Comparing Hypermarket and Traditional Wet Market Consumers

Comparing Hyper securities industry and Traditional nasty commercialize ConsumersCHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS4.0 IntroductionThis study was conducted in twain various computer memory formats, which atomic fig 18 hyper commercialize and tralatitious stiff merchandise respectively. solely 200 questionnaires were distri excepted and collected, each mart has 100 questionnaires respectively.First of all in all, the general information such as answerings profiles, trip patterns and transaction patterns were analyzed by using descriptive statistics. This approach generates frequency and percent long date of the respondents characteristics and presents the basic data and information.Secondly, dependableness of the respondents perception on store image will be political campaigned to examine whether if the data reliable or not. The level of reliability, which is so called Cronbachs alpha, the alpha value should not lower than 0.70 to obtain the consistent leave behind.After that, breakaway t-test will be used to examine the level of signifi undersidet on store attributes between antithetic store formats. Moreover, we will in like manner test the correlation between store formats and the demographic characteristics, trip patterns and transaction patterns. The differences of recall will be calculated, and 95% of confidence intervals were taken in this study. remarkable probability was 0.05. It means if the result lower or equal to 0.05, it indicates statistically monumentally different.4.1 Descriptive depth psychology4.1.1 Respondents Profile4.1.1.1 sexuality tabularize 4.1 Gender aim 4.1 GenderAt both different store formats, we can find that there is more than(prenominal) fe priapic shop at foodstuffs than male person does.Gender distribution of respondents at hyper grocery store was much more balanced than gender distribution of respondents at traditionalistic buckram marketplace, which be 46% for male and 54% for female at hypermarket, while traditional wet market was 1/3 of respondents argon male and 2/3 of respondents are female.4.1.1.2 Age add-in 4.2 AgeFigure 4.2 AgeThe data collecting of this study showed that respondents at hypermarket and traditional wet market with the age of 25 eld one judgment of conviction(a) and under are the highest, which are 35% and 28% respectively, oppose with the ages which are between 26-35 geezerhood overaged (34% and 19%), 36-45 years oldish (16% and 14%), 46-55 years old (12% and 23%), and 56 years old and supra (3% and 16%).One phenomenon can be found in this data is the number of respondents of traditional wet market with the age which are between 46-55 years old and 56 years old and above, are much higher than the respondents of hypermarket with the same range of age. The total piece for this range of age (46-55 years old and 56 years old and above), for traditional wet market is 39%, while for hypermarket is only 15%. We can conclude that the respondents of tr aditional wet market are old than the respondent of hypermarket.4.1.1.3 EthnicTable 4.3 EthnicRUL 573- RESEARCH PROJECT IN PLANNINGCHAPTER 4 Store plan Comparing Hypermarket and Traditional compressed Market Consumers Perception.Case Study Bayan Baru, Penang.Figure 4.3 EthnicIn this study, Chinese has the highest number of great deal (55% from hypermarket, 74% from traditional wet market) following to Malayan (33% from hypermarket, 14% from traditional wet market), Indian (9% from hypermarket, 11% from traditional wet market) and the otherwises (3% from hypermarket, 1% from traditional wet market).The biggest different of these store formats is Chinese respondent has higher portion at traditional wet market discriminate to hypermarket, which are of all respondents of traditional wet market compare to of all respondents of hypermarket. date the figure of Malay showed that Malay tends to shop at hypermarket or else of going to traditional wet market, the number of Malay sho ps at hypermarket is double compare to number of Malay shops at traditional wet market.4.1.1.4 matrimonial StatusTable 4.4 Marital StatusRUL 573- RESEARCH PROJECT IN PLANNINGCHAPTER 4 Store Image Comparing Hypermarket and Traditional Wet Market Consumers Perception.Case Study Bayan Baru, Penang.Figure 4.4 Marital Status40RUL 573- RESEARCH PROJECT IN PLANNINGCHAPTER 4 Store Image Comparing Hypermarket and Traditional Wet Market Consumers Perception.Case Study Bayan Baru, Penang. rootage on the data that obtained, the respondents of hypermarket who are married (42%) are fewerer than those who are single (58%). While respondents from