Table 5.ANOVA Analysis

1.
H0: There is no significant relation between the age of the respondents with perception on
online shopping
H1: There is a significant relation between the age of the respondents with perception on
online shopping
Table 5.ANOVA Analysis

M Hypot
ea hesis
n
Sum S S
of qu i
Squ d ar g
ares f e F .
The website provides in-depth Between . .
.
information. Groups 1.31 5 7
4 32
0 2 1
7
9 4
Within 5 . Accept
368.
Groups 9 61 Ho
050
5 9
Total 5
369.
9
360
9
It is quick and easy to complete a Between . .
.
transaction on online Groups 2.87 9 4
4 71
6 7 2
9
3 2
Within 439. 5 . Accept
Groups 509 9 73 Ho
5 9
Total 5
442.
9
385
9
Chosen site does not waste my Between . .
.
time. Groups 1.12 3 8
4 28
2 9 1
1
5 3
Within 5 . Accept
423.
Groups 9 71 Ho
076
5 1
Total 5
424.
9
198
9
Selected website understands my Between 1
.
needs. Groups 1. .
5.63 1
4 40 6
5 5
9 9
0
3
Within 5 . Accept
495.
Groups 9 83 Ho
238
5 2
Total 5
500.
9
873
9
Comfortable in surfing this site. Between . .
.
Groups 1.75 5 6
4 43
5 5 9
9
0 9
Within 5 . Accept
474.
Groups 9 79 Ho
963
5 8
Total 5
476.
9
718
9
The product that came was Between . .
.
represented accurately by the Groups 2 9
.695 4 17
website. 2 2
4
5 4
Within 5 . Accept
458.
Groups 9 77 Ho
579
5 1
Total 5
459.
9
273
9
The product delivered by the time Between 1
.
promised by the company. Groups 1. .
4.77 2
4 19 3
5 5
4 3
5
6
Within 5 . Accept
531.
Groups 9 89 Ho
725
5 4
Total 5
536.
9
500
9
The company is willing and ready Between 2
.
to respond to customer needs. Groups 1. .
7.82 0
4 95 3
4 5
6 0
7
5
Within 5 . Accept
504.
Groups 9 84 Ho
894
5 9
Total 5
512.
9
718
9
When I have a problem, the Between . .
.
website shows a sincere interest Groups 2.11 8 5
4 52
in solving it 7 3 0
9
9 0
Within 5 . Accept
375.
Groups 9 63 Ho
216
5 1
Total 5
377.
9
333
9
Inquiries are answered promptly. Between . .
.
Groups 1.60 4 8
4 40
5 1 0
1
0 2
Within 5 . Accept
583.
Groups 9 98 Ho
088
5 0
Total 5
584.
9
693
9
My privacy is protected at this site. Between . .
.
Groups 2.72 7 5
4 68
1 1 7
0
9 9
Within 5 . Accept
562.
Groups 9 94 Ho
677
5 6
Total 5
565.
9
398
9
The chosen website has adequate Between 1
.
security features. Groups 1. .
4.38 3
4 09 1
8 2
7 5
8
8
Within 5 . Accept
562.
Groups 9 94 Ho
567
4 7
Total 5
566.
9
955
8
Products purchased through online Between . .
.
are superior Groups 1.22 3 8
4 30
8 5 4
7
0 4
Within 5 . Accept
522.
Groups 9 87 Ho
105
5 7
Total 5
523.
9
333
9
I find products purchased online Between 1
.
are acceptable Groups 1. .
5.35 0
4 33 9
5 9
9 6
9
2
Within 5 . Accept
405.
Groups 9 68 Ho
918
5 2
Total 5
411.
9
273
9
Satisfied with products purchased Between 1
.
online Groups 1. .
6.33 1
4 58 9
9 0
5 3
3
7
Within 5 . Accept
486.
Groups 9 81 Ho
701
5 8
Total 5
493.
9
040
9
Satisfied with online shopping Between 1
.
prices Groups . .
3.08 3
4 77 0
7 7
2 6
3
6
Within 5 . Accept
430.
Groups 9 72 Ho
906
5 4
Total 5
433.
9
993
9
Online shopping prices are Between . .
.
economical Groups 2 9
.945 4 23
2 2
6
8 3
Within 5 1. Accept
617.
Groups 9 03 Ho
828
5 8
Total 5
618.
9
773
9
Superiority of value received Between 1
.
relative to money paid in online Groups 1. .
5.76 2
shopping 4 44 4
1 0
0 8
4
9
Within 5 . Accept
575.
Groups 9 96 Ho
557
5 7
Total 5
581.
9
318
9
product available in online buying Between . .
.
are deemed worthy of purchase Groups 1.65 4 7
4 41
5 4 7
4
5 6
Within 5 . Accept
553.
Groups 9 93 Ho
805
5 1
Total 5
555.
9
460
9
I get value in online shopping Between . .
.
Groups 2.11 6 6
4 52
6 3 3
9
4 8
Within 5 . Accept
496.
Groups 9 83 Ho
258
5 4
Total 5
498.
9
373
9
From the above ANOVA Table – 5.2.41 revels that the Age and The website provides in-
depth information of Selected site does not crash Between and within Groups F value is
0.529 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p
value 0.714 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no
significance difference between Age and The website provides in-depth information.
Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and It is quick and easy to complete a
transaction on online Between and within Groups F value is 0.973 at 5% significance level.
The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.422 is greater than at
0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between
Age and It is quick and easy to complete a transaction. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Chosen site does not waste my time
Between and within Groups F value is 0.395 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table
shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.813 is less than at 0.05 significance level.
Hence, it concludes that there is a significance difference between Age and Chosen site does
not waste my time. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Selected website understands my
needs Between and within Groups F value is 1.693 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.150 is greater than at 0.05
significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age
and Selected website understands my needs. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Comfortable in surfing this site.
shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.699 is less than at 0.05 significance level.
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Comfortable in
surfing this site.. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and The product that came was
represented accurately by the website. Between and within Groups F value is 0.255 at 5%
significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.924
is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance
difference between Age and The product that came was represented accurately by the
website.. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and The product delivered by the time
promised by the company Between and within Groups F value is 1.336 at 5% significance
level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.255 is greater
than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference
between Age and The product delivered by the time promised by the company. Accept null
Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and The company is willing and ready to
respond to customer needs Between and within Groups F value is 2.305 at 5% significance
level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.057 is greater
than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference
between Age and The company is willing and ready to respond to customer needs.. Accept
null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and When I have a problem, the
website shows a sincere interest in solving it Between and within Groups F value is
0.839 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p
significance difference between Age and When I have a problem, the website shows a
sincere interest in solving it. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Inquiries are answered promptly
shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.802 is greater than at 0.05 significance
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Inquiries
are answered promptly. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and My privacy is protected at this site
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and My
privacy is protected at this site. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and The chosen website has adequate
security features Between and within Groups F value is 1.158 at 5% significance level. The
ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.328 is greater than at 0.05
and The chosen website has adequate security features. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Products purchased through online
are superior Between and within Groups F value is 0.350 at 5% significance level. The
and Products purchased through online are superior. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and I find products purchased online are
acceptable Between and within Groups F value is 1.962 at 5% significance level. The
and I find products purchased online are acceptable. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Satisfied with products purchased
online Between and within Groups F value is 1.937 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
and Satisfied with products purchased online. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Satisfied with online shopping prices
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Satisfied
with online shopping prices. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Online shopping prices are
economical Between and within Groups F value is 0.228 at 5% significance level. The
and Online shopping prices are economical. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Superiority of value received relative
to money paid in online shopping Between and within Groups F value is 1.489 at 5%
significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.204
difference between Age and Superiority of value received relative to money paid in online
shopping. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and product available in online buying
are deemed worthy of purchase Between and within Groups F value is 0.445 at 5%
difference between Age and product available in online buying are deemed worthy of
purchase. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and I get value in online shopping
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and I get
value in online shopping. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
2. H0: There is no significant relation between the income of the respondents with
perception towards online shopping
H1: There is a significant relation between the income of the respondents with perception
towards online shopping
Table 5.2 ANOVA Analysis
Sum Mea Hypoth

of n esis
Square Squa Si
s df re F g.
The website provides in- Between Groups .
2.
depth information. 1.64 0
6.560 4 69
0 3
0
0
Within Groups 362.80 59

.610
0 5
Total 369.36 59
0 9
It is quick and easy to Between Groups .

3.
complete a transaction on 2.75 0
11.027 4 80
online 7 0
3
5

.725
8 5
Total 442.38 59
5 9
Chosen site does not waste Between Groups .

.
my time. 7
1.450 4 .362 51
2
0
8

.711
9 5
Total 424.19 59
8 9
Selected website Between Groups 2.771 4 .693 . .

understands my needs. 82 5
8 0
8
.837
2 5
Total 500.87 59
3 9
Comfortable in surfing this Between Groups .

1.
site. 1.30 1
5.217 4 64
4 6
6
1

.792
1 5
Total 476.71 59
8 9
The product that came was Between Groups .

1.
represented accurately by 3
3.561 4 .890 16
the website. 2
2
6

.766
2 5
Total 459.27 59
3 9
The product delivered by Between Groups .

.
the time promised by the 6
2.420 4 .605 67
company. 1
4
0

.898
0 5
Total 536.50 59
0 9
The company is willing and Between Groups .
.
ready to respond to 5
2.874 4 .718 83
customer needs. 0
8
1

.857
5 5
Total 512.71 59
8 9
When I have a problem, Between Groups .

.
the website shows a 7
1.138 4 .285 45
sincere interest in solving 7
0
it 2

.632
5 5
Total 377.33 59
3 9
Inquiries are answered Between Groups .

1.
promptly. 1.33 2
5.348 4 37
7 4
3
2

.974
6 5
Total 584.69 59
3 9
My privacy is protected at Between Groups 3.437 4 .859 . .

this site. 91 4
0 5
8
.944
1 5
Total 565.39 59
8 9
The chosen website has Between Groups .

1.
adequate security features. 1.57 1
6.315 4 67
9 5
3
5

.944
0 4
Total 566.95 59
5 8
Products purchased through Between Groups .

1.
online are superior 1.56 1
6.239 4 79
0 2
5
8

.869
5 5
Total 523.33 59
3 9
I find products purchased Between Groups .

1.
online are acceptable 1.21 1
4.859 4 77
5 3
8
2

.683
5 5
Total 411.27 59
3 9
Satisfied with products Between Groups .
1.
purchased online 1.25 1
5.037 4 53
9 9
5
0

.820
3 5
Total 493.04 59
0 9
Satisfied with online Between Groups .

.
shopping prices 4
2.783 4 .696 96
2
0
9

.725
1 5
Total 433.99 59
3 9
Online shopping prices are Between Groups .

1.
economical 1.29 2
5.171 4 25
3 8
3
7
Within Groups 613.60 59 1.03

3 5 1
Total 618.77 59
3 9
Superiority of value Between Groups 4.473 4 1.11 1. .

received relative to money 8 15 3
paid in online shopping 4 3
0
.969
5 5
Total 581.31 59
8 9
product available in online Between Groups .

.
buying are deemed worthy 4
3.189 4 .797 85
of purchase 8
9
8

.928
1 5
Total 555.46 59
0 9
I get value in online Between Groups .

.
shopping 8
.898 4 .225 26
9
9
8

.836
5 5
Total 498.37 59
3 9
From the above ANOVA Table – 2 revels that the Income Level and The website provides
in-depth information of Selected site does not crash Between and within Groups F value is
value 0.030 is less than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no
significance difference between Income Leveland The website provides in-depth
information. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and It is quick and easy to
complete a transaction on online Between and within Groups F value is 3.803 at 5%
is less than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance
difference between Income Level and It is quick and easy to complete a transaction. Accept
alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and Chosen site does not waste
my time Between and within Groups F value is 0.510 at 5% significance level. The
ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.728 is less than at 0.05
significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is a significance difference between Income
Level and Chosen site does not waste my time. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and Selected website
understands my needs Between and within Groups F value is 0.828 at 5% significance level.
The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.508 is greater than at
Income Level and Selected website understands my needs. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and Comfortable in surfing this
site. Between and within Groups F value is 1.646 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.161 is less than at 0.05 significance
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Income Level and
Comfortable in surfing this site.. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and The product that came was
difference between Income Level and The product that came was represented accurately by
the website. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and The product delivered by
the time promised by the company Between and within Groups F value is 0.674 at 5%
difference between Income Level and The product delivered by the time promised by the
company. Accept null hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and The company is willing and
ready to respond to customer needs Between and within Groups F value is 0.838 at 5%
difference between Income Level and The company is willing and ready to respond to
customer needs.. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and When I have a problem,
the website shows a sincere interest in solving it Between and within Groups F value is
significance difference between Income Level and When I have a problem, the website
shows a sincere interest in solving it. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and Inquiries are answered
promptly Between and within Groups F value is 1.373 at 5% significance level. The
significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between
Income Level and Inquiries are answered promptly. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and My privacy is protected at
this site Between and within Groups F value is 0.910 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
Income Level and My privacy is protected at this site. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and The chosen website has
adequate security features Between and within Groups F value is 1.673 at 5% significance
level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.155 is greater than
at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference
between Income Level and The chosen website has adequate security features. Accept null
Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and Products purchased through
online are superior Between and within Groups F value is 1.795 at 5% significance level.
The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.128is greater than at
Income Level and Products purchased through online are superior. Accept null Hypothesis
H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and I find products purchased
online are acceptable Between and within Groups F value is 1.778 at 5% significance level.
Income Level and I find products purchased online are acceptable. Accept null Hypothesis
H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and Satisfied with products
purchased online Between and within Groups F value is 1.535 at 5% significance level. The
Income Level and Satisfied with products purchased online. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and Satisfied with online
shopping prices Between and within Groups F value is 0.960 at 5% significance level. The
Income Level and Satisfied with online shopping prices. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and Online shopping prices are
Income Level and Online shopping prices are economical. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and Superiority of value
received relative to money paid in online shopping Between and within Groups F value is
significance difference between Income Level and Superiority of value received relative to
money paid in online shopping. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and product available in online
buying are deemed worthy of purchase Between and within Groups F value is 0.859 at 5%
difference between Income Level and product available in online buying are deemed worthy
of purchase. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Income Level and I get value in online
shopping Between and within Groups F value is 0.269 at 5% significance level. The
ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.898 is greater than at 0.05
Income Level and I get value in online shopping. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
3. H0: There is no significant relation between the occupations of respondents with perception
H1: There is a significant relation between the occupations of respondents with perception
Table 5.3 ANOVA Analysis
Me Hypoth
Sum an esis
of Sq
Squa d uar Si
res f e F g.
The website provides in-depth Between . .

1.1
information. Groups 2.764 4 69 34
21
1 5
Within 5 . Accept
366.5
Groups 9 61 Ho
96
5 6
Total 5
369.3
9
60
9
It is quick and easy to complete Between . .
1.0
a transaction on online Groups 3.146 4 78 37
65
7 3
Within 5 . Accept
439.2
Groups 9 73 Ho
39
5 8
Total 5
442.3
9
85
9
Chosen site does not waste my Between . . .

time. Groups 1.860 4 46 65 62
5 5 3
Within 5 . Accept
422.3
Groups 9 71 Ho
38
5 0
Total 5
424.1
9
98
9
Selected website understands Between . . .

my needs. Groups .667 4 16 19 93
7 8 9
Within 5 . Accept
500.2
Groups 9 84 Ho
07
5 1
Total 5
500.8
9
73
9
Comfortable in surfing this Between . .
1.2
site. Groups 3.921 4 98 29
34
0 5
Within 5 . Accept
472.7
Groups 9 79 Ho
97
5 5
Total 5
476.7
9
18
9
The product that came was Between .

1.4 1.9
represented accurately by the Groups 5.862 4 10
65 23
website. 5
Within 5 . Accept
453.4
Groups 9 76 Ho
12
5 2
Total 5
459.2
9
73
9
The product delivered by the Between .

1.7 2.0
time promised by the company. Groups 7.187 4 09
97 20
0
Within 5 . Accept
529.3
Groups 9 89 Ho
13
5 0
Total 5
536.5
9
00
9
The company is willing and Between .
1.4 1.6
ready to respond to customer Groups 5.625 4 16
06 50
needs. 0
Within 5 . Accept
507.0
Groups 9 85 Ho
93
5 2
Total 5
512.7
9
18
9
When I have a problem, the Between . . .

website shows a sincere Groups 1.296 4 32 51 72
interest in solving it 4 3 6
Within 5 . Accept
376.0
Groups 9 63 Ho
37
5 2
Total 5
377.3
9
33
9
Inquiries are answered Between .

