PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

This chapter shows the presentation and analysis of data. It reveals the graphical and tabular presentation based on the questionnaire.

Table 1 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to use of toothbrush. Responses Yes No F 400 0 % 100 0

Table 1: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the brand of toothbrush they are currently using. It revealed that the majority of the respondents said yes (100%) and who said no (0%)

no

0%

yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

100% 100%

Figure 1: The graphical presentation according to use of toothbrush in the level of

effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 2 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to how often they use toothbrush.

Responses Once a day Twice a day Every after meal Once you remembered

F 30 120 250 0

% 7.5 30 62.5 0

Table 2: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the brand of toothbrush they are currently using. It revealed that the majority of the respondents use toothbrush every after meal (62.5%) twice a day (30%) once a day (7.5%).

7.50%

30% 62.50%

once a day twice a day every after meal once you remembered

Figure 2: The graphical presentation according to how often they use toothbrush

in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 3 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to how often they replace their toothbrush. Responses Every month Every 2 months Every 3 months Every 4-6 months Frequency 50 70 250 130 Percentage 12.5 17.5 62.5 32.5

Table 3: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions states 62.5% of them replace their toothbrush every 3 months, 32.5% every 4-6 months, 17.5% every 2 months and 12.5% every month.

32.50%

12.50% 17.50% Every month Every 2 months Every 3 months 62.50% Every 4-6 months

Figure 3: The graphical presentation states how often they replace their

toothbrush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 4 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the age of the respondents.

Responses Below 20 years old 21-30 years old 31-39 years old 40-49 years old 50-50 years old Above 60 years old

Frequency 50 200 150 0 0 0

Percentage 12.5 50 37.5 0 0 0

Table 4: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions clearly states that 12.5% are ages below 20, 50% are 21-29 years old, 37.5% are 21-29 years old.

12.50% 37.50%

Below 20 years old 21-30 years old 31-39 years old 50% 40-49 years old 50-50 years old Above 60 years old

Figure 4: The graphical Presentation according to the age of the respondents in

the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 5 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to gender of the respondents. Responses Male Female Frequency 150 250 Percentage 37.5 62.5

Table 5: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions clearly states that 37.5% are male respondents and 62.5% are female.

37.50% Male Female

62.50%

Figure 5: The graphical presentation according to the gender of the respondents

in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 6 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the civil status of the respondents.

Reponses Single Married Widowed Separated

Frequency 280 190 0 30

Percentage 70 47.5 0 7.5

Table 6: Shows the frequency and percentage distribution clearly states 70% of the respondents are single, 47.5% are married and 7.5% are separated.

7.50% 47.50% 70% Single Married Widowed Separated

Figure 6: The graphical presentation according to the civil status of the

respondents in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 7 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the level of income of the respondents. Responses Below 10,000 10,000-20,000 21,000-30,000 30,000 and above Frequency 40 230 130 0 percentage 10 57.5 32.5 0

Table 7: The graphical presentation clearly states 10% of the respondents income is below 10,000, 57.5% are 10,000-20,000 and 32.5% 21,000-30,000.

10% 32.50% Below 10,000 10,000-20,000 57.50% 21,000-30,000 30,000 and above

Figure 7: The graphical presentation according to the level of income of the

respondents in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 8 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the occupation of the respondents. Reponses Self employed Student Business owner Frequency 260 120 20 Percentage 65 30 5

Table 8: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions that 65% of the respondents occupation is self-employed, 30% are students and 20% are business owner.

5% 30% Self employed 65% Student Business owner

Figure 8: The graphical presentation according to the occupation of the

respondents in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 9 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the brand that first comes to the mind of the respondents. Responses Colgate Oral-b Pepsodent Dental-b Springmaid Frequency 330 70 0 0 0 Percentage 82.5 17.5 0 0 0

Table 9: The graphical presentation clearly states that 82.5% is the Colgate that first brand that comes in their mind and 17.5% are Oral-b.

17.50% Colgate Oral-b Pepsodent 82.50% Dental-b Springmaid

Figure 9: The graphical Presentation according to the brand that first comes to

the mind of the respondents in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 10 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the brand that second comes to the mind of the respondents. Responses Colgate Oral-b Pepsodent Dental-b Springmaid Frequency 0 0 0 330 70 Percentage 0 0 0 82.5 17.5

Table 10: The graphical presentation clearly states that 82.5% is the Dental-b that other brands are aware of and 17.5% are Springmaid.

17.50% Colgate Oral-b Pepsodent 82.50% Dental-b Springmaid

Figure 10: The graphical presentation according to the brand that second comes

to the mind of the respondents in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 11 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the brand that the respondents are aware of. Responses Colgate Oral-b Pepsodent Dental-b Springmaid Frequency 0 0 0 330 70 Percentage 0 0 0 82.5 17.5

Table 11: Shows the frequency and Distribution according to the brand the respondents are aware of. It reveals that majority of the respondents chose Dental-B (82.5%) in Springmaid (17.5%).

