Table 1: Demographic Profile

Variables n Percentage, %
Sex
Male 60 50.0
Female 60 50.0
Strand
STEM 30 25.0
ABM 30 25.0
HUMSS 30 25.0
TVL 30 25.0
Total 120 100.0

It is shown in the table 1 that the respondents were grouped equally according to their sex and

then they were classified according to their strand taken. All in all there were 120 respondents

that were involve in this study.

Table 2: Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of design

Variables n M SD Interpretation
Sex
Male 60 4.17 0.75 High
Female 60 4.17 0.83 High
Strand
STEM 30 4.35 1.00 High
ABM 30 4.12 0.65 High
HUMSS 30 4.27 0.65 High
TVL 30 3.93 0.77 High
As a whole 120 4.17 0.79 High

Table 2 shows that the design of the product highly affects the effectiveness of biscuit

packaging as it was shown that the results were high. The results for the both sexes and all

strands were all similar.

Table 3: Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of advertisement

 Variables n M SD Interpretation
Sex
Male 60 3.99 0.88 High
Female 60 4.22 0.72 High
Strand
STEM 30 4.32 0.74 High
ABM 30 3.99 0.70 High
HUMSS 30 4.02 0.94 High
TVL 30 4.09 0.83 High
As a whole 120 4.11 0.81 High

Table 3 shows that the advertisement of the product highly affects effectiveness of the biscuit

packaging as it was shown that the results were high. The results for the both sexes and all

strands were all similar.

Table 4: Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of brand name

Variables n M SD Interpretation
Sex
Male 60 4.07 0.83 High
Female 60 4.17 0.72 High
Strand
STEM 30 4.32 0.75 High
ABM 30 3.98 0.64 High
HUMSS 30 4.1 0.90 High
TVL 30 4.08 0.79 High
As a whole 120 4.12 0.77 High

Table 4 shows that the brand name of the product highly affects the effectiveness of biscuit

packaging as it was shown that the results were high. The results for the both sexes and all

strands were all similar.

 Table 5:Difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of
design when grouped according to sex
Sex t df p
Male Female      
Design
4.17 4.17 0.002 118 0.998
(0.75) (0.83)      

T-test independent sample was used to determine the significant difference on the Level of Perceived

Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of design when grouped according to sex. There was no

significant difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of design when

grouped according to sex p (0.998).

Table 6:Difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of

advertisement when grouped according to sex

Sex t df p
Male Female      
Advertisement
3.99 4.22 1.510 118 0.134
(0.88) (0.72)      

T-test independent sample was used to determine the significant difference on the Level of Perceived

Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of advertisement when grouped according to sex. There was

no significant difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of

advertisement when grouped according to sex p (0.134).

Table 7:Difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of

brand name when grouped according to sex

Sex t df p
Male Female      
Brand Name
4.07 4.17 0.745 118 0.458
(0.83) (0.72)      
T-test independent sample was used to determine the significant difference on the Level of Perceived

Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of brand name when grouped according to sex. There was no

significant difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of brand name

when grouped according to sex p (0.458).

Table 8:Difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of

design when grouped according to strand
Strand M F df p
STEM 4.35a 1.620 3 0.188
(1.00) 116
ABM 4.12a
(0.65)
HUMSS 4.27a
(0.65)
TVL 3.93a
(0.77)
Note: the difference in the means is significant when p<0.05, means that shares a letter was not significantly different

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the significant difference on the Level of Perceived

Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of design when grouped according to strand. There was no

significant difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of design when

grouped according to Strand [F (3, 116) = 1.620, p = 0.188].

Table 9:Difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of

Advertisement when grouped according to strand

Strand M F df p
STEM 4.32a 1.036 3 0.379
(0.74) 116
ABM 3.99a
(0.70)
HUMSS 4.02a
(0.94)
TVL 4.09a
(0.83)
Note: the difference in the means is significant when p<0.05, means that shares a letter was not significantly different
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the significant difference on the Level of Perceived

Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of advertisement when grouped according to strand. There

was no significant difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of

advertisement when grouped according to Strand [F (3, 116) = 1.036, p = 0.379].

Table 10:Difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of

Brand Name when grouped according to strand

Strand M F df p
STEM 4.32a 1.068 3 0.366
(0.75) 116
ABM 3.98a
(0.64)
HUMSS 4.10a
(0.90)
TVL 4.08a
(0.79)
Note: the difference in the means is significant when p<0.05, means that shares a letter was not significantly different

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the significant difference on the Level of Perceived

Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of brand name when grouped according to strand. There was

no significant difference on the Level of Perceived Effectiveness of biscuit packaging in terms of brand

name when grouped according to Strand [F (3, 116) = 1.068, p = 0.336].