2.2 2.3
promptly. Groups 9.084 4 05
71 47
3
Within 5 . Accept
575.6
Groups 9 96 Ho
10
5 7
Total 5
584.6
9
93
9
My privacy is protected at this Between . . .
site. Groups 3.447 4 86 91 45
2 2 6
Within 5 . Accept
561.9
Groups 9 94 Ho
52
5 4
Total 5
565.3
9
98
9
The chosen website has Between .

2.0 2.1
adequate security features. Groups 8.227 4 06
57 87
9
Within 5 . Accept
558.7
Groups 9 94 Ho
28
4 1
Total 5
566.9
9
55
8
Products purchased through Between . . .

online are superior Groups 2.048 4 51 58 67
2 4 4
Within 5 . Accept
521.2
Groups 9 87 Ho
85
5 6
Total 5
523.3
9
33
9
I find products purchased Between . . .
online are acceptable Groups 1.459 4 36 53 71
5 0 4
Within 5 . Accept
409.8
Groups 9 68 Ho
14
5 9
Total 5
411.2
9
73
9
Satisfied with products Between . . .

purchased online Groups .809 4 20 24 91
2 4 3
Within 5 . Accept
492.2
Groups 9 82 Ho
31
5 7
Total 5
493.0
9
40
9
Satisfied with online shopping Between . . .

prices Groups 2.503 4 62 86 48
6 3 6
Within 5 . Accept
431.4
Groups 9 72 Ho
91
5 5
Total 5
433.9
9
93
9
Online shopping prices are Between . . .
economical Groups 2.566 4 64 62 64
2 0 9
Within 5 Accept
616.2 1.0
Groups 9 Ho
07 36
5
Total 5
618.7
9
73
9
Superiority of value received Between . . .

relative to money paid in Groups 3.542 4 88 91 45
online shopping 6 2 7
Within 5 . Accept
577.7
Groups 9 97 Ho
76
5 1
Total 5
581.3
9
18
9
product available in online Between . . .

buying are deemed worthy of Groups 2.781 4 69 74 55
purchase 5 9 9
Within 5 . Accept
552.6
Groups 9 92 Ho
79
5 9
Total 5
555.4
9
60
9
I get value in online shopping Between . . .
Groups .643 4 16 19 94
1 2 2
Within 5 . Accept
497.7
Groups 9 83 Ho
30
5 7
Total 5
498.3
9
73
9
From the above ANOVA Table – 5.2.44 revels that the Occupation and The website provides
in-depth information of Selected site does not crash Between and within Groups F value is
significance difference between Occupation and The website provides in-depth information.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and It is quick and easy to
complete a transaction on online Between and within Groups F value is 1.065 at 5%
difference between Occupation and It is quick and easy to complete a transaction. Accept null
Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and Chosen site does not waste my
time Between and within Groups F value is 0.655 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
table shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.623 is less than at 0.05 significance
level. Hence, it concludes that there is a significance difference between Occupation and
Chosen site does not waste my time. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and Selected website understands
my needs Between and within Groups F value is 0.198 at 5% significance level. The
Occupation and Selected website understands my needs. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and Comfortable in surfing this
site. Between and within Groups F value is 1.234 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.295 is less than at 0.05 significance
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Occupation and
Comfortable in surfing this site.. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and The product that came was
difference between Occupation and The product that came was represented accurately by the
website. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and The product delivered by the
time promised by the company Between and within Groups F value is 2.020 at 5%
difference between Occupation and The product delivered by the time promised by the
company. Accept null hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and The company is willing and
ready to respond to customer needs Between and within Groups F value is 1.650 at 5%
difference between Occupation and The company is willing and ready to respond to customer
needs.. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and When I have a problem, the
website shows a sincere interest in solving it Between and within Groups F value is 0.513
at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value
0.726 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no
significance difference between Occupation and When I have a problem, the website
shows a sincere interest in solving it. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and Inquiries are answered
promptly Between and within Groups F value is 2.347 at 5% significance level. The
Occupation and Inquiries are answered promptly. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and My privacy is protected at this
site Between and within Groups F value is 0.912 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
Occupation and My privacy is protected at this site. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and The chosen website has
adequate security features Between and within Groups F value is 2.187 at 5% significance
level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.069 is greater than
at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference
between Occupation and The chosen website has adequate security features. Accept null
Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and Products purchased through
online are superior Between and within Groups F value is 0.584 at 5% significance level.
Occupation and Products purchased through online are superior. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and I find products purchased
online are acceptable Between and within Groups F value is 0.530 at 5% significance level.
Occupation and I find products purchased online are acceptable. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and Satisfied with products
purchased online Between and within Groups F value is 0.244 at 5% significance level. The
Occupation and Satisfied with products purchased online. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and Satisfied with online shopping
prices Between and within Groups F value is 0.863 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
Occupation and Satisfied with online shopping prices. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and Online shopping prices are
ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.649is greater than at 0.05
Occupation and Online shopping prices are economical. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and Superiority of value received
relative to money paid in online shopping Between and within Groups F value is 0.912 at
5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the significance p value
0.457 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no
significance difference between Occupation and Superiority of value received relative to
money paid in online shopping. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and product available in online
buying are deemed worthy of purchase Between and within Groups F value is 0.749 at 5%
difference between Occupation and product available in online buying are deemed worthy of
purchase. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Occupation and I get value in online shopping
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Occupation and I
get value in online shopping. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
4. H0: There is no significant relation between the annual incomes of respondents with perception
H1: There is a significant relation the annual incomes of respondents with perception towards
online shopping
5. H0: There is no significant relation between the age of the respondents with the frequency of
purchasing online shopping.
H1: There is a significant relation between the age of the respondents with the frequency of
purchasing online shopping.
6. H0: There is no significant relation between the genders of the respondents with the
satisfaction levels.
H1: There is a significant relation between the genders of the respondents with the satisfaction
levels.
Table 6 ANOVA Analysis