17.50%

Colgate Oral-b 82.50% Pepsodent Dental-b Springmaid

Figure 11: The graphical Presentation according to brand that the respondents are aware of in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 12 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the brand of toothbrush they are using prior to last. Responses Colgate Oral-B Pepsodent Dental-B Springmaid Frequency 250 40 30 30 50 Percentage 62.5 10 7.5 7.5 12.5

Table 12: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the brand of toothbrush they are using prior to last. It revealed that the majority of the respondents choose Colgate (62.5 %) next is Springmaid (12.5 %), followed by Oral-B (10 %), and the least are Pepsodent and Dental-B in same percentage (7.5 %).

12.50% 7.50% 7.50% 62.50% 10%

Colgate Oral-B Pepsodent

Figure 12: The graphical Presentation according to brand that the respondents used prior to last in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 13 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the brand of toothbrush they are currently using. Responses Colgate Oral-B Pepsodent Dental-B Springmaid Frequency 200 70 30 20 80 Percentage 50 17.5 7.5 5 20

Table 13: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the brand of toothbrush they are currently using. It revealed that the majority of the respondents choose Colgate (50 %) next is Springmaid (20 %), followed by OralB (17.5 %), and then Pepsodent (7.5 %) and the least is Dental-B in (5 %).

Colgate Oral-B Pepsodent Dental-B

Figure 13: The graphical Presentation according to brand that the respondents are currently using in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 14 Frequency and Percentage Distributions regarding in awareness of top of the mind brand of toothbrush. Responses Television Blogs/Internet Family/Relatives/Neighbors/Friends Seen on stores Print ads such as posters, magazine, Frequency 180 20 150 30 20 Percentage 45 5 37.5 7.5 5

Table 14: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions in awareness of top of the mind brand of toothbrush. It revealed that the majority of the respondents aware by Television (50 %) next is by Family/Relatives/Neighbors/Friends (37.5 %), followed by seen on stores (7.5 %), and the least are by Blogs/Internet and Print ads such as posters, magazine, etc., in the same percentage (5 %).

Television Blogs/Internet Family/Relatives/Neig hbors/Friends Seen on stores

Figure 14: The graphical Presentation according to the respondents Top of the Mind Toothbrush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 15 Frequency and Percentage Distributions in bringing toothbrush wherever they go. Responses Yes No TOTAL Frequency 350 50 400 Percentage 87.5 12.5 100

Table 15: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions in bringing toothbrush wherever they go. It revealed that the majority of the respondents say Yes (87.5 %) while (12.5 %) say No.

12.50%

Yes 87.50% No

Figure 15: The graphical Presentation according if they bring toothbrush whenever they go prior to last in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 16 Frequency and Percentage Distributions in considering the dentists advice in using toothbrush Responses Yes No TOTAL Frequency 300 100 400 Percentage 75 25 100

Table 16: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions in considering the dentists advice in using toothbrush. It revealed that the majority of the respondents say Yes (75 %) while (25 %) say No.

Percentage Distributions
25% Yes 75% No

Figure 16: The graphical Presentation according if respondents consider Dentist advice in using toothbrush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 17 Frequency and Percentage Distributions regarding if the price of toothbrush means on them. Responses Yes No TOTAL Frequency 250 150 400 Percentage 62.5 37.5 100

Table 17: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions regarding if the price of toothbrush means on them. It revealed that the majority of the respondents say Yes (62.5 %) while (37.5 %) say No.

12.50% Yes 62.50% No

Figure 17: The graphical Presentation according if the price of Toothbrush means to the respondents in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 18 Frequency and Percentage Distributions in using different brands of toothbrush Responses Yes No TOTAL Frequency 270 130 400 Percentage 67.5 32.5 100

Table 18: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions in using different brands of toothbrush. It revealed that the majority of the respondents say Yes (67.5 %) while (32.5 %) say No.

32.50% 67.50%

Yes No

Figure 18: The graphical Presentation according to respondents if they use different brand of Toothbrush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 19 Frequency and Percentage Distributions in buying the product recommended by friends/relatives Responses Yes No TOTAL Frequency 220 180 400 Percentage 55 45 100

Table 19: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions in buying the product recommended by friends/relatives. It revealed that the majority of the respondents say Yes (55 %) while (45 %) say No.

45% 55% Yes No

Figure 19: The graphical Presentation in buying the product recommended by friends/relatives in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 20 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the special function of toothbrush Responses Soft Bristles Easily to carry/handle Unique Design Whitens teeth and clean the gums Frequency 0 0 0 400 Percentage 0 0 0 100

Table 20: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the special function of toothbrush. It revealed that the majority of the respondents say that the special function of toothbrush is for Whitens teeth and clean the gums (100 %).

