Observations Flavor Packaging Light Organic Rank Score (1-Worst) DV

1 Raspberry Homemade waffle No low fat Not organic 9 2

2 Chocolate Cone No low fat Organic 3 8
3 Raspberry Pint Low fat Organic 2 9
4 Strawberry Pint No low fat Organic 4 7
5 Strawberry Cone Low fat Not organic 6 5
6 Chocolate Homemade waffle No low fat Not organic 10 1
7 Vanilla Pint Low fat Not organic 7 4
8 Mango Homemade waffle Low fat Organic 1 10
9 Mango Pint No low fat Not organic 8 3
10 Vanilla Homemade waffle No low fat Organic 5 6

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Standard Error
Observations

ANOVA

Regression
Residual
Total

Intercept
Raspberry
Chocolate
Strawberry
Mango
Homemade Waffle
Cone
Lowfat
Not Organic
 Raspberry Chocolate StrawberryMango Homemade WaffleCone Lowfat Not Organic
1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

ARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics R Square Intepration

0.997471550947 We are 99.49% of the way towards
0.994949494949 perfectly predicting the model.
0.954545454545
0.645497224368
10

df SS MS F Significance F F-Test Interpretation

8 82.0833333333 10.26042 24.625 0.154676086309 Based on the value of Significance F, it can be
said that this model does not prove to be a
1 0.41666666667 0.416667 good fit for the data. As such, this model
9 82.5 should not be used for further forecasting.

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95%Lower 95.0%Upper 95.0%
6.666666666667 0.62360956446 10.69045 0.059378 -1.257044134828 14.59038 -1.257044 14.5903775
0.5 0.64549722437 0.774597 0.580431 -7.701819889451 8.70182 -7.70182 8.70181989
-0.083333333333 0.81223286207 -0.102598 0.934912 -10.40373037221 10.23706 -10.40373 10.2370637
0.166666666667 0.7453559925 0.223607 0.859951 -9.303979175372 9.637313 -9.303979 9.63731251
1.5 0.64549722437 2.32379 0.258708 -6.701819889451 9.70182 -6.70182 9.70181989
-0.416666666667 0.49300664859 -0.845154 0.5533 -6.680910079967 5.847577 -6.68091 5.84757675
1.25 0.72168783649 1.732051 0.333333 -7.919913406011 10.41991 -7.919913 10.4199134
2.083333333333 0.49300664859 4.225771 0.14793 -4.180910079967 8.347577 -4.18091 8.34757675
-5 0.40824829046 -12.24745 0.051865 -10.18728636183 0.187286 -10.18729 0.18728636
Not Organic

f Significance F, it can be
does not prove to be a
As such, this model
or further forecasting.

Upper 95.0%
Observations Brand MPG Power Price ($) Rank Score (1-Worst) DVChrysler
1 Ford 15 MPG 100 HP 18,000 4 6 0
2 Ford 20 MPG 150 HP 24,000 7 3 0
3 Ford 25 MPG 200 HP 21,000 3 7 0
4 Chrysler 15 MPG 150 HP 21,000 6 4 1
5 Chrysler 20 MPG 200 HP 18,000 2 8 1
6 Chrysler 25 MPG 100 HP 24,000 9 1 1
7 GM 15 MPG 200 HP 24,000 8 2 0
8 GM 20 MPG 100 HP 21,000 5 5 0
9 GM 25 MPG 150 HP 18,000 1 9 0

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 1
R Square 1
Adjusted R Sq 65535
Standard Error 0
Observations 9

ANOVA
df SS MS
Regression 8 60 7.5
Residual 0 0 65535
Total 8 60

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat

Intercept 0.3333333333 0 65535
Chrysler -1 0 65535
GM 0.0000 0 65535
20 MPG 1.3333333333 0 65535
25 MPG 1.6666666667 0 65535
150 HP 1.3333333333 0 65535
200 HP 1.6666666667 0 65535
18000 5.6666666667 0 65535
21000 3.3333333333 0 65535

Coefficients
Brand Chrysler -1
GM 0
Ford 0 -1
MPG 15 MPG 0
20 MPG 1.33
1.67
 25 MPG 1.67 1.67
HP 100 HP 0
150 HP 1.33
200 HP 1.67 1.67
Price 18,000 5.67
21,000 3.33
24,000 0 2.34

Price Points New Price = Old Price + Cha

18,000 5.67
New Price = $21,000 + $61.
21000 3.33
24000 0 New Price = $21,061
Difference Difference
3000 dollars 3.33 points If you increase MPG by 1 m
1 Dollar 0.00111 vehicle by approximately $
$21,061.

MPG Points
20 1.33
25 1.67
Difference Difference
5 MPG 0.34
1 0.068

1 Dollar 0.00111
1 MPG 0.068
61.261261261
GM 20 MPG 25 MPG 150 HP 200 HP 18,000 21,000
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1 0 1
0 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 1
1 0 1 1 0 1 0

F Significance F
#NUM! #NUM!

P-value Lower 95%Upper 95%Lower 95.0%

Upper 95.0%
#NUM! 0.333333 0.333333 0.333333 0.333333
#NUM! -1 -1 -1 -1
#NUM! 1.021E-15 1.021E-15 1.021E-15 1.021E-15
#NUM! 1.333333 1.333333 1.333333 1.333333
#NUM! 1.666667 1.666667 1.666667 1.666667
#NUM! 1.333333 1.333333 1.333333 1.333333
#NUM! 1.666667 1.666667 1.666667 1.666667
#NUM! 5.666667 5.666667 5.666667 5.666667
#NUM! 3.333333 3.333333 3.333333 3.333333

Interpretation
Using the procedure for conjoint-analyis, the product
attributes have been ranked based on the value of their
Rank 3 coeffiecients.
According to this data, it can be said that Price is most
important to consumers.
Rank 2
Based on the data, Miles Per Gallon (MPG) and
Horsepower (HP) of equal importance to consumers, but
less important to consumers than the Price attribute.
 attributes have been ranked based on the value of their
coeffiecients.

According to this data, it can be said that Price is most

important to consumers.
Rank 2
Based on the data, Miles Per Gallon (MPG) and
Horsepower (HP) of equal importance to consumers, but
less important to consumers than the Price attribute.
Rank 2 Lastly, Brand Name appears to be the least important
attribute to consumers.

Rank 1

New Price = Old Price + Change

New Price = $21,000 + $61.00

New Price = $21,061

f you increase MPG by 1 mile, it would increase the price of the

vehicle by approximately $61.00, resulting in a new vehicle price of
$21,061.
 Q3

1996 Baseball
Team Runs Singles Doubles Triples HR's BB's SB's Ln Runs (DV)
Cleveland 840 952 279 23 207 542 132 6.7334018918
Chicago Sox 755 982 252 37 146 576 110 6.6267177492
Boston 791 907 286 31 175 560 99 6.6732979678
Minnesota 703 974 270 34 120 471 105 6.5553568918
California 801 927 252 25 186 564 58 6.6858609471
Yankees 749 929 280 34 122 625 50 6.6187389835
Seattle 796 899 276 20 182 549 110 6.6795991858
Milwaukee 740 910 249 42 128 502 105 6.6066501862
Texas 691 895 247 24 138 526 90 6.5381398238
Oakland 730 881 228 18 169 565 112 6.5930445341
Baltimore 704 838 229 27 173 574 92 6.5567783562
Kansas City 629 881 240 35 119 475 120 6.4441312567
Toronto 642 867 275 27 140 492 75 6.4645883037
Detroit 654 788 228 29 159 551 73 6.4831073515
Colorado 785 904 259 43 200 484 125 6.6656837178
Housston 747 1012 260 22 109 566 176 6.6160651851
San Diego 668 978 231 20 116 447 124 6.5042881735
Cincinnati 747 853 277 35 161 519 190 6.6160651851
Mets 657 946 218 34 125 446 58 6.4876840185
Cubs 693 851 267 39 158 440 105 6.5410299992
LA 634 941 191 31 140 468 127 6.4520489544
Philadelphia 615 909 263 30 94 497 72 6.4216222678
Florida 673 891 214 29 144 517 131 6.5117453296
Pittsburgh 629 884 245 27 125 456 84 6.4441312567
Montreal 621 861 265 24 118 400 120 6.4313310819
San Francisco 652 842 229 33 152 472 138 6.4800445619
Atlanta 645 797 210 27 168 520 73 6.4692503168
St Louis 563 813 238 24 107 436 79 6.3332796281

Page 8
 Q3

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics Interpretation of R^2

Multiple R 0.9687972123359 Based on the R^2 value, it can be stated
93% of the way towards predicting LnR
R Square 0.9385680386299
Adjusted R Square 0.921016049667
Standard Error 0.0276500913742
Observations 28

ANOVA
df SS MS
Regression 6 0.24529224377 0.040882
Residual 21 0.01605507861 0.0007645
Total 27 0.26134732239

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat

Intercept 4.9737485304186 0.10443212649 47.626614
Singles 0.0007420723165 0.00010595224 7.0038381
Doubles 0.0010520595245 0.00022902507 4.5936436
Triples 0.0013669632244 0.00082215421 1.6626604
HR's 0.0019653480073 0.00021116996 9.306949
BB's 0.0005687914421 0.00011616997 4.8962004
SB's 0.0002615141566 0.00017070766 1.5319415

RESIDUAL OUTPUT

Observation Predicted Ln Runs Residuals

1 6.7547980049929 -0.0213961132
2 6.6614914216086 -0.0347736724
3 6.678422015776 -0.005124048
4 6.5582613044521 -0.0029044126
5 6.6624635723554 0.02339737471
6 6.6125299449426 0.00620903857
7 6.6573056324411 0.0222935534
8 6.5329664507416 0.07368373546
9 6.5245076712415 0.01363215253 Log-Lin Equa
10 6.5747897144112 0.01825481973
11 6.5639855652236 -0.0072072091 Ln(Runs) = 4

Page 9
 Q3 Log-Lin Equa
Ln(Runs) = 4
12 6.4632862866188 -0.0191550299
13 6.5179572773745 -0.0533689737
14 6.4829979720791 0.00010937938
15 6.676898669011 -0.0112149512
16 6.6105197625753 0.00554542256
17 6.484518169456 0.01977000408
18 6.6073118948824 0.00875329025
19 6.466091972942 0.02159204554
20 6.5277157366466 0.01331426254
21 6.4899132231631 -0.0378642687
22 6.4522538964506 -0.0306316286
23 6.5110512792726 0.00069405037
24 6.4514076364034 -0.0072763797
25 6.4150850267693 0.01624605516
26 6.4878962497905 -0.0078516879
27 6.4680612223981 0.0011890944
28 6.339195531833 -0.0059159037

Page 10
 Q3

n of R^2
R^2 value, it can be stated that we are
ay towards predicting LnRuns.

F Significance F Interpretation of Significance-F Value

53.4736 0.0000 Based on the value of the significance-F value, it can be
stated the model provides a good fit for the data, and the
independent variables appear to be significant in
forecasting LnRun.

P-value Lower 95% Upper 95%Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%

6.981E-23 4.7565700343 5.190927 4.75657 5.190927
0.0000 0.0005217326 0.0009624 0.0005217 0.0009624
0.0001573 0.0005757758 0.0015283 0.0005758 0.0015283
0.1112354 -0.0003428 0.0030767 -0.000343 0.0030767
0.0000 0.001526196 0.0024045 0.0015262 0.0024045
0.0001 0.0003272028 0.0008104 0.0003272 0.0008104
0.1404639 -9.349186E-05 0.0006165 -9.349E-05 0.0006165

Interpretation of P-Values
Using the P-value, it can be said that Singles, Doubles, HR's and BB's have
proven to be significant in forecasting lnRun.

Interpretation of Coefficients
If singles increase by 1 unit, it leads to a .0074%. increase in LnRuns.
If doubles increase by 1 unit, it leads to a .1052% increase in LnRuns.
If triples increase by 1 unit it leads to a .1367% increase in LnRuns.
If HR's increase by 1 unit, it leads to a .1965% increase in LnRuns.
If BB's increase by 1 unit, it leads to a .0569% increase in LnRuns.
If SB's increase by 1 unit, it leads to a .0262% increase in LnRuns.

Log-Lin Equation

Ln(Runs) = 4.97 + 0.00074(100)(Singles) + 0.001052(100)(Doubles) + 0.001965(100)(HR's) + 0.000569(100)(BB's)

Page 11
Log-Lin Equation Q3
Ln(Runs) = 4.97 + 0.00074(100)(Singles) + 0.001052(100)(Doubles) + 0.001965(100)(HR's) + 0.000569(100)(BB's)

Page 12
 Q3

.000569(100)(BB's)

Page 13
 Q3
.000569(100)(BB's)

Page 14