PROJECT REPORT

on
SURVEY ON MOBILE PHONE USAGE BEHAVIOUR OF ADULTS

Submitted by:

Parismita Chetia BAM20009

Kaushik Barman BAM20025
Jitendra Lamsal BAM20027
Jitul Das BAM20038
Bapan Roy BAM20049

Under the Supervision and Guidance of

DR. MRINMOY KUMAR SARMA

PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
TEZPUR UNIVERSITY

Master of Business Administration

Department of Business Administration
Tezpur University
May 2021
 DECLARATION

We hereby declare that, the work which is being presented in this report “SURVEY ON
MOBILE PHONE USAGE BEHAVIOUR OF ADULTS” is submitted by the undersigned
students of MBA 2nd semester, Department of Business Administration, Tezpur University.
This is an original work prepared and analysed by us to give a detailed account of the topic and
has not been submitted in any form for any degree or diploma under any other university or
such institution.

Parismita Chetia (BAM20009)

Kaushik Barman (BAM20025)

Jitendra Lamsal (BAM20027)

Jitul Das (BAM20038)

Bapan Roy (BAM20049)

MBA 2nd Semester

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

TEZPUR UNIVERSITY

Page | i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

On the eve of completion of our Project Report on “SURVEY ON MOBILE PHONE

USAGE BEHAVIOUR OF ADULTS”, we will be failing in our details if we do not

acknowledge all the persons who have been instrumental in successful completion of this
project study. We are pleased to have a chance here to acknowledge the contribution of these
individuals for their support and encouragement throughout the life of the project. We express
our sincere gratitude to all of them.

We are extremely thankful to our faculty, Dr. Mrinmoy Kumar Sarma, Professor,
Department of Business Administration, Tezpur University, without whom this project
would have been incomplete. We would like to express our gratitude towards him for his
immense support. The continuous efforts and guidance of him made this project a fruitful one.
Without his guidance, support, and motivation this project would not have come out into its
existence.

Lastly, we are indebted to our parents and Almighty. Without their blessings or grace, we could
not have finished this project under stipulated time and with focused vision. We will always
cherish and admire the inspiration, understanding and help of our friends and well-wishers.

Parismita Chetia (BAM20009)

Kaushik Barman (BAM20025)

Jitendra Lamsal (BAM20027)

Jitul Das (BAM20038)

Bapan Roy (BAM20049)

MBA 2nd Semester

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

TEZPUR UNIVERSITY

Page | ii
 CONTENT

Sl. No Topic Page No.

1 Declaration i

2 Acknowledgement ii

3 List of Tables iv

4 List of figures iv

5 Abstract 1

6 Introduction 2

7 Objectives 2

8 Scope of the study 3

9 Limitations of the study 3

10 Methodology 4-5

11 Analysis 6-24

12 Findings and Conclusion 25-26

13 Bibliography 27

14 Annexure 28-32

Page | iii
 LIST OF TABLES

Sl. No Table name Page no.

1.1 Gender wise average time spent on mobile phones 7

1.2 Chi- square test of Hypothesis 01 8

2.1 Age wise average time spent on mobile phones 9

2.2 Age wise average time spent on mobile phones (after 11

merging the variables)
2.3 Chi- square test of Hypothesis 02 11

3.1 Profession wise average time spent on mobile phones 12-13

3.2 Profession wise average time spent on mobile phones 14

(after merging the variables)
3.3 Chi- square test of Hypothesis 03 14

4.1 Gender wise mobile phone usage preference 16

4.2 Gender wise mobile phone usage preference (after 18

merging the variables)
4.3 Chi-square test of Hypothesis 04 18

5.1 Profession wise mobile phone usage preference for a 19-20

particular purpose (Video conference)
5.2 Profession wise mobile phone usage preference for a 22
particular purpose (After merging the variables)
5.3 Chi-square test of Hypothesis 05 22

LIST OF FIGURES
Sl. No Figure name Page no.
1 Mobile checking frequency among the respondents 23

2 Preferred time of the day for using mobile phone among the 23
respondents
3.1 Behavioural pattern of the respondents while using mobile phone 23
(in numbers)
3.2 Behavioural pattern of the respondents while using mobile phone 24
(in percentage)

Page | iv
 ABSTRACT

In today’s scenario, mobile phones are acting as a key tool in Information, Communication and
Technology. Nothing can be more evident than this current pandemic scenario. In this
pandemic situation, wherein people are struggling to survive with their daily activities such as
academics, business, jobs (to name a few), mobile phones had been to the rescue.
With the passage of time, it can be noticed that there is an immense increase in the usage of
mobile phones (with an estimated user base of around 760 million in India as on 2021) which
can take all of us to a day when no one would be able to survive without a mobile phone.
In this study, we have conducted an online survey among 137 adults and tried to find out their
mobile phone usage behaviour. Towards the end we came to a conclusion that mobile phone
usage time differ across certain demographic factors like age, whereas it does not differ for
gender and profession. On the other hand, usage preferences differ across certain demographic
factors like gender and profession.