of traditional wet market nominate the different situation, the result was totally inversed of hypermarket, that is 58% of the respondents are married, and the others 42% are single.This result indicates respondents of this study who are married tend to shop at traditional wet market and respondents who are single prefer to shop at hypermarket.4.1.1.5 tuition LevelTable 4.5 Education LevelFigure 4.5 Education LevelThe respondents from both store formats also slang highest number of people (74% of hypermarket and 50% of wet market) who had at least tertiary statement, which indicates college or university. This is because of more than 1/3 of respondents from hypermarket and 1/4 of respondents from traditional wet market who are younger extension, which is in the category of 25 years old and below as shown in Chapter 4.1.1.2.The overall result showed that the respondents of traditional wet market contribute slightly lower education level compare to those respondents of hypermarket. Half of the respondents of traditional wet market have not invariably pursued tertiary education, the number is double compare to those respondents of hypermarket who had only auxiliary education, primary education, and no formal education.4.1.1.6 OccupationTable 4.6 OccupationFigure 4.6 OccupationIn the previous data showed that the respondents wh o are younger generation (25 years old and below) and have at least tertiary education level had a large portion of entire respondents. In this section, it showed that close of the respondents of hypermarket are student (39%), following by waged worker (25%), governing employee (18%), housewife (8%), entrepreneur (7%), retired (3%).While at traditional wet market, most of the respondents are worked as waged worker (32%), following by housewife (26%), student (23%), retired (7%), government employee (5%), entrepreneur (5%) and unemployed (2%).This data also showed that housewife prefers to shop at traditional wet market (25%) kind of of shop at hypermarket (8%).4.1.1.7 pilotowship sizingTable 4.7 menage SizeFigure 4.7 Household SizeThe system number of family surface for respondents of hypermarket and traditional wet market are 4 and 5 respectively.The data showed that 28% and 27% of respondents of hypermarket have household size of 4 and 5. On the other hand, 22% and 28% of respondents of traditional wet market have household size of 4 and 5. These indicate more than half of the respondents who have household size of 4 or 5.From the figure above, we can see that the household size of traditional wet market respondent is slightly bigger than household size of hypermarket respondents. From the calculation, the mean household size of traditional wet market respondents are 4.87, and respondents of hypermarket are 4.63.4.1.1.8Household Monthly IncomeTable 4.8 Household Monthly IncomeFigure 4.8 Household Monthly IncomeFrom these 200 respondents, there is no big difference of household monthly income between two different store formats.For respondent of hypermarket, the categories of RM1500 and below, RM2501-3500, and RM3501-4500 also showed 23% respectively, followed by RM1501-2500 (17%), RM4501and above (14%).On the other hand, the mode number of household monthly income for respondents of traditional wet market is RM2501-3500, followed by RM1500 and below (22%), RM1501-2500 (21%), RM4501 and above (20%), RM3501-4500 (13%).Overall there is not a very significant different between the groups and the categories.4.1.2 Trip Patterns4.1.2.1 Travelling Time from Home to MarketsTable 4.9 Travelling TimeFigure 4.9 Travelling TimeMajority of the respondents motive power from family to the markets were just within 15 minutes and this was showed by 48% respondents of hypermarket and 53% of traditional wet market. This indicates half of the respondents came from adjacent area. While 34% respondents of hypermarket and 28% respondents of traditional wet market have travelling time between 16-30 minutes. Travelling time between 31-60 minutes, 16% and 17% fell to respondents of hypermarket and respondents if traditional wet market respectively. The category of 1 hour and more is only chosen by 2% of respondents of hypermarket and traditional wet market respectively.From the data we can conclude that people prefer to travel from home to market in s horter time.4.1.2.2 Transportation humorTable 4.10 Transportation ModeFigure 4.10 Transportation ModeMajority of the respondents prefer going to the markets by car, the data showed that 68% of hypermarket respondents and 45% of traditional wet market respondents go to the markets by car. Another hug drugation mode that is chosen by