research report

RESEARCH REPORT

GOGYM

MKTG2005 I MARKETING RESEARCH

Executive Summary

The objective of this report is to ascertain the effectiveness of the GoGym lnstagram page in

terms of variables including device used, time of day, interaction time, lnstagram

invo vement, perceptions of the page, monthly visits, demographics and psychographics.

Descriptive analyses of the data determined that mobiles were the primary devices used by

re spo ndents, potentially due to their convenience,. and the most popula r viewing time was

morning. Gender does not appear to influence time spent on the page, perhaps due to the

popularity of health and fitness amongst both sexes. A considerable issue identified iis the

significantly 1,ow perception of the GoGym page amongst New-to-Health and Social Poser

psychographiic groups when compared to more established brands. To increase monthly visits

during the midday time-frame., New-to-Health consumers should be targeted through a paid

lnstagram advertising campaign, with content that provides a val ue exchange for Vilewers.

Inferential analyses ascertained that average perception of the lnstagram account across age

groups was not statistically significantly different, and that consumer perception of the page

is a strong influencer of monthly visits. Respondents displayed a neutral level of dependency

upon lnstagram. Interaction time is significantly influenced by perception and monthly visits,

and in order to improve this it is recommended that GoGym utilize celebrity endorsers to

assist in enhancing consumer perception with a generalized audience in mind.

1

Contents Exec1.1tive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1

3a) Comment on the extent to which the device used differs across the three psychographic groups.

Provide your interpretation of why this may be ..................................................................................... 4

3b) Comment on the extent to which the time of day in accessing the lnstagram page differs across

four age groups .. Provide your interpretation of why this may be . ........................................................ 5

3c) Comment on the extent to w hich the range of interaction times diiffer across ge nder. Provide

your interpretation of why this may be .................................................................................................. 6

3d) Use measures of central tendency to interpret the lnstagram perception of "New-to-Health" and

"Social Posers" . ....................................................................................................................................... 7

3e) Comment on the variability of the 4 items of ''Gym Junkies" lnstagram involvement {II_S,.11_7,

11_8, 11_10). Interpret what could explain thiis .......................................................................................... 8

4) What strategies should GoGym put in pl'ace to increase the monthly visits for those who visit the

lnstagram at a particular time of day? .................................................................................................... 9

Sa) Comment on the relationship between the gender of users and their interaction times with the

lnstagram page .. Provide an interpretation of why this may be . .......................................................... 11

Sb) Comment on the extent to which the percepti ons of the lnstagram page differ across f our age

groups. Provide your interpretation of why this may be ...................................................................... 12

Sc) Determine what "factors'' of lnstagram involvement emerge. Provide conceptual explanati ons

for why these factors may have emerged . ........................................................................................... 13

Sd) Compare how lnstagram involvement ("factors" elucidated above), interaction time, and

perception of the lnstagram site influences the number of monthly visits to the site for the three

psychographic groups. Provide interpretations of why this may be . ................................................... 14

6) What strategies should GoGym put in pl'ace to ensure consumers with differing perceptions of

lnstagram and monthly visits increase interaction time on the GoGym lnstagram page? .................. 16

List of figures

Figure 1: Frequency of devices used across psychographic groups .......................................................... .4

Figure 2: Frequency of time of day of accessing llnstagram account compared across age groups ........ s

Figure 3: Frequency of interaction time across genders .............................................................................. 6

Figure 4: llnstagram perceptions of New-to-Health and Social Poser psychographic groups ................... 7

Figure S: Variability of Gym Junkies lnstagram involvement ....................................................................... 8

Figure 6: Monthlyvis1ts during time of day groups ........................................................................................ 9

Figure 7: Image of Cotton On Body lnstagram Post ...................................................................................... 10

Figure 8: llmage of Lululemon lnstagram Post ............................................................................................. 10

Figure 9: Mean interaction times for different genders .............................................................................. 11

Figure l!O: Perception of lnstagram across age groups ................................................................................ 12

2

Figure :l! 1: llmage of Nike lnstagram Post ....................................................................................................... 17

Figure 12: Image of Adidas lnstagram Post .................................................................................................. 17

List of tables

Table 1: lnstagram involvement factor analysis results ............................................................................... 13

Table 2: Predictors of Monthly visits (New-to-Health ................................. .................. .............................. 14

Table 3: Predictors of Monthly visits (Social Posers) .................................................................................. 14

Table 4: Predictors of Monthly visits (Gym Junkies) ................................................................................... 14

Table· 5: Predictors of Interaction Time ......................................................................................................... 16

3

3a) Comment on the extent to Which the device used differs across the three psychographic

groups. Provide your interpretation of why this may be.

