Marketing Research Skills For Managerial Decision-Making

Reliability analysis

In social research survey’s are conducted to get responses from prospective clients. The responses of the clients are analysed and interpreted. In reliability analysis studies are done to check how well a group of items are correlated with other. The study of the inter-relation between different items in a group is a measure of reliability. The Cronbach’s alpha test is done to measure reliability. In the test for Reliability, the results are checked for Cronbach’s alpha and Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted. The Cronbach’s alpha provides a measure of the reliability of the items. The Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted provides the Cronbach’s alpha if the specific item is deleted. In the condition that any of the values of Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted is higher than Cronbach’s alpha then it is deduced that the reliability of the item is poor as compared to other items in the group. Thus the item should be deleted and a better Cronbach’s alpha generated.

In the present research a survey was done to get the opinion of the people for Foster’s Beer.

Extent of use of celebrity endorsement

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha Save Time On Research and Writing Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper. Get My Paper	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.936	.937	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
I have seen many celebrity endorsements for Foster’s beer	6.1200	14.410	.823	.728	.944
A lot of celebrities have endorsed Foster’s beer	6.2100	14.228	.934	.876	.858
Many ad campaigns of Foster’s involve renowned celebrities	6.2100	14.329	.853	.801	.920

The Cronbach’s alpha for the variable “Extent of use of celebrity endorsement” is 0.936. Hence, from the Cronbach’s alpha it is found that the Variable is highly reliable. The Cronbach’s alpha for the variable is for three items. The Cronbach’s alpha for the item “I have seen many celebrity endorsements for Foster’s beer” is higher than the Cronbach’s alpha (0.944). Hence, the item should be rejected to get a better reliability of the variable.

Likelihood of re-purchase

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.915	.915	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
I would definitely purchase a pint/can of Foster’s beer in the future	7.6000	16.869	.751	.565	.940
I’m sure I’m going to be a regular buyer of Foster’s beer	8.0800	15.872	.866	.800	.849
I will continue purchasing Foster’s on a regular basis	7.9200	14.822	.876	.810	.839

The Cronbach’s alpha for the variable “Likelihood of re-purchase” is 0.915. Thus, from the Cronbach’s alpha it is found that the Variable is highly reliable. The Cronbach’s alpha for the variable is for three items. The Cronbach’s alpha for the item “I would definitely purchase a pint/can of Foster’s beer in the future” is higher than the Cronbach’s alpha (0.940). Hence, the item should be rejected to get a better reliability of the variable.

We asked the people about their opinion towards the attractiveness of the Logo of Foster’s Beer. Three questions were asked to investigate the attractiveness of the Logo.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.910	.910	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
I find the logo of Foster’s to be attractive	8.3000	16.636	.798	.714	.888
The logo of Foster’s beer is really appealing	8.2000	14.889	.900	.814	.800
I am fascinated by Foster’s logo	8.4800	16.656	.764	.638	.916

The Cronbach’s alpha for Attractiveness of Logo is 0.910. However, the table on Item-total statistics shows that the Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted for the item “I am fascinated by Foster’s logo” is 0.916. Hence the item “I am fascinated by Foster’s logo” when deleted will give a better reliability.

The opinion of the people towards Alcohol percentage in Foster’s Beer was assessed through three questions.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.181	.216	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
The alcohol strength in a Foster’s pint/can is very high	7.5657	6.514	.374	.442	-.620a
In my opinion, the alcohol content of Foster’s is extremely high	7.6667	6.857	.300	.457	-.422a
q6b	6.6263	12.910	-.226	.057	.798

The reliability analysis of Alcohol percentage is 0.181. Thus the reliability of the response towards Alcohol percentage is poor. In addition, in the item-total statistics it is seen that the “Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted” for two of the items is negative. This generally happens when the covariance between the items is negative. Moreover, it may happen if the items are scaled wrongly. Since, the responses to the responses were in Likert Scale, hence it would be better to check the scaling of the group of questions in “Alcohol Percentage.”

Extent of use of celebrity endorsement

Calorie count in a pint/can

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alphaa	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Itemsa	N of Items
-.006	-.230	3
a. The value is negative due to a negative average covariance among items. This violates reliability model assumptions. You may want to check item codings.

