Conclusions
Correlated t-test across Brand Index Scores
The scores from the ten Likert items were the basis of the Brand Index Score calculation. The Brand Index Score showed that respondents preferred Orbit over Eclipse and Eclipse over Extra. Orbit had a mean score of 29.9 and standard deviation of 6.1. Eclipse reported a mean score of 27.0 and standard deviation of 4.7. Extra reported a mean score of 2.7 and a standard deviation of 6.2. Because the t-tests for all three brands were significant, this is true for both the sample and the population.
Between-group t-test: Pre-to-post Exposure to Ad
For Extra, about 33% of the respondents became more favorable toward the brand after seeing the ad and about 30% of the respondents reported a lower favorability toward the brand using the brand index score. The increase in favorability may stem from a positive impression of the ad or from being the most likable ad of all three ads. Furthermore, an ad index score was calculated to determine respondents’ impressions of the advertisement for Extra. Those who reported a more favorable view also reported a higher advertisement index score than those who reported a less favorable view of the brand after ad exposure. Based on the t-ratio test, both the brand index scores and ad index scores were found to be significant, and therefore, able to be projected to the population.
Chi-squared Significance Test: Relationship between High/Low Brand Index Scores and Up/Same/Down Movers
Among the people who had an above-median brand index score of the Extra brand, these respondents were pretty evenly dispersed among the three different categories of change in perception. However, those respondents who were part of the below-median brand index score were more likely to report a same or more favorable perception toward the Extra brand. Nonetheless, the highest number of people (n=14, 23.7% of total) reported an above median brand index score but became less favorable toward the brand after ad exposure. Additionally, the next largest group (n=12, 20.3% of total) reported brand index scores below the median but became more favorable toward the brand after viewing the ad. These results imply that the Extra ad may not be extremely successful; however, the results could just be the consequences of respondents comparing all three ads. Incidentally, the chi-square test was significant and determined that the results could be projected to the population.
Pre- and Post-Exposure Change Score Frequencies
Within each brand category, the perceptions toward the brand of the majority of respondents remained the same, except for that of the Orbit brand. Regarding Orbit, about 48% of the respondents reported being less favorable toward the brand after ad exposure. In comparison, about 30% of respondents reported less favorability for Extra and about 18% of respondents reported less favorability for Eclipse after seeing the ad. For this particular sample, the Orbit ad seemed to negatively influence the most respondents while the Eclipse ad seemed to positively influence the most respondents. About 39% of the respondents reported more favorability toward the Eclipse brand after seeing the ad.
Eclipse and Orbit Brand Index Score Frequency Counting
About 31% of the respondents had more positive attitude toward Dove brand than toward Tone brand.
Correlation between Extra and Orbit Brand Index Scores
A comparison of the correlation coefficients for Extra and Orbit shows that a low to moderate positive correlation exists between the brands. This means that growing positive attitudes toward the Extra brand are minimally to moderately related to the growing positive perceptions toward the Orbit brand.
Correlation between Eclipse and Orbit Brand Index Score Sub-sample
About 28% of the respondents chew gum on a daily basis. Based on this group, a moderate to high positive correlation exists (r = 0.60) between the brand index scores of Eclipse and Orbit chewing gum. This means that among daily gum chewers, while their perception of the Eclipse brand becomes more positive, their perception of the Orbit brand also becomes more positive.
Multiple Regression Analysis for Extra
Eight out of the ten brand attributes explain why immediate attitude toward the brand changed better than the other two attributes. However, only five of these attributes can be applied to estimating the population. These five attributes include “Feeling refreshed after chewing Extra”, “Would not buy Extra gum”, “Chewing Extra is better than brushing my teeth”, “Chewing Extra makes me feel sophisticated”, and “Extra is better than the other two brands”.
Multiple Regression Analysis for Eclipse
Eight out of the ten brand attributes explain better than the other brand attributes how the immediate attitude of respondents changed. However, none of the attributes could be applied to the population.