80

70

� 60 CV § so

� 40 .... Q

� 30 .a § 20 z

10

0

Figure 1: Frequency of devices used across psychographic

groups

n = 72

New-to-Health

n = 66

18

6

Social Poser Psychographic Groups

• Mobile •Tablet Computer

n=36

Gym Junkie

The findings displa,yed in Figure 1 indicate a clear preference for the use of Mobile devices

across all three psychographic groups of New�to-H'ealth (6Z.S%1, Social Posers [63.6%] and Gym

Junkies [52.7%) when accessing the lnstagram account of GoGym. Computers were the second

most popular device used for Social Posers [27.3%) and Gym Junkies [38.9%], whilst New-to­

Health participants showed little differentiation in preference between tablets and

computers. Interestingly, 20.8% of New-to-Health respondents used tablets, which is more

than double of both the Social Poser and Gym Junkie tablet users. It should be noted that the

number of Gym Junkie participants is exactly half of New-to-Health respondents, which may

impede upon the validity of the results.

The above results might be due to the convenience of Mobile devices, as smart phones are

used by most of society, and factors such as 4G internet access might positively influenc,e the

u se of lnstagram on these devices. lnstagram is also designed primarilly as a mobile

application, thus the preference for this device. It could be suggested that more New-to­

Health respondents favoured tablets as they are often beginning their fitness journey due to

injury or poor hea,lth, and may spend more time researching GoGym via the llarger screen on

tablets. The results outline a clear opportunity for GoGym to utillise mobile devices in their

marketing strategies.

4

3b) Comment on ttie extent to Which the time of day in accessing the lnstagram page differs

across four age groups. Provide your interpretation of why this may be.

Figure 2: Frequency of time of day of accessing lnstagram

account compared across age groups

50 n =43

n=45 n =44 45 n = 42

40 11 12 3S 14

� 30 9 5 � 25 8 16

10 ! 20

1S 3

10 17 17

5

0 18-22 23-30 31-47 48+

Age Groups

•Morning • Midday •Afternoon Night

The results displayed in Figure 2 indicate that the morning is generally the most popular time

for accessing the GoGym lnstagram page across all age groups, however the 48+ group has

shown a slightly higher preference for the afternoon [38.1% of respondents]. Midday is

significantly less popular for the 18-22 [9.3%] and 48+ [7.1%]1 groups, whilst 23-30 year old

respondents access the lnstaigram account fairly evenly across midday and the afternoon. The

number of respondents in each age group is reasonably similar so this should not significan tly

impact the findings.

The morning time-frame rna1y be generally the most popular as respondents may be catching

up on their social media sites when just waking up before heading to work or other

commitments. For 18-22 year olds, midday may be less convenient if t hey are studying or

working casuall jobs, as they might have classes or shifts during this time .. lhe 48+ group might

prefer the afternoon as they may be more focused on their work or commitments throughout

the day, and place les s priority on using lnstagr am until they have completed more important

tasks throughout the day. The 31-47 group may use lnstagram less in the afternoon as they

might be busy looking after their children during this time (i.e. picking up kids from school,

cooking dinner, etc.).

5

3c) Comment on the extent to which the range of interaction times differ across gender ..

Provide your interpretation of Why this may be.

Figure 3: Frequency of interaction time acrnss genders

35 32

30 28

� 25 21

20 � 20 CIJ 16 a: 15

15

I CIJ

10

5

0

0-22 23-36 37-62 63+

Interaction Time Groups (seconds)

• Female • Male

Figure 3 outlines very little difference between genders in the 0-22 and 37-62 interaction time

groups. The tiime group with the most number of respondents is 23-36 seconds, wit h 30.4%

of total female participants ancl 33.7% of total male p articipants sitting within this interaction

time range. The 63+ second time group was dominated significantly by male respondents,

who accounted for 60.9% of the total r espondents within this time category. It is important

to note, however, that the number of male participants was higher than femalles [9S as opposed

to 79], which may have impacted the results.

The arger number of respondents interacting with the account within t he 23-36 second time

group miight suggest that this range of time is the ideal amount of time needed for followers

of both genders to view the GoGym lnstagram page for their desired purposes. The fact that

the 63+ second category held more male respondents might propose the idea that men are

more involived in purchasing gym equipment and therefore willling to spend more time

searching, or perhaps they are not as agile as women when using lnstagram and thus take a

longer time to move on from the page. There is no clear distinction between the interaction

times of both genders, therefore GoGym should not focus solely on targeting one or the other.

6

3d) Use measures of central tendency to interpret the lnstaqram perception of "New-to­

Health'' and "Social Posers".

30

2S

20

<II

15

10

s

0

Figure 4: lnstagram perceptions of New-to-Health and Social

Poser psychographic groups

26,82

22.42

Mean

22

Median

Measures of Central Tendency

• New-to-Health • Social Posers

1.S

0 o•

Mode

*Multiple modes exist

Figure 4 shows llittle variance between !New-to-Health and Social Posers. lhe mean score for

New-to-Health respondents [22.42] suggests that on average this group alllocated just over

one-third of the time allowance, proposing that there might be an even spread of time

allocated between the three brands. Social Posers [26.82] allocated just under half of the time

on average. Both medians [New-to-Health=20 I Social Posers=22) suggest that there were few

scores in the upper-middlle to high range for GoGym, and the modes supp ort this, as a score

of zero arose for both groups, although the Social Posers interestingly had a second mode of

15.

The New-to-Health mean may have arisen from members of this group spending a fairly even

amount between the three pages, potentially as research for apparel without any brand

preference. The Social Posers mean might suggest that some members have more of an

affinly with the brand and that their products suit the self-image they try to project. The

modes for both groups [OJ suggest a low perception of the GoGym lnstagram account,

proposing that both groups give preference to the other well-established global brands, and

may have a stronger sense of brand loyalty towa,rds them. The second mode [15) for the Social

Posers is not a high score either, therefore GoGym must work to improve this perception.

7

3e) Comment on the variability of the 4 items of "Gym Junkies" fnstaqram .involvement ,(n_s,

11_7, 11_..:8, U_10). Interpret what could explain this.

CIJ

2

E !a ..

!a

Figure 5: Variability of Gym Junkies lnstagram

involvement

115: lnstagram is great for sharing my life with others 1.595

117; I could go a week without visiting lnstagram !RC) 2.005

118; AH my friends use lnstagram regularly 1.859

!110; ! care about what people think of my lnstagram

account 1.763

1 2

• Mean • Standard Deviatim1

4.5

3_25

4.17

4.42

3 4 5

Score

Standard Deviation Scores: 115: 1.595 I 117(RC): 2.005 I 118: 1.859 I 1110: 1.763

6 7

The spread of scores displayed in Figure 5 are not varied significantly, with most of the

lnstagram Involvement scores leaning towards a fairly neutral response for Gym Junkies (Mean

score range: 3.25 • 4.S]. 115 showed a reasonably high tendency toward stronger levels of

agreeance; with only two respondents who strongly disagreed to the statement. The standard

deviation score is the lowest within these results [1.595). 117(RC) showed the highest standard

deviation [2.0051, with a significant dispersion in responses. Eight participants strongly

disagreed with the statement, and on ly three strongly agreed. The response to 118 was

reasonably neutral, with no significant outliers or variance. There was a slight lean towards

the higher end of scores for 1110, but the dispersion from the mean is not substantial!.

The low standard deviation for 115 suggests that most respondents generalllly feel the same

towards sharing instagram with others, which is reiterated by the mean (4.51. potentially

because the program was developed primarily for sharing interests, hence the neutral

response. The high standard deviation for 117(RC) suggest quite a variance in responses to this

item, proposing that some respondents are much more reliant on lnstag ram than others. The

chosen statements mostly relate to the social sharing aspect of lnstagram and the influence

of peers, thus GoGym should harness this aspect when targeting Gym Junkies.

8

4) What strategies should GoGym put in plaice to increase the monthly visits for those who visit

the lnstagram at a particular time of day?