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
The calorie count in a Foster’s beer is extremely high	8.8687	23.360	.035	.163	-.065a
I think that there are a lot of calories in Foster’s beer	8.1818	5.028	.135	.041	-1.115a
q9c	9.2929	27.148	-.168	.129	.255
a. The value is negative due to a negative average covariance among items. This violates reliability model assumptions. You may want to check item codings.

For the survey on “Calorie count in a pint/can” it is seen that the Cronbach’s alpha is negative (-0.006). The value of Cronbach’s alpha is negative due to negative covariance amongst the items. It is probable that the items were coded wrongly.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.930	.930	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
I really like the taste of Foster’s	8.2600	14.821	.832	.692	.918
I find the taste of this brand of beer extremely good	8.5100	15.202	.866	.758	.891
Foster’s beer tastes very good	8.4100	14.426	.871	.764	.886

The Cronbach’s alpha for the item “Taste” is 0.930. Moreover, the Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted for the items is below 0.930. Thus the items in “Taste” is highly reliable.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.926	.926	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
At any given day, I can easily find Foster’s in stock at almost all stores	7.5102	16.747	.859	.743	.885
A pint or a can of Foster’s can be found effortlessly in many stores	7.7041	17.778	.861	.745	.883
In my opinion, Foster’s beer is easily available in any store	7.4796	17.737	.827	.685	.910

The reliability analysis for Availability of Foster’s Beer shows that the Cronbach’s alpha for the three items is 0.926. Moreover, the Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted for the three items are 0.885, 0.883 and 0.910. Since the value of the Cronbach’s alpha for the three items is higher than the values of “Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted” hence the response to Availability of Foster’s Beer is highly reliable.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.916	.916	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
I always come across discounts on Foster’s beer	6.3838	15.382	.853	.742	.861
Foster’s beer is available on discounts extremely often	6.4242	14.879	.852	.742	.861
I always find Foster’s pint/can sold on discounts	6.5051	15.620	.788	.621	.914

The Cronbach’s alpha for the item “Frequency of offers and discounts” is 0.916. Thus the Cronbach’s alpha for the item “Frequency of offers and discounts” is highly reliable. In addition, the Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted for the group is below the Cronbach’s alpha. Hence the item “Frequency of offers and discounts” is reliable.

Extent of marketing and advertising

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.912	.913	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
I always come across Foster’s advertisements	6.6200	15.389	.819	.697	.880
I always see Foster’s advertisements	6.6400	13.566	.869	.760	.836
I am always exposed to Foster’s advertisements	6.8000	14.889	.788	.632	.904

For the item “Extent of marketing and advertising” it is seen that the Cronbach’s alpha is 0.915. Hence, it is seen that the Cronbach’s alpha for the item “Extent of marketing and advertising” are highly reliable. Moreover, Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted for the items in the group is below the Cronbach’s alpha for the group. Hence the items in the group are highly reliable.

Pricing

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.898	.899	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
In my opinion, Foster’s is expensive	7.5833	14.267	.841	.708	.818
A pint/can of Foster’s beer is very expensive for me	7.9167	14.456	.782	.626	.871
The cost of a pint/can of Foster’s beer is too high	7.7917	15.198	.776	.616	.874

For the item “Pricing” it is seen that the Cronbach’s alpha is 0.898. Hence, it is seen that the Cronbach’s alpha for the item “Pricing” are highly reliable. Moreover, Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted for the items in the group is below the Cronbach’s alpha for the group “Pricing”. Hence the items in the group are highly reliable.

Satisfaction

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.887	.887	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
Foster’s beer is one of best beers I’ve ever had	7.4900	14.798	.801	.643	.820
I have truly enjoyed Foster’s beer	7.1900	14.943	.778	.611	.840
Foster’s beer is exactly what I need	7.5800	14.933	.759	.578	.857

The variable “Satisfaction” has a Cronbach’s alpha is 0.887. Moreover, the Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted for the items in the group is below the Cronbach’s alpha for the group “Satisfaction”. Hence the items in the group are highly reliable.

