Analysis of Retail Surge Company's Market Research Data

This report presents an analysis of Retail Surge Company's market research data, including the product categories making the most profit, the product category with the highest cost, differences in payment methods, user groups on customer attitudes, and differences in gender on customer attitudes.

Business statistics
Business analytics and statistics
Student name:
Student number:
Tutor name:
Word count:
1 | P a g e

Business statistics
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction...........................................................................................................................................3
2.0 Problem definition.................................................................................................................................3
3.0 Analysis and results...............................................................................................................................5
3.1 Which product categories are making the most profit?....................................................................5
3.2 Which product category costs the most (COGS)?..............................................................................6
3.3 Is there a difference in payments methods?.....................................................................................7
3.4 Are there any differences in the user groups on all of the customer attitudes? (6 outcomes)..........7
3.5 Test for the difference in means of user groups between different customer attitudes.................11
3.6 Are there any differences in gender on all of the customer attitudes? (6 outcomes).....................15
4.0 Discussion and recommendation.........................................................................................................20
Reference...................................................................................................................................................21
Appendix...................................................................................................................................................22
2 | P a g e

Business statistics
1.0 Introduction
The business world has in the recent past been dogged by myriad of problems ranging from
global inflation to high level competition. Industries have been growing big due to new
entrants in the market. This has posed great challenges in in terms of competition. Due to this,
various businesses have embraced various methods to keep their businesses afloat. This include
having to introduce online platforms where customers can view and by goods online. Some
companies have reverted to doing research about the market trends so as to understand the
trends in the market and adapt.
2.0 Problem definition
Things have not been different for Retail Surge Company, an online company dealing in
clothes and footwear for boys and girls and men and women. Retail Surge also deals in
customisation, accessories and sports equipment. Due to low sales and dwindling profit
margins, the company decided to conduct a market research by conducting data from
customers with an aim of analysing it and drawing important information to guide their
business.
 The product category is made the most profit
To give information about the product category that made the most profit at Retail Surge, the
appropriate bar graphs were employed to visually present the product and the amount of each.
 Product category that cost the most
To give information about the product category that cost most, at Retail Surge, the appropriate
bar graphs were employed to visually present the product and the amount of each.
3 | P a g e

Business statistics
 Is there a difference in payment methods?
Since is a test for difference in means, an inferential statistics was employed. Independent t-test
was employed since the test was being conducted between two variables. Test for difference
between two independent variables use independent t-test. The two variables were the two
methods of payments which were PayPal and credit card.
 Are there any differences in the user groups on all of the customer attitudes? (6
outcomes)
Since is a test for difference in means, an inferential statistics was employed. Analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was employed since the test was being conducted among more 3 variables.
Test for difference between three independent variables uses ANOVA. The three variables were
light users, medium users and heavy users.
 Are there any differences in gender on all of the customer attitudes?
Since is a test for difference in means, an inferential statistics was employed. Independent t-test
was employed since the test was being conducted between two variables. Test for difference
between two independent variables use independent t-test. The two variables were the male and
the females.
4 | P a g e

Business statistics
3.0 Analysis and results
3.1 Which product categories are making the most profit?
Figure 1
Figure 1 above is a bar chart showing the mean total profit of different products sold by Retail
Surge. The product which fetched the highest profit was the customised products ($ 25). The
second best product in terms of mean profit was men’s shoes ($15.5). The product that fetched
the least profit was boys clothing.
5 | P a g e

Business statistics
3.2 Which product category costs the most (COGS)?
Figure 2
Figure 2 above is a bar chart showing the mean cost of goods at Retail Surge. The product
which had the highest mean cost was the customised products ($9.9). The second costly
product was girls’ shoes ($8). The product that was less costly was boys’ clothing.
6 | P a g e

Business statistics
3.3 Is there a difference in payments methods?
Figure 3
The box-plots above show that 95% of the time, the mean total purchases paid by PayPal was
between around 3.15 while the mean total purchases paid by credit card was between 3.3 and 4.0.
3.4 Are there any differences in the user groups on all of the
customer attitudes? (6 outcomes)
1.
Descriptives
N Mea
n
Std.
Deviatio
n
Std.
Erro
r
95% Confidence
Interval for
Mean
Minimu
m
Maximu
m
Lower
Boun
d
Upper
Boun
d
Knowledge
of the
company
Light
Users
10
4
2.85 1.711 .168 2.51 3.18 1 6
Mediu
m
Users
20
4
4.90 1.664 .116 4.67 5.13 2 7
Heavy
Users
28
4
6.45 .601 .036 6.38 6.52 5 7
7 | P a g e