Page | 1
 INTRODUCTION

The world has been taken over by several latest technologies and one such is Mobile phone.
As communication plays an important role in all the aspects of our life, mobile phones
eventually became a very crucial part of it. Mobile phones have helped us ease our lives by
facilitating our everyday tasks. Considering the previous decades, one can fairly notice that this
tool (mobile phone) has taken a sharp move from being a hypothetical one to something which
is desired by majority of the population; adults to be more specific.

The first generation of mobile phone only had the basic features, such as voice call. But today’s
mobile phones are equipped with various new features that includes Communication such as
Short Message Service (SMS) and Entertainment such as MP3 & video player, games and
internet facility, which has increased its popularity among its users. The addition of these new
and exciting features has not only attracted the attention of people all across the walks of life,
but have also resulted in the increase of usage among the existing user especially the younger
generation.

There has been tremendous growth in the use of the mobile phones in India. With the increase
in specifications of a mobile handset, the users’ range of accessible domains got increased from
certain limited ones to numerous ones. In today’s scenario, the contacts are established instantly
with the help of mobile phones which has helped people overcome the feeling of loneliness,
which was not possible earlier.

OBJECTIVES

• To study the average time spent by adults on mobile phone, gender-wise.

• To study the average time spent by adults on mobile phone, age-wise.
• To study the average time spent by adults on mobile phone, profession-wise.
• To analyse the usage preferences and arrive at conclusions, gender-wise.
• To study the usage preference for a particular purpose, profession-wise.
• To understand the behavioural pattern of users while using mobile phones.

Page | 2
 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The scope of this study is to analyse the mobile phone usage behaviour among adults belonging
from different gender, age groups, occupation and earn different level of monthly income. The
study was conducted through online questionnaire method i.e., Google forms only. Individuals
are selected for the purpose of the survey. The sample size is 137 which were selected by using
convenient sampling technique.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

During the course of the study, the information collected was based entirely on the opinion of
the respondents. Thus, there may be an element of bias in the result. Due to constraints of
resources and time, there might be some limitations in our study, such as –

• The data have been collected during the COVID-19 pandemic situation, therefore, most of
the respondents might have provided information which they would not have provided if
the situations would have been different. For e.g., individuals generally prefer doing video
calling over WhatsApp or Google Duo, but during this pandemic, new applications such as
Google Meet and Zoom became more feasible for most of their tasks.
• The respondents might have got confused while choosing the exact options regarding the
average usage time of mobile phones. This is because no one actually keeps exact track of
time while using mobile phones.
• The respondents might have got confused while choosing the most and the least preferred
purpose for using their mobile phones.

Page | 3
 METHODOLOGY
VARIABLES DEFINED

The variables taken into account are as follows:

• Gender
• Age of the respondents
• Profession of the respondents
• Average time spent on mobile phone
• Most used purpose
• Least used purpose
• Preferred mobile applications

SAMPLING PROCEDURE AND SAMPLE SIZE

The sampling method used in this study is convenience sampling. It is advantageous for us as
well as the respondents. Here, The Respondents can fill in the questionnaire at their
convenience. Due to the widespread and increasing availability of smartphones, the participants
can also answer the questions from any location and at any time of day. We as the researchers
are also benefited from this method as information is directly collected digitally and the raw
data is very quickly available for processing.

The sample of survey respondents comprised of adults in the age groups 18-65. In all 137
respondents, 79 were males and 58 were females.

TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES USED FOR DATA COLLECTION

The instrument for data collection, in the form of a ‘structured questionnaire’ was designed to
elicit information on demographic and psychographic aspects of the respondents. The primary
research study was done through Google forms and the population selected for the study was
adults of Assam. The questionnaire was circulated among people of different age groups in the
adult category.

The questionnaire focused on various fields such as specifications of the mobile phone used,
different behavioural patterns, purpose, time spent and applications used. The responses

Page | 4
collected over these fields gave us a clear insight into the overall usage behaviours of the
targeted age group. The three most important variables used are-age, gender and economic
level. The psychographic variables included attitude towards usage of mobile phones and other
related behaviour.

FORMAT OF QUESTIONS

The questionnaire consisted of questions on behaviour as well as usage pattern of the

individuals and the responses were recorded using nominal scale. The questionnaire consisted
of multiple choice based and close-ended questions.

STATISTICAL TOOLS USED

Our analysis is a bivariate analysis. For the analysis purpose of our study, we have chosen chi-
square test. The chi-square test has been performed by “StatCraft” software. Considering the
“p value” obtained by performing chi-square test, we have tried to find out relationships and
level of dependencies among the variables chosen. We have also provided pie charts for
showing a behavioural pattern of users while using mobile phones.

Page | 5
 ANALYSIS
The detailed study carried out in the process included demographic factors such as gender, age,
profession and income. The importance of identifying demographic factors for analysis is
essential. These demographic aspects of the respondents will provide us a clear picture.

