Data Analysis and Interpretation by using SPSS

Submitted To:

Dr. Nosheen Sarwat

Submitted By:

Muhammad Shahid MB2E-19-20

Muhammad Ishfaq MB2E-19-33

M. Talha Khalid MB2E-19-45

MBA 1.5 (Evening)

Session 2019-2021

Task Performed:

Muhammad Shahid Model Design, Hypothesis Development, Descriptive

Muhammad Ishfaq EFA, CFA, Mediation Analysis, Moderation Analysis, and

Reliability Analysis

M. Talha Khalid Frequencies analysis, Correlation Analysis, Regression

INTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES

BAHUDDIN ZAJKARIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN.
1
2
Table of Contents
Model:.........................................................................................................................................................3

Relationship:................................................................................................................................................3

Hypothesis:..................................................................................................................................................3

Descriptive Analysis.....................................................................................................................................4

Frequencies:................................................................................................................................................5

Reliability Analysis:......................................................................................................................................6

Correlation...................................................................................................................................................7

Regression...................................................................................................................................................8

Exploratory Factor analysis (EFA)................................................................................................................9

Conformity Factor Analysis (CFA)..............................................................................................................13

Baseline Comparisons............................................................................................................................13

RMSEA...................................................................................................................................................14

AVE & CR...............................................................................................................................................14

Mediating role of Optimism......................................................................................................................15

Model Summary....................................................................................................................................15

The relationship of IV and Mediator:.....................................................................................................15

TOTAL EFFECT MODEL...........................................................................................................................15

Indirect effect(s) of IV and DV................................................................................................................16

OUTCOME VARIABLE:............................................................................................................................16

Moderating effect of Perceived Stress on Life Satisfaction:......................................................................16

3
Model:

Perceived Stress

Self Esteem Life Satisfaction

Optimism

Relationship:
 Self-esteem is significantly associated with life satisfaction, where a positive association
will be found.
 Life satisfaction is associated with self-esteem and perceived stress level can modify the
relationship between these two.
 Individual personality can be modify the relationship between self-esteem and life
satisfaction.

Hypothesis:
H1: There is a positive relationship between self-esteem and life satisfaction.

H2: If the individual self-esteem increased/decreased then also the life satisfaction is
increased/decreased.

H3: The individual whom have high self-esteem have more life satisfaction

H4: There is a positive relationship between self-esteem and optimism and this leads to the life
satisfaction.

4
H5: If the level of perceived stress is high then the self-esteem will be and its leads to low level
of life satisfaction.

H6: There is inversely proportional relationship among perceived stress and life satisfaction.

Descriptive Analysis
Discussion:

Descriptive Statistics
N Minimu Maximu Mean Std.
m m Deviation
sex 150 1 2 1.59 .494
age 150 18 82 37.83 14.298
marital status 150 1 8 3.31 1.821
highest educ completed 150 2 6 3.94 1.227
Self-Esteem 148 2.67 4.87 3.7032 .52794
Optimism 150 3.00 4.85 3.8831 .39160
Perceived Stress 150 2.40 4.60 3.6833 .61844
Life Satisfaction 150 3.30 4.40 3.9453 .29047
Valid N (list wise) 148

The total of number of respondents (N) for this study was 150 and data was collected from
different individuals to analyze the relationship of self-esteem and life satisfaction. All the data is
collected based on the Likert scale. The analysis of this data shows that all the respondents’
answers are on the scale and no data is out of scale and there is no error in the data collection.

5
Frequencies:
sex
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid MALES 62 41.3 41.3 41.3
FEMALES 88 58.7 58.7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

This table shows that, the total number of respondents are 150, where 62 are males and 88 are
females.

The above table tells us that mostly respondents are belong to the 24 years age group and this
consist the 6.5% of total 100% respondents. Which means that mostly are young females
respondents. And the following table consist the educational background of respondents.

