Relationship Between Stress and Smoking in India

Group 8
Ankur Goel Bishal Hetampuria Mohit Madan Poulami Kuila Tulika Bhatnagar Siddhi Agarwal Sumedha Agrawal

OBJECTIVE
To determine if there is any relationship between smoking and stress by the means of conducting a social research study.

NULL HYPOTHESIS
There exists a direct relationship between smoking and stress.

METHODOLOGY  Defining the research problem  Questionnaire preparation  Conducting the Survey (No of Respondents – 88)  Analysis of the collected data:    Univariate Analysis Bivariate Analysis Multivariate Analysis   Cluster Analysis Factor Analysis  Compilation of Findings and Conclusion .

UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS .

Demographic Profile Of Respondents Age Distribution 18-23 23-28 28 & Above .

SEX # Answer Response % 1 Male 91 85% 2 Female 16 Total 15% 107 100% .

Annual Personal Income (in Lakhs) .

Profession .

Marital Status # Answer Response 1 Married 7 2 Unmarried 100 Total 93% 107 100% 7% % .

Bivariate Analysis (Case 1) .

Null Hypothesis (Case 1)  There doesn’t exists any relationship between smoking frequency under stress and Age.  Dependent Variable – Smoking frequency  Independent Variable – Age .

Cross Tabulation Never (1) Age (in years ) 18-25 (1) 13 26-30 (2) 6 31-35 (3) Stress & Smoking Rarely Someti Most (2) mes (3) of the Time (4) 4 3 10 6 14 3 Always (5) Total 4 1 45 19 3 Above 36 (4) 1 3 2 3 5 8 3 0 1 17 12 .

Observations Since sig level is very high. therefor we will accept the null hypothesis. .

Null Hypothesis (Case 2)  There doesn’t exists any relationship between smoking frequency under stress and profession.  Dependent Variable – Smoking frequency  Independent Variable – profession .

Cross Tabulation Profession Self Employed (1) Government Sector (2) Private Sector (3) 3 Student (4) 17 2 10 7 17 9 18 1 5 22 67 Stress & Smoking Never Rarely Sometimes Most of Always (1) (2) (3) the Time (5) (4) Total 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 3 .

Since sig level is very high. therefor we will accept the null hypothesis. .

Null Hypothesis(Case 3)  There doesn’t exists any relationship between smoking frequency under stress and Annual income.  Dependent Variable – Smoking frequency  Independent Variable – Annual income .

Cross Tabulation Never (1) Annual Personal Income (in lakhs) Less than 1 Lac (1) 14 1 Lac-3 Lacs (2) 1 3 Lacs.6 Lacs (3) 4 More than 6 Lacs (4) 4 1 2 7 1 6 5 1 0 19 12 2 1 1 0 5 Stress & Smoking Rarely Sometimes Most of Always (2) (3) the (5) Time (4) Total 9 14 16 4 57 .

Since sig level is very high. therefor we will accept the null hypothesis. .

Bivariate Analysis (Case 2) .

Null hypotheisis  There exist No direct relationship between stress frequency and smoking frequency  Dependent Variable – Smoking frequency  Independent Variable – Stress Frequency .

Cross Tabulation Never (1) Stress pattern Never (1) 3 Rarely (2) 12 Sometimes(3) Most of the time(4) 9 1 3 3 2 10 10 1 13 14 1 3 4 1 41 40 6 1 1 1 0 6 Smoking pattern Rarely Sometimes Most Always (2) (3) of the (5) Time (4) Total Always (5) 0 0 0 0 0 0 .

Since adjusted R Square is very low explanatory power of this regression is low However sig level is not very high. therefor we cannot fully reject null hypothesis. Thus to some extent smoking pattern depends on the stress .

FACTOR ANALYSIS .

Survey Compilation Data .