Business statistics
Total 59
2
5.28 1.840 .076 5.14 5.43 1 7
Satisfaction
with the
company
Light
Users
10
4
2.54 1.157 .113 2.31 2.76 1 6
Mediu
m
Users
20
4
5.39 1.033 .072 5.25 5.53 2 7
Heavy
Users
28
4
6.07 .776 .046 5.98 6.16 2 7
Total 59
2
5.22 1.585 .065 5.09 5.34 1 7
Preference
for Nike
Light
Users
10
4
2.46 1.507 .148 2.17 2.75 1 6
Mediu
m
Users
20
4
2.82 1.572 .110 2.61 3.04 1 5
Heavy
Users
28
4
4.45 1.654 .098 4.26 4.64 1 7
Total 59
2
3.54 1.826 .075 3.39 3.69 1 7
Purchase
Intention for
Nike
Light
Users
10
0
4.16 1.835 .184 3.80 4.52 1 7
Mediu
m
Users
20
4
4.04 1.893 .133 3.78 4.30 2 7
Heavy
Users
28
4
5.01 1.195 .071 4.87 5.15 3 7
Total 58
8
4.53 1.648 .068 4.40 4.66 1 7
Would
recommend
company to a
friend
Light
Users
10
4
3.46 1.131 .111 3.24 3.68 2 6
Mediu
m
Users
20
4
4.92 .494 .035 4.85 4.98 4 6
Heavy
Users
28
4
6.35 .477 .028 6.29 6.40 6 7
Total 59
2
5.35 1.260 .052 5.25 5.45 2 7
Loyalty for Light 10 3.92 1.499 .147 3.63 4.21 2 6
8 | P a g e

Business statistics
Nike Users 4
Mediu
m
Users
20
4
4.14 1.563 .109 3.92 4.35 2 6
Heavy
Users
28
4
3.92 1.575 .093 3.73 4.10 2 7
Total 59
2
3.99 1.559 .064 3.87 4.12 2 7
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Levene
Statistic
df1 df2 Sig.
Knowledge of the
company
Based on Mean 137.679 2 589 .000
Based on Median 43.167 2 589 .000
Based on Median and
with adjusted df
43.167 2 366.541 .000
Based on trimmed mean 130.226 2 589 .000
Satisfacition with the
company
Based on Mean 34.012 2 589 .000
Based on Median 19.318 2 589 .000
Based on Median and
with adjusted df
19.318 2 543.743 .000
Based on trimmed mean 28.470 2 589 .000
Preference for Nike Based on Mean 3.007 2 589 .050
Based on Median 2.032 2 589 .132
Based on Median and
with adjusted df
2.032 2 534.316 .132
Based on trimmed mean 3.259 2 589 .039
Purchase Intention for
Nike
Based on Mean 51.499 2 585 .000
Based on Median 48.655 2 585 .000
Based on Median and
with adjusted df
48.655 2 555.807 .000
Based on trimmed mean 49.574 2 585 .000
Would recommend
company to a friend
Based on Mean 155.697 2 589 .000
Based on Median 75.229 2 589 .000
Based on Median and
with adjusted df
75.229 2 489.408 .000
Based on trimmed mean 152.051 2 589 .000
Loyalty for Nike Based on Mean .438 2 589 .645
Based on Median 1.134 2 589 .322
9 | P a g e

Business statistics
Based on Median and
with adjusted df
1.134 2 466.890 .323
Based on trimmed mean .333 2 589 .717
Table 1
Homogeneity of variance test was employed to test whether there was equality of variance in customer
attitudes. The null hypothesis in this test maintains equality of variance (Derrick, Toher, & White, 2017).
Three attitudes; satisfaction with the company, purchase intention for Nike and knowledge with the
company had p-values equal to 0.00 which is less than level of significance 0.05. This means that null
hypothesis is violated in all the three attitudes thus it is concluded that at least one item has a different
mean. On the other hand, under loyalty for Nike, the p-values (0.64) was greater than level of significance
0.05. The alternative hypothesis is accepted thus it is concluded that at least one variance is different
(Leigh, 2008).
ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Knowledge of the company Between Groups 1034.437 2 517.218 315.401 .000
Within Groups 965.888 589 1.640
Total 2000.324 591
Satisfaction with the
company
Between Groups 959.259 2 479.630 538.032 .000
Within Groups 525.065 589 .891
Total 1484.324 591
Preference for Nike Between Groups 461.224 2 230.612 89.966 .000
Within Groups 1509.803 589 2.563
Total 1971.027 591
Purchase Intention for Nike Between Groups 129.379 2 64.690 25.830 .000
Within Groups 1465.070 585 2.504
Total 1594.449 587
Would recommend company
to a friend
Between Groups 692.399 2 346.199 829.181 .000
Within Groups 245.919 589 .418
Total 938.318 591
Loyalty for Nike Between Groups 6.460 2 3.230 1.331 .265
Within Groups 1429.513 589 2.427
Total 1435.973 591
Table 2
10 | P a g e

Business statistics
3.5 Test for the difference in means of user groups between
different customer attitudes
a. Attitude 1: Knowledge of the company
H0 : μ ean1=μ ean2 =μ ean3
H1 : Not all the means are equal
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, not all the means are equal
Attitude 2: Satisfaction with the company
H0 : μean1=μean2=μean3
H1 : Not all the means are equal
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, not all the means are equal (Howell, 2007).
b. Attitude 3: Preference for Nike
H0 : μean1=μean2=μean3
H1 : Not all the means are equal
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, not all the means are equal
c. Attitude 4: Purchase intention for Nike
H0 : μean1=μean2=μean3
H1 : Not all the means are equal
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, not all the means are equal (Hinkelmann & Kempthorne, 2010).
11 | P a g e

Business statistics
d. Attitude 5: Would recommend company to a friend?
H0 : μean1=μean2=μean3
H1 : Not all the means are equal
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, not all the means are equal
e. Attitude 6: Loyalty for Nike
H0 : μean1=μean2=μean3
H1 : Not all the means are equal
The test found the p-value (0.27) to be greater than the level of significance (0.05). The
conclusion then is, all the means are equal (Gelman, 2005).
Multiple Comparisons
Bonferroni
Dependent Variable
(I) Webiste User
Group
(J) Webiste User
Group
Mean
Difference
(I-J)
Std.
Error Sig.
95% Confidence
Interval
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
Knowledge of the
company
Light Users Medium Users -2.056* .154 .000 -2.43 -1.69
Heavy Users -3.605* .147 .000 -3.96 -3.25
Medium Users Light Users 2.056* .154 .000 1.69 2.43
Heavy Users -1.549* .118 .000 -1.83 -1.27
Heavy Users Light Users 3.605* .147 .000 3.25 3.96
Medium Users 1.549* .118 .000 1.27 1.83
Satisfaction with the
company
Light Users Medium Users -2.854* .114 .000 -3.13 -2.58
Heavy Users -3.532* .108 .000 -3.79 -3.27
Medium Users Light Users 2.854* .114 .000 2.58 3.13
Heavy Users -.678* .087 .000 -.89 -.47
Heavy Users Light Users 3.532* .108 .000 3.27 3.79
Medium Users .678* .087 .000 .47 .89
Preference for Nike Light Users Medium Users -.362 .193 .183 -.83 .10
Heavy Users -1.989* .184 .000 -2.43 -1.55
Medium Users Light Users .362 .193 .183 -.10 .83
Heavy Users -1.627* .147 .000 -1.98 -1.27
Heavy Users Light Users 1.989* .184 .000 1.55 2.43
12 | P a g e

Business statistics
Medium Users 1.627* .147 .000 1.27 1.98
Purchase Intention
for Nike
Light Users Medium Users .121 .193 1.000 -.34 .58
Heavy Users -.854* .184 .000 -1.30 -.41
Medium Users Light Users -.121 .193 1.000 -.58 .34
Heavy Users -.975* .145 .000 -1.32 -.63
Heavy Users Light Users .854* .184 .000 .41 1.30
Medium Users .975* .145 .000 .63 1.32
Would recommend
company to a friend
Light Users Medium Users -1.455* .078 .000 -1.64 -1.27
Heavy Users -2.887* .074 .000 -3.06 -2.71
Medium Users Light Users 1.455* .078 .000 1.27 1.64
Heavy Users -1.432* .059 .000 -1.57 -1.29
Heavy Users Light Users 2.887* .074 .000 2.71 3.06
Medium Users 1.432* .059 .000 1.29 1.57
Loyalty for Nike Light Users Medium Users -.214 .188 .763 -.66 .24
Heavy Users .008 .179 1.000 -.42 .44
Medium Users Light Users .214 .188 .763 -.24 .66
Heavy Users .222 .143 .364 -.12 .57
Heavy Users Light Users -.008 .179 1.000 -.44 .42
Medium Users -.222 .143 .364 -.57 .12
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Table 3
Difference in mean for light, medium and heavy users
Hypothesis
H0 : μean1=μean2=μean3
H1 : Not all the means are equal
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, not all the means are equal
However for Nike products, the hypothesis and conclusion was as below;
H0 : μean1=μean2=μean3
H1 : Not all the means are equal
The test found the p-value (0.27) to be greater than the level of significance (0.05). The
conclusion then is, all the means are equal.
13 | P a g e

Business statistics
3.6 Are there any differences in gender on all of the customer
attitudes? (6 outcomes)
Group Statistics
Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Knowledge of the company Female 388 5.02 1.961 .100
Male 204 5.78 1.463 .102
Satisfaction with the
company
Female 388 5.18 1.595 .081
Male 204 5.29 1.567 .110
Preference for Nike Female 388 3.19 1.876 .095
Male 204 4.22 1.516 .106
Purchase Intention for Nike Female 388 4.67 1.619 .082
Male 200 4.26 1.675 .118
Loyalty for Nike Female 388 3.44 1.588 .081
Male 204 5.04 .768 .054
Would recommend company
to a friend
Female 388 5.40 1.255 .064
Male 204 5.25 1.267 .089
Table 4
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df
Sig.
(2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Knowledge of
the company
Equal
variances
assumed
56.606 .000 -4.892 590 .000 -.764 .156 -1.070 -.457
14 | P a g e

Business statistics
Equal
variances not
assumed
-5.347 522.857 .000 -.764 .143 -1.044 -.483
Satisfaction
with the
company
Equal
variances
assumed
.024 .877 -.867 590 .386 -.119 .137 -.388 .150
Equal
variances not
assumed
-.872 419.112 .384 -.119 .136 -.387 .149
Preference
for Nike
Equal
variances
assumed
14.901 .000 -6.765 590 .000 -1.030 .152 -1.329 -.731
Equal
variances not
assumed
-7.223 493.730 .000 -1.030 .143 -1.310 -.750
Purchase
Intention for
Nike
Equal
variances
assumed
2.724 .099 2.876 586 .004 .410 .143 .130 .690
Equal
variances not
assumed
2.845 390.123 .005 .410 .144 .127 .694
Loyalty for
Nike
Equal
variances
assumed
246.135 .000 -
13.543
590 .000 -1.596 .118 -1.827 -1.364
Equal
variances not
assumed
-
16.471
586.589 .000 -1.596 .097 -1.786 -1.406
Would
recommend
company to a
friend
Equal
variances
assumed
.157 .692 1.442 590 .150 .157 .109 -.057 .371
Equal
variances not
assumed
1.437 409.319 .151 .157 .109 -.058 .372
Table 5
 Test for equality of variance in attitude (knowledge of the company) between male and
female
Hypothesis
15 | P a g e

Business statistics
H0: Variance1 = Variance2
Versus
H1: Variance1 ≠ Variance2
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, there is a significant difference in the two variances.
 Test for equality of variance in attitude (satisfaction with the company) between male
and female
Hypothesis
H0: Variance1 = Variance2
Versus
H1: Variance1 ≠ Variance2
The test found the p-value (0.27) to be greater than the level of significance (0.05). The
conclusion then is, all the means in attitude levels between the males and females are equal.
 Test for equality of variance in attitude (preference for Nike) between male and female
Hypothesis
H0: Variance1 = Variance2
Versus
H1: Variance1 ≠ Variance2
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, there is a significant difference in the two variances.
 Test for equality of variance in attitude (purchase intention for Nike) between male
and female
Hypothesis
16 | P a g e

Business statistics
H0: Variance1 = Variance2
Versus
H1: Variance1 ≠ Variance2
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, there is a significant difference in the two variances.
 Test for equality of variance in attitude (loyalty for Nike) between male and female
Hypothesis
H0: Variance1 = Variance2
Versus
H1: Variance1 ≠ Variance2
The test found the p-value (0.00) to be less than the level of significance (0.05). The conclusion
then is, there is a significant difference in the two variances.
 Test for equality of variance in customer attitude (would recommend company to a
friend) between male and female
Hypothesis
H0: Variance1 = Variance2
Versus
H1: Variance1 ≠ Variance2
The p-value calculated (0.15) is great compared to the alpha value (0.05). This means that null
hypothesis is accepted thus equality of variance in attitude levels between the males and females.
One sample t-test for the mean satisfaction level (3.5)
Hypothesis
17 | P a g e

