NE 2042 APPLIED

BIOSTATISTICS
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH/2
SUPERVISOR: PUAN NUR ZAKIAH BINTI MOHD SAAT

SUPERVISOR: PUAN NUR ZAKIAH BINTI MOHD SAAT

MEMBERS:

MOHAMAD SAIFUL BIN NORDIN

A120264

SITI NORASIAH BINTI HJ AWANG TEH

A118638

NURUL 'IZZAH BINTI ISMAIL

A118856

NOR ALIA BINTI ROSLAN

A118957

NOR ATIKAH BINTI KOSNON

A119030

AMIRA BINTI ABD RAHAMAN

A119249

NURHANISAH BINTI ZAKRI

A119434

AIN SHAQIRAH BINTI ABDUL AZIZ

A119626

ZUNNURAIN BINTI ZULKEFLI

A119782

FADHILAH BINTI MOHD RADZI

A119832

MUHAMMAD FIRDAUS BIN ISHAK

A119479

MUHAMMAD AZIZUL BIN ISMAIL

A119525

MOHD FIDAIE BIN MOHAMAD

A119933


THE STUDY OF UNDERSTANDING THE
ROAD SIGNS AMONG THE FIRST YEAR
STUDENTS OF FACULTY OF ALLIED
HEALTH SCIENCES (FSKB)
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF
MALAYSIA KUALA LUMPUR (UKMKL)
SESSION 2008/2009

INTRODUCTION
According to Malaysian Road Safety
Department(JKJR),3.9% road death
increases in 2008 compared to the
previous year.
Road signs represent one of the most
common devices for controlling traffic. They
help in regulate, warn, and as a guidance
to road users (Tamar & David 2006)

Research Justification
1.To increase awareness and driving
etiquette on road.
2. To decrease road accidents risk.
3. To improve the knowledge about road
signs among the students.
4. To know the student comprehension
regarding the road signs

GENERAL OBJECTIVES
To study the understanding about road
sign among the first year of FSKBs
students in UKM,KL session
2008/2009.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES

To identify the students s knowledge about the road signs.

To determine the differences in knowledge between gender about

the road signs.

To determine the differences in knowledge about the road signs

between student having and not having license.

To determine the differences in knowledge about the road signs

among the student who living in urban and rural area.

To identify the students score of knowledge about the road sign.

HYPOTHESIS
1. There are differences between knowledges score and comprehensions score
regarding the road signs among the first year student of FSKB .
(question part B)
2. There are differences in the score of knowledge between gender, license
availability and area.
3. There are differences in their score of knowledge on road signs between
gender.
(question part A no 1 , part B & C )
4. There are differences in score of knowledge on road signs between student
with and without driving license.
(question part A no 4, part B & C )
5.There are differences in score of knowledge on road signs between students
living in urban and rural area.
(question part A no 3, part B & C )
6.There are association between the gender/area/license with sources of
students knowledge on the road sign .
(question part A no 7)

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Background
-1st year students among 12 programs in FSKB UKM KL intake 2008/2009.
-license only registered and approved by JPJ

Research Design
- Cross sectional study

Sampling Method
- Population target ;UKM KL student
- Population sample ; 1st year FSKB student intake 2008/2009
- Sample size ;192 student(calculation from sample size of selected
population formula)

Calculating sample size

n = ____X2NP (1-P)____
2(N-1) + X2P(1-P)
= 192

Where X2 = 3.84, = 0.05, P

= 0.5
But 10% would drop out so,

n* = __192__
(1-0.1)

= 213.3

= 214

Questionnaire

Distribute : 214
Responded : 195
Not responded : 19
Percentage of not responded :9.74%
questionnaire

DATA ANALYSIS
1st OBJECTIVE:

To identify the students s knowledge

about the road signs.
HYPOTHESIS 1
There are differences between knowledges score
and comprehensions score regarding the road sign.

Test : Descriptive Statistic

Ba1 vs Bb1

Ba5 vs Bb5

Ba9 vs Bb9

Road signs

Comprehension score (%)

Knowledge score (%)

Correct

Incorrect

60.0

19.0

5.1

6.7

9.2

90.8

9.2

39.0

31.3

16.9

9.7

3.1

45.6

54.4

65.6

19.5

4.6

2.1

8.2

95.9

4.1

72.8

13.8

2.6

2.1

8.7

92.3

7.7

73.3

16.4

1.0

2.1

7.2

97.4

2.6

56.9

22.1

8.7

6.2

6.2

96.4

3.6

50.8

23.6

11.8

7.2

6.7

90.3

9.7

51.3

30.3

7.7

5.1

5.6

87.7

12.3

31.8

35.4

17.9

10.8

4.1

45.6

54.4

53.3

27.7

8.7

5.1

5.1

89.2

10.8

1st OBJECTIVE:

To identify the students s knowledge

about the road signs.
HYPOTHESIS 2

There are different in the score of

knowledge between gender, license
availability and area of residential.
Test: Binary logistic regression

Gender

B
0.658

P value
0.461

Exp(B)
1.931

Area
License

-0.088
- 2.091

0.908
0.018

0.916
0.124

female obtain higher score , 1.931 times

more than male.
rural area obtain low score, 0.916 times
less than urban area.
student without license obtain lowest score,
0.124 times less than student with license

2nd OBJECTIVE:
To determine the differences in
knowledge between gender
about the road signs.
HYPOTHESIS 3
There are differences in score of
knowledge on road signs between
gender.
Test : Independent T-test

Gende n
r
Male

45

Female 150

Mean

Standard PDeviation value

0.207
13.866 2.24216
7
14.353 2.26481
3

normal
P value >0.05
The score means of the knowledge on road
sign between gender are not different.
t(193)=-1.267,p>0.05.

3rd OBJECTIVE:
To determine the differences in
knowledge about the road signs
between student having and not
having license.
HYPOTHESIS 4
There are differences in score of knowledge
on road signs between student with and
without driving license.
Test : Independent T-test

License

Mean

Standard
Deviation

Pvalue

Yes

134

14.5746

13.5082

0.012

No

61

1.72717

3.02557

normal
P value <0.05.
The score means of the knowledge on road sign
between student with and without driving license
are different.
t(78.344)=2.569,p<0.05.

4th OBJECTIVE:
To determine the differences in
knowledge about the road signs
among the student who living in
urban and rural area.
HYPOTHESIS 5
There are differences in score of
knowledge on road signs between
the student who living in urban and
rural area.

Area

Mean

Standar Pd
value
Deviatio
n

Urban 122 14.3115 2.24927 0.575

Rural 73
14.1233 2.29701
Normal
P value >0.05.
The score means of the knowledge on road
sign among student who living in urban
and rural area are not different.
t(193)=0.561, p>0.05

GENDER

SCORE

AREA

LICENSE

male

female

urban

rural

yes

no

45

150

122

73

134

61

13.8667

14.3533

14.3115

14.1233

14.5746

13.5082

Median

14

15

15

14

15

14

Mode

15

15

15

13

15

15

2.24216

2.26481

2.24927

2.29701

1.72717

3.02557

5.027

5.129

5.059

5.276

2.983

9.154

N
Mean

Standard Deviation

Variance
Significant value

Range

0.207

0.575

0.012

Minimum

Maximum

17

17

17

17

17

17

5th OBJECTVE:
To identify the source of students
knowledge on road sign
HYPOTHESIS 6:
There are association between the
gender/area/license with sources of
students knowledge on the road sign.
Test: Chi Square

1) Gender
Sources Driving school
Gender

Non-driving

Total

school

Male

25(64.1%)

14(35.9%)

39(100.00%)

Female

90(70.9%)

37(29.1%)

127(100.00%)

Total

115(69.3%)

51(30.7%)

166(100.00%)

The Pearson Chi-Square = 0.64

P value > 0.05
X 2 = 0.641, df = 1, p > 0.05

P value

Pearson
Chi-Square
value

P = 0.423 X 2 = 0.641

There are not significant association between the

gender and sources of students knowledge on the
road sign.

2) Area
Sources Driving school
Area

Non-driving

Total

school

P value

Pearson
Chi-Square
value

2
104(100.00%) P = 0.085 X = 2.966

Urban

77(74.0%)

27(32.0%)

Rural

38(61.3%)

24(38.7%)

62(100.00%)

Total

115(69.3%)

51(30.7%)

166(100.00%)

The Pearson Chi-Square = 2.966

P value > 0.05
X 2 = 2.966, df = 1, p > 0.05

There are not significant association between the

area and sources of students knowledge on the
road sign.

3) License
Sources Driving school
License

Non-driving

Total

school

Yes

99(84.6%)

18(15.4%)

117(100.00%)

No

16(32.7%)

33(67.3%)

49(100.00%)

Total

115(69.3%)

51(30.7%)

166(100.00%)

The Pearson Chi-Square = 43.813

P value < 0.05
X 2 = 43.813, df = 1, p < 0.05

P value

Pearson
Chi-Square
value

P = 0.001 X 2 = 43.813

There are significant association between the license

and sources of students knowledge on the road sign.

Conclusion Chi-square test

License seems to be must
factor to contribute sources of
knowledge for student compare
to gender and residential area

THANK
YOU