Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis, and interpretation of date gathered in

determining the acceptability levels of coconut wine as alternative bread enhancer.

Input

This variable includes the following process of coconut wine as alternative bread

enhancer to improve the quality of the product; 3 hours, 6 hours, and 9 hours.

Table 1

Descriptive levels of Coconut wine as an alternative bread enhancer (n = 30)

3 hours 6 hours 9 hours

Treatment
M SD M SD M SD

Visual Attractiveness (Crumb) 8.20 1.03 8.17 1.05 8.53 0.82

Smell Pleasantness (Crumb) 7.73 0.94 7.93 1.08 8.37 1.00

Taste Pleasantness (Crumb) 8.07 1.01 8.17 1.26 8.53 0.94

Smell Pleasantness (Crust) 7.83 1.15 8.00 1.08 8.47 0.94

Taste Pleasantness (Crust) 8.23 0.94 8.07 1.08 8.57 0.77

Overall Pleasantness 8.20 0.89 8.13 1.01 8.53 0.78

General Acceptability 7.53 1.22 7.73 0.94 8.33 0.88

 Table 1 shows the level of Coconut wine as an alternative enhancer. The result reveals

that the highest sensory factor criteria for Visual Attractiveness (crumb) has a mean of 8.53,

Smell Pleasantness (crumb) has a mean of 8.37, Taste Pleasantness (crumb) has a mean of 8.53,

Smell Pleasantness (crust) has a mean of 8.47, Taste Pleasantness (crust) has a mean of 8.57, all

highest mean for the sensory criteria is in the duration of 9 hours. It means that the most accepted

time for all the sensory criteria is 9 hours.

In measuring the overall pleasantness, the mean of the gathered data after 3 hours was

8.20, 8.13 after 6 hours and the highest after 9 hours with a value of 8.53. The overall

pleasantness, hence, can be obtained after 9 hours period.

Lastly, the general acceptability has a mean of 7.53 after 3 hours, 7.73 after 6 hour and

8.33 after 9 hours. The 9 hours period is the optimal time to get the highest level of acceptability.

From the above table, it can be summarized that all the testable variables yielded the

highest mean after 9 hours period and the lowest mean after 3 hours period, except the variable

taste pleasantness of the crust which the lowest mean was found after 6 hours period.

The result of the study shows that the most acceptable time of the coconut wine to be used as an

enhancer is 9 hours. The result is supported by the study of (find citation in chapter 2).

Table 2
Test of significant difference (One-Way ANOVA) on the acceptability of Coconut wine as

alternative bread enhancer

F df1 df2 p

Visual Attractiveness (Crumb) 1.50 2 57.2 0.232

Smell Pleasantness (Crumb) 3.23 2 57.8 0.047

Taste Pleasantness (Crumb) 1.86 2 57.2 0.165

Smell Pleasantness (Crust) 3.11 2 57.6 0.052

Taste Pleasantness (Crust) 2.41 2 56.9 0.099

Overall Pleasantness 1.90 2 57.4 0.159

General Acceptability 5.28 2 57.1 0.008

Table 2 shows the comparison of the means between the groups of data for the variables

used to describe the coconut wine as alternative bread enhancer.

The study aimed to find out if there is a significant difference on the visual attractiveness

(crumb), smell pleasantness (crumb), taste pleasantness (crumb), smell pleasantness (crust), taste

pleasantness (crust) and overall pleasantness of coconut wine based from the three procedures

conducted. It was hypothesized that there is no significant difference between the mentioned

variables of coconut wine.

 The first variable is the “visual attractiveness (crumb)”. The computed F-value of 1.50

yielded a p-value of 0.232 which is higher than 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null

hypothesis of no significant effect is accepted. Thus, there is no significant difference on the

visual attractiveness (crumb) of coconut wine based from the three procedures.

The second variable was the “smell pleasantness (crumb).” The calculated F-value of

3.23 and a p-value of 0.047. The p-value is less than the 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the

null hypothesis is rejected. Thus, there is a significant difference on the smell pleasantness

(crumb) of coconut wine based from the three procedures.

The "taste pleasantness (crumb)" was the third variable to be investigated using the

accepted statistical methodology. The computed F-value of 1.86 produced a p-value of 0.165,

which is greater than the 0.05 level of significance, as can be seen from the above table. As a

result, the null hypothesis of no significant difference cannot be disproved. Therefore, based on

the three techniques, there is no significant difference in the pleasantness (crumb) of the taste of

coconut wine.