Business statistics
H0: μ = 3.5
Versus
H1: μ ≠ 3.5
Test results table is as shown below
One-Sample Statistics
N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Satisfaction with the
company
592 5.22 1.585 .065
Table 6
One-Sample Test
Test Value = 3.5
t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Satisfaction with the company 26.349 591 .000 1.716 1.59 1.84
Table 7
Since the p-value calculated (0.00) is less compared to the alpha value (0.05). This means that
null hypothesis is not accepted thus the mean satisfaction level is not 3.5.
4.0 Discussion and recommendation
The research team found many revelations from the data analysis results. The product which
fetched the highest profit was the customised products ($ 25). The second best product in terms
of mean profit was men’s shoes ($15.5). The product that fetched the least profit was boys
clothing. To add on, the product which had the highest mean cost was the customised products
($9.9). The second costly product was girls’ shoes ($8). The product that was less costly was
boys’ clothing. The research also found that there was no significant difference in the attitude
levels between males and females.
18 | P a g e

Business statistics
Reference
Derrick, B., Toher, D., & White, P. (2017). How to compare the mean of two samples that
include paired observations and independent observations. Quantitative methods for
Psychology, 13(2), 120 - 126.
Gelman, A. (2005). Analysis of variance? Why it is more important than ever. The anals of
Statistics, 33, 1 - 53.
Hinkelmann, K., & Kempthorne, O. (2010). Design and analysis of experiments (5 ed., Vol. 8).
Howell, D. C. (2007). Statistical methods for Psychology (3 ed., Vol. 5).
Leigh, E. S. (2008). Consumer rites. Selling of American Holidays, 6(3), 106 - 191.
19 | P a g e

Business statistics
Appendix
20 | P a g e

Business statistics
Descriptives
21 | P a g e

Business statistics
N Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std.
Error
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Minimum Maximum
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
Knowledge of the
company
Light
Users
104 2.85 1.711 .168 2.51 3.18 1 6
Medium
Users
204 4.90 1.664 .116 4.67 5.13 2 7
Heavy
Users
284 6.45 .601 .036 6.38 6.52 5 7
Total 592 5.28 1.840 .076 5.14 5.43 1 7
Satisfaction with
the company
Light
Users
104 2.54 1.157 .113 2.31 2.76 1 6
Medium
Users
204 5.39 1.033 .072 5.25 5.53 2 7
Heavy
Users
284 6.07 .776 .046 5.98 6.16 2 7
Total 592 5.22 1.585 .065 5.09 5.34 1 7
Preference for
Nike
Light
Users
104 2.46 1.507 .148 2.17 2.75 1 6
Medium
Users
204 2.82 1.572 .110 2.61 3.04 1 5
Heavy
Users
284 4.45 1.654 .098 4.26 4.64 1 7
Total 592 3.54 1.826 .075 3.39 3.69 1 7
Purchase Intention
for Nike
Light
Users
100 4.16 1.835 .184 3.80 4.52 1 7
Medium
Users
204 4.04 1.893 .133 3.78 4.30 2 7
Heavy
Users
284 5.01 1.195 .071 4.87 5.15 3 7
Total 588 4.53 1.648 .068 4.40 4.66 1 7
Would recommend
company to a
friend
Light
Users
104 3.46 1.131 .111 3.24 3.68 2 6
Medium
Users
204 4.92 .494 .035 4.85 4.98 4 6
Heavy
Users
284 6.35 .477 .028 6.29 6.40 6 7
Total 592 5.35 1.260 .052 5.25 5.45 2 7
22 | P a g e

