameter Mean Decision

Loyalty Male=3.48 Female= 4.56 Male have
unfavourable loyalty
and female have
favourable.
Q5.

Objective: To identify the difference in average perception of differebnt age group with respect to
preference.

Justification: Since the age group is in nominal scale and have more thean 2 options and
preference is in interval scale we will take One way Anova

Hypothesis:

Ho: There is no significant difference in the perception of preference of different age group

H1: There is significant difference in the perception of preference of different age group

ANOVA
Age
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 10.785 6 1.798 2.774 .023
Within Groups 27.215 42 .648
Total 38.000 48

Interpretation : Since the value of p is less than alpha(0.05) we reject Ho and so we can say that
there is difference in average perception of different age group w.r.t preference.

Further to identify we will apply 2 independent sample t test.

AGE group Hypothesis P value Decision

10-20 and 21-30 Ho= Uage=u preference 0.267 P> alpha
H1=u age ≠ u preference Do not reject ho

21-30 and >30 Ho= Uage=u preference 0.000 P< alpha

H1=u age ≠ u preference Reject H0

>30 and 10-20 Ho= Uage=u preference 0.000 P< alpha

H1=u age ≠ u preference Reject H0
 Group Statistics
Age N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Preferene for Adidas 10-20 23 4.09 1.411 .294
Products 21-30 10 3.50 1.269 .401

Group Statistics
Age N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Preferene for Adidas 21-30 10 3.50 1.269 .401
Products >30 16 5.63 1.088 .272

Group Statistics
Age N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Preferene for Adidas 10-20 23 4.09 1.411 .294
Products >30 16 5.63 1.088 .272

There is no difference in perception of preference between age group of 10-20 and 21-30

Wile there is difference in preference of age group 21-30 and >30 and also between 10-20 age group
and >30 age group.

Parameter Mean Decision

21-30 and >30 21-30= 3.50 >30= 5.63 21-30 have
unfavourable
[preference and >30
have favourable.
10-20 and >30