CHI SQUARE TEST

Case processing summary

Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Age * medical 100 100.0% 0 0.0% 100 100.0%
checkup

Age * medical checkup cross tabulation

Count
Medical checkup Total
Highly Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Highly
satisfied dissatisfied
Below 25 years 4 5 4 5 2 20
25-35 years 8 6 7 10 5 36
Age 35-45 years 4 5 1 2 2 14
45-55 years 3 10 3 2 1 19
Above 55 years 3 3 2 2 1 11
Total 22 29 17 21 11 100

Chi-square tests
Value Df Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Pearson chi-square 11.037a 16 .807
Likelihood ratio 11.163 16 .799
Linear-by-linear 1.737 1 .187
association
N of valid cases 100
A. 19 cells (76.0%) have expected count less than 5. The
minimum expected count is 1.21.

CORRELATION METHOD
Symmetric measures
Value Approx.
Sig.
Nominal by Contingency .315 .807
nominal coefficient
N of valid cases 100

Case processing summary

Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Salary and benefits * 100 100.0% 0 0.0% 100 100.0%
promotion policies

Salary and benefits * promotion policies cross tabulation

Count
Promotion policies Total
Highly Satisfie Neutral Dissatisfie Highly
satisfied d d dissatisfie
d
Salaryandbenefi Highly satisfied 6 6 1 4 2 19
ts Satisfied 2 4 3 5 5 19
 Neutral 2 6 1 4 4 17
Dissatisfied 7 9 1 8 0 25
Highly 6 5 1 4 4 20
dissatisfied
Total 23 30 7 25 15 100

Symmetric measures
Value Asymp. Std. Approx. Approx.
Errora Tb Sig.
Nominal by Contingency .360 .529
nominal coefficient
Interval by interval Pearson's r -.051 .103 -.509 .612c
Ordinal by ordinal Spearman correlation -.057 .105 -.568 .571c
N of valid cases 100
A. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
B. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
C. Based on normal approximation.

ONE WAY ANOVA

Anova
Seating arrangement
Sum of Df Mean square F Sig.
squares
Between 14.228 4 3.557 2.060 .092
groups
Within groups 164.012 95 1.726
Total 178.240 99
 Multiple comparisons
Dependent variable: seating arrangement
Tukey hsd
(i) (j) Mean Std. Sig. 95% confidence interval
ventilation ventilation difference (i- Error Lower Upper
j) bound bound
Good -.55000 .37453 .585 -1.5915 .4915
Average -.62353 .43345 .605 -1.8289 .5818
Very good
Poor -.57778 .42689 .659 -1.7649 .6093
Very poor -1.33846* .46811 .041 -2.6402 -.0367
Very good .55000 .37453 .585 -.4915 1.5915
Average -.07353 .39434 1.000 -1.1701 1.0231
Good
Poor -.02778 .38712 1.000 -1.1043 1.0488
Very poor -.78846 .43215 .366 -1.9902 .4133
Very good .62353 .43345 .605 -.5818 1.8289
Good .07353 .39434 1.000 -1.0231 1.1701
Average
Poor .04575 .44438 1.000 -1.1900 1.2815
Very poor -.71493 .48411 .580 -2.0612 .6313
Very good .57778 .42689 .659 -.6093 1.7649
Good .02778 .38712 1.000 -1.0488 1.1043
Poor
Average -.04575 .44438 1.000 -1.2815 1.1900
Very poor -.76068 .47824 .507 -2.0906 .5692
Very good 1.33846* .46811 .041 .0367 2.6402
Good .78846 .43215 .366 -.4133 1.9902
Very poor
Average .71493 .48411 .580 -.6313 2.0612
Poor .76068 .47824 .507 -.5692 2.0906
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

Seating arrangement
Tukey hsda,b
Ventilatio N Subset for alpha =
n 0.05
1 2
Very 20 2.2000
good
Good 32 2.7500 2.7500
Poor 18 2.7778 2.7778
Average 17 2.8235 2.8235
Very poor 13 3.5385
Sig. .605 .370
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets
are displayed.
A. Uses harmonic mean sample size =
18.345.
B. The group sizes are unequal. The
harmonic mean of the group sizes is used.
Type i error levels are not guaranteed.