Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 129 views

    SPSS Lab 4 - Velu Pandian Ravichandran

    Uploaded by

    GanesanDurairaj
    This document analyzes survey data from 36 respondents rating their experience at 3 cooking schools - Cambronne, Garibald, and Sko - on measures of presentation, cleanliness, taste, and balance. Descriptive statistics show differences in average ratings across schools. Factor analysis identifies two factors that together explain 84.6% of the variance. Factor 1 emphasizes cleanliness and balances and explains most of the variance. Factor 2 emphasizes presentation, cleanliness, and balance over taste. Component scores show Sko highest on Factor 1 followed by Garibald then Cambronne, indicating Sko focuses most on Factor 1 qualities like cleanliness and balance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    SPSS Lab 4 - Velu Pandian Ravichandran

    Uploaded by

    GanesanDurairaj
    129 views10 pages
    This document analyzes survey data from 36 respondents rating their experience at 3 cooking schools - Cambronne, Garibald, and Sko - on measures of presentation, cleanliness, taste, and balance. Descriptive statistics show differences in average ratings across schools. Factor analysis identifies two factors that together explain 84.6% of the variance. Factor 1 emphasizes cleanliness and balances and explains most of the variance. Factor 2 emphasizes presentation, cleanliness, and balance over taste. Component scores show Sko highest on Factor 1 followed by Garibald then Cambronne, indicating Sko focuses most on Factor 1 qualities like cleanliness and balance.

    Original Description:

    SPSS, Linear Regression, Multiple Regression, Factor Analysis, Cluster Analysis

    Original Title

    SPSS Lab 4 _ Velu Pandian Ravichandran

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document analyzes survey data from 36 respondents rating their experience at 3 cooking schools - Cambronne, Garibald, and Sko - on measures of presentation, cleanliness, taste, and balance. Descriptive statistics show differences in average ratings across schools. Factor analysis identifies two factors that together explain 84.6% of the variance. Factor 1 emphasizes cleanliness and balances and explains most of the variance. Factor 2 emphasizes presentation, cleanliness, and balance over taste. Component scores show Sko highest on Factor 1 followed by Garibald then Cambronne, indicating Sko focuses most on Factor 1 qualities like cleanliness and balance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    129 views10 pages

    SPSS Lab 4 - Velu Pandian Ravichandran

    Uploaded by

    GanesanDurairaj
    This document analyzes survey data from 36 respondents rating their experience at 3 cooking schools - Cambronne, Garibald, and Sko - on measures of presentation, cleanliness, taste, and balance. Descriptive statistics show differences in average ratings across schools. Factor analysis identifies two factors that together explain 84.6% of the variance. Factor 1 emphasizes cleanliness and balances and explains most of the variance. Factor 2 emphasizes presentation, cleanliness, and balance over taste. Component scores show Sko highest on Factor 1 followed by Garibald then Cambronne, indicating Sko focuses most on Factor 1 qualities like cleanliness and balance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 10

    Velu Pandian Ravichandran

    SPSS Lab 4 : Analysis on the Last page


    Question 1 : Describe and interpret the Zscore
    Descriptive analysis of the variables
    Descriptive Statistics
    N

    Minimum

    Maximum

    Mean

    Std. Deviation

    Presentation

    36

    5.6

    8.9

    7.437

    .9182

    Cleanliness

    36

    2.9

    4.6

    3.762

    .4413

    Taste

    36

    4.0

    6.8

    5.553

    .6322

    Balance

    36

    .0

    2.2

    .969

    .5701

    Valid N (listwise)

    36

    Descriptive analysis of the standardized variables For interpretation purposes Only


    Descriptive Statistics
    N

    Minimum

    Maximum

    Mean

    Std. Deviation

    Zscore(Presentation)

    36

    -2.03124

    1.54720

    .0000000

    1.00000000

    Zscore(Cleanliness)

    36

    -2.05019

    1.99623

    .0000000

    1.00000000

    Zscore(Taste)

    36

    -2.45606

    1.97276

    .0000000

    1.00000000

    Zscore(Balance)

    36

    -1.70041

    2.15841

    .0000000

    1.00000000

    Valid N (listwise)

    36

    Normal distribution, 95% of the distribution is between -2 and 2.


    Zscore values > 2 or < -2 Extreme Values

    Question 2 : Analyse the correlation matrix R and explain why you can run a
    factorial analysis.

    Correlations
    Zscore(Presentat Zscore(Cleanline
    ion)
    Zscore(Presentation)

    Pearson Correlation

    ss)

    products
    Covariance
    N
    Zscore(Cleanliness)

    Pearson Correlation
    Sig. (2-tailed)
    Sum of Squares and Crossproducts
    Covariance
    N

    Zscore(Taste)

    Pearson Correlation
    Sig. (2-tailed)
    Sum of Squares and Crossproducts
    Covariance
    N

    Zscore(Balance)

    Pearson Correlation
    Sig. (2-tailed)
    Sum of Squares and Crossproducts
    Covariance
    N

    **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).


    *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

    +/- 2/n =>2/36=+/-0.333

    Zscore(Balance)

    .712**

    .513**

    -.398*

    .000

    .001

    .016

    35.000

    24.922

    17.963

    -13.928

    1.000

    .712

    .513

    -.398

    36

    36

    36

    36

    -.402*

    .023

    .015

    Sig. (2-tailed)
    Sum of Squares and Cross-

    Zscore(Taste)

    .712

    **

    .000

    .377

    24.922

    35.000

    13.193

    -14.072

    .712

    1.000

    .377

    -.402

    36

    36

    36

    36

    .513**

    .377*

    -.668**

    .001

    .023

    17.963

    13.193

    35.000

    -23.365

    .513

    .377

    1.000

    -.668

    36

    36

    36

    36

    -.398*

    -.402*

    -.668**

    .016

    .015

    .000

    -13.928

    -14.072

    -23.365

    35.000

    -.398

    -.402

    -.668

    1.000

    36

    36

    36

    36

    .000

    Matrix is Symmetric and correlations are outside (-0.33,0.33)


    Question 3 , 4, 5 & 6 (Explanations and Interpretation Given Below)
    Factor Analysis
    Total Variance Explained
    Initial Eigenvalues
    Component

    Total

    % of Variance

    Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings


    Cumulative %

    Total

    % of Variance

    Cumulative %

    2.537

    63.417

    63.417

    2.537

    63.417

    63.417

    .850

    21.243

    84.660

    .850

    21.243

    84.660

    .382

    9.562

    94.222

    .231

    5.778

    100.000

    Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


    Component Matrixa
    Component
    1

    Zscore(Presentation)

    .830

    .403

    Zscore(Cleanliness)

    .783

    .504

    Zscore(Taste)

    .803

    -.432

    -.769

    .497

    Zscore(Balance)

    Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.a


    a. 2 components extracted.

    Component Score Coefficient Matrix


    Component
    1

    Zscore(Presentation)

    .327

    .474

    Zscore(Cleanliness)

    .309

    .593

    Zscore(Taste)

    .317

    -.508

    -.303

    .585

    Zscore(Balance)

    Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


    Component Scores.
    Component Score Covariance Matrix
    Component

    1.000

    .000

    .000

    1.000

    School
    Case Processing Summary
    Cases
    Valid
    School
    REGR factor score 1 for

    Missing
    Percent

    Total
    Percent

    Percent

    Cambronn

    12

    100.0%

    0.0%

    12

    100.0%

    Garibald

    12

    100.0%

    0.0%

    12

    100.0%

    Sko

    12

    100.0%

    0.0%

    12

    100.0%

    analysis 1

    Descriptives
    School
    REGR factor score 1 for

    Cambronn

    Statistic
    Mean

    -.1948437

    analysis 1
    95% Confidence Interval

    Lower Bound

    -.8845321

    Upper Bound

    .4948448

    for Mean

    Std. Error
    .31335442

    5% Trimmed Mean

    -.1478043

    Median

    .0827993

    Variance

    1.178

    Std. Deviation

    Garibald

    1.08549156

    Minimum

    -2.42191

    Maximum

    1.18552

    Range

    3.60743

    Interquartile Range

    1.91646

    Skewness

    -.715

    .637

    Kurtosis

    -.173

    1.232

    -.0479483

    .25052979

    Mean
    95% Confidence Interval

    Lower Bound

    -.5993607

    Upper Bound

    .5034640

    for Mean

    5% Trimmed Mean
    Median
    Variance
    Std. Deviation

    -.0368293
    .2853231
    .753
    .86786066

    Minimum

    -1.33781

    Maximum

    1.04177

    Range

    2.37958

    Interquartile Range

    1.59741

    Skewness

    -.318

    .637

    Kurtosis
    Sko

    Mean
    95% Confidence Interval

    -1.722

    1.232

    .2427920

    .30850633

    Lower Bound

    -.4362258

    Upper Bound

    .9218099

    for Mean

    5% Trimmed Mean

    .3009525

    Median

    .5931711

    Variance
    Std. Deviation

    1.142
    1.06869727

    Minimum

    -2.07194

    Maximum

    1.51064

    Range

    3.58258

    Interquartile Range

    1.54036

    Skewness
    Kurtosis

    -1.052

    .637

    .573

    1.232

    Question 3, 4, 5 & 6:
    Quality of F1=1/p=2.537/4 = 63.417%
    F1= Zscore(Presentation)*0.327+ Zscore(Cleanliness)*0.309+ Zscore(Taste)*0.317- Zscore(Balance)*(0.303)
    F1 is maximum when Cleanliness and balance are high and when balance is low.

    Sko seems to have higher scores followed by Garibaldi and finally Cambronne. Garibaldi seems to have more evenly
    distributed scores with grade more concentrated.
    We believe that there exists a relation between the school and F1.

    Quality of F2=2/p=0,850/4=21.243%
    F2= Zscore(Presentation)*0. 474+ Zscore(Cleanliness)*0. 593+ Zscore(Balance)*(0.585) - Zscore(Taste)*(0. 508)
    F2 is maximum when Cleanliness and presentation are high and when taste and balance are low.
    Quality of the projection of F1 & F2 is: (1+2)/4=(2.537+0,850)/4=84.660%
    Projection will have ~ 85% of the information.
    Sko School: top right Quadrant. This school trains cooks for high quality restaurants and fast food places
    Garibaldi school: bottom of the graph. They have a lower standard than other schools

    Cambronne School: Majority close to 0 on the F2 axis but spread on the F1 axis. This school trains high presentation
    and cleanliness.

    You might also like