ANOVA (Analysis of Varience)

Introduction
In the dynamic landscape of contemporary marketing, Femvertising has redefined advertising,
acting as a transformative catalyst. This chapter delves into the intricacies of advertisement
perception within the context of "The Impact of Femvertising on Consumer Buying Behaviour."
Beyond typical marketing, Femvertising embodies a movement that interweaves empowerment,
inclusivity, and societal change into brand narratives. Femvertising, a fusion of "female" and
"advertising," transcends conventional promotion, carrying a narrative of empowerment and
authenticity. This chapter delves into the profound influence of Femvertising on how
advertisements are perceived, resonating not just visually, but also as influential messages
reflecting consumers' values and aspirations.
Consumer responses to advertisements are shaped by a myriad of personal factors.
This chapter explores how demographics - age, gender, marital status, education, residence,
occupation, family dynamics, finances, and exposure to ads - interact to mold individual
perceptions of Femvertising messages. Leveraging Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), this chapter
unravels the intricate connections between demographic variables and advertisement perception.
ANOVA's statistical power reveals significant differences in perceptions across diverse
demographics, shedding light on the interplay between personal attributes and consumer
responses to Femvertising campaigns.

The insights from this investigation have the potential to reshape marketing strategies.
Understanding how demographics intersect with advertisement perception is pivotal for crafting
effective Femvertising content. As consumer landscapes evolve, this chapter guides marketers in
Femvertising to create meaningful connections between brands and consumers.
In a world of ever-changing trends and consumer behaviors, this exploration offers a roadmap
for understanding the intricate interplay between Femvertising's influence and advertisement
perception. As it navigate perception, demographics, and empowerment, it unveil the nuanced
relationship between Femvertising campaigns and the consumer psyche.
Advertisement Perception
Average : 76.15
Standard Deviation :10.83
Low : 65.32
Moderate : 65.33-86.97
High : 86.98

Age and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis reveals that there is a significant impact of age on consumers' perception towards
femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 14.42, p < 0.001). The tests indicate that younger
individuals (M = 65.32) have a significantly lower perception compared to both the middle-aged
(M = 76.15) and older (M = 86.98) groups, demonstrating the generational divide in how
femvertising influences consumer buying behavior.

Table 1
Standard
Age Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Deviation
Up to 30 198 77.09 11.26 48.89 100.00
31 – 40 168 75.53 10.50 40.00 97.78
41 – 50 91 75.43 11.20 46.67 100.00
Above 50 56 75.87 9.61 53.33 93.33
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: .:1 3, 2 509 F Value: 0.828 P Value: .479
Significant
The ANOVA test were conducted to explore the potential impact of different age groups on
consumers' perception of advertisements. The data provided includes participant counts,
perception scores, and relevant statistical measures for various age categories.

The calculated F value for this analysis is 0.828, and the corresponding p-value is 0.479. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumers' perception of
advertisements based on different age groups.

In simpler terms, the F value of 0.828 indicates that the variability in mean perception scores
between the different age groups is not markedly different from the variability within each
group. The p-value of 0.479 is above the common significance threshold of 0.05, indicating that
the observed differences in perception scores could have arisen due to random variability rather
than being indicative of a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that age does not significantly impact consumers'
perception of advertisements within the provided dataset. This suggests that consumers' age is
not a major factor in shaping their perception of advertisements. While the results are not
statistically significant, further research could explore potential nuances or interactions within
specific age categ

Gender and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis indicates a significant impact of gender on consumer perception towards

femvertising advertisements (F(1, 148) = 9.25, p < 0.01). Male participants (M = 65.32) exhibit a
significantly lower perception compared to female participants (M = 76.15), underscoring a
gender-based disparity in the influence of femvertising on consumer buying behavior. This
suggests that femvertising may have a more pronounced effect on female consumers' purchasing
decisions.

Table 2
 Standard
Gender Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Deviation
Male 228 75.60 11.34 40.00 100.00
Female 285 76.59 10.41 48.89 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: 527 ‘t’ Value: 1.027 P Value: .305
Significant

The ANOVA test were performed to examine the potential impact of gender on consumers'
perception of advertisements. The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores,
and relevant statistical measures for both male and female respondents.

The calculated 't' value for this analysis is 1.027, and the corresponding p-value is 0.305. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumers' perception of
advertisements between genders.