6
Reliability Analysis:
Scale N a Lower Upper
Self-esteem 15 0.777 0.756 0.776
Optimism 13 0.678 0.629 0.715
Perceived Stress 10 0.809 0.766 0.808
Life Satisfaction 10 0.699 0.659 0.704

The minimum value for reliability of scale is 0.70 and if a scale having minimum this value is
consider as accepted for the research and consider as more reliable as compared to the scales
which value is less than 0.70, but also these lower values scales can be used for analysis and it
dependents on the circumstances. The above table is showing the results of reliability of scales
and these scale can be used for this research purpose as self-esteem and perceived stress scales
has higher value the 0.70 and the other scales optimism and life satisfaction are near to 0.70.
Which means that the data can be used to verify the hypothesis and a final conclusion can be
made based on these scales.

7
Correlation
  Correlations
Std.
Deviatio
    Mean n   1 2 3 4 5 6
sex 1.59 0.494 Pearson            
Correlatio
1 n
age 37.83 14.298 Pearson 0.077          
Correlatio
2 n
highest 3.94 1.227 Pearson - -        
educ Correlatio 0.119 0.107
complete n
3 d
marital 3.31 1.821 Pearson . . -      
status Correlatio 234** 659** 0.07
4 n 0
Mean_SE 3.703 0.52794 Pearson 0.072 . - 0.13  
2 Correlatio 227** 0.05 5 0.777
5 n 8
Mean_LS 3.945 0.29047 Pearson 0.010 0.117 0.07 0.09 .
0.69
3 Correlatio 9 6 615**
9
6 n
  **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The above table explains that the independent and dependent variables are correlated to each
other and their values are significant. The normal values for correlation is between the +1 and -1.
The positive and negative sign explain the type of relationship among the variables. In this
analysis there is positive relationship among the variables. As the values is 0.615 and positive,
which means that if there is a change in independent variable then this change will also occurred

8
in the dependent variable. And furthermore there is positive relationship between age and self-
esteem (IV), the changes in age might change the level of self-esteem.

Regression

Model Summary
M R R Adjust Std. Change Statistics
R F df1 df2 Sig. F
od Squar ed R Error
Square Chan Change
el e Square of the
Change ge
Estimat
e
1 . .014 .000 .29233 .014 1.033 2 145 .358
119a
2 . .380 .367 .23269 .366 84.84 1 144 .000
616b 8
a. Predictors: (Constant), age, sex
b. Predictors: (Constant), age, sex, Mean_SE

The adjusted R square value 0.367 shows that, there is positive relationship among the
independent and dependent variable and there is no link between the age and gender of
respondents, both type of genders to much conscious about their self-esteem and this is
predicting changes in their life satisfaction level. And also the significance values if 0.000 and
which is below the 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001. Which means that there is significant relationship
between these two variables and if changes are occurred in one this will also make changes in the
other variable.

Coefficients a
Model Unstandardized Standard t Sig. 95.0% Confidence
Coefficients ized Interval for B
Coefficie
nts

9
 B Std. Beta Lower Upper
Error Bound Bound
1 (Const 3.856 .099 38.91 .000 3.660 4.051
ant) 7
sex -.001 .049 -.002 -.022 .982 -.098 .096
age .002 .002 .119 1.433 .154 -.001 .006
2 (Const 2.717 .147 18.53 .000 2.428 3.007
ant) 9
sex -.020 .039 -.033 -.505 .615 -.097 .058
age .000 .001 -.020 -.289 .773 -.003 .002
Mean_ .344 .037 .622 9.211 .000 .270 .418
SE
a. Dependent Variable: Mean_LS

In this coefficient table the significance value is below the threshold values which means that
there is a positive relationship between the variables and changes are also occurring the
dependent variable due to the independent variable.