Sum of Mean Hypothesis
Squares df Square F Sig.
Availability of variety Between Groups .000 1 .000 .000 .997
of goods Within Groups 668.293 598 1.118
Total 668.293 599
Product Between Groups 1.197 1 1.197 1.157 .283
Specifications Within Groups 618.762 598 1.035
Total 619.958 599
Product Pictures Between Groups 1.236 1 1.236 1.194 .275
Within Groups 619.138 598 1.035
Total 620.373 599
Quality of Products Between Groups .479 1 .479 .599 .439
Within Groups 477.720 598 .799
Total 478.198 599
Payment Options Between Groups .618 1 .618 .557 .456
Within Groups 663.580 598 1.110
Total 664.198 599
Product Packaging Between Groups .004 1 .004 .005 .946
Total 518.260 599
Delivery Process Between Groups .186 1 .186 .212 .646
Total 526.265 599
Replacement Between Groups .118 1 .118 .114 .736
Within Groups 618.122 598 1.034
Total 618.240 599
Promotion Schemes Between Groups 1.567 1 1.567 1.847 .175
Total 508.625 599
Price Comparison Between Groups .359 1 .359 .321 .571
Within Groups 669.314 598 1.119
Total 669.673 599
Grievance Between Groups .079 1 .079 .083 .773
Mechanism Within Groups 571.639 598 .956
Total 571.718 599
Terms & Conditions Between Groups .124 1 .124 .145 .704
Total 514.798 599
Privacy System Between Groups .026 1 .026 .030 .862
Total 513.760 599
Customer Care Between Groups .666 1 .666 .880 .349
Total 453.040 599
Payment Security Between Groups 3.521 1 3.521 3.829 .051
Total 553.460 599
Order Tracking Between Groups .364 1 .364 .367 .545
Facility Within Groups 592.110 598 .990
Total 592.473 599
Website Navigation Between Groups .180 1 .180 .211 .646
Total 508.625 599
Order booking Between Groups 1.754 1 1.754 2.205 .138
Total 477.493 599
Cancellation of order Between Groups .040 1 .040 .038 .845
Within Groups 623.159 598 1.042
Total 623.198 599
Delivery Charges Between Groups 1.547 1 1.547 1.743 .187
Total 532.265 599
Reliability of product Between Groups 1.167 1 1.167 1.085 .298
information Within Groups 643.127 598 1.075
Total 644.293 599
Assuring product Between Groups .111 1 .111 .124 .725
quality Within Groups 536.487 598 .897
Total 536.598 599
Affordable price of Between Groups .004 1 .004 .005 .944
products Within Groups 473.589 598 .792
Total 473.593 599
Availability of more Between Groups .773 1 .773 .858 .355
brands Within Groups 538.901 598 .901
Total 539.673 599
Display of product Between Groups .609 1 .609 .723 .395
images Within Groups 503.731 598 .842
Total 504.340 599
Prompt delivery Between Groups .290 1 .290 .324 .570
Total 534.918 599
Security in payment Between Groups 1.197 1 1.197 1.399 .237
process Within Groups 511.428 598 .855
Total 512.625 599
Easy accessibility of Between Groups .685 1 .685 .795 .373
information Within Groups 515.815 598 .863
Total 516.500 599
Reliability of web Between Groups .555 1 .555 .662 .416
advertisements Within Groups 501.438 598 .839
Total 501.993 599
Safety of the products Between Groups .162 1 .162 .242 .623
Total 399.173 599
Lesser cost of Between Groups .054 1 .054 .073 .787
delivery Within Groups 443.039 598 .741
Total 443.093 599
Amount of time Between Groups .027 1 .027 .031 .859
spend to gather Within Groups 509.292 598 .852
Total 509.318 599
Real time support for Between Groups .506 1 .506 .476 .491
after sales Within Groups 636.492 598 1.064
Total 636.998 599
From the above ANOVA Table – 6 revels that the Gender and Availability of variety of goods
Between and within Groups F value is 0.000 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows
d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.997 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence,
it concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Availability of variety
of goods Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Product Specifications Between and
within Groups F value is 1.157 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)
with the significance p value 0.283 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Product Specifications.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Product Pictures Between and within
Groups F value is 1.194 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the
significance p value 0.275 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that
there is no significance difference between Gender and Product Pictures. Accept null Hypothesis
Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Quality of Products. Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Quality of Products.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Payment Options Between and within
Groups F value is 0.557 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595) with the
significance p value 0.456 is less than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there
is no significance difference between Gender and Payment Options. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Product Packaging Between and
within Groups F value is 0.005 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f
(4,595)with the significance p value 0.946 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and I Product Packaging.
Accept null hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Delivery Process Between and within
there is a significance difference between Gender and Delivery Process. Accept null Hypothesis
Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Replacement Between and within
there is no significance difference between Gender and Replacement. Accept null Hypothesis
H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Promotion Schemes Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Promotion Schemes.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Price Comparison Between and within
there is no significance difference between Gender and Price Comparison. Accept null
Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Grievance Mechanism Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Grievance Mechanism.
Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Terms & Conditions Between and
(4,595)with the significance p value 0.704 is less than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it
concludes that there is a significance difference between Gender and Terms & Conditions
.Accept alternative Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Privacy System Between and within
there is no significance difference between Gender and Privacy System. Accept alternative
Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Customer Care Between and within
there is no significance difference between Gender and Customer Care. Accept null Hypothesis
H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Payment Security Between and within
there is no significance difference between Gender and Payment Security. Accept null
Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Order Tracking Facility Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Order Tracking Facility.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Website Navigation Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Website Navigation.
Accept alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Order booking Between and within
there is no significance difference between Gender and Order booking. Accept null Hypothesis
H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Cancellation of order Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Cancellation of order.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Delivery Charges Between and within
there is no significance difference between Gender and Delivery Charges. Accept null
Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Reliability of product information
shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.298 is greater than at 0.05 significance level.
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Reliability of
product information. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Assuring product quality information
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Assuring
product quality. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Affordable price of products of
products Between and within Groups F value is 0.005 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
table shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.944 is greater than at 0.05 significance
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Affordable
price of products. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Availability of more brands Between
and within Groups F value is 0.858 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f
(4,595) with the significance p value 0.355 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Availability of more
brands. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Display of product imGenders
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Display of
product images. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Prompt delivery Between and within
there is no significance difference between Gender and Prompt delivery. Accept null Hypothesis
H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Security in payment process Between
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Security in payment
process. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Easy accessibility of information
it concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Easy accessibility of
information. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Reliability of web advertisements
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Reliability of
web advertisements. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Safety of the products Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Safety of the products.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Amount of time spend to gather
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Amount of time
spend to gather. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Gender and Real time support for after sales
it concludes that there is no significance difference between Gender and Real time support for
after sales. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
7. H0: There is no significant relation between the age of the respondents with level of
satisfaction towards online shopping
H1: There is a significant relation between the annual incomes of the respondents with level of
satisfaction towards online shopping.

Sum of Mean Hypothesis
Availability of variety of goods Between Groups 3.931 4 .983 .880 .475
Within Groups 664.363 595 1.117 Accept Ho
Total 668.293 599
Product Specifications Between Groups 5.481 4 1.370 1.327 .259
Within Groups 614.477 595 1.033
Total 619.958 599
Product Pictures Between Groups 2.168 4 .542 .522 .720
Within Groups 618.205 595 1.039
Total 620.373 599
Quality of Products Between Groups 3.747 4 .937 1.175 .321
Total 478.198 599
Payment Options Between Groups 5.937 4 1.484 1.342 .253
Within Groups 658.262 595 1.106
Total 664.198 599
Product Packaging Between Groups 2.697 4 .674 .778 .540
Total 518.260 599
Delivery Process Between Groups 4.639 4 1.160 1.323 .260
Total 526.265 599
Replacement Between Groups 4.434 4 1.108 1.074 .368
Within Groups 613.806 595 1.032
Total 618.240 599
Promotion Schemes Between Groups 6.692 4 1.673 1.983 .096
Total 508.625 599
Price Comparison Between Groups 4.358 4 1.090 .974 .421
Within Groups 665.315 595 1.118
Total 669.673 599
Grievance Mechanism Between Groups 3.778 4 .945 .990 .413
Total 571.718 599
Terms & Conditions Between Groups 13.784 4 3.446 4.093 .003
Total 514.798 599
Privacy System Between Groups 1.616 4 .404 .469 .758
Total 513.760 599
Customer Care Between Groups 3.988 4 .997 1.321 .261
Total 453.040 599
Payment Security Between Groups 2.461 4 .615 .664 .617
Total 553.460 599
Order Tracking Facility Between Groups 5.445 4 1.361 1.380 .239
Total 592.473 599
Website Navigation Between Groups 3.392 4 .848 .999 .408
Total 508.625 599
Order booking Between Groups 1.238 4 .309 .387 .818
Total 477.493 599
Cancellation of order Between Groups 5.848 4 1.462 1.409 .229
Within Groups 617.350 595 1.038
Total 623.198 599
Delivery Charges Between Groups 1.940 4 .485 .544 .703
Total 532.265 599
Reliability of product Between Groups 1.752 4 .438 .406 .805
information Within Groups 642.541 595 1.080
Total 644.293 599
Assuring product quality Between Groups 2.749 4 .687 .766 .548
Total 536.598 599
Affordable price of products Between Groups 1.137 4 .284 .358 .839
Total 473.593 599
Availability of more brands Between Groups 6.988 4 1.747 1.951 .100
Total 539.673 599
Display of product images Between Groups 1.640 4 .410 .485 .746
Total 504.340 599
Prompt delivery Between Groups 1.484 4 .371 .414 .799
Total 534.918 599
Security in payment process Between Groups 5.032 4 1.258 1.474 .208
Total 512.625 599
Easy accessibility of Between Groups 1.938 4 .485 .560 .692
information Within Groups 514.562 595 .865
Total 516.500 599
Reliability of web Between Groups .823 4 .206 .244 .913
advertisements Within Groups 501.170 595 .842
Total 501.993 599
Safety of the products Between Groups 1.657 4 .414 .620 .648
Total 399.173 599
Lesser cost of delivery Between Groups 4.247 4 1.062 1.440 .219
Total 443.093 599
Amount of time spend to Between Groups 6.299 4 1.575 1.863 .115
gather Within Groups 503.020 595 .845
Total 509.318 599
Real time support for after sales Between Groups 2.939 4 .735 .689 .599
Within Groups 634.060 595 1.066
Total 636.998 599
From the above ANOVA Table – 5.2.65 revels that the Age and Availability of variety of goods
it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Availability of variety of
goods Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Product Specifications Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Product Specifications.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Product Pictures Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Product Pictures. Accept null Hypothesis
Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Quality of Products. Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Quality of Products. Accept null Hypothesis
Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Payment Options Between and within
Groups F value is 0.41.342 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595) with
the significance p value 0.253 is less than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that
there is no significance difference between Age and Payment Options. Accept null Hypothesis
Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Product Packaging Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and I Product Packaging. Accept null hypothesis
Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Delivery Process Between and within
there is a significance difference between Age and Delivery Process. Accept null Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Replacement Between and within Groups
F value is 1.074 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595)with the
there is no significance difference between Age and Replacement. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Promotion Schemes Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Promotion Schemes. Accept null Hypothesis
Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Price Comparison Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Price Comparison. Accept null Hypothesis
H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Grievance Mechanism Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Grievance Mechanism.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Terms & Conditions Between and within
significance p value 0.003 is less than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes that there
is a significance difference between Age and Terms & Conditions .Accept alternative
Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Privacy System Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Privacy System. Accept alternative
Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Customer Care Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Customer Care. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Payment Security Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Payment Security. Accept null Hypothesis
H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Order Tracking Facility Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Order Tracking Facility.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Website Navigation Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Website Navigation. Accept alternative
Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Order booking Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Order booking. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Cancellation of order Between and within
Groups F value is 1,409 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595) with the
there is no significance difference between Age and Cancellation of order. Accept null
Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Delivery Charges Between and within
Groups F value is 0.544at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f (4,595) with the
there is no significance difference between Age and Delivery Charges. Accept null Hypothesis
H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Reliability of product information
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Reliability of
product information. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Assuring product quality information
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Assuring product
quality. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Affordable price of products of products
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Affordable price of
products. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Availability of more brands Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Availability of more brands.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Display of product images Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Display of product images.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Prompt delivery Between and within
there is no significance difference between Age and Prompt delivery. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Security in payment process Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Security in payment process.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Easy accessibility of information Between
and within Groups F value is 0.560at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table shows d.f
concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Easy accessibility of
information. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Reliability of web advertisements
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Reliability of web
advertisements. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Safety of the products Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Safety of the products. Accept
null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Amount of time spend to gather
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Amount of time
spend to gather. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Age and Real time support for after sales Between
concludes that there is no significance difference between Age and Real time support for after
sales. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
8. H0: There is no significant relation between the marital status of the respondents with level of
satisfaction towards online shopping
H1: There is a significant relation between the marital status of the respondents with level of
satisfaction towards online shopping.

Sum of Mean
Availability of variety Between
3.191 4 .798 .714 .583
of goods Groups
Within Groups 665.102 595 1.118
Total 668.293 599
Product Between
12.648 4 3.162 3.098 .015
Specifications Groups
Within Groups 607.311 595 1.021
Total 619.958 599
Product Pictures Between
6.888 4 1.722 1.670 .155
Groups
Within Groups 613.486 595 1.031
Total 620.373 599
Quality of Products Between
3.694 4 .923 1.158 .328
Groups
Total 478.198 599
Payment Options Between
1.879 4 .470 .422 .793
Groups
Within Groups 662.319 595 1.113
Total 664.198 599
Product Packaging Between
.497 4 .124 .143 .966
Groups
Total 518.260 599
Delivery Process Between
4.870 4 1.217 1.389 .236
Groups
Total 526.265 599
Replacement Between
2.124 4 .531 .513 .726
Groups
Within Groups 616.116 595 1.035
Total 618.240 599
Promotion Schemes Between
3.005 4 .751 .884 .473
Groups
Total 508.625 599
Price Comparison Between
5.370 4 1.343 1.202 .309
Groups
Within Groups 664.303 595 1.116
Total 669.673 599
Grievance Between
1.161 4 .290 .303 .876
Mechanism Groups
Total 571.718 599
Terms & Conditions Between
2.246 4 .562 .652 .626
Groups
Total 514.798 599
Privacy System Between .885 4 .221 .257 .906
Groups
Total 513.760 599
Customer Care Between
3.157 4 .789 1.044 .384
Groups
Total 453.040 599
Payment Security Between
3.030 4 .757 .819 .513
Groups
Total 553.460 599
Order Tracking Between
1.936 4 .484 .488 .745
Facility Groups
Total 592.473 599
Website Navigation Between
2.335 4 .584 .686 .602
Groups
Total 508.625 599
Order booking Between
1.780 4 .445 .557 .694
Groups
Total 477.493 599
Cancellation of order Between
2.549 4 .637 .611 .655
Groups
Within Groups 620.649 595 1.043
Total 623.198 599
Delivery Charges Between
5.169 4 1.292 1.459 .213
Groups
Total 532.265 599
Reliability of product Between
2.872 4 .718 .666 .616
information Groups
Within Groups 641.421 595 1.078
Total 644.293 599
Assuring product Between
3.063 4 .766 .854 .491
quality Groups
Total 536.598 599
Affordable price of Between
4.015 4 1.004 1.272 .280
products Groups
Total 473.593 599
Availability of more Between
.194 4 .048 .053 .995
brands Groups
Total 539.673 599
Display of product Between
2.118 4 .530 .627 .643
images Groups
Total 504.340 599
Prompt delivery Between
5.126 4 1.281 1.439 .220
Groups
Total 534.918 599
Security in payment Between
3.094 4 .773 .903 .462
process Groups
Total 512.625 599
Easy accessibility of Between
1.327 4 .332 .383 .821
information Groups
Total 516.500 599
Reliability of web Between
1.578 4 .395 .469 .758
advertisements Groups
Total 501.993 599
Safety of the products Between
3.738 4 .934 1.406 .230
Groups
Total 399.173 599
Lesser cost of Between
2.520 4 .630 .851 .493
delivery Groups
Total 443.093 599
Amount of time Between 8.345 4 2.086 2.478 .043
spend to gather Groups
Total 509.318 599
Real time support for Between
7.039 4 1.760 1.662 .157
after sales Groups
Within Groups 629.960 595 1.059
Total 636.998 599
From the above ANOVA Table –8revels that the Marital Status and Availability of variety of
goods Between and within Groups F value is 0.714 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA table
shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.583is greater than at 0.05 significance level.
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and
Availability of variety of goods Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Product Specifications Between
(4,595) with the significance p value 0.015 is less than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Product
Specifications. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Product Pictures Between and
(4,595)with the significance p value 0.0.155 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Product Pictures.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Quality of Products. Between
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Quality of
Products. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Payment Options Between and
with the significance p value 0.793 is less than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it concludes
that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Payment Options. Accept null
Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Product Packaging Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and I Product
Packaging. Accept null hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Delivery Process Between and
concludes that there is a significance difference between Marital Status and Delivery Process.
Accept null Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Replacement Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Replacement.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Promotion Schemes Between
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Promotion
Schemes. Accept null Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Price Comparison Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Price Comparison.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Grievance Mechanism Between
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Grievance
Mechanism. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Terms & Conditions Between
(4,595)with the significance p value 0.626 is less than at 0.05 significance level. Hence, it
concludes that there is a significance difference between Marital Status and Terms & Conditions
.Accept alternative Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Privacy System Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Privacy System.
Accept alternative Hypothesis Ho.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Customer Care Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Customer Care.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Payment Security Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Payment Security.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Order Tracking Facility
d.f (4,595)with the significance p value 0.745 is greater than at 0.05 significance level. Hence,
it concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Order Tracking
Facility. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Website Navigation Between
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Website
Navigation. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Order booking Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Order booking.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Cancellation of order Between
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Cancellation of
order. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Delivery Charges Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Delivery Charges.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Reliability of product
information Between and within Groups F value is 0.666 at 5% significance level. The
significance level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital
Status and Reliability of product information. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Assuring product quality
information Between and within Groups F value is 0. 854 at 5% significance level. The
Status and Assuring product quality. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Affordable price of products of
products Between and within Groups F value is 1.272 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and
Affordable price of products. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Availability of more brands
Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and
Availability of more brands. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Display of product imEducation
Qualification s Between and within Groups F value is 0.627 at 5% significance level. The
Status and Display of product images. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Prompt delivery Between and
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Prompt delivery.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Security in payment process
it concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Security in
payment process. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Easy accessibility of
information Between and within Groups F value is 0.383 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
level. Hence, it concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and
Easy accessibility of information. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Reliability of web
advertisements Between and within Groups F value is 0.469 at 5% significance level. The
Status and Reliability of web advertisements. Accept null Hypothesis H0.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Safety of the products Between
concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Safety of the
products. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Lesser cost of delivery Between
concludes that there is a significance difference between Marital Status and Lesser cost of
delivery. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Amount of time spend to
gather Between and within Groups F value is 2.478 at 5% significance level. The ANOVA
table shows d.f (4,595) with the significance p value 0.043 is less than at 0.05 significance
level. Hence, it concludes that there is a significance difference between Marital Status and
Amount of time spend to gather. Accept alternative Hypothesis Ha.
From the above ANOVA Table revels that the Marital Status and Real time support for after sales
it concludes that there is no significance difference between Marital Status and Real time support
for after sales. Accept null Hypothesis H0.

