Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Cronbachs Alpha calculation can be categorized into various status which is shown
as below table:
0.9 Excellent
0.8 Good
0.7 Acceptable
0.6 Questionable
0.5 Poor
From the data analysed in the research, we can see that all the factors have the
Cronbachs Alpha as range between 0.70 and 0.77, which are considered to be
acceptable for the research. Or in the order words, those items were well designed and
data is reliable.
1
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.702 5
Item-Total Statistics
Corrected Cronbach's
Scale Mean if Scale Variance Item-Total Alpha if Item
Item Deleted if Item Deleted Correlation Deleted
BR1 15.91 4.108 .425 .666
BR2 15.89 3.588 .636 .574
BR3 15.68 3.839 .586 .601
BR4 15.89 4.052 .388 .684
BR5 15.87 4.494 .286 .720
Table 3 Reliability test of Brand (1 run)
st
2
After re-run the SPSS reliability test for the items BR1, BR2, BR3, BR4, we
continued to remove the item of BR4 as its Corrected Item-Total Correlation is 0.297
and the Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted is 0.786. In the last run including of BR1,
BR2 and BR3, all the value were well construct and will be used in the next step of
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.720 4
Item-Total Statistics
3
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.786 3
Item-Total Statistics
To sum up, all the items of the research will have a valid reliability shown in the
below table. More details of other items could be found in the Appendix.
In this section, the researcher present the results of the Exploratory factor analysis
(EFA), which might explain the number of underlying factors or dimensions of each
construct. By using the technique, we will drop some invalid items and group all
items into relevant groups. Varimax rotation would be used to minimize the number
4
of variables that have high loading in each factor. In the EFA calculation, there are
The difference between the maximum absolute value and minimum absolute
value of loading factors must be greater than or equal to 0.3 for any item
The KMO test of the research found a value of 0.669, which is above of the minimum
significant at the level of 0.01, this means that factor analysis could be used in this
Rotated component matrix would show the items under each factor to be grouped in
relevant items. The minimal value of each item on the table should be 0.5. Regarding
to the research, all items were loaded in the range of 0.557 and 0.849 under new nine
5
Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
RA4 .782
RA1 .671
RA5 .642
RA2 .624
RA3 .603
FE1 .775
FE2 .695
FE5 .679
FE4 .677
PR2 .797
PR1 .731
PR5 .589
PR3 .586
BR2 .843
BR3 .833
BR1 .771
CO1 .837
CO2 .799
CO3 .732
SI1 .829
SI2 .793
SI5 .557
SI3 .849
SI4 .738
FE3 .635
PR4 .629
CO4 .760
CO5 .611
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 13 iterations.
Table 7 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for independent variables
The new factor after the EFA test shall be categorized with new items as below:
6
Factor Variables included Name Label
RA4, RA5
A similar test has been applied to the dependent variables of purchase intention in
order to examine if all the items are grouped into one or not:
7
As the above table, we could discover that the KMO is 0.739, meanwhile, the
Bartletts test of sphericity is 0.000. The both values show that the variable PI was
8
Correlations
RA FE PR BR CO SI SIN PE PN PI
RA Pearson
1 .207** .137* .183** .180** .007 .237** .111 .393** .459**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .043 .007 .008 .912 .000 .104 .000 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
FE Pearson
.207** 1 .028 .177** .319** -.047 .178** .353** .272** .447**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .679 .009 .000 .487 .008 .000 .000 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
PR Pearson
.137* .028 1 .195** -.062 .042 -.021 .369** -.035 .061
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .043 .679 .004 .359 .540 .757 .000 .611 .371
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
BR Pearson
.183** .177** .195** 1 .225** -.012 .086 .193** .156* .170*
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .009 .004 .001 .865 .208 .004 .021 .012
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
CO Pearson
.180** .319** -.062 .225** 1 -.117 .060 .232** .417** .205**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .008 .000 .359 .001 .085 .381 .001 .000 .002
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
SI Pearson
.007 -.047 .042 -.012 -.117 1 .412** .022 .057 .008
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .912 .487 .540 .865 .085 .000 .752 .401 .911
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
SIN Pearson
.237** .178** -.021 .086 .060 .412** 1 .141* .108 .179**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .008 .757 .208 .381 .000 .038 .111 .008
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
PE Pearson
.111 .353** .369** .193** .232** .022 .141* 1 .233** .285**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .104 .000 .000 .004 .001 .752 .038 .001 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
PN Pearson
.393** .272** -.035 .156* .417** .057 .108 .233** 1 .537**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .611 .021 .000 .401 .111 .001 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
PI Pearson
.459** .447** .061 .170* .205** .008 .179** .285** .537** 1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .371 .012 .002 .911 .008 .000 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
The above table shows the correlations between independent variables and dependent
variable. There are two factors found to be insignificant with the dependent variables
Purchase intention: Price (PR) and Social Influence (SI) have the P value of 0.371 and
9
0.911 which are considerably higher than 0.05. The other factors with P value under
The relation between Relative advantage (RA) and Purchase intention (PI) is
considered at a medium rate as the correlation value is 0.459. This value fall in a
A similar relation also has been found between the Product Features (FE) and
Purchase intention. While the correlation value falls between 0.41 to 0.70, at the
There is a relationship between Brand (BR) and Purchase intention. However, as the
correlation value is just 0.170, in the range of 0.00 to 0.20, this relationship is just
Meanwhile, there are stronger relationship between Compatibility (CO) and Purchase
intention. While falling in the range of 0.21 to 0.40, the correlation value is 0.205.
intention. As the correlation value is 0.537, it falls between 0.41 to 0.70. This
Social interaction (SIN) and Purchase intention are at a negligible relationship. The
correlation value appears to be 0.179, hence, there is just a slight relationship between
10
There is surely a relationship between Performance (PE) and Purchase intention. As
the correlation value is 0.285, we can conclude that there is definite a relationship
Weiers (2008) stated that multiple regression analysis is an analysis with one
dependent variable and two or more dependent variables participate in. In the other
Model Summaryb
According to the Model Summary table, the R Square value, which is determined for
the explained variation (variance) in Purchase intention from the seven factors
there is also 55.2% unexplained still left in the study. Meanwhile, the multiple
correlation coefficient (R) provides the strength of the relationship between the
11
ANOVAa
Sum of Mean
Model Squares df Square F Sig.
1 Regression 32.883 7 4.698 25.384 .000b
Residual 38.863 210 .185
Total 71.745 217
a. Dependent Variable: PI
b. Predictors: (Constant), PN, SIN, BR, PE, FE, RA, CO
The p-value (Significant of 0.000) in the ANOVA table is less than 0.05. Its means
that the alternative hypothesis as the independent variables are significantly explains
the variance in consumers' level is supported by the data and will be accepted.
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Std.
Model B Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .094 .369 .254 .800
RA .254 .058 .252 4.411 .000
FE .329 .065 .291 5.070 .000
BR .020 .052 .021 .387 .699
At last, the Coefficients table provides that the following independent variables are
not significant to predict the dependent variable including: Brand (p-value of 0.699),
values are excluded while they are higher than the alpha level of 0.05. In contrast,
Relative advantage (RA), Product Features (FE), Compatibility (CO) and Preference
12
(PN) are significant to predict the Purchase intention. Those independent variables
have p-value less than alpha of 0.05. Hence, the relationship between these variables
can be formed by the following equation, which is supported by the above table:
After several stages of testing, the initial hypothesis has been seen to change as the
dependent variables transformed into various groups. The test of hypothesis would be
modified to match with the data collected and previous analyzing. In particular, they
Hypothesis 1
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of compatibility is 0.043,
which is less than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was rejected, it means that
Hypothesis 2
13
H1: There is an impact from Product Features towards purchase intention of
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of Product Features is 0.000,
which is less than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was rejected, it means that
Hypothesis 3
H0: There is no impact from brand towards purchase intention of Smartphone among
H1: There is an impact from brand towards purchase intention of Smartphone among
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of brand is 0.699, which is
higher than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was accepted, it means that brand
Hypothesis 4
14
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of social interaction is 0.723,
which is higher than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was accepted, it means
Hypothesis 5
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of performance is 0.723,
which is higher than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was accepted, it means
Hypothesis 6
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of preference is 0.000, which
is less than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was rejected, it means that
15
Hypothesis 7
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of relative advantage is 0.000,
which is less than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was rejected, it means that
Hypothesis 8
Social Interaction and Product Features) have the most significant influence on the
Preference, Social Interaction and Product Features) has the most significant influence
There are four factors influence on the purchase intention of smartphone among the
Compatibility and Preference. Those three factors have p-value of under the
significant level of 0.05. Step back to the table of Regression above, preference will
16
be the factor most significant influence on purchase intention of smartphone among
17
CHAPTER 2. CONCLUSION
2.1 Conclusion
This study explores the factors influence on the purchase intention of smartphone. 218
Questionnaires were provided, which will collect data into 5 groups of independent
variables.
The respondents of this study including of 50% males and 50% females
Most of them have an average income less than 8,000,000 VND (32% in detail). The
mean of 4.29. In contrast, the least mean of item value was 2.63 of Friends and
influence.
The data analyze also presented some irrelevant points in the study. Two items were
excluded from the factor Brand after three times of Cronbachs alpha test. This stage
has also demonstrated that all factors had the reliability value in range of 0.7 to 0.8,
Several factors have been examined if they have impact on the purchasing intention of
smartphone in this study. From the very beginning, the researchers spend efforts
analyzing this relationship between the dependent variables and the independent
Features and Social Influence. Nevertheless, collected data present that office workers
Compatibility and Preference. While the first three variables as listed are proposed at
18
first, the last variables was surprisingly discovered after the validity test. The variable
was a part of the previous items found in Product Features and Price. Furthermore,
Preference is also known as the variable which most influence the purchase intention
was also found to have negative relationship with purchase intention. Meanwhile, the
rest three factors were known to play a vital role in affecting the dependent variable.
Since then, adjustments of those three factors will lead to changes of purchasing
intention in reality.
Evidences from the study demonstrated that, smartphone firms might be inherited
from the buying decision if they could enhance the effect of Relative Advantage,
Product Features, Compatibility and Preference into real product, as well as into their
marketing strategy.
From the academic findings, practical implication is also recommended, which might
While Relative Advantage has been proven to have impact on purchase intention, it is
suggested to enhance the advantages of smartphone towards the old feature phones.
hi-tech complements, more fashion and style and higher integration. Invest on product
smartphone, especially, in the segment of office workers, who are at intensive use of
smartphone.
19
Product Features is yet another field to consider in product development. For office
workers, who are examined to prefer function of gaming, taking photos and
connecting to internet, those phone with ready feature to fulfill their requirements
might take a easily step to approach those group of consumers. As well as focus on
these features for firms marcom campaign. Especially, when the manufacturer has
their ability on offering high-quality of those features, take them as their unique
Last but not least, Preference has been analyzed to be the most significant impact on
the purchase intention, which means their items regarding the use of applications and
producers. It is essential to understand that office workers, who tend to have higher
education comparing to other group of society, may spend time and efforts in
searching information and review for a smartphone. Since then, those people logically
require a competitive price in connection with the quality they will perceive.
with productivity would be an useful tool into their smartphone. Firms might pay
attention to provide such appropriate price with meaningful software to satisfy their
consumers.
In addition to the above implications, it is necessary for firm to collaborate with their
consumers. Review and feedback from consumers for a smartphone function, design,
price and build quality is required to build a strong relation between manufacturer and
20
2.3 Limitation and further recommendation
The data analyze has concerned about the precision of factors and items included.
There are items and factors removed from the initial proposal, which have let to
changes of analyzing factors and items. However, as the purpose to understand the
analyze has significant discover to unhide the researchers questions. Alongside the
Firstly, with a narrow scope of office workers in Hochiminh City with small samples,
this research does not have ability to generalize the results in term of the whole
with larger samples. Since then, more accurate insights of smartphone consumers
Secondly, the study sample has not include the other groups as teenager or students,
who are very fond of smartphone and have highly intention to use smartphone.
Further explanation for more segment insight should give a wider picture for firms to
Thirdly, various stages of the consumers buying decision have not included in this
research. Those stages also have important impact on the purchase intention of
consumers, it is suggested that researchers should also consider and fulfill other
determinants.
21
22
23