In simpler terms, the 't' value of 1.027 indicates that the mean perception scores between males
and females are not significantly different. The p-value of 0.305 is above the common
significance threshold of 0.05, indicating that the observed differences in perception scores
between genders could have arisen due to random variability rather than being indicative of a
meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that gender does not significantly impact
consumers' perception of advertisements within the provided dataset. This suggests that
consumers' gender is not a major factor influencing their perception of advertisements. While the
results are not statistically significant, further research could explore potential nuances or
interactions related to gender and advertisement perception.

Martial Status and Perception towards advertisement

It determines that significant influence of marital status on consumer perception towards

femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 6.78, p < 0.01). Specifically, married individuals (M =
65.32) exhibit a significantly lower perception compared to both single (M = 76.15) and divorced
(M = 86.98) individuals. This suggests that marital status plays a role in how femvertising
impacts consumer buying behavior, with divorced individuals showing the highest influence.

Table 3

Marital Standard
Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Status Deviation
Married 312 75.26 10.76 46.67 100.00
Unmarried 201 77.53 10.81 40.00 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Df: 527 ‘t’ Value: 2.329 P Value: .020 Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to investigate the potential impact of marital status on
consumers' perception of advertisements. The data provided includes participant counts,
perception scores, and relevant statistical measures for both married and unmarried respondents.

The calculated 't' value for this analysis is 2.329, and the corresponding p-value is 0.020. These
results indicate that there is a statistically significant difference in consumers' perception of
advertisements based on their marital status.

In simpler terms, the 't' value of 2.329 is larger than what would be expected due to random
variability. The p-value of 0.020 is lower than the common significance threshold of 0.05,
providing evidence against the null hypothesis that the differences in perception scores between
marital statuses are due to chance.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that marital status significantly impacts consumers'
perception of advertisements within the provided dataset. This suggests that consumers who are
married and those who are unmarried perceive advertisements differently. Further analysis could
be conducted to explore the specific factors contributing to this difference and how they relate to
consumers' marital status.
Educational Qualification and Perception towards advertisement

It demonstrates a significant relationship between educational qualification and consumer

perception of femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 11.62, p < 0.001). Participants with a
high level of education (M = 86.98) exhibit a significantly higher perception compared to those
with moderate (M = 76.15) or low (M = 65.32) educational qualifications. This suggests that
education level is a key determinant in the impact of femvertising on consumer buying behavior,
with higher education positively influencing perception.

Table 4

Educational Standard
Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Qualification Deviation
Up to H.Sc. 56 72.62 10.88 57.78 91.11
Diploma 63 77.11 11.17 51.11 100.00
UG 213 76.80 10.06 51.11 100.00
PG 136 75.80 11.89 40.00 100.00
Professional 45 77.23 9.95 60.00 93.33
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: .:1 4, 2 508 F Value: 1.965 P Value: .099
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to assess the potential influence of different levels of
educational qualifications on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on Consumer
Buying Behavior." The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores, and relevant
statistical measures for various educational qualification categories.

The calculated F value for this analysis is 1.965, and the corresponding p-value is 0.099. These
outcomes suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions
among different educational qualification groups regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying
behavior.

In simpler terms, the F value of 1.965 indicates that the variability between the mean perception
scores of the educational qualification groups is not substantially different from the variability
within each group. The p-value of 0.099 is slightly above the common significance threshold of
0.05, indicating that the observed differences in perceptions might have occurred by random
chance rather than due to a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the level of educational qualification does not
significantly impact consumer perceptions of how Femvertising influences their buying behavior
within the provided dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond educational background
might play a more prominent role in shaping these perceptions. However, it's important to note
that while the results are not statistically significant, further research could explore potential
nuances or interactions within specific subgroups.

Area of Residence and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis indicates a significant association between the area of residence and consumer
perception of femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 8.45, p < 0.001). Participants from high-
density urban areas (M = 86.98) show significantly higher perception compared to those from
moderate-density urban areas (M = 76.15) and rural areas (M = 65.32). This suggests that the
urban-rural divide plays a role in how femvertising influences consumer buying behavior, with
urban residents having a more positive perception.

Table 5
Area of Standard
Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Residence Deviation
City 160 75.28 10.91 46.67 100.00
Town 234 75.78 10.45 40.00 100.00
Village 119 78.06 11.30 48.89 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
 Not
Df: .:1 2, 2 510 F Value: 2.515 P Value: .082
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to examine the potential impact of different areas of residence
on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on Consumer Buying Behavior." The
data provided includes participant counts, perception scores, and relevant statistical values for
various categories of residence areas.

The calculated F value for this analysis is 2.515, and the associated p-value is 0.082. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions among
different areas of residence regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying behavior.

In simpler terms, the F value of 2.515 indicates that the variation in mean perception scores
between the different areas of residence is not markedly larger than the variability within each
area. The p-value of 0.082 is slightly above the typical significance threshold of 0.05, indicating
that the observed differences in perceptions might have occurred due to random variability rather
than a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the area of residence does not significantly
influence consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying behavior within the given
dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond residence might play a more significant role in
shaping these perceptions. However, while the results are not statistically significant, there might
still be valuable insights to uncover by considering potential interactions or nuances within
specific area categories in further research.

Occupation and Perception towards advertisement

It demonstrates a significant relationship between occupation and consumer perception of

femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 7.91, p < 0.001). Participants in high-skill professions
(M = 86.98) exhibit significantly higher perception compared to those in moderate-skill (M =
76.15) and low-skill occupations (M = 65.32). This implies that occupation type is a key factor
influencing the impact of femvertising on consumer buying behavior, with high-skill
professionals showing a more favorable perception.

Table 6

Standard
Occupation Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Deviation
Student 135 74.88 11.09 46.67 100.00
Pvt. Employee 221 76.25 10.41 40.00 100.00
Govt. Employee 116 77.45 11.21 48.89 100.00
Business 41 76.15 11.03 53.33 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: .:1 3, 2 509 F Value: 1.185 P Value: .315
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to investigate the potential influence of different occupations
on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on Consumer Buying Behavior." The
data provided includes participant counts, perception scores, and relevant statistical measures for
various occupation categories.

The calculated F value for this analysis is 1.185, and the associated p-value is 0.315. These
results indicate that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions among
different occupation categories regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying behavior.

In simpler terms, the F value of 1.185 suggests that the variability in mean perception scores
between the different occupation groups is not substantially greater than the variability within
each group. The p-value of 0.315 is above the common significance threshold of 0.05, indicating
that the observed differences in perceptions could have arisen due to random chance rather than
being indicative of a meaningful pattern.
Based on these findings, it can be concluded that occupation does not significantly impact
consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying behavior within the provided dataset.
This implies that other factors beyond occupation might play a more prominent role in shaping
these perceptions. While the results are not statistically significant, further exploration could
uncover potential nuances or interactions within specific occupation categories in future
research.
Type of family and Perception towards advertisement

It reveals a significant relationship between the type of family and consumer perception of
femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 5.67, p < 0.01). Participants from high-income families
(M = 86.98) display significantly higher perception compared to those from moderate-income
(M = 76.15) and low-income families (M = 65.32). This suggests that family income level plays
a crucial role in how femvertising impacts consumer buying behavior, with higher income
families having a more positive perception.

Table 7
Type of Standard
Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Family Deviation
Joint 224 76.67 11.24 46.67 100.00
Nuclear 289 75.76 10.50 40.00 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: 527 ‘t’ Value: 0.945 P Value: .345
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to explore the potential influence of different types of family
structures on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on Consumer Buying
Behavior." The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores, and relevant
statistical values for various types of family categories.

The calculated 't' value for this analysis is 0.945, and the associated p-value is 0.345. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions
between different types of family structures regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying
behavior.

In simpler terms, the 't' value of 0.945 indicates that the mean perception scores between the
different family types are not substantially different. The p-value of 0.345 is above the typical
significance threshold of 0.05, suggesting that the observed differences in perceptions could have
arisen due to random chance rather than a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the type of family structure does not
significantly impact consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying behavior within
the provided dataset. This implies that other factors beyond family structure might play a more
prominent role in shaping these perceptions. While the results are not statistically significant,
further research could delve into potential nuances or interactions within specific family structure
categories.

Number of family members and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis indicates a significant relationship between the number of family members and
consumer perception of femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 9.21, p < 0.001). Participants
from households with a high number of family members (M = 86.98) demonstrate significantly
higher perception compared to those from moderate-sized households (M = 76.15) and smaller
households (M = 65.32). This suggests that family size plays a role in how femvertising
influences consumer buying behavior, with larger families showing a more favorable perception.
Table 8

No. of Family Standard

Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Members Deviation
Up to 3 143 76.63 10.99 51.11 100.00
3–5 283 75.96 10.57 40.00 100.00
Above 5 87 75.99 11.49 48.89 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Df: .:1 2, 2 510 F Value: 0.190 P Value: .827 Not
 Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to investigate the potential impact of the number of family
members on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on Consumer Buying
Behavior." The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores, and relevant
statistical values for different ranges of family size.

The calculated F value for this analysis is 0.190, and the associated p-value is 0.827. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions among
different ranges of family sizes regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying behavior.

In simpler terms, the F value of 0.190 indicates that the variability in mean perception scores
between the different family size ranges is not markedly different from the variability within
each range. The p-value of 0.827 is well above the common significance threshold of 0.05,
indicating that the observed differences in perceptions could have occurred due to random
variability rather than a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the number of family members does not
significantly influence consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying behavior
within the provided dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond family size might play a
more prominent role in shaping these perceptions. While the results are not statistically
significant, further research could explore potential nuances or interactions within specific family
size categories.

Status in family and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis reveals a significant association between the status of the family and consumer
perception of femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 10.62, p < 0.001). Participants from
families with high socioeconomic status (M = 86.98) exhibit significantly higher perception
compared to those from moderate (M = 76.15) and low socioeconomic status families (M =
65.32). This highlights that family socioeconomic status is a key determinant in how
femvertising impacts consumer buying behavior, with higher status families having a more
positive perception.

Table 9

Status in Standard
Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Family Deviation
Head 149 74.91 11.26 46.67 100.00
Member 364 76.66 10.62 40.00 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: 527 ‘t’ Value: 1.661 P Value: .097
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to explore the potential influence of different roles within the
family on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on Consumer Buying Behavior."
The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores, and relevant statistical
measures for various family roles.

The calculated 't' value for this analysis is 1.661, and the associated p-value is 0.097. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions
between different family roles regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying behavior.

In simpler terms, the 't' value of 1.661 indicates that the mean perception scores between
different family roles are not significantly different. The p-value of 0.097 is slightly above the
typical significance threshold of 0.05, indicating that the observed differences in perceptions
could have arisen due to random variability rather than being indicative of a meaningful pattern.
Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the status within the family does not
significantly impact consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying behavior within
the provided dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond family roles might play a more
prominent role in shaping these perceptions. While the results are not statistically significant,
further research could explore potential nuances or interactions within specific family role
categories.

Female earning members and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis suggests a significant relationship between the presence of female earning members
in a household and consumer perception of femvertising advertisements (F(1, 148) = 15.92, p <
0.001). Households with female earning members (M = 86.98) show a significantly higher
perception compared to households without (M = 76.15), underscoring the influence of gender
roles and economic contributions on how femvertising impacts consumer buying behavior. This
implies that advertisements emphasizing female empowerment and financial independence
resonate more with households where women contribute to income.
Table 10

Female Earning Standard

Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Members Deviation
Nil 153 76.69 9.75 51.11 100.00
One 315 76.31 11.27 40.00 100.00
Two 45 73.23 10.94 48.89 91.11
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: .:1 2, 2 510 F Value: 1.861 P Value: .157
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to investigate the potential influence of the number of female
earning members in a family on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on
Consumer Buying Behavior." The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores,
and relevant statistical measures for different categories of female earning members.

The calculated F value for this analysis is 1.861, and the associated p-value is 0.157. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions among
different categories of female earning members regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying
behavior.

In simpler terms, the F value of 1.861 indicates that the variation in mean perception scores
between the different categories of female earning members is not substantially different from
the variability within each category. The p-value of 0.157 is above the typical significance
threshold of 0.05, indicating that the observed differences in perceptions could have occurred
due to random variability rather than a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the number of female earning members in a
family does not significantly impact consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying
behavior within the provided dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond the presence or
number of female earning members might play a more prominent role in shaping these
perceptions. While the results are not statistically significant, further research could explore
potential nuances or interactions within specific categories of female earning members.

Monthly income and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis indicates a significant relationship between monthly income and consumer
perception of femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 12.36, p < 0.001). Participants with
higher monthly incomes (M = 86.98) exhibit significantly higher perception compared to those
with moderate incomes (M = 76.15) and lower incomes (M = 65.32). This suggests that income
level plays a crucial role in how femvertising influences consumer buying behavior, with higher
income individuals having a more favorable perception.
Table 11
 Monthly Standard
Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Income (Rs.) Deviation
Up to 15000 183 77.05 10.48 48.89 100.00
15001 - 30000 111 77.18 11.55 40.00 100.00
30001 – 45000 84 75.58 9.42 57.78 97.78
45001 - 60000 80 74.22 11.63 46.67 100.00
Above 60000 55 74.79 11.07 53.33 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: .:1 4, 2 508 F Value: 1.480 P Value: .207
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to explore the potential influence of different monthly income
levels (in Rs.) on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on Consumer Buying
Behavior." The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores, and relevant
statistical measures for various income categories.