respondents is pass (15% of hypermarket respondents and 23% of traditional wet market respondents), as well as motorcycle (8% of hypermarket respondents and 23% traditional wet market respondents).A few people chose bus (5% of hypermarket respondents and 6% of traditional wet market respondents) and roll (4% of hypermarket respondents and 3% of traditional wet market respondents). Taxi and the others transportation mode have none of respondent chose such mode of transportation.Although majority of the respondents have the shortest travelling time from home to market as showed at Chapter 4.1.2.1, but most of them still prefer to drive to the market.4.1 .3Transaction Patterns4.1.3.1 Frequency of seeTable 4.11 Frequency of VisitingFigure 4.11 Frequency of VisitingMajority of the respondents shout markets once a week, 36% of hypermarket respondents and 40% traditional wet market respondents chose this category. While 27% of hypermarket respondents and 21% of traditional wet market respondents chose to envision the market less(prenominal) than once a week.Less than half of the respondents haggle the market twice or more than twice weekly. From the data obtained, 21% of hypermarket respondents and 11% of traditional wet market respondents visit the market twice weekly, 12% of hypermarket respondents and 10% of traditional wet market respondents visit the market thrice weekly, and 4% of hypermarket respondents and 18% of traditional wet market respondents visit 4 times and more weekly.The respondents who visit the markets 4 times and above weekly are 4.5 times more than those hypermarket respondents do.4.1.3.2 Visiting Markets with WhomTable 4.12 Visiting Markets with WhomFigure 4.12 Visiting Markets with WhomAlmost half of the respondents prefer to visit the markets with their family element or relatives, this occupied 47% of hypermarket respondents and 52% of traditional wet market respondents.While the respondents who chose to visit markets with friends/ neighbors/ colleagues or alone, there is a significant different between hypermarket and traditional wet market. 36% of respondents of hypermarket prefer to go to the markets with their friends/ neighbors/ colleagues instead of go by alone, which has only 17% of the respondents chose that. On the other hand, traditional wet market is different. 36% of the respondents chose to go alone instead of go with friends/ neighbors/ colleagues, which only has 12%.None of them chose to visit the markets with the people who have other relationships.4.1.3.Time worn out(p)Table 4.13 Time SpentFigure 4.13 Time SpentFrom the data that obtained, majority of the traditiona l wet market respondent washed-out 30-60 minutes in the market, which occupied 49% of the traditional wet market respondent, followed by 1-2 hours (28%), 30 minutes and less (18%), and 2 hours and more (5%).While hypermarket respondents prefer to spend longer time in the market. 41% of hypermarket respondents spent 1-2 hours, followed by 30-60 minutes (32%), 2 hours and more (15%), 30 minutes and less (12%).For overall, 2/3 of traditional wet market respondents tends to spend shorter time compare to only 44% of hypermarket respondents spent less than 1 hour.4.2 reliability AnalysisData of consumer perception have been collected in the approach of Likert scale, reliability of the data should be tested. Gatewood and Field (1990) said that reliability is the ability of the doer in providing the consistent results when it is repeated used. Cronbachs alpha is the basic measurement for reliability and an alpha value of 0.7 is sufficient (Nunnally, 1978).All the store attributes will be tested in terms of the store attributes those contribute as the reasons of consumers to take away a retail store and also the importance level that respondents have given to the store attributes.4.2.1Store designates as the Reasons for Consumers to ShopFollowing are the store attributes as the reasons for consumer to shop ascribe 1 Appropriate opening hoursAttribute 2 Near to place of residenceAttribute 3 fruit qualityAttribute 4 Product varietyAttribute 5 Reasonable priceAttribute 6 Speed of purchaseAttribute 7 Satisfactorily serviceAttribute 8 Spacious intragroup spaceAttribute 9 Not crowdedAttribute 10 Clean and comfortableAttribute 11 Good public transport availableAttribute 12 Car parking facilitiesAttribute 13 Easiness on finding the productAttribute 14 useAttribute 15 Trust in vendor4.2.1.1 HypermarketTable 4.14 Reliability Statistics (Store Attributes as the Reasons for Consumers to Shop at Hypermarket)Table 4.15 Item-Total Statistics(Store Attributes as the Reasons for Consumers to ShopAt Hyperma