Table 5.ANOVA Analysis

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Table 5.ANOVA Analysis

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

1.

Table 5.ANOVA Analysis

Table 5.2 ANOVA Analysis

Sum Mea Hypoth

Within Groups 362.80 59

It is quick and easy to Between Groups .

Within Groups 431.35 59

Chosen site does not waste Between Groups .

Within Groups 422.74 59

Selected website Between Groups 2.771 4 .693 . .

Comfortable in surfing this Between Groups .

Within Groups 471.50 59

The product that came was Between Groups .

Within Groups 455.71 59

The product delivered by Between Groups .

Within Groups 534.08 59

Within Groups 509.84 59

When I have a problem, Between Groups .

Within Groups 376.19 59

Inquiries are answered Between Groups .

Within Groups 579.34 59

My privacy is protected at Between Groups 3.437 4 .859 . .

The chosen website has Between Groups .

Within Groups 560.64 59

Products purchased through Between Groups .

Within Groups 517.09 59

I find products purchased Between Groups .

Within Groups 406.41 59

Within Groups 488.00 59

Satisfied with online Between Groups .

Within Groups 431.21 59

Online shopping prices are Between Groups .

Within Groups 613.60 59 1.03

Superiority of value Between Groups 4.473 4 1.11 1. .

product available in online Between Groups .

Within Groups 552.27 59

I get value in online Between Groups .

Within Groups 497.47 59

Table 5.3 ANOVA Analysis

The website provides in-depth Between . .

Chosen site does not waste my Between . . .

Selected website understands Between . . .

The product that came was Between .

The product delivered by the Between .

When I have a problem, the Between . . .

Inquiries are answered Between .

The chosen website has Between .

Products purchased through Between . . .

Satisfied with products Between . . .

Satisfied with online shopping Between . . .

Superiority of value received Between . . .

product available in online Between . . .

Table 6 ANOVA Analysis

Table 7 ANOVA Analysis

Table 8 ANOVA Analysis

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi