Reliability Statistics: Cronbach's Alpha N Of Items?
Reliability Analysis
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
.990 22
Cronbach’s Alpha is used for computing reliability of that data which came out to be 0.990 which is highly satisfactory (>0.7)
Mean Value of the data
The mean and standard values of the data are presented on table no. 6.1 for performance rating.
Out of 22 items the mean values of 9 items came to be less than moderate (< 3) which indicates a high level of disagreement among the saleswomen regarding following aspects of Work-life Balance.
Following are the conclusion drawn out of the mean value of data.
• Employees do not get Flexible Work arrangements.
• A healthy amount of leisure time is not planned weekly
• Work culture is not liked by the most.
• Work place …show more content…
(2-tailed) Mean Difference Lower Upper
Q1 41.243 119 .070 1.80000 1.7136 1.8864
Q2 -2.536 119 .013 -.33333 -.5936 -.0731
Q3 3.864 119 .000 .4500 .219 .681
Q4 -6.622 119 .000 -.85000 -1.1042 -.5958
Q5 7.672 119 .069 .85000 .6306 1.0694
Q6 -8.629 119 .000 -.91667 -1.1270 -.7063
Q7 -10.261 119 .000 -.86667 -1.0339 -.6994
Q8 -3.485 119 .001 -.33333 -.5227 -.1439
Q9 4.920 119 .078 .56667 .3386 .7947
Q10 3.446 119 .056 .46667 .1985 .7348
Q11 3.374 119 .501 .38333 .1583 .6083
Q12 -7.306 119 .000 -.80000 -1.0168 -.5832
Q13 30.491 119 .670 1.66667 1.5584 1.7749
Q14 -1.370 119 .173 -.15000 -.3669 .0669
Q15 2.612 119 .650 .31667 .0766 .5568
Q16 -1.747 119 .083 -.20000 -.4267 .0267
Q17 1.498 119 .137 .18333 -.0590 .4257
Q18 5.151 119 .560 .63333 .3899 .8768
Q19 1.443 119 .152 .13333 -.0496 .3163
Q20 2.839 119 .765 .38333 .1160 .6507
Q21 2.403 119 .438 .33333 .0587 .6079
Q22 -4.970 119 .000 -.63333 -.8856 -.3810
Mean Comparisons
In order to analyze the difference between the groups of respondents two sample T-test is used considering the sub categories of demographic variables which are not more than …show more content…
Correlation
The correlation between each item in the questionnaire are computed and addressed. The results are presented below.
For the ease of analysis only correlation values more than 0.5 are considered to be important for analysis.
Following are the items that are correlated each other and the conclusion derived accordingly.
Correlation of Q1 with Q3 indicates when employees are able to balance their work and life then they can spend enough time with friends and family.
Correlation of Q2 with Q4 indicates when employees get flexible work timing they are able to plan a leisure week time.
Correlation of Q2 with Q10 when employees get flexible works timing they are able to balance their work life.
Correlation of Q6 with Q7 indicates when employees happy with the work culture they don’t consider work place to be a greatest source of stress
Correlation of Q10 with Q11 indicates when more time is spend on work it makes them miss many of the quality time with dear
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
.990 22
Cronbach’s Alpha is used for computing reliability of that data which came out to be 0.990 which is highly satisfactory (>0.7)
Mean Value of the data
The mean and standard values of the data are presented on table no. 6.1 for performance rating.
Out of 22 items the mean values of 9 items came to be less than moderate (< 3) which indicates a high level of disagreement among the saleswomen regarding following aspects of Work-life Balance.
Following are the conclusion drawn out of the mean value of data.
• Employees do not get Flexible Work arrangements.
• A healthy amount of leisure time is not planned weekly
• Work culture is not liked by the most.
• Work place …show more content…
(2-tailed) Mean Difference Lower Upper
Q1 41.243 119 .070 1.80000 1.7136 1.8864
Q2 -2.536 119 .013 -.33333 -.5936 -.0731
Q3 3.864 119 .000 .4500 .219 .681
Q4 -6.622 119 .000 -.85000 -1.1042 -.5958
Q5 7.672 119 .069 .85000 .6306 1.0694
Q6 -8.629 119 .000 -.91667 -1.1270 -.7063
Q7 -10.261 119 .000 -.86667 -1.0339 -.6994
Q8 -3.485 119 .001 -.33333 -.5227 -.1439
Q9 4.920 119 .078 .56667 .3386 .7947
Q10 3.446 119 .056 .46667 .1985 .7348
Q11 3.374 119 .501 .38333 .1583 .6083
Q12 -7.306 119 .000 -.80000 -1.0168 -.5832
Q13 30.491 119 .670 1.66667 1.5584 1.7749
Q14 -1.370 119 .173 -.15000 -.3669 .0669
Q15 2.612 119 .650 .31667 .0766 .5568
Q16 -1.747 119 .083 -.20000 -.4267 .0267
Q17 1.498 119 .137 .18333 -.0590 .4257
Q18 5.151 119 .560 .63333 .3899 .8768
Q19 1.443 119 .152 .13333 -.0496 .3163
Q20 2.839 119 .765 .38333 .1160 .6507
Q21 2.403 119 .438 .33333 .0587 .6079
Q22 -4.970 119 .000 -.63333 -.8856 -.3810
Mean Comparisons
In order to analyze the difference between the groups of respondents two sample T-test is used considering the sub categories of demographic variables which are not more than …show more content…
Correlation
The correlation between each item in the questionnaire are computed and addressed. The results are presented below.
For the ease of analysis only correlation values more than 0.5 are considered to be important for analysis.
Following are the items that are correlated each other and the conclusion derived accordingly.
Correlation of Q1 with Q3 indicates when employees are able to balance their work and life then they can spend enough time with friends and family.
Correlation of Q2 with Q4 indicates when employees get flexible work timing they are able to plan a leisure week time.
Correlation of Q2 with Q10 when employees get flexible works timing they are able to balance their work life.
Correlation of Q6 with Q7 indicates when employees happy with the work culture they don’t consider work place to be a greatest source of stress
Correlation of Q10 with Q11 indicates when more time is spend on work it makes them miss many of the quality time with dear