Exploratory Factor analysis (EFA)

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling .800
Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 728.18
Sphericity 4
df 36
Sig. .000

Communalities
Extracti
Initial
on
SE14 1.000 .747
SE15 1.000 .785
Optimis
1.000 .755
m
pss3 1.000 .772
pss4 1.000 .752
pss5 1.000 .739

10
 pss7 1.000 .901
lifsat3 1.000 .755
lifsat4 1.000 .864
lifsat5 1.000 .716
lifsat7 1.000 .878
Extraction Method: Principal
Component Analysis.

The threshold value for communalities is 0.7 and all the factors/item which have less value than
0.7 are excluded one by one and the factors/items in the above table are all significant and are
making changes in the model and these are most important factors in this analysis.

Total Variance Explained

Comp Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Rotation Sums of
onent Squared Loadings Squared Loadings
Total % of Cumu Total % of Cumu Total % of Cumu
Varia lative Varia lative Varia lative
nce % nce % nce %
1 4.419 49.10 49.10 4.419 49.10 49.10 3.594 39.93 39.93
1 1 1 1 9 9
2 1.539 17.09 66.19 1.539 17.09 66.19 2.363 26.26 66.19
8 9 8 9 0 9
3 .752 8.352 74.55
1
4 .684 7.601 82.15
2
5 .568 6.308 88.45
9
6 .378 4.200 92.65
9
7 .344 3.821 96.48
0
8 .175 1.944 98.42
4
9 .142 1.576 100.0

11
 00
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

The total variance table is used to explain that how many factors are the most important in this
research and what is the level of their impact in the research. According to the table there are two
factors that have cumulative impact of 66.199% and this impact is greater than the other
remaining factors.

Component Matrix a
Component
1 2
SE14 .589 .620
SE15 .623 .623
Optimism .631 .587
pss3 .819
pss4 .674
pss5 .760
lifsat3 .799
lifsat5 .766
lifsat7 .599
Extraction Method: Principal Component
Analysis.
a. 2 components extracted.

12
While considering this component matrix its necessary that there should be at least three
factors/components in one category, so for this purpose all other are excluded. And the threshold
values for this component matrix are two and one can choose depends on its analysis. The one is
0.7 and other is 0.5. So in this analysis we consider 0.50 value and all the other factors less the
0.50 are excluded.

Component Transformation
Matrix
Compone 1 2
nt
1 .845 .535
2 -.535 .845
Extraction Method: Principal
Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax
with Kaiser Normalization.

From the above analysis and interpreting the results, it can be concluded that the scales are not
well defined and the results might be contrast with our hypothesis or objective. So for this
purpose the best practices is that we have to recollect the data and then run the all analysis and
then interprets its results. If the results are same then this means that these scales are not good for
this research because we have to remove a lot of questions/factors/items that are creating
problem while the analysis and due to these we are unable to reach the minimum threshold value
level.

13
Conformity Factor Analysis (CFA)

Baseline Comparisons
RFI TLI
NFI IFI
Model rho rho CFI
Delta1 Delta2
1 2
Default model .398 .341 .552 .491 .535
Saturated model 1.000 1.000 1.000
Independence
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000
model

In this we use the value of CFI and the rule of thumb for this values is it should 0.5 or greater
than this. In this it’s CFI=0.535, which means that over model is good and it can be used to
interpret the relationship of Self-esteem and life satisfaction. So, it is confirmed that over scales
are good and reliable and these can be used for this research and their results will be significant.

RMSEA
Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSE
Default model .088 .083 .093 .000
Independence model .123 .119 .128 .000

14
The RMSEA values is 0.088 and it is very low and it should be equal to 0.95. This value help us
in determining that how much our variables and scales are fit for this variable. As this is very
low and on this basis we cannot use this model to analyze the relationship of self-esteem with
life satisfaction. The life satisfaction is not related to self-esteem and optimism, there are other
many factors that affecting the life satisfaction. So, this model is rejected and it cannot be
solemnly used for this purpose, either there should be other variables that are directly effecting
the life satisfaction.

AVE & CR
Composite Reliability (CR), Average Variance Extracted (AVE)

Count 48 48 48
Sum 21.172 11.108956 36.891044
Square 448.253584
AVE 0.231436583
CR 0.923958667

This matrix is used to analyze that how much our scale are reliable and what can be the average
variance extraction for these scales. The AVE of this model is 23.14% and which is very low and
we cannot accept this model or it cannot used for this analysis, as the normal value for is 70%
and it can be greater than 0.70 but the low value cannot be accepted. So on the basis of this we
are rejecting this model. The other factor in this table is CR and it has the 92.39% value and on
the basis of this value this model can be accepted and it will help us in determine the relationship
of self-esteem and life satisfaction. The normal threshold value for this is 0.9 or 90% and our
model scores 92% and there are chances that overall results will be good and it will help us in
determine the relationship of self-esteem and life satisfaction with the mediating role of
optimism and moderating role of perceived stress.

While considering the all results of CFA, this model is not good for this kind of analysis and the
results will be unreliable and there will be misunderstanding while interpreting the relationship
of self-esteem and life satisfaction.

15
Mediating role of Optimism
Model Summary
R R-sq p
.5984 .3581 .0000

The summary of model is explaining about the relationship of mediator in the overall analysis
and the value of significance is less than the threshold value. As the value of p should be less
then o.o5, 0.1 and 0.001.
The relationship of IV and Mediator:
F df1 df2 p
2.3233 1.0000 144.0000 .1296

The significance of IV and mediator is not less than the threshold values, which means that it has
less impact on the IV, but still changes are occurring due the mediator in the dependent variable.
TOTAL EFFECT MODEL
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE p
.6148 .3780 .0535 .0000
TOTAL, DIRECT, AND INDIRECT EFFECTS OF X ON Y
The Impact of independent variable on dependent variable:
Effect se t p
.3405 .0361 9.4201 .0000
Direct effect of independent variable on dependent variable:
Effect se t p
.2655 .0441 6.0261 .0000
Indirect effect(s) of IV and DV.
Effect BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI
Mean_OP .0750 .0257 .0247 .1258

OUTCOME VARIABLE:
Mean_OP

16
 Coeff BootMean BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI
Constant 2.2346 2.2274 .1828 1.8684 2.5841
Mean_SE .4457 .4477 .0499 .3499 .5459
OUTCOME VARIABLE:
Mean_LS
Coeff BootMean BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI
Constant 2.3089 2.3067 .1691 1.9730 2.6401
Mean_SE .2655 .2662 .0395 .1888 .3461
Mean_OP .1683 .1682 .0568 .0544 .2771
The overall relationship of IV and DV is significant and DV is strongly affected by the IV. And
also the mediating variable Optimism is creating changes in the relationship of IV and DV. As
the significance p=0.000 and which is less than 0.05, 0.001 and 0.01. When there is positive self-
esteem and also one has high/positive scores in the optimism then this leads to the overall
increase in the life satisfaction dependent variable.

Moderating effect of Perceived Stress on Life Satisfaction:

Model Summary
Mo R R Adjusted Std.
del Squar R Square Error of
e the
Estimate
a
1 .119 .014 .000 .29233
2 .871b .759 .752 .14568
3 .872c .760 .751 .14586

The adjusted R square value of demographics is 0.000 and which explains that individually they
have no impact on the DV and there are no changes in DV due to these variables. But when the
age and gender is considered with IV and Moderator they have 75.2% (Adjusted R Square 0.752)
impact on the DV and this is the strong impact on DV and due to this many modifications are
occurring the DV.

17
To analyze the strength of moderator between the relationship of IV and DV, we also use the
value of R square. And in this model the R square values are 0.759 and 0.760. The effect of this
can be measured on the basis of value of R square and the highest value of this means that higher
relationship strength of moderator. In this model perceived stress is moderator and it has strong
effect on the relationship of self-esteem and life satisfaction. There are many changes in life
satisfaction that are occurring due to the perceived level of stress in the life and when the
perceived level of stress is high then the overall life satisfaction is decreased and vice versa.

18