PQ17
Agribank always puts customer interests first | 0.771 | ||||
PQ22 | Compared with other banking brands, Agribank's service quality is outstanding. superior | 0.735 | |||
PQ18 | Agribank's working environment is professional. | 0.731 | |||
BL29 | I am a loyal customer of Agribank. | 0.736 | |||
BL26 | I do not want to switch to another bank's services because Agribank meets my requirements. I | 0.712 | |||
BL28 | I will introduce the brand Agribank with my friends and relatives | 0.699 | |||
BL27 | I will continue to use the product, Agribank's services in the future | 0.697 | |||
BL24 | Agribank is a trusted brand | 0.695 | |||
BL25 | Agribank brand is my first choice | 0.665 | |||
BL23 | I am satisfied with Agribank's products and services. | 0.591 | |||
BAS13 | Agribank is a bank with uniforms. nice and polite transaction | 0.763 | |||
BAS12 | Agribank is a bank with a fee schedule and competitive interest rates | 0.728 | |||
BAS11 | Agribank is a bank that provides high quality services. | 0.671 | |||
BAS9 | Agribank brand leaves a good impression in customers' minds | 0.614 | |||
BAS7 | Agribank brand image is different from other bank brands | 0.514 | |||
BAW1 | I can recognize the Agribank logo | 0.832 | |||
BAW5 | I can distinguish Agribank from other bank brands | 0.794 | |||
BAW4 | I can recognize the Agribank sign. | 0.793 |
Maybe you are interested!
-
Cronbach'S Alpha of the Tourist Scenery Factor Scale Table 4.1: Reliability Assessment of the Tourist Scenery Scale -
A. Results of Testing the Reliability Coefficient of the Factor Scale from the Enterprise Side -
Results of Scale Reliability Assessment -
Identify Rating Levels and Rating Scales
zt2i3t4l5ee
zt2a3gstourism,quan lan,quang ninh,ecology,ecotourism,minh chau,van don,geography,geographical basis,tourism development,science
zt2a3ge
zc2o3n4t5e6n7ts
of the islanders. Therefore, this indicator will be divided into two sub-indicators:
a1. Natural tourism attractiveness a2. Cultural tourism attractiveness
b. Tourist capacity
The two island communes in Quan Lan have different capacities to receive tourists. Minh Chau Commune is home to many standard hotels and resorts, attracting high-income domestic and international tourists. Meanwhile, Quan Lan Commune has many motels mainly built and operated by local people, so the scale and quality are not high, and will be suitable for ordinary tourists such as students.
c. Time of exploitation of Quan Lan Island Commune:
Quan Lan tourism is seasonal due to weather and climate conditions and festivals only take place on certain days of the year, specifically in spring. In Quan Lan commune, the period from April to June and from September to November is considered the best time to visit Quan Lan because the cultural tourism activities are mainly associated with festivals taking place during this time.
Minh Chau island commune:
Tourism exploitation time is all year round, because this is a place with a number of tourist attractions with diverse ecosystems such as Bai Tu Long National Park Research Center, Tram forest, Turtle Laying Beach, so besides coming to the beach for tourism and vacation in the summer, Minh Chau will attract research groups to come for tourism combined with research at other times of the year.
d. Sustainability
The sustainability of ecotourism sites in Quan Lan and Minh Chau communes depends on the sensitivity of the ecosystems to climate changes.
landscape. In general, these tourist destinations have a fairly high level of sustainability, because they are natural ecosystems, planned and protected. However, if a large number of tourists gather at certain times, it can exceed the carrying capacity and affect the sustainability of the environment (polluted beaches, damaged trees, animals moving away from their habitats, etc.), then the sustainability of the above ecosystems (natural ecosystems, human ecosystems) will also be affected and become less sustainable.
e. Location and accessibility
Both island communes have ports to take tourists to visit from Van Don wharf:
- Quan Lan – Van Don traffic route:
Phuc Thinh – Viet Anh high-speed boat and Quang Minh high-speed boat, depart at 8am and 2pm from Van Don to Quan Lan, and at 7am and 1pm from Quan Lan to Van Don. There are also wooden boats departing at 7am and 1pm.
- Van Don - Minh Chau traffic route:
Chung Huong high-speed train, Minh Chau train, morning 7:30 and afternoon 13:30 from Van Don to Minh Chau, morning 6:30 and afternoon 13:00 from Minh Chau to Van Don.
f. Infrastructure
Despite receiving investment attention, the issue of infrastructure and technical facilities for tourism on Quan Lan Island is still an issue that needs to be resolved because it has a direct impact on the implementation of ecotourism activities. The minimum conditions for serving tourists such as accommodation, electricity, water, communication, especially medical services, and security work need to be given top priority. Ecotourism spots in Minh Chau commune are assessed to have better infrastructure and technical facilities for tourism because there are quite complete and synchronous conditions for serving tourists, meeting many needs of domestic and foreign tourists.
3.2.1.4. Determine assessment levels and assessment scales
Corresponding to the levels of each criterion, the index is the score of those levels in the order of 4, 3, 2, 1 decreasing according to the standard of each level: very attractive (4), attractive (3), average (2), less attractive (1).
3.2.1.5. Determining the coefficients of the criteria
For the assessment of DLST in the two communes of Quan Lan and Minh Chau islands, the students added evaluation coefficients to show the importance of the criteria and indicators as follows:
Coefficient 3 with criteria: Attractiveness, Exploitation time. These are the 2 most important criteria for attracting tourists to tourism in general and eco-tourism in particular, so they have the highest coefficient.
Coefficient 2 with criteria: Capacity, Infrastructure, Location and accessibility . Because the assessment area is an island commune of Van Don district, the above criteria are selected by the author with appropriate coefficients at the average level.
Coefficient 1 with criteria: Sustainability. Quan Lan has natural and human-made ecotourism sites, with high biodiversity and little impact from local human factors. Most of the ecotourism sites are still wild, so they are highly sustainable.
3.2.1.6. Results of DLST assessment on Quan Lan island
a. Assessment of the potential for natural tourism development
For Minh Chau commune:
+ Natural tourism attractiveness is determined to be very attractive (4 points) and the most important coefficient (coefficient 3), so the score of the Attractiveness criterion is 4 x 3 = 12.
+ Capacity is determined as average (2 points) and the coefficient is quite important (coefficient 2), then the score of Capacity criterion is 2 x 2 = 4.
+ Exploitation time is long (4 points), the most important coefficient (coefficient 3) so the score of the Exploitation time criterion is 4 x 3 = 12.
+ Sustainability is determined as sustainable (4 points), the important coefficient is the average coefficient (coefficient 1), so the score of the Sustainability criterion is 4 x 1 = 4 points
+ Location and accessibility are determined to be quite favorable (2 points), the coefficient is quite important (coefficient 2), the criterion score is 2 x 2 = 4 points.
+ Infrastructure is assessed as good (3 points), the coefficient is quite important (coefficient 2), then the score of the Infrastructure criterion is 3 x 2 = 6 points.
The total score for evaluating DLST in Minh Chau commune according to 6 evaluation criteria is determined as: 12 + 4 + 12 + 4 + 4 + 6 = 42 points
Similar assessment for Quan Lan commune, we have the following table:
Table 3.3: Assessment of the potential for natural ecotourism development in Quan Lan and Minh Chau communes
Attractiveness of self-tourismof course
Capacity
Mining time
Sustainability
Location and accessibility
Infrastructure
Result
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
CommuneMinh Chau
12
12
4
8
12
12
4
4
4
8
6
8
42/52
Quan CommuneLan
6
12
6
8
9
12
4
4
4
8
4
8
33/52
b. Assessment of the potential for humanistic tourism development
For Quan Lan commune:
+ The attractiveness of human tourism is determined to be very attractive (4 points) and the most important coefficient (coefficient 3), so the score of the Attractiveness criterion is 4 x 3 = 12.
+ Capacity is determined to be large (3 points) and the coefficient is quite important (coefficient 2), then the score of the Capacity criterion is 3 x 2 = 6.
+ Mining time is average (3 points), the most important coefficient (coefficient 3) so the score of the Mining time criterion is 3 x 3 = 9.
+ Sustainability is determined as sustainable (4 points), the important coefficient is the average coefficient (coefficient 1), so the score of the Sustainability criterion is 4 x 1 = 4 points.
+ Location and accessibility are determined to be quite favorable (2 points), the coefficient is quite important (coefficient 2), the criterion score is 2 x 2 = 4 points.
+ Infrastructure is rated as average (2 points), the coefficient is quite important (coefficient 2), then the score of the Infrastructure criterion is 2 x 2 = 4 points.
The total score for evaluating DLST in Quan Lan commune according to 6 evaluation criteria is determined as: 12 + 6 + 6 + 4 + 4 + 4 = 36 points.
Similar assessment with Minh Chau commune we have the following table:
Table 3.4: Assessment of the potential for developing humanistic eco-tourism in Quan Lan and Minh Chau communes
Attractiveness of human tourismliterature
Capacity
Mining time
Sustainability
Location and accessibility
Infrastructure
Result
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
Point
DarkMulti
Quan CommuneLan
12
12
6
8
9
12
4
4
4
8
4
8
39/52
Minh CommuneChau
6
12
4
8
12
12
4
4
4
8
6
8
36/52
Basically, both Minh Chau and Quan Lan localities have quite favorable conditions for developing ecotourism. However, Quan Lan commune has more advantages to develop ecotourism in a humanistic direction, because this is an area with many famous historical relics such as Quan Lan Communal House, Quan Lan Pagoda, Temple worshiping the hero Tran Khanh Du, ... along with local festivals held annually such as the wind praying ceremony (March 15), Quan Lan festival (June 10-19); due to its location near the port and long exploitation time, the beaches in Quan Lan commune (especially Quan Lan beach) are no longer hygienic and clean to ensure the needs of tourists coming to relax and swim; this is also an area with many beautiful landscapes such as Got Beo wind pass, Ong Phong head, Voi Voi cave, but the ability to access these places is still very limited (dirt hill road, lots of gravel and rocks), especially during rainy and windy times; In addition, other natural resources such as mangrove forests and sea worms have not been really exploited for tourism purposes and ecotourism development. On the contrary, Minh Chau commune has more advantages in developing ecotourism in the direction of natural tourism, this is an area with diverse ecosystems such as at Rua De Beach, Bai Tu Long National Park Conservation Center...; Minh Chau beach is highly appreciated for its natural beauty and cleanliness, ranked in the top ten most beautiful beaches in Vietnam; Minh Chau commune is also home to Tram forest with a large area and a purity of up to 90%, suitable for building bridges through the forest (a very effective type of natural ecotourism currently applied by many countries) for tourists to sightsee, as well as for the purpose of studying and researching.
Figure 3.1: Thenmala Forest Bridge (India) Source: https://www.thenmalaecotourism.com/(August 21, 2019)
3.2.2. Using SWOT matrix to evaluate Quan Lan island tourism
General assessment of current tourism activities of Quan Lan island is shown through the following SWOT matrix:
Table 3.5: SWOT matrix evaluating tourism activities on Quan Lan island
Internal agent
Strengths- There is a lot of potential for tourism development, especially natural ecotourism and humanistic ecotourism.- The unskilled labor force is relatively abundant.- resource environmentunpolluted, still
Weaknesses- Poorly developed infrastructure, especially traffic routes to tourist destinations on the island.- The team of professional staff is still weak.- Tourism products in general
quite wild, originalintact
general and DLST in particularalone is monotonous.
External agents
Opportunity- Tourism is a key industry in the socio-economic development strategy of the province and Van Don economic zone.- Quan Lan was selected as a pilot area for eco-tourism development within the framework of the green growth project between Quang Ninh province and the Japanese organization JICA.- The flow of tourists and especially ecotourism in the world tends toincreasing
Challenge- Weather and climate change abnormally.- Competition in tourism products is increasingly fierce, especially with other localities in the province such as Ha Long, Mong Cai...- Awareness of tourists, especially domestic tourists, about ecotourism and nature conservation is not high.
Through summary analysis using SWOT matrix we see that:
To exploit strengths and take advantage of opportunities, it is necessary to:
- Diversify products and service types (build more tourism routes aimed at specific needs of tourists: experiential tourism immersed in nature, spiritual cultural tourism...)
- Effective exploitation of resources and differentiated products (natural resources and human resources)
div.maincontent .p { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; margin:0pt; } div.maincontent p { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; margin:0pt; } div.maincontent .s1 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 13pt; } div.maincontent .s2 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 13pt; } div.maincontent .s3 { color: #0D0D0D; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s4 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: italic; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s5 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s6 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: italic; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; vertical-align: -3pt; } div.maincontent .s7 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: italic; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; vertical-align: -2pt; } div.maincontent .s8 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: italic; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; vertical-align: -1pt; } div.maincontent .s9 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s10 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s11 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s12 { color: black; font-family:Symbol, serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s13 { color: black; font-family:Wingdings; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s14 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 9pt; vertical-align: 5pt; } div.maincontent .s15 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 9pt; vertical-align: 5pt; } div.maincontent .s16 { color: black; font-family:Cambria, serif; font-style: italic; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s17 { color: #080808; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s18 { color: #080808; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s19 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 11pt; } div.maincontent .s20 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 10pt; } div.maincontent .s21 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; font-size: 11pt; } div.maincontent .s22 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 11pt; } div.maincontent .s23 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: italic; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s24 { color: #212121; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; tex -
Expert Survey Results on Research Scales

BAW2
I can read the slogan of Agribank | 0.706 | ||||
BAW6 | When it comes to banking, Agribank is the first brand that comes to mind | 0.564 |
(Source: SPSS processing results)
With the KMO test result of 0.954 greater than 0.5 and the Barlett test with Sig. value less than 0.05, it shows that the observed variables are correlated with each other in the whole, it can be concluded that the 26 observed variables ensure the conditions to conduct EFA and can use those results.
The EFA analysis results with Eigenvalue criteria greater than 1 formed 4 factors. The total variance extracted was 74.95%, (greater than 50%) meeting the requirements of exploratory factor analysis and showing that these 4 factors explained 74.95% of the variation in the data. All factor loadings of the observed variables in each factor were greater than 0.5.
The four factors identified in Table 3.6 can be described as follows:


The first factor: includes the variables "Agribank staff are always polite and courteous to customers", "Agribank always fulfills its commitments to customers", "Agribank staff are always ready to support customers", "Agribank answers customers' questions and complaints quickly and reasonably", "Agribank's products and services are diverse", "Agribank's products and services are very convenient", "Agribank always puts customers' interests first", "Compared to other bank brands, Agribank's service quality is outstanding", "Agribank's working environment is professional". This factor has an Eigenvalue = 14.647 > 1, explaining 27.632% of the variation in the data and is the factor with the largest rate of explaining the variation in the data. The variables of the factor all show customers' evaluation of perceived quality of the Agribank brand, so it is named "Perceived Quality" .
The second group of factors includes the variables “ I am a loyal customer of Agribank ”, “I do not want to switch to using the services of another bank because

Agribank meets my requirements", "I will introduce Agribank brand to my friends and relatives", "I will continue to use Agribank's products and services in the future", "Agribank is a trustworthy brand", "Agribank brand is my first choice", "I am satisfied with Agribank's products and services". This factor has an Eigenvalue value = 2.273 > 1 and explains 17.746% of the variation in the data. Most of the variables of this factor show customers' assessment of loyalty to the Agribank brand, so it is named "Brand Loyalty" .

The third group of factors: includes the variables " Agribank is a bank with beautiful and polite transaction uniforms ", " Agribank is a bank with competitive fees and interest rates ", " Agribank is a bank that provides high-quality services ", " Agribank brand leaves a good impression in the minds of customers ", " Agribank brand image is different from other bank brands ". This factor has an Eigenvalue value = 1.528 > 1 and explains 15.449% of the variation in the data. The variables in the factor are explained by customers that this is their association when referring to the Agribank brand, so it is named "Brand association" .
Factor group 4: includes the variables "I can recognize the Agribank logo", "I can distinguish Agribank from other bank brands", "I can recognize the Agribank signboard", "I can read the slogan (commercial slogan) of Agribank", "When mentioning banks, Agribank is the first brand I think of" . This factor has an Eigenvalue = 1.039 > 1 and explains 14.122% of the variation in the data. The variables in the factor are all aimed at assessing the level of brand awareness of customers, so it is named "Brand awareness" .
The results of factor analysis give us the results of 4 factors affecting Brand Value : Perceived Quality , Brand Loyalty, Brand Association and Brand Awareness.
The factors of this new scale, after being tested for reliability by Cronbach's Alpha coefficient, are all greater than 0.6, and the observed variables all have variable-total correlations greater than 0.3, ensuring the conditions for performing the next analysis steps.
Table 3.7: Results of reliability assessment of factor scales after second factor analysis
VARIABLE
Medium scale if variable type | Scale variance if variable type | Total variable correlation | Cronbach's Alpha coefficient if excluded variable | |
BRAND RECOGNITION: Cronbach's Alpha = 0.882 | ||||
I can recognize the Agribank logo | 13.25 | 17,463 | 0.687 | 0.864 |
I can read the slogan of Agribank. | 13.88 | 16,730 | 0.777 | 0.842 |
I can recognize the Agribank sign. | 13.18 | 17,585 | 0.689 | 0.863 |
I can distinguish Agribank from other bank brands | 13.27 | 16,945 | 0.754 | 0.848 |
When it comes to banks, Agribank is the first brand that comes to mind. | 14.08 | 17,645 | 0.679 | 0.866 |
BRAND ASSOCIATION: Cronbach's Alpha = 0.881 | ||||
Agribank brand image is different from other bank brands | 11.66 | 14,923 | 0.510 | 0.897 |
Agribank brand leaves a good impression in customers' minds | 11.64 | 12,000 | 0.796 | 0.836 |
Agribank is a bank that provides high quality services. | 11.92 | 11,096 | 0.803 | 0.835 |
Agribank is a bank with competitive fees and interest rates. | 11.74 | 12,661 | 0.770 | 0.844 |
Agribank is a bank with beautiful and polite transaction uniforms. | 11.69 | 12,060 | 0.719 | 0.856 |
PERCEIVED QUALITY: Cronbach's Alpha = 0.963 | ||||
Agribank's products and services are diverse. | 23.52 | 60,157 | 0.826 | 0.960 |
Agribank's products and services are very | 23.69 | 59,353 | 0.885 | 0.957 |
utilities
Agribank always fulfills its commitments to customers. | 23.41 | 60,702 | 0.862 | 0.958 |
Agribank always puts customer interests first | 23.56 | 60,640 | 0.828 | 0.960 |
Agribank's working environment is professional. | 23.71 | 58,589 | 0.880 | 0.957 |
Agribank answers customer questions and complaints quickly and reasonably. | 23.58 | 61,403 | 0.818 | 0.960 |
Agribank staff is always ready to support customers. | 23.64 | 61,890 | 0.802 | 0.961 |
Agribank staff are always polite and courteous to customers. | 23.59 | 61,043 | 0.848 | 0.959 |
Compared with other bank brands, Agribank's service quality is more outstanding. | 23.88 | 59,748 | 0.861 | 0.958 |
BRAND LOYALTY: Cronbach's Alpha = 0.945 | ||||
I am satisfied with Agribank's products and services. | 16.87 | 36,021 | 0.821 | 0.936 |
Agribank is a trusted brand | 16.27 | 40,562 | 0.607 | 0.952 |
Agribank brand is my first choice | 16.93 | 36,029 | 0.834 | 0.934 |
I do not want to switch to another bank's services because Agribank meets my requirements. | 16.89 | 36,958 | 0.826 | 0.935 |
I will continue to use Agribank products and services in the future. | 16.68 | 35,896 | 0.860 | 0.932 |
I will introduce Agribank brand to my friends and relatives. | 16.80 | 35,811 | 0.878 | 0.930 |
I am a loyal customer of Agribank. | 17.00 | 35,979 | 0.877 | 0.931 |
(Source: SPSS processing results)
3.2.2.2. Factor analysis of dependent variable
Qualitative research results show that Brand value from the customer's perspective is measured by 4 factors: the brand must be famous, prestigious, and recognized.
Many people love and consider it a strong brand. However, to evaluate the measurement level for the dependent variable, these 4 observed variables need to be included in factor analysis.
Table 3.8: KMO and Bartlett test for dependent variable
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. | 0.804 | |
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity | Approx. Chi-Square | 463,816 |
df | 6 | |
Sig. | 0.000 | |
(Source: SPSS processing results)
With the KMO test result of 0.804 greater than 0.5 and less than 1, the Bartlett test has a Sig. value less than 0.05, proving that the observed variables are correlated with each other in the whole, all 4 variables have factor loading coefficients greater than 0.5, it can be concluded that the 4 observed variables ensure the conditions to conduct EFA exploratory factor analysis and can use those results.
Table 3.9: Matrix of components for dependent variable
Component Matrix a
Component | |
1 | |
I think Agribank is a strong brand. | 0.903 |
I think Agribank is a famous brand. | 0.849 |
I think Agribank is a brand that many people love. | 0.849 |
I think Agribank is a prestigious brand. | 0.772 |
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis
(Source: SPSS processing results)
Table 3.10: Total variance extracted for dependent variables
Components
Initial Eigenvalues | Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings | |||||
Total | % of Variance | cumulative % | Total | % of Variance | cumulative % | |
1 | 2,853 | 71,326 | 71,326 | 2,853 | 71,326 | 71,326 |
2 | 0.521 | 13,016 | 84,342 | |||
3 | 0.392 | 9,803 | 94,145 | |||
4 | 0.234 | 5,855 | 100,000 | |||
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis
(Source: SPSS processing results)
The results of factor analysis of the dependent variable showed that only one factor was extracted, Eigenvalues of 2.853 satisfied the condition of being greater than 1 and the total variance extracted was 71.326%, greater than 50%, showing that the conditions of factor analysis were suitable for the observed variables and the variables in the Brand Value scale explained well the measured quantity.
3.2.2.3. Summary of factor analysis results
The test results show that the 04 scales used in the model all have valid values. The 26 observed variables extracted into 4 factors are saved with representative names for use in the following regression and ANOVA analyses as shown in Table 3.11.
Table 3.11: Representative variables in the regression model
Representative variable/Encoding
Variable type | Number of variables | Observation variable | |
Brand Awareness/BAW | Independence | 5 | BAW1 |
BAW5 | |||
BAW4 | |||
BAW2 | |||
BAW6 | |||
Brand association/BAS | Independence | 5 | BAS13 |
BAS12 | |||
BAS11 |
BAS9 | |||
BAS7 | |||
Perceived Quality/PQ | Independence | 9 | PQ21 |
PQ16 | |||
PQ20 | |||
PQ19 | |||
PQ14 | |||
PQ15 | |||
PQ17 | |||
PQ22 | |||
PQ18 | |||
Brand Loyalty/BL | Independence | 7 | BL29 |
BL26 | |||
BL28 | |||
BL27 | |||
BL24 | |||
BL25 | |||
BL23 | |||
Brand Value/BE | Dependent | 4 | BE33 |
BE32 | |||
BE30 | |||
BE31 |
(Source: Author's analysis)
3.3. LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS
After the factor analysis and correlation analysis stages, there are 04 independent variables and 01 dependent variable included in the model testing. In which, each variable in the model is scored by taking the average of the observed variables obtained from the results of factor analysis in the corresponding scale.
3.3.1. Pearson correlation coefficient test