Variety of beer

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha	Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
.881	.882	3

Item-Total Statistics
	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Squared Multiple Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted
I see very few types of beer under the Foster’s brand	8.4200	13.499	.719	.521	.878
The range of beer provided by Foster’s is not diverse	8.4400	13.219	.814	.675	.791
Foster’s has a limited range of beer types	8.2600	13.851	.778	.636	.824

For the item “Variety of Beer” the Cronbach’s alpha is 0.881. Thus, the Cronbach’s alpha for the item “Variety of Beer” is highly reliable. Moreover, Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted for the three items in the group is below the Cronbach’s alpha for the group “Variety of Beer”. Hence the items in the group are highly reliable.

The reliability of the 12 group of variables shows that one of the items should be deleted in the variables “Extent of use of celebrity endorsement”, “Likelihood of re-purchase” and “Attractiveness of logo.” Deleting of one of the items in the variable would increase the reliability of the variables. Moreover,  for the variable “Alcohol percentage” two of the items have a negative covariance. The items have a negative covariance due to negative average covariance amongst the items. This generally happens due to incorrect coding of the items. In addition, for the variable “Calorie count in a pint/can” the Cronbach’s alpha is negative. The negative Cronbach’s alpha is due to incorrect coding of the variables. The three items in “Calorie count in a pint/can” and “Alcohol percentage” needs to be coded correctly. The rest of the variables are highly reliable.

Likelihood of re-purchase

The test for association between two variables is tested through Karl Pearson Correlation coefficient (r). The correlation coefficient is used to detect the strength as well as the direction of the relationship. A positive correlation is reflected by a positive sign (+) and a negative correlation is identified by a negative sign (-). The strength of the correlation depends its distance between 0 and 1. When a number is closer to 1 then it has a high correlation. When the correlation coefficient, r = 0, then there is no correlation.  

Descriptive Statistics
	Mean	Std. Deviation	N
Extent of Marketing and advertising	3.3433	1.87095	100
Attractiveness of logo	4.1633	1.96004	100
Pricing	3.8819	1.86628	96
Frequency of offers and discounts	3.2189	1.91554	99
Taste	4.1967	1.89162	100
Alcohol Percentage	3.3131	1.79652	99
Availability of Foster’s beer	3.7823	2.04928	98
Variety of Beer	4.1867	1.78617	100
Extent of use of celebrity endorsements	3.0900	1.86278	100
Likelihood of repurchase	3.9333	1.94999	100
Satisfaction	3.7100	1.87706	100

The correlation coefficient, of 11 variables was calculated. The mean (standard deviation) of the variable “Taste” is the highest, 4.1967 (1.89162), followed by “Variety of Beer” 4.1867 (1.78617).  The mean±sd “attractiveness of logo” was found to be 4.1633 ±1.96004. The mean±sd “Likelihood of repurchase” is 3.93330±1.94999. The mean±sd “Pricing” is 3.88190±1.86628. The mean±sd for “Availability of Foster’s beer” was found as 3.78230±2.04928. The mean±sd for “Satisfaction” was 3.71000±1.87706. The mean±sd for “Extent of Marketing and advertising” was found to be 3.34330±1.87095. The mean±sd for “Alcohol Percentage” was 3.31310±1.79652. The mean±sd for “Frequency of offers and discounts” was 3.21890± 1.91554. Finally, the mean±sd for “Extent of use of celebrity endorsements” was found to be 3.09000±1.86278.

Thus it is seen that the mean for the variable “Taste” is the highest and for “Extent of use of celebrity endorsements” is the least. Hence, it can be interpreted that most of the client’s of Foster Beer strongly agreed with the three items for Taste. The descriptive statistics for the variables shows that when the mean is above 4 then most of the clients strongly agreed with items in the variable. Similarly, when the mean has a value from 3.5 to 4 then most of the client agreed with the items of the variable. Likewise, when the mean has a value around 3.0 them the clients were neutral towards the items of the variables. Hence, for “Extent of use of celebrity endorsements” it can be said that most of the clients of Foster Beer were neutral in their responses towards the three items.