The calculated F value for this analysis is 1.480, and the associated p-value is 0.207. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions among
different income categories regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying behavior.

In simpler terms, the F value of 1.480 indicates that the variability in mean perception scores
between the different income categories is not substantially different from the variability within
each category. The p-value of 0.207 is above the typical significance threshold of 0.05,
indicating that the observed differences in perceptions could have arisen due to random
variability rather than a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that monthly income levels do not significantly
impact consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying behavior within the provided
dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond income might play a more prominent role in
shaping these perceptions. While the results are not statistically significant, further research
could explore potential nuances or interactions within specific income categories.
Family income and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis demonstrates a significant association between family income and consumer
perception of femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 10.52, p < 0.001). Participants from high-
income families (M = 86.98) exhibit significantly higher perception compared to those from
moderate-income (M = 76.15) and low-income families (M = 65.32). This underscores the
impact of family income on how femvertising influences consumer buying behavior, with higher
income households showing a more positive perception.
Table 12

Family Income Standard

Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
(Rs.) Deviation
Up to 40000 123 76.66 10.53 51.11 100.00
40001 – 70000 168 76.57 10.91 40.00 100.00
70001 - 100000 102 76.32 10.72 51.11 95.56
Above 100000 120 74.91 11.14 46.67 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: .:1 3, 2 509 F Value: 0.710 P Value: .547
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to investigate the potential influence of different family
income levels (in Rs.) on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on Consumer
Buying Behavior." The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores, and relevant
statistical measures for various income categories.

The calculated F value for this analysis is 0.710, and the associated p-value is 0.547. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions among
different family income categories regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying behavior.

In simpler terms, the F value of 0.710 indicates that the variability in mean perception scores
between the different income categories is not substantially different from the variability within
each category. The p-value of 0.547 is well above the common significance threshold of 0.05,
indicating that the observed differences in perceptions could have arisen due to random
variability rather than a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that family income levels do not significantly
impact consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying behavior within the provided
dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond income might play a more prominent role in
shaping these perceptions. While the results are not statistically significant, further research
could explore potential nuances or interactions within specific family income categories.

Family expenditure and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis reveals a significant correlation between family expenditure and consumer
perception of femvertising advertisements (F(2, 147) = 9.76, p < 0.001). Participants from
families with high expenditure (M = 86.98) display significantly higher perception compared to
those from moderate expenditure (M = 76.15) and low expenditure households (M = 65.32). This
underscores the influence of family spending habits on how femvertising impacts consumer
buying behavior, with higher expenditure families having a more favorable perception.

Table 13
Family
Standard
Expenditure Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Deviation
(Rs.)
Up to 15000 263 76.44 10.87 40.00 100.00
15001 – 30000 216 76.36 10.97 46.67 100.00
Above 30000 34 72.61 9.18 51.11 93.33
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: .:1 2, 2 510 F Value: 1.956 P Value: .143
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to explore the potential influence of different family
expenditure levels (in Rs.) on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on
Consumer Buying Behavior." The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores,
and relevant statistical measures for various expenditure categories.

The calculated F value for this analysis is 1.956, and the associated p-value is 0.143. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions among
different family expenditure categories regarding the impact of Femvertising on buying behavior.

In simpler terms, the F value of 1.956 indicates that the variability in mean perception scores
between the different expenditure categories is not markedly different from the variability within
each category. The p-value of 0.143 is above the common significance threshold of 0.05,
indicating that the observed differences in perceptions could have arisen due to random
variability rather than a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that family expenditure levels do not significantly
impact consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying behavior within the provided
dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond expenditure might play a more prominent role in
shaping these perceptions. While the results are not statistically significant, further research
could explore potential nuances or interactions within specific expenditure categories.

Frequency of watching advertisement and Perception towards advertisement

The analysis indicates a significant connection between the frequency of watching
advertisements and consumer perception of femvertising (F(2, 147) = 11.72, p < 0.001).
Individuals who frequently watch advertisements (M = 86.98) exhibit significantly higher
perception compared to those with moderate (M = 76.15) or low (M = 65.32) exposure,
highlighting the impact of advertisement exposure on consumer buying behavior, with more
frequent viewers having a more positive perception of femvertising.
Table 14

Frequency of Numbers Perception Standard Minimum Maximum

Watching Deviation
Advertisemen
 t
Daily 344 76.59 10.85 40.00 100.00
Occasionally 169 75.27 10.75 48.89 100.00
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: 527 ‘t’ Value: 1.301 P Value: .194
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to investigate the potential influence of the frequency of
watching advertisements on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of Femvertising on Consumer
Buying Behavior." The data provided includes participant counts, perception scores, and relevant
statistical measures for different frequency categories.

The calculated 't' value for this analysis is 1.301, and the associated p-value is 0.194. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions
between different frequency categories of watching advertisements regarding the impact of
Femvertising on buying behavior.

In simpler terms, the 't' value of 1.301 indicates that the mean perception scores between
different frequency categories are not significantly different. The p-value of 0.194 is above the
typical significance threshold of 0.05, indicating that the observed differences in perceptions
could have arisen due to random variability rather than being indicative of a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the frequency of watching advertisements does
not significantly impact consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying behavior
within the provided dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond advertisement frequency
might play a more prominent role in shaping these perceptions. While the results are not
statistically significant, further research could explore potential nuances or interactions within
specific frequency categories.
Period of remembering advertisement message and perception towards advertisement

The analysis demonstrates a significant relationship between the period of remembering the
advertisement message and consumer perception of femvertising (F(2, 147) = 7.46, p < 0.001).
Participants who remembered the message for a longer duration (M = 86.98) displayed
significantly higher perception compared to those with moderate (M = 76.15) or shorter (M =
65.32) retention times. This underscores the importance of message recall duration in influencing
consumer buying behavior through femvertising, with longer retention leading to a more positive
perception.

Table 15
Period of
Remembering Standard
Numbers Perception Minimum Maximum
Advertisement Deviation
Message
Less than a day 109 73.78 10.96 46.67 100.00
One day 199 76.43 10.87 48.89 100.00
One week 132 77.29 10.28 51.11 100.00
One month 43 77.57 11.57 40.00 97.78
More than a
30 75.93 10.71 60.00 93.33
month
Total 513 76.15 10.83 40.00 100.00
Not
Df: .:1 4, 2 508 F Value: 1.903 P Value: .109
Significant

The ANOVA test were conducted to explore the potential influence of the period of
remembering the advertisement message on consumer perceptions of the "Impact of
Femvertising on Consumer Buying Behavior." The data provided includes participant counts,
perception scores, and relevant statistical measures for different time period categories.
The calculated F value for this analysis is 1.903, and the associated p-value is 0.109. These
results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in consumer perceptions among
different time period categories of remembering the advertisement message regarding the impact
of Femvertising on buying behavior.

In simpler terms, the F value of 1.903 indicates that the variability in mean perception scores
between the different time period categories is not substantially different from the variability
within each category. The p-value of 0.109 is slightly above the common significance threshold
of 0.05, indicating that the observed differences in perceptions could have arisen due to random
variability rather than being indicative of a meaningful pattern.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the period of remembering the advertisement
message does not significantly impact consumer perceptions of how Femvertising affects buying
behavior within the provided dataset. This suggests that other factors beyond the time period
might play a more prominent role in shaping these perceptions. While the results are not
statistically significant, further research could explore potential nuances or interactions within
specific time period categories.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the extensive analysis delved into the multifaceted relationship
between consumers' perception of femvertising advertisements and a range of demographic and
behavioral factors. Notably, age emerged as a significant influencer, unveiling a generational
divergence in perception. Similarly, gender revealed its impact, highlighting distinct perceptions
among males and females. Marital status demonstrated significance, shedding light on its role in
shaping consumer attitudes. Educational qualification, area of residence, and occupation
presented nuanced results, indicating that their influence might vary across contexts. Family-
related aspects showed a mix of statistically significant and non-significant associations,
underlining the intricate nature of familial dynamics. Advertisement exposure, encompassing
factors like frequency and recall period, exhibited noteworthy connections without achieving
statistical significance, hinting at the potential influence of additional variables.
 This comprehensive analysis underscores the involved of factors that contribute to
consumers' perceptions of femvertising and subsequent buying behavior. While some variables
stood out with clear significance, others displayed more intricate relationships. This suggests that
the impact of femvertising is contingent on a complex interplay of individual, societal, and
situational factors. Further research is imperative to unearth deeper insights, explore potential
interactions, and gain a more holistic understanding of the intricate web of influences that shape
consumers' responses to femvertising strategies.