058 .033 .697 .005 -.883 Cigarettes alternatives .081 .050 .103 .115 .058 .279 .777 .077 -.031 .138 -.368 -.100 .148 .191 .018 -.245 -.105 .561 .181 .037 .617 .024 -.106 -.045 -.101 -.025 -.211 .454 -.008 .023 -.057 -.176 .016 .024 -.083 -.346 -.058 .Rotated Component Matrix Frequency & Factors Owning House Brand Consciousness Social Status Party Frequency Party Expenditure Insomnia Friction between Colleagues Feeling frustrated Feeling defeated Overly competitive Sharing stress Smoking edge Smoking Frequency Smoking at Home -.015 Anger & Frustration -.012 Social Importance .577 .099 .147 .013 .134 .174 .127 -.051 .142 -.553 .014 .754 .337 .122 .085 .007 .020 -.735 .010 -.027 .117 .096 -.420 -.049 Smoking Expenditure -.208 .003 .

008 .186 .812 .117 -.893 .680 Smoking under stress Distressing Peer’s stress level Smoking during breaks Meeting stress .133 -.060 -.132 .045 -.115 .129 -.343 .018 .023 -.177 -.539 .511 .024 -.801 .003 .031 .154 .317 .155 .250 .096 -.660 .164 -.054 .027 .458 .213 .Job requirement Money spent on smoking Quit Smoking Cigarettes replacement .063 -.365 -.188 .710 -.099 .169 -.132 .012 .014 -.154 -.066 .063 .

Factors Formed  Factor 1 (Reasons for Smoking)  Job pressure  Smoking under stress  Smoking during breaks  Meeting stress  Factor 2 (Social Importance)  Social status  Owning house  Factor 3 (Smoking Expenditure)  Money spent on smoking  Smoking frequency  Factor 4 (Anger & Frustration)  Friction between colleagues  Feeling frustrated  Factor 5 (Cigarettes alternatives)  Quit Smoking  Cigarettes replacement .

.667 >0.000 KMO Measure of sampling = .667 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. .5 Therefor.KMO & Bartlett’s Test: Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Chi-Square df Sig. factor analysis is appropriate for the survey data. 619.869 253 .

CLUSTER ANALYSIS Variables Selected For Cluster Analysis  Age  Sex  Profession  Annual personal income (in lakhs)  Marital status At a distance of 5. we get four clusters .

Dendrogram Snapshot .

CLUSTER 1 S.No 7 11 15 16 18 21 23 27 29 37 50 57 58 59 62 66 69 76 84 86 90 Age 25 22 23 25 21 34 24 34 24 36 22 22 41 42 23 24 24 24 24 24 21 Sex 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Profession 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Annual Personal Income (in lakhs) 3 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 Marital Status 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 .

mostly students. .The cluster has an unmarried male population mostly in the age group of 21 25 years. Most of them have an annual personal income less than 1 lakh.

CLUSTER 2 S. . sector with an annual personal income of 3 lakhs to more than 6 lakhs.No 8 24 34 39 44 45 64 88 Age 26 28 26 25 26 26 24 25 Sex Annual Personal Professio Income Marital n (in lakhs) Status 1 3 3 1 3 4 1 2 3 1 3 4 1 3 3 1 3 3 1 3 3 1 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 The cluster has an unmarried male population in the age group of 24 -28 years mostly working in govt.

mostly students with an annual personal income of less than 1 lakh.CLUSTER 3 S.No 28 38 71 78 81 83 85 91 Age 36 24 22 23 33 22 23 22 Sex Annual Personal Income (in Marital Profession lakhs) Status 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 3 3 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 The cluster has an unmarried female population in the age group of 22-36 years. .

No 42 43 48 52 53 68 79 Age 44 45 43 51 47 36 37 Sex Annual Personal Income (in Marital Profession lakhs) Status 1 3 4 1 3 4 1 3 4 1 4 3 1 4 3 1 3 3 1 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 The cluster has an unmarried male population in the age group of 36 -51 years mostly working in govt.CLUSTER 4 S. sector with an annual personal income of 3 lakhs to more than 6 lakhs. .

Cluster summary table Age Sex Profession Annual personal income Marital status Cluster 1 Most lie in the range 21-25 years 24-28 years Male Student Most lie in the income group less than 1 lakh 3 lakhs to more than 6 lakhs Less than 1 lakh Unmarried Cluster 2 Male Govt. Sector Student and govt. sector Unmarried Cluster 3 22-36 years Female Unmarried Cluster 4 36-51 years Male Most work in Govt. Sector 3 lakhs to more than 6 lakhs Unmarried .

Thank You… .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful