summerwilcox.weebly.com · web viewthe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: summerwilcox.weebly.com · Web viewThe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore,](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042203/5ea47d045c2b1e110a1d4cb8/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
SPSS Computer Lab Assignment #5
Summer Wilcox
BUSA 2182, MW 6:00p.m. - 7:15p.m.
![Page 2: summerwilcox.weebly.com · Web viewThe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore,](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042203/5ea47d045c2b1e110a1d4cb8/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Explanatory Paragraph #1
Ŷ= 9.896+ .604(attendance) + .135(attachment)
A multiple regression analysis was conducted using satisfaction as the dependent variable
and attendance, attachment, enduring involvement, identity salience, and situational involvement
as the independent variables. The overall status of the model indicated that there was a successful
Omnibus- F test (p=.001<.05) (F=65.603). Attendance and attachment were significant
predictors. However, enduring involvement, identity salience, and situational involvement were
not significant predictors. The coefficient of determination (R²) was .837, indicating that 84
percent of the variation can be explained by the equation. The coefficient of correlation (r)
was .915. This indicates a strong relationship between satisfaction and its predictors. The
adjusted R², which considers the number of predictor and sample size was .824, indicating that
there were no extraneous predictors in the model. Standard error of the estimate, which indicates
how much error is in the prediction of the dependent variable was 1.181 verifying that the
equation was performing satisfactory. The tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience,
and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore, multi-
collinearity was present and could not be trusted.
![Page 3: summerwilcox.weebly.com · Web viewThe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore,](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042203/5ea47d045c2b1e110a1d4cb8/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Explanatory Paragraph #2
A bivariate correlation analysis was conducted using satisfaction, attendance, attachment,
enduring involvement, identity salience, and situational involvement. Attendance, attachment,
identity salience, and situational involvement were all positively correlated with satisfaction.
However, enduring involvement was negatively correlated with satisfaction.
![Page 4: summerwilcox.weebly.com · Web viewThe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore,](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042203/5ea47d045c2b1e110a1d4cb8/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Figure- 1: Conceptual Model
Attachment
Identity Salience
Enduring Involvement
Attendance
Satisfaction
Situational Involvement
![Page 5: summerwilcox.weebly.com · Web viewThe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore,](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042203/5ea47d045c2b1e110a1d4cb8/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Table 1: Means, Standard Deviations, and Zero-Order Correlations
Variables Means S.D. 1 2 3 4
5 6
1. Satisfaction 10.85 2.81
2. Attendance 10.27 3.13 .880** .
3. Attachment 30.64 9.41 .602** .665**
4. Enduring Involvement 33.34 7.70 .149** .226 .806
5. Identity Salience 10.87
3.79 .645** .807** .784** .493**
6. Situational Involvement 54.57 6.81 -.535**
-.472** .143 .618** -.153
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
![Page 6: summerwilcox.weebly.com · Web viewThe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore,](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042203/5ea47d045c2b1e110a1d4cb8/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Table- 2: Descriptive Statistics
Variables Means Standard Deviation
1. Satisfaction 10.85 2.81
2. Attendance 10.27 3.12
3. Attachment 30.64 9.41
4. Enduring Involvement 33.34 7.70
5. Identity Salience 10.87 3.79
6. Situational Involvement 54.57 6.81
**Significant at the 0.01 level
![Page 7: summerwilcox.weebly.com · Web viewThe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore,](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042203/5ea47d045c2b1e110a1d4cb8/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Table- 3: Regression Output Table
Independent Variables Beta T- Value Tolerance P- Value
(constant) 4.541 .000
Attendance .604 5.485 .170 .000*
Attachment .135 2.724 .093 .008*
Enduring Involvement -.020 -.322 .092 .749
Identity Salience -.199 -2.582 .236 .012
Situational Involvement -1.20 -2.613 .206 .011
R-Squared .912
*Significant at the 0.05 level
![Page 8: summerwilcox.weebly.com · Web viewThe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore,](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042203/5ea47d045c2b1e110a1d4cb8/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
![Page 9: summerwilcox.weebly.com · Web viewThe tolerance coefficient for attendance, identity salience, and situational involvement were below the minimum threshold value (.19), therefore,](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022042203/5ea47d045c2b1e110a1d4cb8/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)