Dino Soriano Dizon Dr.

Sherwyn Allibang
MBA MBA102- Statistics with Computer Application

PART I

Variable View

Data View

Statistics
 Responde
Responde Province Responde nt's
nt's the Responde nt's mother's
Identificati responden nt's religious education
on ts live in Responde ethnicity Responde affiliation - years of
number (PROVINC nt's gender (ETHNICIT nt's age (RELIGION schooling
(ID) E) (GENDER) Y) (AGE) ) (MAEDUC)
N Valid 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Missin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
g
Output View

Respondent's Identification number (ID)

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1 1 4.0 4.0 4.0
2 1 4.0 4.0 8.0
3 1 4.0 4.0 12.0
4 1 4.0 4.0 16.0
5 1 4.0 4.0 20.0
6 1 4.0 4.0 24.0
7 1 4.0 4.0 28.0
8 1 4.0 4.0 32.0
9 1 4.0 4.0 36.0
10 1 4.0 4.0 40.0
11 1 4.0 4.0 44.0
12 1 4.0 4.0 48.0
13 1 4.0 4.0 52.0
14 1 4.0 4.0 56.0
15 1 4.0 4.0 60.0
16 1 4.0 4.0 64.0
17 1 4.0 4.0 68.0
18 1 4.0 4.0 72.0
19 1 4.0 4.0 76.0
20 1 4.0 4.0 80.0
21 1 4.0 4.0 84.0
22 1 4.0 4.0 88.0
23 1 4.0 4.0 92.0
24 1 4.0 4.0 96.0
25 1 4.0 4.0 100.0
Total 25 100.0 100.0
Province the respondents live in (PROVINCE)
 Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid La Union 12 48.0 48.0 48.0
Pangasinan 13 52.0 52.0 100.0
Total 25 100.0 100.0

Respondent's gender (GENDER)

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Male 12 48.0 48.0 48.0
Female 13 52.0 52.0 100.0
Total 25 100.0 100.0

Respondent's ethnicity (ETHNICITY)

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Ilokano 13 52.0 52.0 52.0
Pangasinense 12 48.0 48.0 100.0
Total 25 100.0 100.0

Respondent's age (AGE)

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 19 1 4.0 4.0 4.0
20 3 12.0 12.0 16.0
24 1 4.0 4.0 20.0
25 1 4.0 4.0 24.0
27 1 4.0 4.0 28.0
29 2 8.0 8.0 36.0
30 1 4.0 4.0 40.0
32 2 8.0 8.0 48.0
34 1 4.0 4.0 52.0
37 1 4.0 4.0 56.0
38 2 8.0 8.0 64.0
43 1 4.0 4.0 68.0
45 1 4.0 4.0 72.0
53 2 8.0 8.0 80.0
54 1 4.0 4.0 84.0
67 1 4.0 4.0 88.0
68 1 4.0 4.0 92.0
72 1 4.0 4.0 96.0
86 1 4.0 4.0 100.0
Total 25 100.0 100.0
 Respondent's religious affiliation (RELIGION)
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Protestant 8 32.0 32.0 32.0
Catholic 14 56.0 56.0 88.0
Born Again 1 4.0 4.0 92.0
None 2 8.0 8.0 100.0
Total 25 100.0 100.0

Respondent's mother's education - years of schooling (MAEDUC)

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1 2 8.0 8.0 8.0
2 1 4.0 4.0 12.0
3 1 4.0 4.0 16.0
4 1 4.0 4.0 20.0
5 2 8.0 8.0 28.0
6 1 4.0 4.0 32.0
7 2 8.0 8.0 40.0
8 1 4.0 4.0 44.0
9 1 4.0 4.0 48.0
10 2 8.0 8.0 56.0
11 1 4.0 4.0 60.0
12 2 8.0 8.0 68.0
13 1 4.0 4.0 72.0
14 1 4.0 4.0 76.0
15 1 4.0 4.0 80.0
16 1 4.0 4.0 84.0
17 1 4.0 4.0 88.0
19 2 8.0 8.0 96.0
20 1 4.0 4.0 100.0
Total 25 100.0 100.0

Questions: Answers:

1) What percentage of the sample is female? 52%

2) What percentage of the sample is Pangasinense? 48%
3) What percentage of the sample is Catholic? 56%
4) What percentage of the sample is from La Union? 48%

Statistics
 Responde
nt's
mother's
Responde Province Responde educatio
nt's the Responde Responde nt's n - years
Identificat responde nt's nt's religious of
ion nts lives in gender ethnicity Responde affiliation schooling
number (PROVIN (GENDER (ETHNICI nt's age (RELIGIO (MAEDU
(ID) CE) ) TY) (AGE) N) C)
N Valid 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 13.00 1.52 1.52 1.48 39.80 1.88 9.84
Std. Deviation 7.360 .510 .510 .510 18.296 .833 5.793
Minimum 1 1 1 1 19 1 1
Maximum 25 2 2 2 86 4 20

This figure above shows the Mean, Std. Deviation, Minimum and Maximum of the data
from the previous tables. This satisfies the answers that were filled in this table below:

Variable Mean Standard Lowest Value Highest Value

Deviation
Age 5) 39.8 6) 18.296 7) 19 8) 86
Mother’s 9) 9.84 10) 5.793 11) 1 12) 20
Education (in
years)

AGE Group
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Late 4 16.0 16.0 16.0
Adolescent
Young Adult 12 48.0 48.0 64.0
Middle Adult 5 20.0 20.0 84.0
Late Adult 4 16.0 16.0 100.0
Total 25 100.0 100.0

This table above shows the data that will satisfy the following questions and tables below:

13) What age group category has the least number of participants/people?

Late adolescent and late adult (both are 16%)

14) What age group category has the most number of participants/people?

Young adult (48%)

15) What % of the sample is late adult?

16% is in Late Adult

16) What % of the sample is young adult?

48% is young adult

17) What % of the sample is middle adult?

20% is middle adult

Statistics
Respondent's
mother's
education -
years of
Respondent's schooling
age (AGE) (MAEDUC)
N Valid 25 25
Missing 0 0
Mean 39.80 9.84
Median 34.00 10.00
Mode 20 1a
Maximum 86 20
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is
shown

PART II- Correlation

Variable View

Data View
Output View

Descriptive Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
Knowledge Score (Out 29.60 11.071 20
of 50)
Calcium Intake 784.65 174.367 20
(mg/day)

Correlations
Knowledge Calcium
Score (Out of Intake
50) (mg/day)
Knowledge Score (Out Pearson Correlation 1 .885**
of 50) Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Sum of Squares and 2328.800 32468.200
Cross-products
Covariance 122.568 1708.853
N 20 20
Calcium Intake Pearson Correlation .885** 1
(mg/day) Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Sum of Squares and 32468.200 577672.550
Cross-products
Covariance 1708.853 30403.818
 N 20 20
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The figure above shows the correlation between calcium intake and knowledge score to
satisfy the data or answers to the questions below:

1) What is the value of correlation coefficient (r)? it is equal to 0.885. This means that
as the knowledge about calcium increases, the calcium intake also increases.
2) Is there a relationship between calcium intake and knowledge about calcium in sports
science students? There is a strong relationship between the calcium intake and
knowledge about calcium in sports science students since the correlation coefficient is
almost 1.
3) Is the data collected statistically significant? It is very significant. There is a significant
relationship between the calcium intake and the knowledge about calcium in sports
science students since the Sig.(2 tailed) is less than 0.5.

4) Draw the scatter plot of the data to see any underlying trend in the relationship. Derive

In this scatter plot, it is quite noticeable that it has a directly proportional relationship.

5) Derive a brief conclusion on the result of the analysis.

You can conclude that you have a positive correlation between your variables.
Increases in one variable are correlated with increases in your other variable. Similarly,
decreases in one variable are correlated with decreases in your other variable.

Variable view

Data view
Output view

Descriptive Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
length (in years) 5.080 1.9118 25
feelings (1-very upset; 10- 5.04 2.622 25
very happy)

Correlations
feelings (1-very
upset; 10-very
length (in years) happy)
length (in years) Pearson Correlation 1 -.452*
Sig. (2-tailed) .023
Sum of Squares and Cross- 87.720 -54.380
products
Covariance 3.655 -2.266
N 25 25
feelings (1-very upset; 10-very Pearson Correlation -.452* 1
happy) Sig. (2-tailed) .023
 Sum of Squares and Cross- -54.380 164.960
products
Covariance -2.266 6.873
N 25 25
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

This figure shows the data that will satisfy the following questions below:

6) Create a scatter plot for this data. Put ‘length’ values along the x-axis and the ‘feelings’
values along the y-axis.

7) What is the value of the correlation coefficient (r)? It is equal to -0.452

8) Is there a relationship between the lengths of their relationships and their feelings at
the end of the relationship? We can say that the relationship between the lengths of
their relationship and their feelings at the end of relationship is inversely proportional.
Meaning, as the length of their relationship increases, the feelings at the end of
relationship decreases.
9) Is the data statistically significant? The Sig. (2-Tailed) value is 0.023. This value is less than
0.05. Because of this, we can conclude that there is a statistically significant correlation
between the lengths of their relationship and their feelings at the end of relationship
10) Derive a brief conclusion on the result of the analysis.
We can conclude that we have a negative correlation between the two variables.
Increases in one variable (lengths of their relationship) are correlated with decreases in
your other variable ( their feelings at the end of their relationship..

PART III- Causal-Comparative