Soft Bristles Easily to carry/handle 100% Unique Design Whitens teeth and clean the gums

Figure 20: The graphical Presentation according to the special function of toothbrush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 21 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to, who influence them to buy toothbrush Responses Myself Parents Dentist others Frequency 70 300 30 0 Percentage 17.5 75 7.5 0

Table 21: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to, who influence them to buy toothbrush. It revealed that the majority of the respondents say that they are influence by their parents (75 %) next is by their self (17.5 %), followed their dentist (25 %), and no one influence by others (0 %).

7.50%

17.50%

Myself Parents Dentist

75%

others

Figure 21: The graphical Presentation according to, who influence them to buy toothbrush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 22 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the qualities they are looking for the toothbrush Responses Popularity of the brand Easy to use Good Quality Attractive design Frequency 30 150 200 20 Percentage 7.5 37.5 50 5

Table 22: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the qualities they are looking for the toothbrush. It revealed that the majority of the respondents say that the qualities they are looking for the toothbrush is Good quality (50 %) next is easy to use (37.5 %) followed by Popularity of the brand (7.5 %) and least is for Attractive design (5 %).
5% 7.50% 37.50%

Popularity of the brand Easy to use Good Quality

50%

Figure 22: The graphical Presentation according to the qualities they are looking for the toothbrush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 23 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to what they are likely most in their present toothbrush Responses Popularity of the brand Easy to use Good Quality Attractive design Frequency 50 80 200 70 Percentage 12.5 20 50 17.5

Table 23: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to what they are likely most in their present toothbrush. It revealed that the majority of the respondents say that they most like the Good quality (50 %) next is easy to use (20 %) followed by Attractive design (17.5 %) and the least is the Popularity of the brand (12.5%).

17.50%

12.50% 20%

Popularity of the brand Easy to use Good Quality Attractive desig

50%

Figure 23: The graphical Presentation according to what they are likely most in their present toothbrush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 24 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having Soft Bristle Brush. Responses Very important Moderately important Important Less important Not Important Frequency 150 150 50 50 0 Percentage 37.5 37.5 12.5 12.5 0

Table 24: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having a soft bristle brush. It revealed that it is very important (37.5) moderately important (37.5%) important (12.5%) Less important (12.5%)

12.50% 12.50% Very important 37.50% 37.50% Moderately important Important Less important Not Important

Figure 24: The graphical Presentation to the degree of importance in having Soft Bristle Brush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 25 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having Attractive Packaging Responses Very important Moderately important Important Less important Not Important Frequency 100 120 100 80 0 Percentage 25 30 25 20 0

Table 25: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having Attractive packaging. It revealed that it is very important (25%) moderately important (30% important (25%) Less important (20%)

Very important 20% 25% 25% 30% Moderately important Important Less important Not Important

Figure 25: The graphical Presentation to the degree of importance in having attractive packaging in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate

Table 26 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having Ordinary Brush Responses Very important Moderately important Important Less important Not Important Frequency 0 30 100 120 150 Percentage 0 7.5 25 30 37.5

Table 26: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having Ordinary Brush. It revealed that it is not important (37.5%) moderately important (7.5%) important (25%) Less important (30%)

7.50% 37.50% Very important 25% Moderately important Important 30% Less important Not Important

Figure 26: The graphical Presentation to the degree of importance in having an ordinary brush in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 27 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having Unique Design Responses Very important Moderately important Important Less important Not Important Frequency 0 0 70 150 130 Percentage 0 0 17.5 37.5 32.5

Table 27: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having unique design. It revealed that it is not important (32.5%) important (17.5%) Less important (37.5%)

32.50%

17.50%

Very important Moderately important Important

37.50%

Less important Not Important

Figure 27: The graphical Presentation to the degree of importance in having unique design in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 28 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having Informative Advertising Responses Very important Moderately important Important Less important Not Important Frequency 200 150 20 30 0 Percentage 50 37.5 5 7.5 0

Table 28: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having informative advertising. It revealed that it is very important (50%) less important (7.5%) moderately important (37.5%) important (5%)
7.50% 50% 37.50%

5%

Very important Moderately important Important Less important Not Important

Figure 28: The graphical Presentation to the degree of importance in having informative advertising in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.

Table 29 Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having Reputable Brand Name Responses Very important Moderately important Important Less important Not Important Frequency 400 0 0 0 0 Percentage 100 0 0 0 0

Table 29: Shows the Frequency and Percentage Distributions according to the degree of importance in having Ordinary Brush. It revealed that it is very important (100%)

Very important Moderately important Important 100% Less important Not Important

Figure 29: The graphical Presentation to the degree of importance in having reputable brand name in the level of effectiveness of image design and quality of toothmate.