Multiple Regression Analysis for Orbit
Five out of the ten brand attributes explain better the differences in immediate attitude change than the other five attributes. However, only three of the important attributes can be applied to estimating the population. These three attributes include “I feel desirable after chewing Orbit gum”, “I would recommend Orbit gum to my family”, and “I feel sophisticated after chewing Orbit gum”. The other two attributes that were seen to explain the change in attitude include “I would not buy Orbit gum” and “I must carry Orbit gum wherever I go”.
Out of the 10 items, six of the indicated items were deemed as important based upon standardized discriminant function coefficients that were above the absolute value of the highest score divided by two. These attributes were “feels refreshed after chewing”, “would not buy”, “must always carry [Extra]”, “gains confidence after chewing”, “feels sophisticated after chewing”, and “is better than other two brands”.
However, because the Wilk's Lambda and chi-squared tests were not significant, these results could not be projected to the population. On the other hand, the Classification Matrix showed that it was possible to predict with 71.4% accuracy whether a respondent would prefer the brand based on the attitude that that respondent had toward the brand and because the t-ratio was found to be significant, this accuracy percentage could be projected to the rest of the population.
ANOVA (Analysis of Variance)
This analysis showed that women are more likely than men to consider Eclipse chewing gum to be better than brushing one’s teeth. The mean scores for women were higher than those of men within all three groups (i.e. “more favorable”, “less favorable”, and “stayed the same”). This suggests that women agreed more strongly with the statement “Chewing Eclipse chewing gum is better than brushing my teeth”. Nevertheless, the F-ratios showed that only the mean scores among the gender group could be projected to the rest of the population.
MANOVA (Multiple Analysis of Variance)
Even though females were more likely than males to indicate that chewing Eclipse gum was better than brushing one’s teeth, this specific item overall was viewed significantly lower than other Likert items for both males and females in all change-in-attiude score groups. A few other conclusions to note are:
- Men who reported a more favorable attitude toward the brand after ad exposure reported higher mean scores for “feels desirable after chewing” and “gains confidence after chewing” than the other groups. This could indicate that men tended to be more affected from the ad than from women or just remembered the emotional nuances of the ad better than women.
- Women who reported a more favorable attitude toward the brand after ad exposure reported a higher mean score for “would not buy” and “must always carry it” than the other groups, suggesting that the ad itself did not effectively convey this type of message to its audience.
- Women who reported a less favorable attitude toward the brand after ad exposure reported a higher mean score for “is a good chewing gum”, “is better than brushing teeth”, “would recommend to family members”, and “gains confidence after chewing”. This contradiction in response could suggest that women have an overall positive perception toward Eclipse gum, but perhaps rated other brands higher than this brand.
Incidentally, only the between groups change score was significant and therefore able to be projected to the population.
The eigenvalues from this analysis showed that Eclipse had four important factors while Extra and Orbit only had two. The Varimax-rotated matrices were selected for Extra and Orbit, but the original factor matrix was chosen for Eclipse. These matrices were chosen because they had the least number of ambiguous rows. Overall, the mean attitude scores for all three brands showed again that Orbit had the highest mean score, followed by Extra, and then Eclipse. The results showed that the respondents responded a bit more positively toward Orbit and Extra than Eclipse. The t-ratio indicates that these means were significant and could be projected to the population.
This analysis showed that for Eclipse, respondents should be grouped in two clusters since the relationship between the clusters in the two-cluster group was clearer than the relationship among the three-cluster group. The means of the clusters show that people in Cluster 2 generally held a slightly better view of the Eclipse brand than those people in Cluster 1 as all items in Cluster 2 reported higher scores than those of Cluster 1 except for the “Is better than brushing teeth” item. Overall, all clusters reported relatively similar counts in each group and no glaring relationships appear to be evident between the clusters and how often respondents chewed gum. On the other hand, because the chi-squared for this table was not found to be significant, the data cannot be projected to the population.
<<Previous Next>>