Based on the various objectives of our research study, we have constructed some beliefs and
formulated the hypotheses accordingly:

1. Males spend more amount of time on mobile phones compared to females

a. H0 = Gender and usage time are not related to each other.
b. H1 = Gender and usage time are related to each other

2. Adults of the age group 18-25 spend more amount of time on mobile phones
a. H0 = Age group and usage time are not related to each other
b. H1 = Age group and usage time are related to each other

3. Students spend more amount of time on mobile phones

a. H0 = Profession and usage time are not related to each other
b. H1 = Profession and usage time are related to each other

4. Females do not prefer playing games on mobile phones

a. H0 = Gender and usage preferences are not related to each other
b. H1 = Gender and usage preferences are related to each other

5. Students spend more time on Google meet than the rest of the adults
a. H0 = Profession and usage preferences are not related to each other
b. H1 = Profession and usage preferences are related to each other

Page | 6
1. To study the average time spent by adults on mobile phone, gender-wise

Crosstab
Average Time
Gender Less than 4
4-8 hours 8-12 hours More than 12 hours Total
hours

Female 14 27 13 4 58
Expected 16.51094891 25.82481752 10.58394161 5.08029197 -
Row
24.138 46.552 22.414 6.897 5.8
Proportion
Column
35.897 44.262 52 33.333 -
Proportion
Male 25 34 12 8 79
Expected 22.48905109 35.17518248 14.41605839 6.91970803 -
Row
31.646 43.038 15.19 10.127 7.9
Proportion
Column
64.103 55.738 48 66.667 -
Proportion
Total 39 61 25 12
137
Proportion 3.9 6.1 2.5 1.2
Table 1.1- Gender wise average time spent on mobile phones

Interpretation:

From the above-mentioned table, we can deduce that most of the females i.e., 27 out of 58
prefer to use their mobile phones for an average time of 4-8 hours in a single day. Similarly,
most of the males i.e., 34 out of 79 also prefer to use their mobile phones for an average time
of 4-8 hours in a single day.

Belief 01:

Based on this analysis, we constructed a belief that:

“Males spend more amount of time on mobile phones compared to females”

To prove our belief marginally, we formulated the following hypotheses:

o H0 = Gender and usage time are not related to each other.

o H1 = Gender and usage time are related to each other.

To perform the analysis, we have chosen the chi-square test. In order to perform chi-square
test, the variables have to be in the nominal scale. The variables in this analysis are gender and

Page | 7
averagetime and both are in nominal scale. Hence, a perfect chi-square test can be performed
now.

Validity of Chi-square test:

Before performing the Chi-square test and accepting or rejecting the null hypothesis, we have
to confirm the assumptions of Chi-square test.

One of the assumptions of Chi square test is that, no. of cells with expected count less than 5
should not be more than 20% of total cells. If it is more than 20%, Chi square test will be
invalid.

The table 1.1 is a 2X4 contingency table. Here, the total no. of cells is 8 and 20% of 20 is 1.6.
But, number of cells with expected count less than 5 is 0. Therefore, none of the total number
of cells are showing expected count less than 5. So, we can conclude that Chi square test is
valid.

We have performed our chi-square test in Stat Craft and the result obtained is as follows:

Pearson Chi-Squared Test

Chi-
df p Value
Squared
2.10977 3 0.549939
Table 1.2- Chi- square test of Hypothesis 01

Here, p value stands for probability value. There stands a relationship between this p value and
the level of significance, 𝛼 . In order to prove our belief marginally, we have to reject our null
hypothesis, which is possible only when p value<𝛼.

But, in this case since p value is greater than 𝛼, that is, 0.549939>𝛼, therefore we cannot reject
the null hypothesis. Hence, the belief that we had that “Males spend more amount of time
on mobile phones compared to females.” cannot be proved.

Page | 8
2. To study the Average time spent by adults on mobile phone, age-wise.

Crosstab
Average time
Age group Less than 4 More than
4-8 hours 8-12 hours Total
hours 12 hours

18-25 years 14 41 21 7 83
Expected 23.62773723 36.95620438 15.1459854 7.27007299 -
Row Proportion 16.867 49.398 25.301 8.434 -
Column
35.897 67.213 84 58.333 -
Proportion
26-35 years 9 14 3 4 30
Expected 8.54014599 13.35766423 5.47445255 2.62773723 -
Row Proportion 30 46.667 10 13.333 -
Column
23.077 22.951 12 33.333 -
Proportion
36-45 years 5 1 1 1 8
Expected 2.27737226 3.5620438 1.45985401 0.70072993 -
Row Proportion 62.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 -
Column
12.821 1.639 4 8.333 -
Proportion
46-55 years 4 4 0 0 8
Expected 2.27737226 3.5620438 1.45985401 0.70072993 -
Row Proportion 50 50 0 0 -
Column
10.256 6.557 0 0 -
Proportion
56-65 years 7 1 0 0 8
Expected 2.27737226 3.5620438 1.45985401 0.70072993 -
Row Proportion 87.5 12.5 0 0 -
Column
17.949 1.639 0 0 -
Proportion
Total 39 61 25 12
137
Proportion 3.9 6.1 2.5 1.2
Table 2.1- Age wise average time spent on mobile phones

Interpretation:

From the above table we can deduce that in the age group 18-25 years, most of the respondents
i.e., 41 out of 83 prefer to use their mobile phones for an average time of 4-8 hours in a day.
Similarly for the age group 26-35 years, most of the respondents i.e., 14 out of 30 prefer to use
their mobile phones for an average time of 4-8 hours in a day. But if we consider the age group
of 36-45 years, most of the respondents i.e., 5 out of 8 prefer to use their mobile phones for an
average time of less than 4 hours in a day. Now considering the age group 46-55 years, all the
respondents i.e., 8 of them prefer to use their mobile phones not more than 8 hours a day.

Page | 9
Finally for the age group 56-65 years, most of the respondents i.e., 7 out of 8 prefer to use their
mobile phones for less than 4 hours a day.

Belief 02:

Based on this analysis, we constructed a belief that:

“Adults of the age group 18-25 spend more amount of time on mobile phones”

In order to prove our belief marginally, we have formulated the under mentioned hypotheses.

o H0 = Age group and usage time are not related to each other
o H1 = Age group and usage time are related to each other
To perform the analysis, we have chosen the chi-square test. In order to perform chi-square
test, the variables have to be in the nominal scale. The variables in this analysis are ‘Age group’
and ‘Average time’ and both are in nominal scale. Hence, a perfect chi-square test can be
performed now.

Validity of Chi-square test:

Before performing the Chi square test and accepting or rejecting the null hypothesis, we have
to confirm the assumptions of Chi-square test.

One of the assumptions of Chi square test is that, no. of cells with expected count less than 5
should not be more than 20% of total cells. If it is more than 20%, Chi square test will be
invalid.

The table 2.1 is a 5X4 contingency table. Here, the total no. of cells is 20 and 20% of 20 is 4.
But, number of cells with expected count less than 5 is 13. Therefore, more than 20% of total
number of cells showing expected count less than 5. So, we can conclude that Chi square test
is invalid.

Chi-Square test:

So, to make the Chi-square test valid we have merged the variables of average time and made
two variables out of it, name ‘Less than 8 hours’ and ‘More than 8 hours’. Moreover, we have
taken the age groups as 18-25 years, 26-35 years and 36-65 years.

Page | 10
 Crosstab
Average time
Age group
Less than 8 hours More than 8 hours Total

18-25 years 55 28 83
Expected 60.58394161 22.41605839 -
Row Proportion 66.265 33.735 -
Column Proportion 55 75.676 8.3
26-35 years 23 7 30
Expected 21.89781022 8.10218978 -
Row Proportion 76.667 23.333 -
Column Proportion 23 18.919 3
36-65 years 22 2 24
Expected 17.51824818 6.48175182 -
Row Proportion 91.667 8.333 -
Column Proportion 22 5.405 2.4
Total 100 37
137
Proportion 10 3.7
Table 2.2- Age wise average time spent on mobile phones (after merging the variables)

We have performed our chi-square test in Stat Craft and the result obtained is:
Pearson Chi-Squared Test
Chi-Squared df p Value

6.356514 2 0.041658
Table 2.3- Chi- square test of Hypothesis 02

Here, p value stands for probability value. There stands a relationship between this p value and
the level of significance, 𝛼 . In order to prove our belief marginally, we have to reject our null
hypothesis, which is possible only when p value<𝛼. The level of significance, i.e., the value of
𝛼 = 0.05

In this case the p value is smaller than 𝛼, that is, 0.041658<0.05, therefore we can reject the
null hypothesis, which says that “Age group and usage time are not related to each other” and
accept the alternative hypothesis, which says that “Age group and usage time are related to
each other”. Hence, the belief that we had that “Adults of the age group 18-25 spend more
amount of time on mobile phones” can be proved marginally with a 95% level of
confidence.

Page | 11
3. To study the Average time spent by adults on mobile phone, profession-wise.
Crosstab
Average time
Profession Less than 4 More than 12
4-8 hours 8-12 hours Total
hours hours

Actor 0 0 1 0 1
Expected 0.28467153 0.44525547 0.18248175 0.08759124 -
Row Proportion 0 0 100 0 -
Column
0 0 4 0 -
Proportion
Business 6 3 0 2 11
Expected 3.13138686 4.89781022 2.00729927 0.96350365 -
Row Proportion 54.545 27.273 0 18.182 -
Column
15.385 4.918 0 16.667 -
Proportion
Government
4 5 0 0 9
Employee
Expected 2.5620438 4.00729927 1.64233577 0.78832117 -
Row Proportion 44.444 55.556 0 0 -
Column
10.256 8.197 0 0 -
Proportion
Graduate
0 0 1 0 1
Apprentice
Expected 0.28467153 0.44525547 0.18248175 0.08759124 -
Row Proportion 0 0 100 0 -
Column
0 0 4 0 -
Proportion
Homemaker 5 2 0 0 7
Expected 1.99270073 3.11678832 1.27737226 0.61313869 -
Row Proportion 71.429 28.571 0 0 -
Column
12.821 3.279 0 0 -
Proportion
Photographer 0 1 0 0 1
Expected 0.28467153 0.44525547 0.18248175 0.08759124 -
Row Proportion 0 100 0 0 -
Column
0 1.639 0 0 -
Proportion
Private
5 8 3 2 18
Employee
Expected 5.12408759 8.01459854 3.28467153 1.57664234 -
Row Proportion 27.778 44.444 16.667 11.111 -
Column
12.821 13.115 12 16.667 -
Proportion
Retired 5 0 0 0 5
Expected 1.42335766 2.22627737 0.91240876 0.4379562 -
Row Proportion 100 0 0 0 -

Page | 12
 Column
12.821 0 0 0 -
Proportion
Student 14 39 20 7 80
Expected 22.77372263 35.62043796 14.59854015 7.00729927 -
Row Proportion 17.5 48.75 25 8.75 -
Column
35.897 63.934 80 58.333 -
Proportion
Unemployed 0 3 0 1 4
Expected 1.13868613 1.7810219 0.72992701 0.35036496 -
Row Proportion 0 75 0 25 -
Column
0 4.918 0 8.333 -
Proportion
Total 39 61 25 12
137
Proportion 3.9 6.1 2.5 1.2
Table 3.1- Profession wise average time spent on mobile phones

Interpretation:

From the above table we can interpret that most of the respondents i.e. 61 out of 137
irrespective of their profession, prefer to use mobile phones for an average time of 4-8 hours a
day.

Belief 03:

Based on this analysis, we constructed a belief that:

“Students spend more amount of time on mobile phones”

In order to prove our belief marginally, we have formulated the under mentioned hypotheses.

o H0 = Profession and usage time are not related to each other.

o H1 = Profession and usage time are related to each other.
To perform the analysis, we have chosen the chi-square test. In order to perform chi-square
test, the variables have to be in the nominal scale. The variables in this analysis are ‘Profession’
and ‘Average time’ and both are in nominal scale. Hence, a perfect chi-square test can be
performed now.

Validity of Chi-square test:

Before performing the Chi square test and accepting or rejecting the null hypothesis, we have
to confirm the assumptions of Chi-square test.

Page | 13
One of the assumptions of Chi square test is that, no. of cells with expected count less than 5
should not be more than 20% of total cells. If it is more than 20%, Chi square test will be
invalid.

The table 3.1 is a 10X4 contingency table. Here, the total no. of cells is 40 and 20% of 20 is 8.
But, number of cells with expected count less than 5 is 34. Therefore, more than 20% of total
number of cells showing expected count less than 5. So, we can conclude that Chi square test
is invalid.

Chi-square test:

So, to make the Chi-square test valid we have merged the variables of average time and made
two variables out of it, name ‘Less than 8 hours’ and ‘More than 8 hours’. Moreover, we have
taken the profession as ‘Students’ and ‘Other than students’.

Crosstab
Average time
Profession
Less than 8 hours More than 8 hours Total

Other than Students 39 18 57

Expected 41.60583942 15.39416058 -
Row Proportion 68.421 31.579 5.7
Column Proportion 39 48.649 -
Student 61 19 80
Expected 58.39416058 21.60583942 -
Row Proportion 76.25 23.75 8
Column Proportion 61 51.351 -
Total 100 37
137
Proportion 10 3.7
Table 3.2- Profession wise average time spent on mobile phones (after merging the variables)
We have performed our chi-square test in Stat Craft and the result obtained is:

Pearson Chi-Squared Test

Chi-Squared df p Value

1.0348811 1 0.309015

Table 3.3- Chi- square test of Hypothesis 03

Page | 14
Here, p value stands for probability value. There stands a relationship between this p value and
the level of significance, 𝛼 . In order to prove our belief marginally, we have to reject our null
hypothesis, which is possible only when p value<𝛼. The level of significance, i.e., the value of
𝛼 = 0.05

In this case the p value is greater than 𝛼, that is, 0.309015>0.05, therefore we cannot reject the
null hypothesis, which says that “Profession and usage time are not related to each other”.
Hence, the belief that we had that “Students spend more amount of time on mobile
phones.” cannot be proved.

Page | 15
 4. To analyse the usage preferences and arrive at conclusions, gender-wise.

Crosstab

Usage type least

All
most Media Use
Gender Busin
every Comm and Phot Social it as
ess Educat Gamin
option unicati Entert News ogra Medi a Total
activi ion g
mentio on ainmen phy a torc
ties
ned t h
above

Female 1 0 0 1 38 2 6 8 2 0 58
Expecte 13.5 0.42
0.4234 0.42 1.27 2.96 30.1 1.2701 5.1 2.54 -
d 47 3
Row
13.7
Proport 1.724 0 0 1.72 65.5 3.448 10 3.45 0 5.8
93
ion

Column
Proport 100 0 0 14.3 53.5 66.667 50 25 33.3 0 -
ion

Male 0 1 3 6 33 1 6 24 4 1 79
Expecte 18.4 0.57
0.5766 0.58 1.73 4.04 40.9 1.7299 6.9 3.46 -
d 53 7
Row
30.3 1.26
Proport 0 1.27 3.797 7.6 41.8 1.266 7.6 5.06 7.9
8 6
ion

Column
Proport 0 100 100 85.7 46.5 33.333 50 75 66.7 100 -
ion
Total 1 1 3 7 71 3 12 32 6 1
Proport 137
0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 7.1 0.3 1.2 3.2 0.6 0.1
ion
Table 4.1- Gender wise mobile phone usage preference

Page | 16
Interpretation:

From the above-mentioned table, we can deduce that most of the females i.e., 38 out of 58 are
least involved in ‘Gaming’ while using a mobile phone. Similarly, most of the males i.e., 33
out of 79 are also least involved in ‘Gaming’ while using a mobile phone. We can also interpret
that in comparison to males, females are most likely to have least interest in ‘Gaming’.

Belief 04:

Based on this analysis, we constructed a belief that:

“Females do not prefer playing games on mobile phones”

To prove our belief marginally, we have formulated the under mentioned hypotheses.

o H0 = Gender and usage preferences are not related to each other.

o H1 = Gender and usage preferences are related to each other.

To perform the analysis, we have chosen the chi-square test. In order to perform chi-square
test, the variables have to be in the nominal scale. The variables in this analysis are ‘Gender’
and ‘Usage type least’ and both are in nominal scale. Hence, a perfect chi-square test can be
performed now.

Validity of Chi-square test:

Before performing the Chi square test and accepting or rejecting the null hypothesis, we have
to confirm the assumptions of Chi-square test.

One of the assumptions of Chi square test is that, no. of cells with expected count less than 5
should not be more than 20% of total cells. If it is more than 20%, Chi square test will be
invalid.

The table 4.1 is a 2X10 contingency table. Here, the total no. of cells is 20 and 20% of 20 is 4.
But, number of cells with expected count less than 5 is 14. Therefore, more than 20% of total
number of cells showing expected count less than 5. So, we can conclude that Chi square test
is invalid.

Page | 17
Chi-square test:

So, to make the Chi-square test valid we have defined the variable ‘gender’ as it was before
i.e., male and female, and have taken the variable ‘Usage type least’ as ‘Gaming’ and ‘Other
than Gaming’

Crosstab
Usage type least
Gender Other than
Gaming Total
Gaming

Female 38 20 58
Expected 30.05839416 27.9416058 -
Row Proportion 65.517 34.483 5.8
Column Proportion 53.521 30.303 -
Male 33 46 79
Expected 40.94160584 38.0583942 -
Row Proportion 41.772 58.228 7.9
Column Proportion 46.479 69.697 -
Total 71 66
137
Proportion 7.1 6.6
Table 4.2- Gender wise mobile phone usage preference (after merging the variables)

We have performed our chi-square test in Stat Craft and the result obtained is:

Pearson Chi-Squared Test

Chi-Squared df p Value
7.553026 1 0.00599094
Table 4.3- Chi-square test of Hypothesis 04

Here, p value stands for probability value. There stands a relationship between this p value and
the level of significance, 𝛼 . In order to prove our belief marginally, we have to reject our null
hypothesis, which is possible only when p value<𝛼. The level of significance, i.e., the value of
𝛼 = 0.05

In this case the p value is smaller than 𝛼, that is, 0.00599094<0.05, therefore we can reject the
null hypothesis, which says that “Gender and usage preferences are not related to each other
and accept the alternative hypothesis, which says that “Gender and usage preferences are
related to each other”. Hence, the belief that we had, that “Females do not prefer playing
games on mobile phones.” can be proved with a level of confidence of 95%.

Page | 18
5. To study the usage preference for a particular purpose, profession-wise.

Crosstab
Video Conference
Profession WhatsApp
Google Google Not
Others Video Zoom Total
Duo Meet Applicable
Calling

Actor 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Expected 0.021898 0.518248 0.087591 0.007299 0.189781 0.175182 -
Row
0 100 0 0 0 0 -
Proportion

Column
0 1.408 0 0 0 0 -
Proportion
Business 0 0 2 0 5 4 11
Expected 0.240876 5.70073 0.963504 0.080292 2.087591 1.927007 -
Row
0 0 18.182 0 45.455 36.364 -
Proportion

Column
0 0 16.667 0 19.231 16.667 -
Proportion

Government
0 1 2 0 2 4 9
Employee

Expected 0.19708 4.664234 0.788321 0.065693 1.708029 1.576642 -

Row
0 11.111 22.222 0 22.222 44.444 -
Proportion

Column
0 1.408 16.667 0 7.692 16.667 -
Proportion

Graduate
1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Apprentice

Expected 0.021898 0.518248 0.087591 0.007299 0.189781 0.175182 -

Row
100 0 0 0 0 0 -
Proportion

Column
33.333 0 0 0 0 0 -
Proportion

Homemaker 0 0 3 0 3 1 7
Expected 0.153285 3.627737 0.613139 0.051095 1.328467 1.226277 -
Row
0 0 42.857 0 42.857 14.286 -
Proportion
Page | 19
Column
0 0 25 0 11.538 4.167 -
Proportion

Photographer 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Expected 0.021898 0.518248 0.087591 0.007299 0.189781 0.175182 -
Row
0 0 0 0 100 0 -
Proportion

Column
0 0 0 0 3.846 0 -
Proportion

Private
2 2 0 1 5 8 18
Employee
Expected 0.394161 9.328467 1.576642 0.131387 3.416058 3.153285 -
Row
11.111 11.111 0 5.556 27.778 44.444 -
Proportion

Column
66.667 2.817 0 100 19.231 33.333 -
Proportion
Retired 0 1 2 0 2 0 5
Expected 0.109489 2.591241 0.437956 0.036496 0.948905 0.875912 -
Row
0 20 40 0 40 0 -
Proportion

Column
0 1.408 16.667 0 7.692 0 -
Proportion
Student 0 65 2 0 6 7 80
Expected 1.751825 41.45985 7.007299 0.583942 15.18248 14.0146 -
Row
0 81.25 2.5 0 7.5 8.75 -
Proportion

Column
0 91.549 16.667 0 23.077 29.167 -
Proportion

Unemployed 0 1 1 0 2 0 4
Expected 0.087591 2.072993 0.350365 0.029197 0.759124 0.70073 -
Row
0 25 25 0 50 0 -
Proportion

Column
0 1.408 8.333 0 7.692 0 -
Proportion
Total 3 71 12 1 26 24
137
Proportion 0.3 7.1 1.2 0.1 2.6 2.4
Table 5.1- Profession wise mobile phone usage preference for a particular purpose
(Video conference)

Page | 20
Interpretation:

From the above table we can interpret that among the users of google meet most of them are
students i.e., 65 out of 71. This can be also viewed as among 80 students, 65 of them prefer
using google meet for Video conferencing.

Belief 05:

Based on this analysis, we constructed a belief that:

“Students spend more time on Google meet than the rest of the adults”

To prove our belief marginally, we have formulated the following hypotheses:

o H0 = Profession and usage preferences are not related to each other.

o H1 = Profession and usage preferences are related to each other.
To perform the analysis, we have chosen the chi-square test. In order to perform chi-square
test, the variables have to be in the nominal scale. The variables in this analysis are Profession
and Video Conference (which is one of the applications) and both are in nominal scale. Hence,
a perfect chi-square test can be performed now.

Validity of Chi-square test:

Before performing the Chi square test and accepting or rejecting the null hypothesis, we have
to confirm the assumptions of Chi-square test.

One of the assumptions of Chi square test is that, no. of cells with expected count less than 5
should not be more than 20% of total cells. If it is more than 20%, Chi square test will be
invalid.

The table 5.1 is a 10X6 contingency table. Here, the total no. of cells is 60 and 20% of 20 is
12. But, number of cells with expected count less than 5 is 48. Therefore, more than 20% of
total number of cells showing expected count less than 5. So, we can conclude that Chi square
test is invalid.

Chi-square test:

So to make the Chi-square test valid we have merged the variables of Profession and made two
variable out of it, ‘Students’ and ‘Other than students’. Moreover, we have also merged the
variables of Video Conference as ‘Google Meet’ and ‘Other than google meet’

Page | 21
 Crosstab
Video Conference
Profession Other than Google
Google Meet Total
Meet

Other than Students 6 51 57

Expected 29.54015 27.45985 -
Row Proportion 10.526 89.474 5.7

Column Proportion 8.451 77.273 -

Student 65 15 80
Expected 41.45985 38.54015 -
Row Proportion 81.25 18.75 8

Column Proportion 91.549 22.727 -

Total 71 66
137
Proportion 7.1 6.6
Table 5.2- Profession wise mobile phone usage preference for a particular purpose (After
merging the variables)

We have performed our chi-square test in Stat Craft and the result obtained is:

Pearson Chi-Squared Test

Chi-Squared df p Value

66.68265 1 0.00

Table 5.3- Chi-square test of Hypothesis 05

Here, p value stands for probability value. There stands a relationship between this p value and
the level of significance, 𝛼 . In order to prove our belief marginally, we have to reject our null
hypothesis, which is possible only when p value<𝛼. The level of significance, i.e., the value of
𝛼 = 0.05

In this case the p value is smaller than 𝛼, that is, 0.00<0.05, therefore we can reject the null
hypothesis, which says that “Profession and Usage Preferences are not related to each other
and accept the alternative hypothesis, which says that “Profession and usage preferences are
related to each other”. Hence, the belief that we had, that “Students spend more time on
Google meet than the rest of the adults.” can be proved with a level of confidence of 95%.

Page | 22
6. To understand the behavioural pattern of users while using mobile phones.

Check Preferred time

2.90% 5.80%
22.60%

8.80%
54% 25.50%
14.60%
65.70%

Whenever there is a notification

Every 15 min
Every 30 min
Others Morning Afternoon Evening Anytime

Figure 1: Mobile checking frequency Figure 2: Preferred time of the day for
among the respondents using mobile phone among the
respondents

• From the above pie charts, we can find that for maximum of our respondents there is
no fixed time at which they check their mobile phones. Their mobile phone checking
pattern is not time bounded, therefore they have chosen “Others”. Also, we can see that
our respondents use their phones at any time during the day and there is no specific
time such as morning or evening. From this we can deduce that mobile phone usage is
not influenced by a particular hour of a day.

119
NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS

120 105 104

83 88
100
80
54 49
60
32 33
40 18
20
0
Sleep Morning Charging Restroom Driving
Yes 32 104 54 49 18
No 105 33 83 88 119
AXIS TITLE

Yes No

Figure 3.1- Behavioural pattern of the respondents while using mobile phone (in numbers)

Page | 23
 86.90%

PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS
90.00% 76.60% 75.90%
80.00% 64.20%
60.60%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00% 39.40% 35.80%
40.00% 23.40% 24.10%
30.00% 13.10%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Sleep Morning Charging Restroom Driving
Yes 23.40% 75.90% 39.40% 35.80% 13.10%
No 76.60% 24.10% 60.60% 64.20% 86.90%
AXIS TITLE

Yes No

Figure 3.2- Behavioural pattern of the respondents while using mobile phone (in percentage)

From the above-mentioned graphs, we can say that

• Most of our respondents (76.60% of 137 respondents) prefer not to use their mobile
phones while sleeping. Only 23.40% of 137 respondents prefer to check their mobile
phones while sleeping.
• Most of our respondents prefer to check their mobile phones right after waking up in
the morning. Almost 75.90% of 137 respondents prefer to do so.
• Most of our respondents (60.60% of 137 respondents) prefer not to use their mobile
phones while charging them. Only 39.40% of them prefer to do so.
• Most of our respondents (64.20% of 137 respondents) prefer not to use their mobile
phones while using the restroom. Only 35.80% of them prefer to do so.
• Most of our respondents (86.90% of 137 respondents) prefer not to use their mobile
phones while driving. Only 13.10% of them prefer to do so.

Page | 24
 FINDINGS

• On the basis of the obtained results, it can be said that on an average, most of the
respondents (61 respondents amounting to 44.5%) spent around 4-8 hours on their
phones daily.
• We also found that most of the respondents check their phones whenever there is a
notification (74 respondents amounting to 54%). Further, the most preferred time
during the day is “anytime”, which means people use their phones at any time during
the day and that there is no specific time such as morning or evening (90 respondents
amounting to 65.7%).
• Majority of the respondents do not prefer to check their phones between their sleep (105
respondents amounting to 76.76%) and the same applies to the using of phones while
charging (83 respondents amounting to 60.6%).
• In addition, maximum people check their phone right after waking up in the morning
(104 respondents amounting to 75.9%). Maximum respondents prefer not to use their
phones while using the restroom (88 respondents amounting to 64.2%) and while
driving (119 respondents amounting to 86.9%).
• Communication is the most used feature (36 respondents amounting to 26.3%) while
gaming is the least used (71 respondents amounting to 51.8%).
• Further, we have also found that in case of applications for gaming purpose, most of
the respondents (82) chose ‘Not Applicable’ which meant they do not use any
applications for gaming and only a few chose some particular gaming applications.

Page | 25
 CONCLUSION
This study can be seen as an attempt to understand the mobile phone usage behaviour among
adults in Assam. Our objectives were to draw a dependency between mobile phone usage
behaviour and different demographic components like gender, age and profession. We also
tried to draw a behavioural pattern of our respondents regarding the mobile phone usage
behaviour by asking certain psychological questions.

Our study is based on primary data and for the collection of primary data we have conducted
an online survey by circulating a ‘structured questionnaire’ among the respondents. Also,
convenient sampling method has been used for selecting the sample of our study.

We can conclude that there are no dependencies among mobile phone usage time and certain
demographic factors like gender and profession, whereas we can find a dependency among age
and mobile phone usage time. At the same time, we can also find out that mobile phone usage
preferences differ across certain demographic factors like gender and profession. A
behavioural pattern has been drawn regarding the mobile phone usage behaviour. Thus, all our
mentioned objectives for studying the mobile phone usage behaviour had been achieved.

Although, we have certain limitations in our study due to the resource and time constraints due
to the current pandemic scenario but this can be achieved by performing one in one interview
or telephonic interview.

Page | 26
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. George, S., Saif, N., Joseph, B.B. (August, 2017). A study on the mobile phone usage
pattern and its dependence among medical students of a college in Kerala, India.
International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. Retrieved from
https://msjonline.org

2. Kritika, M., Dr. Vasanta, S. (2013). The Mobile Phone Usage among Teens and Young
Adults Impact Of Invading Technology. International Journal of Innovative Research
in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 2, Issue 12, December 2013. Retrieved
from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299540610

3. Malhotra, N.K., Dash, S. (2020). Marketing Research. An Applied Orientation.

Pearson India Education Services Pvt. Ltd.

Page | 27
ANNEXURE (Questionnaire)

Page | 28
Page | 29
Page | 30
Page | 31
Page | 32