Business statistics
Loyalty for Nike Light
Users
104 3.92 1.499 .147 3.63 4.21 2 6
Medium
Users
204 4.14 1.563 .109 3.92 4.35 2 6
Heavy
Users
284 3.92 1.575 .093 3.73 4.10 2 7
Total 592 3.99 1.559 .064 3.87 4.12 2 7
Multiple Comparisons
Bonferroni
Dependent Variable
(I) Webiste User
Group
(J) Webiste User
Group
Mean
Difference
(I-J)
Std.
Error Sig.
95% Confidence
Interval
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
Knowledge of the
company
Light Users Medium Users -2.056* .154 .000 -2.43 -1.69
Heavy Users -3.605* .147 .000 -3.96 -3.25
Medium Users Light Users 2.056* .154 .000 1.69 2.43
Heavy Users -1.549* .118 .000 -1.83 -1.27
Heavy Users Light Users 3.605* .147 .000 3.25 3.96
Medium Users 1.549* .118 .000 1.27 1.83
Satisfaction with the
company
Light Users Medium Users -2.854* .114 .000 -3.13 -2.58
Heavy Users -3.532* .108 .000 -3.79 -3.27
Medium Users Light Users 2.854* .114 .000 2.58 3.13
Heavy Users -.678* .087 .000 -.89 -.47
Heavy Users Light Users 3.532* .108 .000 3.27 3.79
Medium Users .678* .087 .000 .47 .89
Preference for Nike Light Users Medium Users -.362 .193 .183 -.83 .10
Heavy Users -1.989* .184 .000 -2.43 -1.55
Medium Users Light Users .362 .193 .183 -.10 .83
Heavy Users -1.627* .147 .000 -1.98 -1.27
Heavy Users Light Users 1.989* .184 .000 1.55 2.43
Medium Users 1.627* .147 .000 1.27 1.98
Purchase Intention
for Nike
Light Users Medium Users .121 .193 1.000 -.34 .58
Heavy Users -.854* .184 .000 -1.30 -.41
Medium Users Light Users -.121 .193 1.000 -.58 .34
Heavy Users -.975* .145 .000 -1.32 -.63
Heavy Users Light Users .854* .184 .000 .41 1.30
Medium Users .975* .145 .000 .63 1.32
23 | P a g e

Business statistics
Would recommend
company to a friend
Light Users Medium Users -1.455* .078 .000 -1.64 -1.27
Heavy Users -2.887* .074 .000 -3.06 -2.71
Medium Users Light Users 1.455* .078 .000 1.27 1.64
Heavy Users -1.432* .059 .000 -1.57 -1.29
Heavy Users Light Users 2.887* .074 .000 2.71 3.06
Medium Users 1.432* .059 .000 1.29 1.57
Loyalty for Nike Light Users Medium Users -.214 .188 .763 -.66 .24
Heavy Users .008 .179 1.000 -.42 .44
Medium Users Light Users .214 .188 .763 -.24 .66
Heavy Users .222 .143 .364 -.12 .57
Heavy Users Light Users -.008 .179 1.000 -.44 .42
Medium Users -.222 .143 .364 -.57 .12
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Group Statistics
Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Knowledge of the company Female 388 5.02 1.961 .100
Male 204 5.78 1.463 .102
Satisfaction with the
company
Female 388 5.18 1.595 .081
Male 204 5.29 1.567 .110
Preference for Nike Female 388 3.19 1.876 .095
Male 204 4.22 1.516 .106
Purchase Intention for Nike Female 388 4.67 1.619 .082
Male 200 4.26 1.675 .118
Loyalty for Nike Female 388 3.44 1.588 .081
Male 204 5.04 .768 .054
Would recommend company
to a friend
Female 388 5.40 1.255 .064
Male 204 5.25 1.267 .089
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
24 | P a g e

Business statistics
F Sig. t df
Sig.
(2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Knowledge of
the company
Equal
variances
assumed
56.606 .000 -4.892 590 .000 -.764 .156 -1.070 -.457
Equal
variances not
assumed
-5.347 522.857 .000 -.764 .143 -1.044 -.483
Satisfaction
with the
company
Equal
variances
assumed
.024 .877 -.867 590 .386 -.119 .137 -.388 .150
Equal
variances not
assumed
-.872 419.112 .384 -.119 .136 -.387 .149
Preference
for Nike
Equal
variances
assumed
14.901 .000 -6.765 590 .000 -1.030 .152 -1.329 -.731
Equal
variances not
assumed
-7.223 493.730 .000 -1.030 .143 -1.310 -.750
Purchase
Intention for
Nike
Equal
variances
assumed
2.724 .099 2.876 586 .004 .410 .143 .130 .690
Equal
variances not
assumed
2.845 390.123 .005 .410 .144 .127 .694
Loyalty for
Nike
Equal
variances
assumed
246.135 .000 -
13.543
590 .000 -1.596 .118 -1.827 -1.364
Equal
variances not
assumed
-
16.471
586.589 .000 -1.596 .097 -1.786 -1.406
Would
recommend
company to a
Equal
variances
assumed
.157 .692 1.442 590 .150 .157 .109 -.057 .371
25 | P a g e

Business statistics
friend Equal
variances not
assumed
1.437 409.319 .151 .157 .109 -.058 .372
26 | P a g e