As the above result shows that p-value of above model is greater than 0.
05, this
The above regression analysis shows that none of the independent
variable i.e. Q1, Q2, Q5 & Q7 has significant impact on LF at 5%
confidence level. The R-squared of the model is 0.1225, which means
that only 12.15% of variance in LF is explained by Q1, Q2, Q3 & Q4.
Further, the F-test score is 3.49 corresponding p-value of 0.001026 which
shows that overall model is insignificant in explaining the impact on LF.
shows that we are fail to reject the null hypothesis. This means that coefficient
are not significant to the model and does not add value to the model.
Therefore, we can conclude that only Q1, Q4, and Q4 are jointly insignificant at
the 5% level in predicting LF.
The R-squared of model is only 0.0065 which also shows that model is not
good fit.
Further, the F-test score is 0.22 corresponding p-value of 0.881 (greater than
0.05) which shows that overall model is insignificant in explaining the impact
on LF.
We do not reject the null hypothesis as the absolute value of the t-statistic for all
the coefficients of the factors does not exceeds the critical value of 1.960.
Therefore, we can conclude that the estimated coefficients are statistically
insignificant at the 5% level.
The above regression analysis shows that one of the independent variable i.e.
The above regression analysis shows that two of the independent variables i.e. Q21
Q21 has significant impact on LF at 5% confidence level. The beta coefficient of
and Q27 has significant impact on LF at 5% confidence level. The beta coefficient of
Q21 i.e. 0.1629, this means if Q21 will increase by 1%, LF will increase by
Q21 ( b1=0.1635, & p-value=0.0011) and Q27 ( b1=0.1158, & p-value=0.8694).
16.29%. Whereas, remaining 2 independent variables including Q20 and Q24
Whereas, the beta coefficient of Q24 ( b1=0..009157, & p-value=0.0011) is
are insignificant in predicting LF at 5% confidence level. The R-squared of the
insignificant in predicting LF at 5% confidence level. The R-squared of the model is
model is 0.1429, which means that only 14.29% of variance in LF is explained
0.1996, which means that only 19.96 % of variance in LF is explained by overall
by Q20, Q21 & @4. Further, the F-test score is 5.613 corresponding p-value of
independent variables. Further, the F-test score is 6.2359 corresponding p-value of
0.001337 which shows that overall model is significant in explaining the impact
0.000160 which shows that overall model is significant in explaining the impact on LF.
on LF.
As the above result shows that p-value of above model is less than 0.05, As the above result shows that p-value of above model is less than 0.05, this
this shows that we are fail to rejecting the null hypothesis. This means that shows that we are fail to rejecting the null hypothesis. This means that some of
some of the coefficient’s are significant in predicting LF and add value to the coefficient’s are significant in predicting LF and add value to the model.
the model.
The R-squared of model is also comparatively good i.e. 0.3542 which also
Therefore, we can conclude that only Q27, Q65, and Q91 are jointly shows that model is moderately good fit. Further, the F-test score is 10/85
insignificant at the 5% level in predicting LF. corresponding p-value of 0.000 (less than 0.05) which shows that overall model
is significant in explaining the impact on LF.We reject the null hypothesis as
The R-squared of model is also comparatively good i.e. 0.3542 which the absolute value of the t-statistic for all the coefficients of the factors exceeds
also shows that model is moderately good fit. the critical value of 1.960.

Further, the F-test score is 10/85 corresponding p-value of 0.000 (less Therefore, we can conclude that only Q27, Q65, and Q91 are jointly
than 0.05) which shows that overall model is significant in explaining insignificant at the 5% level in predicting LF.
the impact on LF.

We reject the null hypothesis as the absolute value of the t-statistic for all
the coefficients of the factors exceeds the critical value of 1.960.
As the above result shows that p-value of above model is less than 0.05,
As the above result shows that p-value of above model is less than 0.05, this
this shows that we are rejecting the null hypothesis. This means that some
shows that we are rejecting the null hypothesis at 5% level. This means that
of the coefficient’s are significant in predicting LF and add value to the
some of the coefficient’s are significant in predicting LF and add value to the
model.
model.
The R-squared of model is also comparatively good i.e. 0.3542 which
The R-squared of model is also comparatively good i.e. 0.357 which further
also shows that model is moderately good fit. Further, the F-test score is
improved from previous model and is moderately good fit. Further, the F-test
13.7 corresponding p-value of 0.000 (less than 0.05) which shows that
score is 11.019 corresponding p-value of 0.000 (less than 0.05) which shows
overall model is significant in explaining the impact on LF. We reject the
that overall model is significant in explaining the impact on LF
null hypothesis as the absolute value of the t-statistic for all the
coefficients of the factors exceeds the critical value of 1.960.
Therefore, we can conclude that only Q27, and Q65 (t-statistics absolute >1.96)
are jointly significant at the 5% level in predicting LF.
Therefore, we can conclude that only Q27, Q65, and Q91 are jointly
significant at the 5% level in predicting LF.
As the above result shows that p-value of F-statistics (9.07) is less than
0.05, this shows that we are rejecting the null hypothesis at 5% level. This
means that some of the coefficient’s are significant in predicting LF and
add value to the model.

The R-squared of model is also moderately good i.e. 0.357.

T-statistic of Q27 and Q64 exceeds the critical value of 1.960 except hml
& cma.

Therefore, we can conclude that only Q27, and Q65 (t-statistics absolute
>1.96) are jointly significant at the 5% level in predicting LF.
As the above result shows that p-value of Fstatistics (9.07) is less than As the above result shows that p-value of Fstatistics (4.06) is less than 0.05, this
0.05, this shows that we are rejecting the null hypothesis at 5% level. This shows that we are rejecting the null hypothesis at 5% level. This means that
means that some of the coefficient’s are significant in predicting LF and some of the coefficient’s are significant in predicting LF and add value to the
add value to the model. model.

The R-squared of model is also moderately good i.e. 0.357. The R-squared of model is not good i.e. 0.10.76

T-statistic of Q27 and Q64 exceeds the critical value of 1.960. T-statistic of only Q2 exceeds the critical value of 1.960

Therefore, we can conclude that only Q27, and Q65 (t-statistics absolute Therefore, we can conclude that only Q2 (t-statistics absolute >1.96) is
>1.96) are jointly significant at the 5% level in predicting LF. significant at the 5% level in predicting LF.

As the above result shows that p-value of Fstatistics (2.86) is less than
0.05, this shows that we are rejecting the null hypothesis at 5% level.
This means that model is significant in predicting LF.
The R-squared of model is not good i.e. 12.62., which shows model is
very weak.
T-statistic of only Q2 exceeds the critical value of 1.960, this means only
Q2 is significant in predicting LF
Therefore, we can conclude that only Q2 (t-statistics absolute >1.96) is
significant at the 5% level in predicting LF.
As the above result shows that p-value of Fstatistics (3.62) is less than 0.05, this
shows that we are rejecting the null hypothesis at 5% level. This means that
model is significant in predicting LF.
The R-squared of model is not good i.e. 18.31., which shows model is very
weak.
T-statistic of only Q2 exceeds the critical value of 1.960 and beta coefficient is
0.363171, this means only Q2 is significant in predicting LF
Therefore, we can conclude that only Q2 (t-statistics absolute >1.96) is
significant at the 5% level in predicting LF.
As the above result shows that p-value of F-statistics (23.98) is less than 0.05,
this shows that we are rejecting the null hypothesis at 5% level. This means that
model is significant in predicting LF.

The R-squared of model is good i.e. 54.77., which shows model is moderately
good.

T-statistic of only Q91 and Q96 exceeds the critical value of 1.960 and beta
coefficient are 0.1559 and -0.976.

Therefore, we can conclude that only Q91 and Q96 (t-statistics absolute >1.96)
is significant at the 5% level in predicting LF.
 The descriptive statistics is mentioned above.

The ordinary correlation between Q24 and Q31 is positive but weak as
coefficient value is just 0.071.
The ordinary correlation between LF and PR is positive but weak as
coefficient value is just 0.3643.

Covariance: the below table shows that LF has positive relationship wiyj PR,
Q1, and Q2. Whereas, it is negatively associated with Q$
 Q18_1 Q18_10 Q18_11 Q18_12 Q18_13 Q18_14 Q18_15 Q18_2 Q18_3 Q18_4 Q18_5 Q18_6 Q18_7 Q18_8 Q18_9
1.00000 10.0000 11.0000 12.0000 13.0000 14.0000 15.0000 2.00000 3.00000 4.00000 5.00000 6.00000 7.00000 8.00000 9.00000
Mean 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00000 10.0000 11.0000 12.0000 13.0000 14.0000 15.0000 2.00000 3.00000 4.00000 5.00000 6.00000 7.00000 8.00000 9.00000
Median 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00000 10.0000 11.0000 12.0000 13.0000 14.0000 15.0000 2.00000 3.00000 4.00000 5.00000 6.00000 7.00000 8.00000 9.00000
Maximum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00000 10.0000 11.0000 12.0000 13.0000 14.0000 15.0000 2.00000 3.00000 4.00000 5.00000 6.00000 7.00000 8.00000 9.00000
Minimum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
Std. Dev. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Skewness NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Kurtosis NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Jarque-Bera NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Probability NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

29.0000 50.0000 44.0000 36.0000 65.0000 42.0000 150.000 50.0000 36.0000 56.0000 55.0000 72.0000 105.000 64.0000 27.0000
Sum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sum Sq. 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
Dev. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Observation
s 29 5 4 3 5 3 10 25 12 14 11 12 15 8 3

Q16_1 Q16_2 Q16_3 Q16_4 Q16_5 Q16_6 Q16_7

Mean 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Median 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Maximum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Minimum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Std. Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Skewness NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Kurtosis NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Jarque-Bera NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Probability NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Sum 35.00000 24.00000 177.0000 168.0000 35.00000 360.0000 112.0000

Sum Sq.
Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000

Observations 35 12 59 42 7 60 16

Q40_1 Q40_10 Q40_11 Q40_2 Q40_3 Q40_4 Q40_5 Q40_6 Q40_7 Q40_8 Q40_9
Mean 1.000000 10.00000 11.00000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Median 1.000000 10.00000 11.00000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Maximum 1.000000 10.00000 11.00000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Minimum 1.000000 10.00000 11.00000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Std. Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Skewness NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Kurtosis NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Jarque-Bera NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Probability NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Sum 54.00000 200.0000 484.0000 18.00000 39.00000 84.00000 65.00000 96.00000 70.00000 48.00000 369.0000
Sum Sq.
Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Observations 54 20 44 9 13 21 13 16 10 6 41

Q59_1 Q59_2 Q59_3 Q59_4 Q59_5 Q59_6 Q59_7 Q59_8 Q59_9

Mean 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Median 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Maximum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Minimum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Std. Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 NA
Skewness NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Kurtosis NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Jarque-Bera NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Probability NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Sum 47.00000 142.0000 162.0000 132.0000 130.0000 384.0000 189.0000 376.0000 9.000000
Sum Sq.
Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000

Observations 47 71 54 33 26 64 27 47 1

Q59_1 Q59_2 Q59_3 Q59_4 Q59_5 Q59_6 Q59_7 Q59_8 Q59_9

Mean 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Median 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Maximum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Minimum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000 8.000000 9.000000
Std. Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 NA
Skewness NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Kurtosis NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Jarque-Bera NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Probability NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Sum 47.00000 142.0000 162.0000 132.0000 130.0000 384.0000 189.0000 376.0000 9.000000
Sum Sq.
Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000

Observations 47 71 54 33 26 64 27 47 1

Q64_1 Q64_2 Q64_3 Q64_4 Q64_5 Q64_6 Q64_7

Mean 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Median 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Maximum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Minimum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Std. Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 NA
Skewness NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Kurtosis NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Jarque-Bera NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Probability NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Sum 77.00000 136.0000 33.00000 96.00000 50.00000 156.0000 7.000000

Sum Sq.
Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000

Observations 77 68 11 24 10 26 1

Q64_1 Q64_2 Q64_3 Q64_4 Q64_5 Q64_6 Q64_7

Mean 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Median 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Maximum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Minimum 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 4.000000 5.000000 6.000000 7.000000
Std. Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 NA
Skewness NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Kurtosis NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Jarque-Bera NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Probability NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Sum 77.00000 136.0000 33.00000 96.00000 50.00000 156.0000 7.000000

Sum Sq.
Dev. 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000

Observations 77 68 11 24 10 26 1