4.

1DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
4.1.1 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
Table 4.1 Demographic Profile
No
Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Content
Gender
Male
Female
Races
Malay
Chinese
India
Others
Brand (X)
Nike
Adidas
Brooks
New Balance
Others
Item Purchase
Shoes
Apparel
Accessories
Main Reason
Brand Name
Product Quality
Promotion
Style

Frequency

Percentage (%)
63
17

78.8%
21.3%

32
32
13
3

40.0%
40.0%
16.3%
3.8%

16
18
30
3
13

20.0%
22.5%
37.5%
3.8%
16.3%

73
3
4

91.3%
3.8%
5.0%

9
62
4
5

11.3%
77.5%
5.0%
6.3%

The table 4.1 shows the frequency of gender researcher get from respondents, there were 63 male
and 17 is female. The higher respondent is male with 78.8% (N=63) while female is 21.3%
(N=17) from total of respondent is 100% (N=80).
Based on figure 3, the researcher has analyzed that runners are mostly male than female. This is
because mostly respondents that answers the questionnaire are male compare to female.

Gender
Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Valid

Male

63

78.8

78.8

78.8

Female

17

21.3

21.3

100.0

Total

80

100.0

100.0

Races
Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Valid

Malay

32

40.0

40.0

40.0

Chinese

32

40.0

40.0

80.0

India

13

16.3

16.3

96.3

Other

3.8

3.8

100.0

Total

80

100.0

100.0

Brand (X)
Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative
Percent

Nike

16

20.0

20.0

20.0

Adidas

18

22.5

22.5

42.5

Brooks

30

37.5

37.5

80.0

3.8

3.8

83.8

Others

13

16.3

16.3

100.0

Total

80

100.0

100.0

Valid
New Balance

4.2 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS

Reliability analysis is used to indicate the reliability (consistency) of the variables chosen for this
research. In general, reliabilities analysis that are less than 0.6 are considered to be poor, those in
the 0.7 range is acceptable and those over 0.8 is consider good(Sekaran,2010).

Table 4.2 Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha

.826

N of Items

18

The table 4.2 above shows the entire reliability test was done by cronbachs Alpha Technique
and after considering all variables use in this research study, the reliability test result is at 0.787
which is acceptable. From this result it shows that the variable used by the researcher can be
consider quite suitable in this research study.

4.3 BRAND LOYALTY

Mean

Std. Deviation

BN

80

4.0000

.84006

80

4.1188

.81226

PQ

80

4.3025

.69500

80

4.1417

1.68369

BL

80

3.7437

1.17999

Valid N (listwise)

80

4.4 VARIABLE
Table 4.4.1 Brand name
No

Item

Strongly

Disagree

Average

Agree

Disagree

Strongly

Total

Mean

Agree
Brand Name

Q6

Q7

Brand (X) is

12

25

38

80

reputable

1.3

5.0

15.0

31.3

47.5

100.0

Brand (X)

15

24

36

80

name and

3.8

2.5

18.8

30.0

45.0

100.0

19

29

20

80

5.0

10.0

23.8

36.3

25.0

100.0

4.19

4.10

image attract
me to purchase
Q8

Brand (X) is
selected

3.66

regardless of
price
Q9

Brand (X)
reflect my own
personality

12

22

37

80

3.8

7.5

15.0

27.5

46.3

100.0

4.05

Table 4.4.2 Style

No

Item

Strongly

Disagree

Average

Agree

Disagree

Strongly

Total

Mean

Agree
Style

Q10

Brand (X)

13

26

35

80

0.0

7.5

16.3

32.5

43.8

100.0

11

28

38

80

2.5

1.3

13.8

35.0

47.5

100.0

18

21

34

80

2.5

6.3

22.5

26.3

42.5

100.0

Style of Brand

15

25

35

80

(X) are trendy

1.3

5.0

18.8

31.3

43.8

100.0

provides

4.13

variety of style
Q11

Style of Brand
(X) are

4.24

suitable for me
Q12

Style of Brand
(X) have

4.00

distinctive
feature
Q13

and
fashionable

4.11

Table 4.4.3 Product Quality

No

Item

Strongly

Disagree

Average

Agree

Disagree

Strongly

Total

Mean

Agree
Product Quality

Q14

The size of the

23

45

80

sportswear fits

2.5

2.5

10.0

28.8

56.3

100.0

27

42

80

1.3

2.5

10.0

33.8

52.5

100.0

10

26

40

80

2.5

2.5

12.5

32.5

50.0

100.0

29

41

80

0.0

2.5

10.0

36.3

51.3

100.0

13

27

37

80

3.8

16.3

33.8

46.3

100.0

347

me
Q15

The material
used are

347

comfortable
Q16

Brand (X) has

sufficient

340

colour choice
Q17

Brand (X) has

good

349

functional
quality
Q18

Brand (X) is
durable

0
0.0

338

Table 4.4.4 Promotion

No

Item

Strongly

Disagree

Average

Agree

Strongly

Disagree

Total

Mean

Agree
Promotion

Q19

Advertisement
of Brand (X)

21

21

31

80

1.3

6.3

26.3

26.3

38.8

100.0

20

31

25

80

5.0

25.0

38.8

31.3

100.0

4.46

attract me to
purchase
Q20

Window

0
0.0

displays of the

3.96

stores are
attractive
Q21

Price

2
2.5

reduction

14

29

30

80

6.3

17.5

36.3

37.5

100.0
4.00

influence me
to purchase

Table 4.4.5 Brand Loyalty

No

Item

Strongly

Disagree

Average

Agree

Disagree

Strongly

Total

Mean

Agree
Brand Loyalty

Q22

I will not buy

15

24

27

80

other brand if

10.0

7.5

18.8

30.0

33.8

100.0

2
2.5

12

16

21

29

80

15.0

20.0

26.3

36.3

100.0

3.70

Brand (X) is
available
Q23

I consider
myself loyal to
Brand (X)

3.79

4.5 CROSS TABULATION ANALYSIS

Table 4.5.1 Cross tabulation brand loyalty across gender
Gender
Item

Strongly
Disagree

Disagree

Q22
Male

Female

Total

Female

Total

Agree

Total

Strongly Agree

BL1: I Will not buy other brand if brand (X) is available

14

18

20

63

11.1%

6.3%

22.2%

28.6%

31.7%

100.0%

17

5.9%

11.8%

5.9%

35.3%

41.2%

100.0%

15

24

27

80

10.0%

7.5%

18.8%

30.0%

33.8%

100.0%

Q23
Male

Average

BL2: I consider myself loyal to brand (X)

13

18

22

63

1.6%

14.3%

20.6%

28.6%

34.9%

100.0%

17

5.9%

17.6%

17.6%

17.6%

41.2%

100.0%

12

16

21

29

80

2.5%

15.0%

20.0%

26.2%

36.2%

100.0%

Table 4.5.2 Cross tabulation brand loyalty across races

Gender
Item

Strongly
Disagree

Disagree

Q22
Malay

Chinese

India

Others

Total

Chinese

India

Others

Total

Agree

Total

Strongly Agree

BL1: I Will not buy other brand if brand (X) is available

14

32

3.1%

3.1%

25.0%

43.8%

25.0%

100.0%

11

32

18.8%

12.5%

12.5%

21.9%

34.4%

100.0%

13

7.7%

0.0%

7.7%

23.1%

61.5%

100.0%

0.0%

33.3%

66.7%

0.0%

0.0%

100.0%

15

24

27

80

10.0%

7.5%

18.8%

30.0%

33.8%

100.0%

Q23
Malay

Average

BL2: I consider myself loyal to brand (X)

13

32

3.1%

0.0%

28.1%

40.6%

28.1%

100.0%

13

32

3.1%

28.1%

6.2%

21.9%

40.6%

100.0%

13

0.0%

15.4%

23.1%

7.7%

53.8%

100.0%

0.0%

33.3%

66.7%

0.0%

0.0%

100.0%

12

16

21

29

80

2.5%

15.0%

20.0%

26.2%

36.2%

100.0%

4.6 HYPOTHESIS ANALYSIS

The method test used was Pearson Correlation (r) and measures the strength of a dependent variable by
an independent variable.
The pearson correlation coefficient is a number between +1 and -1. The rules of thumb as proposed by
Lukas, Hair, Brush and Ortinau (2004)that the significant relationship in range 0.81 to 1.00 is strong,

0.41 to 0.61 is moderate, 0.21 to 0.4 is weak and 0.00 to 0.20 is not significant.
Table 4.6 Pearson correlations

Correlations
BN
Pearson Correlation
BN

Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Pearson Correlation
PQ

Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Pearson Correlation

BL

Sig. (2-tailed)
N

PQ

.725

Sig. (2-tailed)
N

.309

**

.690

**

.005

.000

80

80

80

80

**

**

80

80

**

**

.673

.000

.000

80

80

**

.309

**

.000

.000

.597

.597

BL

.000
80
.725

**

.276

.673

.276

.504

**

.000

.013

.000

80

80

80

.253

.574

**

.024

.000

80

80

80

.284

.253

.005

.013

.024

80

80

80

80

80

**

**

**

.690

.504

.574

.011

.284

.000

.000

.000

.011

80

80

80

80

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

80