Correlations
		Likelihood of Repurchase	Customer Satisfaction
Extent_Of_Marketing	Pearson Correlation	.272**	.410**
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.006	0.000
N	100	100
Logo_Attractiveness	Pearson Correlation	0.051	.294**
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.616	0.003
N	100	100
Pricing	Pearson Correlation	0.071	.228*
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.490	0.025
N	96	96
Freq_of_Discounts	Pearson Correlation	0.155	.272**
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.126	0.006
N	99	99
Taste	Pearson Correlation	.368**	.506**
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.000	0.000
N	100	100
Alcohol_Percentage	Pearson Correlation	0.083	.218*
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.414	0.030
N	99	99
Availability_in_stores	Pearson Correlation	0.135	0.032
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.184	0.752
N	98	98
Variety_of_Beer	Pearson Correlation	.218*	0.178
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.030	0.076
N	100	100
Extent_of_Celebrity_Endorsements	Pearson Correlation	0.127	.346**
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.206	0.000
N	100	100
Intention_For_Repurchase	Pearson Correlation	1	.530**
Sig. (2-tailed)		0.000
N	100	100
Customer_Satisfaction	Pearson Correlation	.530**	1
Sig. (2-tailed)	0.000
N	100	100
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

The correlation has been computed between 11 Independent Variables and 2 dependent variables. The two dependent variables are “Likelihood of Repurchase” and “Customer Satisfaction.” The correlation between the two dependent variables is moderate, positive and linear, r = 0.530. Moreover, the correlation is statistically significant, p = 0.000 at 0.01 level of significance. Hence, it can be said that when a customer is satisfied and is likely to repurchase foster Beer. Similarly,   the correlation between Taste and customer satisfaction is also moderate, positive and linear, r = 0.506. Moreover, the correlation is statistically significant, p = 0.000 at 0.01 level of significance. The least correlation is between “Attractiveness of Logo” and “Likelihood of Repurchase,” r = 0.051. Moreover, the correlation is statistically not significant.

Regression analysis is used to predict the relationship between variables. The dependent variable is the predictor variable. The independent variables are used to predict the dependent variables.

Model Summary
Model	R	R Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate
1	.480a	.231	.154	1.79396
a. Predictors: (Constant), Extent_of_Celebrity_Endorsements, Availability_in_stores, Logo_Attractiveness, Variety_of_Beer, Pricing, Taste, Alcohol_Percentage, Extent_Of_Marketing, Freq_of_Discounts

ANOVAa
Model	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	86.797	9	9.644	2.997	.004b
Residual	289.647	90	3.218
Total	376.444	99
a. Dependent Variable: Intention_For_Repurchase
b. Predictors: (Constant), Extent_of_Celebrity_Endorsements, Availability_in_stores, Logo_Attractiveness, Variety_of_Beer, Pricing, Taste, Alcohol_Percentage, Extent_Of_Marketing, Freq_of_Discounts

Coefficientsa
Model	Unstandardized Coefficients	Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.	Collinearity Statistics
B	Std. Error	Beta	Tolerance	VIF
1	(Constant)	1.295	.803		1.613	.110
Extent_Of_Marketing	.147	.121	.141	1.221	.225	.638	1.566
Logo_Attractiveness	-.154	.106	-.155	-1.456	.149	.756	1.323
Pricing	-.066	.112	-.061	-.586	.559	.778	1.285
Freq_of_Discounts	.031	.126	.031	.249	.804	.564	1.773
Taste	.386	.113	.374	3.418	.001	.713	1.403
Alcohol_Percentage	-.023	.118	-.021	-.192	.848	.730	1.370
Availability_in_stores	.022	.093	.022	.231	.818	.907	1.102
Variety_of_Beer	.254	.104	.233	2.454	.016	.950	1.053
Extent_of_Celebrity_Endorsements	.081	.131	.078	.621	.536	.549	1.823
a. Dependent Variable: Intention_For_Repurchase

In the following regression “intention for repurchase” is the dependent variable. 23.1% of “intention for repurchase” can be predicted from the variables. The equation for regression can be given as:

Intention for repurchase = 1.295 + 0.147*Extent_of_Marketing – 0.154*Logo_Attractiveness -0.066*Pricing + 0.031*Frequency_of_discounts+0.386*Taste – 0.023*Alcohol_Percentage + 0.022* Availability_in_stores + 0.254* Variety_of_Beer + 0.081* Extent_of_Celebrity_Endorsements

From the equation it is seen that with increase in “logo attractiveness”, “pricing” and “alcohol percentage” the “intention for repurchase” decreases. For all other variables the “intention for repurchase” increases. The coefficient for the variables “taste” and “variety of beer’ are statistically significant. The rest of the variables are not statistically significant.

