This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
A study has been conducted to study and evaluate the number of people who enter in the city of Muree (each week), during the peak season. The amount of money spent has been rounded to the nearest one thousand rupees and the number of tourists visiting in the previous years has also been rounded to the nearest thousand. Thus one can analyze that how the number of tourists varies with the changing of different factors like fare from Lahore to Muree, the temperature and the amount spent on the promotion of Muree.
The question arises whether there is a significant difference in the number of tourists by changing different variables like temperature, amount of money spent and he fare from Lahore to Muree. We will see how much independent variable explains variation in the dependent variable. The greater the variation the more valid the line would be. We will test the following hypothesis for following population means of dependent variables.
H0 : µ = 7.5
Against alternative hypothesis
H1 : µ
The numbers of people visiting Muree in the last twelve years have been given. The data given can be used to find out the effect of given variables i.e. Fare from Lahore to Muree, money spent on promotion and temperature. This data can be used then to find out that whether the Muree tourist agency should spend on promotion or they should alter the fare from Lahore to Muree. The number of cases studied=12
Different variable names
Tourists: The number of tourists that visited Muree during a week. (in thousands) Price: Number of Pakistani rupees charged for a round trip from Lahore to Muree. (In thousands) Promot: The amount spent on promoting the city (in thousands of rupees) Temp: Mean temperature during the week in Muree (In degree Celsius)
Note: the data is shown in appendix
1 Std. Dev = 1.05 Mean = 7.86 0 6.50 7.00 7.50 8.00 8.50 9.00 9.50 10.00 N = 12.00
The above graph shows the number of tourists that visited Muree for last few years. Most of the times the people visiting are 7.00 .the shape of the distribution is normal peaked and positively skewed.
Std. Dev = 3.77 Mean = 36.3 N = 12.00 30.0 32.5 35.0 37.5 40.0
The above graph shows the variation in price of a ticket from Lahore to Muree for last few years. This graph is negatively skewed. In addition to this graph gas a slightly higher peak
Std. Dev = 1.12 Mean = 9.49 N = 12.00 8.50 9.00 9.50 10.00 10.50 11.00 11.50
This graph shows the money spent on promotion since last few years. The graph is low peaked as well as is positively skewed. Most of the time the money spent on promotion is 8.5.
1 Std. Dev = .81 Mean = 16.27 0 15.50 16.00 16.50 17.00 17.50 N = 12.00
The graph shows the temperature of Muree since the past few years. The graph is highly peaked as well as it is positively skewed. Most of the times the temperature in Muree is around 15.5.
De scriptiv e Statistics N Statistic 12 12 12 12 12 Mean Statistic 7.8583 36.2500 9.4917 16.2750 Std. Deviation Statistic 1.0466 3.7689 1.1172 .8081 Skewness Statistic Std. .895 -.478 .959 .392 Kurtosis Statistic Std. Error -.062 1.232 -.868 1.232 -.232 1.232 -1.164 1.232
TOURIST PRICE PROMOT TEMP Valid N (listwise)
Error .637 .637 .637 .637
The above output is calculated by using SPSS.The data shows that 12 outputs are taken for each variable i.e. tourist, price, promot, temp.The data indicates that the average number of tourists visiting is 7.85 approximately, while the average price for the ticket is around 36.250.The average amount spent on promotion is 9.4917 approx and the average temperature of muree is almost 16.27. The data also reflects that the Skewness for the tourists is 0.895 which shows that the distribution for the tourists is positively skewed. The coefficient of kurtosis for the number of tourists is -.062 which shows that the distribution is normal peaked. We can also find out that the Skewness for the price is almost -.478.It indicates that the distribution for the price is negatively skewed. The coefficient of kurtosis for the price charged is -0.868 which shows that the distribution has a slightly higher peak. The analysis shows that the Skewness for the amount spent on promotion is 0.959 which indicates that the Skewness for the price is positively skewed. The coefficient of kurtosis is -0.232 which shows that the distribution is low peaked.
The Skewness for the temperature is 0.392 which shows that the Skewness for the price is positive. The coefficient of kurtosis is -1.164 which shows that the distribution is normal peaked. The standard deviation for tourists is 1.0466, while standard deviation for the price of ticket is 3.7689; the standard deviation for promotion and the standard deviation for temperature are 1.1172 and 0.8081 respectively.
One -Sample Statistics N TOURIST 12 Mean 7.8583 Std. Deviation 1.0466 Std. Error Mean .3021
One -Sample Te st Test Value = 7.5 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper -.3066 1.0233
Sig. (2-tailed) .261
Mean Difference .3583
From the above table the p-value is greater the assigned level of significance that is 0.05.therefore we can conclude that the mean of the dependent variable “tourist” is not significantly different from the estimated value that is 7.5 We can also find out the upper and lower limits are -.3066 and1.0233 respectively.
Variable s Ente re d/Re mov ebd Model 1 Variables Entered TEMP, PRICE, a PROMOT Variables Removed . Method Enter Backward (criterion: Probabilit y of F-to-remo ve >= .100).
a. All requested variables entered. b. Dependent Variable: TOURIST
Initially we entered three independent variables. Later the temperature was removed because it was insignificant.
M ode l Summary Model 1 2 R R Square .984 a .969 .980 b .961 Adjusted R Square .958 .952 Std. Error of the Estimate .2154 .2293
a. Predictors: (Constant), TEMP, PRICE, PROMOT b. Predictors: (Constant), PRICE, PROMOT
The above table shows how much independent variable explains variation in the dependent variable. Two models are given. In first model we included all the independent variables while in the second model shows the result when one variable is removed. In the first model independent variable explains 96.9% variation in the dependent variable. While in the second model when one variable is removed; the independent variable explains 96.1% variation in dependent variable. Thus we can conclude that there is not much difference in explaining variation.
Regression Residual Total Regression Residual Total
Sum of Squares 11.678 .371 12.049 11.576 .473 12.049
df 3 8 11 2 9 11
Mean Square 3.893 4.638E-02 5.788 5.257E-02
Sig. .000 a
a. Predictors: (Constant), TEMP, PRICE, PROMOT b. Predictors: (Constant), PRICE, PROMOT c. Dependent Variable: TOURIST
In the first model, the p value is less than the assigned value of level of significance, so the line is significant and valid.While in the second model even when one variable is removed the p value is less than the assigned value of level of significance.
a Coe fficie nts
(Constant) PRICE PROMOT TEMP (Constant) PRICE PROMOT
Unstandardized Coefficients B Std. Error 9.019 2.912 -.175 .044 .289 .161 .150 .101 9.892 3.036 -.160 .045 .398 .153
Standardi zed Coefficien ts Beta -.630 .309 .116 -.577 .424
t 3.097 -3.993 1.793 1.484 3.258 -3.525 2.593
Sig. .015 .004 .111 .176 .010 .006 .029
a. Dependent Variable: TOURIST
So our regression line is as follows Y=9.89-.160 X1+.398 X2 Where, Y is the number of tourists. X1 is the price of ticket. X2 is the amount spent on promotion
• • • • •
The curve of the distribution of tourists is normal peaked and positively skewed. The distribution for the price is negatively skewed and has a slightly higher peak. The distribution for promotion is low peaked and positively skewed. The distribution for temperature is highly peaked as well as positively skewed. The regression line t be fitted in this case is. Y =9.89-.160 X1+.398 X2
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.