Table 1: KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. ChiSquare Df Sig.

.690 751.539 210 .000

INTERPRETATION: KMO varies between 0 and 1.0 indicates that the sum of partial correlations is large relative to sum of correlations, indicating diffusion in pattern of correlations. Hence factor analysis is inappropriate in this case. A value close to 1 indicates that patterns of correlations are relatively compact. So factor analysis gives distinct and reliable factors. Kaiser recommends accepting values >0.5 as acceptable. In this data, KMO value is 0.690.This indicates that factor analysis is appropriate. BARTLETTS measure tests null hypothesis that the original correlation matrix is identity matrix. If that correlation matrix were identity matrix, then all correlation coefficients would be 0 which indicates that there is no relation between the variables. But we need relation between the variables. So we want to reject the null hypothesis. Therefore we want this test to be significant. i.e. <0.05.For this data, Bartletts test is highly significant (p<0.001).Hence factor analysis is appropriate.

Table 2: Communalities Extractio Initial n 1.000 .596 1.000 .419 1.000 .389

familiar restaurant Price delicious food cleanliness of 1.000 .395 restaurant variety of menu 1.000 .651 good service 1.000 .720 parking facility 1.000 .603 Ambience 1.000 .660 brand image 1.000 .664 quality of food 1.000 .629 location of restaurant 1.000 .516 courtesy of waiters 1.000 .609 time taken to serve 1.000 .531 interior designing 1.000 .749 Furnishings 1.000 .813 seating capacity 1.000 .733 Novelty 1.000 .658 Privacy 1.000 .565 availability of 1.000 .614 favourite food billing time 1.000 .682 uniform of waiters 1.000 .584 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
INTERPRETATION:

This table shows communalities before and after extraction. Principal component analysis works on initial assumption that all variance is common. Therefore, the initial communalities are all 1.The communalities in the column labeled Extraction reflect the common/shared variance in the data structure. In this data, 59.6% of variance of familiar restaurant is common variance. It can also be viewed as the proportion of variance explained by the underlying factors.

Table 3: Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigen values % of Cumulative Total Variance % 3.970 1.913 1.773 1.494 1.328 1.196 1.107 .986 .931 .863 .804 .697 .653 .592 .541 .518 .459 .413 .326 .268 .166 18.906 9.108 8.441 7.112 6.323 5.697 5.274 4.696 4.435 4.108 3.829 3.320 3.111 2.821 2.578 2.469 2.184 1.967 1.555 1.277 .790 18.906 28.014 36.456 43.568 49.891 55.588 60.861 65.558 69.993 74.100 77.929 81.250 84.361 87.182 89.760 92.229 94.412 96.379 97.934 99.210 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings % of Cumulativ Total Variance e% 3.970 1.913 1.773 1.494 1.328 1.196 1.107 18.906 9.108 8.441 7.112 6.323 5.697 5.274 18.906 28.014 36.456 43.568 49.891 55.588 60.861 Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Cumulative Total % of Variance % 2.561 2.166 2.033 1.810 1.482 1.401 1.328 12.197 10.312 9.682 8.621 7.055 6.671 6.323 12.197 22.509 32.191 40.813 47.868 54.538 60.861

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

INTERPRETATION: Eigen values under the column Total represent variance explained by that particular component. The Eigen values are in descending order. First few factors explain relatively large amount of variance whereas subsequent components explain only small amounts of variance. In the data, component 1 explains 18.906% of total variance. The Eigen values >1 are extracted because components with Eigen values <1 account for less variance and hence they are ignored. In the data, there are seven components whose eigen values are >1 and they are represented in the column Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings. This Kaisers criterion to extract factors is recommended when the sample size is small. The column Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings contains Eigen values of components after rotation. Rotation is done because it has the effect of optimizing the factor structure and it also leads to the equalization of relative importance of components/factors. In the data, before rotation, factor 1 accounts for 18.906% of variance and others (9.108%, 8.441%, 7.112 %.....). After rotation, factor 1 accounts for 12.197% of variance and others (10.312%, 9.682%, 8.621 %.......).

Table 4: Rotated Component Matrix Component 4

familiar restaurant Price .364 delicious food .595 cleanliness of .581 restaurant variety of menu .782 good service .800 parking facility .685 Ambience .795 brand image .728 quality of food .453 location of restaurant .665 courtesy of waiters .682 time taken to serve .662 interior designing .752 Furnishings .746 seating capacity .716 Novelty .763 Privacy .525 availability of .493 favourite food billing time .617 uniform of waiters Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. A Rotation converged in 12 iterations. INTERPRETATION:

7 .667

.500

This table is same as the component matrix but is rotated. Orthogonal rotation is used when the factors are theoretically independent and Varimax procedure is commonly used for this kind of rotation. Rotation minimizes the no. of variables with high loadings on a factor and the factor matrix becomes simpler and easy to interpret. In rotated component matrix, values >0.3 are only acceptable (values <0.3 indicates highly unrelated variables and each one might contribute to a factor. Hence they are ignored).

Table 5: Scree Plot

Scree Plot

Eigenvalue

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Component Number

__

INTERPRETATION: This graph shows that there are 7 factors whose eigenvalues are more than 1. Totally 7 factors are extracted and they are named as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Dining Experience Variety Customer satisfaction Social status Value for money Convenience Orderliness
5

Table 6: Reliability (Cronbachs Alpha)

FACTORS ITEMS FACTOR LOADINGS .682 .662 .752 .746 % OF VARIANCE EXPLAINED 12.197 RELIABILITY (CRONBACHS ALPHA) .755

DINING EXPERIENCE

Courtesy of waiters Time taken to serve Interior designing Furnishings

VARIETY

Variety of menu Location of restaurant Billing time

.782 .665 .617

10.312

.653

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Seating capacity Novelty Availability of favourite food

.716 .763 .493

9.682

.605

SOCIAL STATUS

Ambience Brand image Quality of food

.795 .728 .453 .364 .595 .581 .525

8.621

.525

VALUE FOR MONEY

Price Delicious food Cleanliness of restaurant Privacy

7.055

.299

Good service CONVENIENCE Parking facility

.800 .685

6.671

.465

ORDERLINESS

Familiar restaurant Uniform of waiters

.667 .500

6.323

.049

By adding all the percentages, we get 59.6% which is the common