You are on page 1of 9

Reporting Descriptive Analysis, Correlation Analysis and Regression Analysis

Mean

Std. Deviation

symbolic2

3.6115

.70954

function2

4.0031

.42587

social2

3.6581

.70054

experiential2

3.9360

.54965

SATISFACTION

3.9722

.49002

LOYALTY

4.0380

.48491

4.8

Descriptive Analysis

The mean and standard deviation values for all of the study variables are presented in Table 4.11.
All of the variables were measured using a five-point Likert scale anchored by 1 (strongly
disagree or very unlikely) to 5 (strongly agree or very likely).
Results show that the mean scores for each of the four components of brand image
benefits varied from 3.94 to 4.00, indicating that respondents had a moderate perception of all
the dimensions of brand image benefits. The standard deviation for these components ranged
from 0.43 to 0.71. Similarly, overall customer satisfaction had a moderate mean value of 3.97,
with a standard deviation of 0.49. On the other hand, loyalty intention achieved a high mean
score of 4.04, indicating that respondents had high loyalty towards the brand.
In summary, the means and standard deviations for all four dimensions of brand image
benefits, overall satisfaction and loyalty intention in the study were found to be average (i.e.
based upon the scale of 1 to 5, the mean scores can be explained as: a mean score that is less than
2 is rated as low, a mean score between 2 to 4 is rated as average, and a mean score greater than
4 is rated as high (Yasin, 2004)).

Table 4.11
Mean and Standard Deviation for Variables in the Study
Variables
Functional benefits
Social benefits
Symbolic benefits
Experiential benefits
Overall customer satisfaction
Loyalty intention

Mean

Std. Deviation

4.00

0.43

3.66

0.70

3.61

0.71

3.94

0.55

3.97

0.49

4.04

0.48

Correlation Analysis
Pearson correlation coefficients were computed in order to examine the strength and the direction of the
relationship between all the constructs in the study. The Pearson correlation coefficient values can vary
from -1.00 to +1.00. A correlation value of +1.00 indicates a perfect positive correlation, while a value of
-1.00 represents a perfect negative correlation, and a value of 0.00 indicates no linear relationship
between the X and Y variables or between two variables (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007; Pallant, 2007).
Cohen (1988) interprets the correlation values as: small/weak when the correlation value is r = .10 to .29
or r = -.10 to -.29, medium/moderate when the value is r = .30 to .49 or r = -.30 to -.49, and large/strong
when the correlation value is r=0.5 to r=1.0 or r= -0.5 to r= -1.0.
As shown in Table 4.12, the results indicate that all of the brand image benefits dimensions were
positively correlated with loyalty intention. Functional benefits (r = .507, p < 0.01) was highly and
positively associated with loyalty intention. In addition, symbolic benefits and experiential benefits were
found to have a moderate significant correlation with loyalty intention. The correlation coefficient values
between the aforementioned brand image dimensions and loyalty intention ranged from 0.353 (p < 0.01)
to .388 (p < 0.01). However, one dimension of brand image benefits is significantly correlated with
loyalty intention but is slightly weak, namely social benefits (r = .260, p < 0.01).
All of the brand image benefits dimensions were found to be positively correlated with overall
satisfaction. The results show that functional benefits (r = .603, p < 0.01) was strongly and significantly
correlated with overall customer satisfaction. The rest of the brand image dimensions benefits such as
social benefits, symbolic benefits and experiential benefits were found to be moderately and positively
associated with overall customer satisfaction. The correlation coefficient values between these dimensions
of brand image benefits and overall customer satisfaction are between the ranged of 0.321 (p < 0.01) to
0.452 (p <0.01)

The results summarized in Table 4.12 indicate that overall customer satisfaction has a strong
positive correlation with loyalty intention (r = .621, p < 0.01).

Table 4.12
Pearson Correlations Matrix of Study Variables (N=583)
Variables

Symbolic Functional

Social

Experiential Satisfaction

Symbolic Benefits

Functional Benefits

.351**

Social Benefits

.550**

.320**

**

**

Loyalty

Experiential Benefits

.495

.388

.451**

Satisfaction

.452**

.603**

.365**

.420**

Loyalty

.353**

.507**

.260**

.388**

.621**

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

Reporting Regression Analysis


Variables Entered/Removedb

Model
1

Variables

Variables

Entered

Removed

Method

experiential2,
function2,

. Enter

social2,
symbolic2a
a. All requested variables entered.
b. Dependent Variable: LOYALTY

Model Summaryb

Model

R
.560a

R Square

Adjusted R

Std. Error of the

Square

Estimate

.313

.308

.40327

a. Predictors: (Constant), experiential2, function2, social2, symbolic2


b. Dependent Variable: LOYALTY

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

Regression

42.856

10.714

Residual

93.996

578

.163

136.852

582

Total

a. Predictors: (Constant), experiential2, function2, social2, symbolic2


b. Dependent Variable: LOYALTY

F
65.882

Sig.
.000a

Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model
1

Std. Error

(Constant)

1.331

.171

symbolic2

.095

.030

function2

.453

social2
experiential2

Coefficients
Beta

Sig.

7.774

.000

.140

3.162

.002

.044

.397

10.359

.000

-.016

.030

-.023

-.545

.586

.155

.037

.176

4.172

.000

a. Dependent Variable: LOYALTY

4.10 Multiple Regression Analysis


Multi regression analysis was used to analyze the relationship between brand
image benefits (independent variable) and loyalty intention (dependent
variable), the relationship between brand image (independent variable) and
overall customer satisfaction (mediating variable) and the relationship
between overall customer satisfaction (mediating variable) and loyalty
intention (dependent variable).
4.10.1

The Relationship between Brand Image Benefits and

Loyalty Intention.
The first hypothesis (H1) examined whether there is a positive relationship
between brand image benefits and loyalty intention. Results in Table 4.13
indicated that 31.3% variances in loyalty intention can be explained by brand
image based benefits (R2 = 31.3, p < 0.01). Detail regression results of the
aforementioned hypotheses are discussed below.
The first hypothesis (H1) suggested that there is a positive relationship
between brand image benefits and loyalty intention. Results shown in Table
4.13 illustrated that three of the dimensions of brand image benefits; namely
functional benefits ( = .397, p < 0.01), symbolic benefits ( = .140, p <

0.01) and experiential benefits ( = .176, p < 0.01) were found to have a
positive effect on loyalty intention. Therefore, hypotheses H1a, H1c and H1d
are supported. The effect of social benefits on loyalty intention is not
significant (p > 0.05), hence hypothesis H1b is rejected. Overall, the first
hypothesis H1 is also partially supported.
Table 4.13
Regression Analysis of Brand Image Benefits with Loyalty Intention
Dependent
Variable
Loyalty intention

Independent Variable
Brand Image benefits
:
Functional benefits
Social benefits
Symbolic benefits
Experiential benefits
R2
.313
Adjust R2
.308
Sig. F
.65.88**

Std. Coefficient
Beta ()

t-value

10.359
-.545
3.162
4.172

.397**
-.023
.140**
.176**

Note: Significant levels: **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05


Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model
1

Std. Error

(Constant)

1.331

.171

symbolic2

.095

.030

function2

.453

social2
experiential2
a. Dependent Variable: LOYALTY

Coefficients
Beta

Sig.

7.774

.000

.140

3.162

.002

.044

.397

10.359

.000

-.016

.030

-.023

-.545

.586

.155

.037

.176

4.172

.000

Regression between brand image benefits and overall customer


satisfaction
Variables Entered/Removedb

Model
1

Variables

Variables

Entered

Removed

Method

experiential2,
function2,

. Enter

social2,
symbolic2a
a. All requested variables entered.
b. Dependent Variable: SATISFACTION

Model Summaryb

Model

R
.665a

Adjusted R

Std. Error of the

Square

Estimate

R Square
.442

.438

.36729

a. Predictors: (Constant), experiential2, function2, social2, symbolic2


b. Dependent Variable: SATISFACTION

ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

Regression

61.778

15.444

Residual

77.972

578

.135

139.750

582

Total

a. Predictors: (Constant), experiential2, function2, social2, symbolic2


b. Dependent Variable: SATISFACTION

F
114.488

Sig.
.000a

Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model
1

Std. Error

(Constant)

.766

.156

symbolic2

.139

.027

function2

.542

social2
experiential2

Coefficients
Beta

Sig.

4.912

.000

.202

5.063

.000

.040

.471

13.619

.000

.036

.027

.052

1.336

.182

.102

.034

.115

3.021

.003

a. Dependent Variable: SATISFACTION

The

Relationship

between

Brand

Image

Benefits

and

Overall

Customer Satisfaction
Hypothesis 2 posited that there is a positive relationship between brand
image benefits and overall customer satisfaction. The results in Table 4.14
revealed that 44.2% of the total variances in overall satisfaction were
explained by brand image benefits (R 2 = 44.2, p > 0.01). Results in Table
4.14 demonstrated that functional benefits ( = .256, p < 0.01), symbolic
benefits ( = .100, p < 0.01) and experiential benefits ( = .221, p < 0.01)
have significant influences on overall satisfaction. However, the effect of
social benefits on customers overall satisfaction with the brand is not
significant (p > 0.05). Thus, H4a, H4b, and H4d are supported while H4c is
rejected. This concludes that H4 is partially accepted.
Table 4.14

Regression Analysis of Brand Image Attributes and Brand Image Benefits


with Overall Customer Satisfaction
Dependent Variable
Overall Customer
Satisfaction

Independent Variables
Brand Image benefits :

Functional benefits
Social benefits
Symbolic benefits
Experiential benefits
R2
.629
Adjust R2
.621
Sig. F
77.66**
Note: Significant levels: **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05

Std.
Coefficient
Beta ()

.256**
.039
.100**
.221**