The "smell pleasantness (crust)" was the fourth variable that the One-Way ANOVA

examined, and it produced an F-value of 3.11 and a p-value of 0.052 based on the

aforementioned table. The estimated p-value of 0.052 is greater than the significance threshold of

0.05. The null hypothesis cannot be rejected as a result. Thus, there is no significant difference

on the smell pleasantness (crust) of coconut wine based from the three procedures.

The fifth variable tested was the “taste pleasantness (crust).” The statistical test calculated

a F-value of 2.41 which yielded a p-value of 0.099. The p-value is greater than the significance

threshold of 0.05 which gives the decision to the null hypothesis is accepted. Hence, there is no
significant difference on the taste pleasantness (crust) of coconut wine based from the three

procedures.

The overall pleasantness of the coconut wine as alternative bread enhancer was also

tested using the One-Way ANOVA to come up with a decision on the null hypothesis. Based

from the table presented above, the statistical tool calculated an F-value of 1.90 which yielded a

p-value of 0.159. The calculated p-value is greater than the 0.05 level of significance. Hence, the

decision on the null hypothesis is failed to be rejected. Thus, there is no significant difference on

the overall pleasantness of coconut wine based from the three procedures.

The final variable tested using the One-Way ANOVA was the general acceptability. The

statistical tool used calculated an F-value of 5.28 and yielded a p-value of 0.008. The p-value

0.008 is less than the 0.05 level of significance. The decision on the null hypothesis is rejected.

Thus, there is a significant difference on the general acceptability of coconut wine based from

the three procedures.

Table 3

Tukey Post-Hoc Test – Smell Pleasantness (Crumb)

3 hours 6 hours 9 hours

Table
3 hours Mean difference — -0.200 -0.633 * 3

p-value — 0.724 0.045 shows

the
6 hours Mean difference — -0.433
results
p-value — 0.226
of the
9 hours Mean difference —
Tukey
p-value —
Post

Note. * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 Hoc

test on

the

variable smell pleasantness (crumb). This is done to determine precisely which groups differ

from one another since the results of the One-Way ANOVA showed significant differences on

the smell pleasantness of crumb of the coconut wine based from the three procedures. According

to the table above, the mean difference of the 6 hours to 3 hours is -0.200 which is lower

than/greater than the calculated with the p-value of 0.045. This indicates that the difference

between the groups of 6 hours and 3 hours are not honestly significantly different. Moreover, the

p-value between 9 hours and 3 hours is 0.045. This is lower than the calculated p-value of 0.05.

The interpretation is that these groups are significantly different.

 The mean difference between the groups of 9 hours and 6 hours is -0.433. This calculated

mean difference is greater than the calculated p-value of .05. This indicates that the difference

between the groups of 9 hours and 6 hours are not honestly significantly different.

Table 4

Tukey Post-Hoc Test – General Acceptability

3 hours 6 hours 9 hours

The

findings
3 hours Mean difference — -0.200 -0.800 **
of the
p-value — 0.732 0.009 Tukey

Post
6 hours Mean difference — -0.600
Hoc test

p-value — 0.067 on the

variable
9 hours Mean difference —
general

p-value —

Note. * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

acceptability are presented in Table 4. Since the results of the One-Way ANOVA demonstrated

significant differences on the general acceptability of the coconut wine depending on the three methods,

this is done to specify precisely which groups differ from one another.
 The p-value between the 6 hours and 3 hours is 0.732, which is more than the calculated p-value

of .05, per the table above. This shows that there is no honest significant difference between the groups of

6 hours and 3 hours. Additionally, there is a p-value difference of 0.009 between 9 hours and 3 hours.

This is less than than the estimated p-value of 0.05. The conclusion is that there was significant difference

between these groups.

Between the groups of 9 hours and 6 hours, there is a p-value of 0.067. The calculated p-value is

greater than .05 degree of confidence. This shows that there was no significant difference between the

groups of 9 hours and 6 hours.

Chapter 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 This chapter summarizes the findings of the study and presents the conclusions and

recommendations or the researchers have formulated relative to the findings of the study.

Summary of Findings

The following are the summary of findings arrange in this section according to the order

of the presentation of research problems.

1. What extent of acceptability level using the process of coconut wine as alternative bread

enhancer based on the different duration of time from harvest to 3 hours, 6 hours, and 9 hours in

terms of: Visual Attractiveness (crumb), Smell Pleasantness (crumb), Taste Pleasantness

(crumb), Smell Pleasantness (crust), Taste Pleasantness (crust), Overall Pleasantness?

The findings on the level of acceptability using the process of coconut wine as alternative

bread enhancer in terms of visual attractiveness (crumb), smell pleasantness (crumb), taste

pleasantness (crumb), smell pleasantness (crust), taste pleasantness (crust), and overall

pleasantness wherein the test results illustrated that the process of 9 hours from harvest of

coconut wine being used as alternative bread enhancer has yielded with the highest of overall

mean that mention above.

Lastly, the general acceptability has an overall mean of 8.33 interpreted as Very High in

the process of 9 hours. The result shows that the most acceptable time of the coconut wine to be

used as an enhancer is 9 hours from harvest.

2. Is there a significant difference on the Visual attractiveness (crumb) of coconut wine

based from the three procedures?

 There was no significant difference on the visual attractiveness (crumb) of coconut based

from the three procedures.

3. Is there a significant difference on the Smell Pleasantness (crumb) of coconut wine based

from the three procedures?

The test for the significant difference on the smell pleasantness (crumb) between 3 hours

and 9 hours was determined by computed correlation coefficient value of -0.633 with p-value of

0.045 lower than .05 level of significance. This resulted to rejecting the hypothesis that there is

no significant difference on the smell pleasantness (crumb) of coconut wine based from 3 hours

and 9 hours procedures.

4. Is there a significant difference on the Taste Pleasantness (crumb) of coconut wine based

from the three procedures?

There was no significant difference on the taste pleasantness (crumb) of coconut based

from the three procedures.

5. Is there a significant difference on the Smell Pleasantness (crust) of coconut wine based

from the three procedures?

There was no significant difference on the smell pleasantness (crust) of coconut based

from the three procedures.

6. Is there a significant difference on the Taste Pleasantness (crust) of coconut wine based

from the three procedures?

There was no significant difference on the taste pleasantness (crust) of coconut based

from the three procedures.

 7. Is there a significant difference on the Overall Pleasantness of coconut wine based from

the three procedures?

There was no significant difference on the overall pleasantness of coconut based from the

three procedures.
Conclusions

The following conclusions were drawn by the researchers based on the findings of the

study.

1. The product was accessible and affordable since coconut wine is available in the locality

of Pagadian City.

2. The results of the study surprisingly revealed that 9 hours from harvest of coconut wine is

highly acceptable for using as bread enhancer.

3. There are other factors that also affects the coconut wine for being used as bread

enhancer such as weather condition, container that used in the coconut-sap in collecting the tuba,

and other ingredients.

4. The product also are useful in human health as probiotics. This contains a unique

chemical composition of sugars, vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and phytohormones and is a

rich source of electrolytes and natural salts, especially potassium and magnesium. It is low

calorie and nearly fat-free, low in sugar as well as contains a little fiber to moderate absorption,

and is rich in cytokinin, or plant hormones, which have anti-aging, anti-cancer, and anti-

thrombolytic effects in humans.

5. The product are safer, healthier, and cheaper to use in making bread and the level of

leavened enhancement of the dough is not far from the commercial enhancer.
Recommendation

The recommendations presented below were formulated by the researchers based the

outcomes of the study and following problems identified in the course of this investigation.

1. Bakers. Since they are the ones who make bread for business, the findings of this study

will give them knowledge of using coconut wine as alternative enhancer for their products. It

will also be a guide for their experiment to make a better result of their finished product and also

it can give health benefits to the consumers.

2. Business Industry. This sector of the community is one of the beneficiaries of this study

for creating a new face or an innovation of new product that using with coconut wine as

alternative enhancer.

3. Consumers. This study will surely benefit our community as they will know that coconut

wine can be used as an alternative enhancer. In addition to that, the product of this study will be

helpful as it can give our community an idea to start a business and sell in on the market.

4. Future Researchers. This study they can benefit from the study as means as a guide, a

tool, and a reference when conducting research that has relevance to the study.

5. Students. The study will help the learners by giving reliable information that coconut

wine can be an alternative enhancer in making cakes and pastries. Moreover, students can use

this study as a learning material that can help them in the future, and they can use it as a basis for

personal use.