Customer Satisfaction

Model Summary
Model	R	R Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate
1	.649a	.422	.364	1.49702
a. Predictors: (Constant), Extent_of_Celebrity_Endorsements, Availability_in_stores, Logo_Attractiveness, Variety_of_Beer, Pricing, Taste, Alcohol_Percentage, Extent_Of_Marketing, Freq_of_Discounts

ANOVAa
Model	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	147.117	9	16.346	7.294	.000b
Residual	201.696	90	2.241
Total	348.812	99
a. Dependent Variable: Customer_Satisfaction
b. Predictors: (Constant), Extent_of_Celebrity_Endorsements, Availability_in_stores, Logo_Attractiveness, Variety_of_Beer, Pricing, Taste, Alcohol_Percentage, Extent_Of_Marketing, Freq_of_Discounts

Coefficientsa
Model	Unstandardized Coefficients	Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.	Collinearity Statistics
B	Std. Error	Beta	Tolerance	VIF
1	(Constant)	-.367	.670		-.548	.585
Extent_Of_Marketing	.133	.101	.133	1.326	.188	.638	1.566
Logo_Attractiveness	.084	.088	.088	.956	.341	.756	1.323
Pricing	.004	.093	.004	.045	.964	.778	1.285
Freq_of_Discounts	.031	.105	.031	.294	.769	.564	1.773
Taste	.395	.094	.398	4.194	.000	.713	1.403
Alcohol_Percentage	.052	.099	.049	.527	.599	.730	1.370
Availability_in_stores	-.119	.078	-.128	-1.526	.131	.907	1.102
Variety_of_Beer	.251	.086	.239	2.900	.005	.950	1.053
Extent_of_Celebrity_Endorsements	.237	.109	.235	2.175	.032	.549	1.823
a. Dependent Variable: Customer_Satisfaction

In the following regression “customer satisfaction” is the dependent variable. 42.2% of “customer satisfaction” can be predicted from the variables. The equation for regression can be given as:

Customer Satisfaction = 0.133*Extent_of_Marketing + 0.084*Logo_Attractiveness + 0.004*Pricing + 0.031*Frequency_of_discounts + 0.395*Taste + 0.052*Alcohol_Percentage – 0.119* Availability_in_stores + 0.251* Variety_of_Beer + 0.237* Extent_of_Celebrity_Endorsements – 0.367

From the equation it is seen that with increase in “availability in stores” the “customer satisfaction” decreases. For all other variables “customer satisfaction” increases. The coefficient for the variables “taste”, “variety of beer” and “Extent of celebrity endorsement” are statistically significant. The rest of the variables are not statistically significant.

From the above data analysis we can conclude that:

• One item each of the variables “Extent of use of celebrity endorsement”, “Likelihood of re-purchase” and “Likelihood of re-purchase” to get a better reliability.
• The items in “Alcohol percentage” and “Calorie count in a pint/can” should be recoded and analysis for reliability.
• The variables “Taste”, “Availability of Foster’s beer”, “Frequency of offers and discounts”, “Extent of marketing and advertising”, “Pricing”, “Satisfaction” and “Variety of beer” are highly reliable.
• The mean response to “Taste” of Foster Beer is the highest.
• The mean response to “Extent of use of celebrity endorsements” is the least.
• The correlation coefficient between “Satisfaction” and “Intention for repurchase” is moderate and statistically significant.
• The correlation coefficient between “Logo Attractiveness” and “Likelihood of repurchase” is very poor.
• The independent variables can predict 23.1% of the variation in Intention for repurchase.
• The independent variables can predict 42.2% of the variation in Customer Satisfaction.