Figure 6: Monthly vfsits during time of day groups

70 n=65

60 14

·;;; > so

n =46

17 n =38 9 c 40 -----·------

'o 30 n =25 16 12

.. 17 QI 3

.a 20 5 11 E 10

9 10 17 8 14

4

Morning Midday Afternoon Night ----------

Time of Day

• 18-22 •23-30 31-47 48+

Ag�Groups

To determine the most suitable strategic recommendations for GoGym, preliminary analysis

was conducted to ascertain what time of day gained the lowest monthly visits. Figiure 6

highlights th at midday scored the lowest [2SJ. Figure 2 clea rly shows that the 18-22 and 48+

age groups contributed the least to this. time-frame (4 and 3 respectively]. As seen in Appendix 6,

further analysis was conducted to determine which psychographic group was most prev.alent

within these findings. Given that the 48+ group had the lowest monthly visits during midday

(31, and over 50% of respondents within this group are classified as New-to-Health, the

strategiic recommendations will be aimed at increasing monthly visits of New-to-Health

respondents during midday.

To achieve this objective, a pai d lnstagram advertising campaign can be implemented, which

will be tailored to the releva,nt demographics in the campaign settings .. This paid content will

be posted at midday, and at earlier and later times of the day to draw consumers in. For

exampl e, a post may be uploaded in the morning creating a call-to-action, encouraging

followers to view the page ait midday for competition details (e.g. "tag a friend to win1 a free

pair of runners"). This promotional tool ca,n also act as a distribution platform, as s·een in

Figure 7 by Cotton On Body, providing links to p urchase items in the page bio.

Given that the target market of this objective consists mostly of people beginning theirfi itiness

journey as determined in the data findings, a,n effective marketing strategy woulld be for

GoGym to create a content value excha1nge through t heir l,nstagram posts. By posting

information at midday that is useful and helpful to the viewer, the organisation can increase

consumer engagement (Satell 2012). Lululemon have effectively utilised this strategy through

9

posts as seen in Figure 8. These strategies may assist in boosting monthly midday visits for

this group more in line with the figures seen for the 23-30 and 31-47 age groups 1(8 and 10

respectively).

Figure 7: Image of Cotton On Body lnstagram Post

Figure 8: Image of lululemon lnstagram Post

OF

�lnodno U1Mnytt_lC

loC'tit�ieed1a •fo.d

lil�po OM$1\� not; in AuWN -t:icc.; fflifflft&tlc a.my lfonroc Ioele at ,hrM ._ ...

--

"""'"°"'""boo t,t,I)

Pftl,Ot'i!,!&¥IQl�IW¥1tU\4'�11

... .._.....,. - """ those be ..... In it.ores CIC cmoooobocty 7?

""'llsytianis Oohh !hes<, l"lll)ifl9s/

47.6k\<lews

lululemon More and more research Is ShOwing "'41 'l'J90 ftnd me<!;! Jon CM hell) bvdcl re,i nQC, promote ""1th end aeate cClfllfllUl.tj'--'Mllch Is why t-k>re to Be. our oow >OCia1 l,npact progralll. 1, -;OQ tO Mak I/IMC j)<&CIJCC$ accessible lo all communrt.es.

10

Sa) Comment on the relationship between the gender of users and their interaction times with

the lnstagram page. Provide an interpretation of why this may be.

"' -0

C 0 u

60

50

� 40 CIJ

E i= 6 30 ·13

� 20 C 0:,

CIJ

� 10

0

Figure 9: Mean interaction times for different genders

n =95

n= 79

42.92 46.35

Female Male

Gender of Users

Female: n=79, mean=42.92 I Male: n::95, mean=46.35 I t=0.350, p>0.05

Figure 7 indicates a slightly higher average interaction time on the GoGym lnstagram page for

ma le respondents (female = 42.92 I male= 46.35], however the resu Its from both genders are not

statistically significantly different. Th e footnote above highlights that p>0.05, therefore no

statistical difference has been observed.

These findings suggest that the response to the -GoGym lnstagram account 1is fairly equal

across the two genders, with no one gender spending a significantly longer or shorter amount

of time on the page. This might indicate that the brand is effectively marketing their products

towards a generalised audience, rather than with one specific gender in mind, and that the

GoGym products appeal to both sexes. This might also relate to the fact that maintaining

healith and fitness is not something that one sex generally values more than the other. Men

may be spending slightly longer on the page on average as they might be less agile with the

devices they are using to view the lnstagram page, for examplle; men tend to hav,e larger

thumbs and therefore it might take longer for them to navigate the touch screen on a smart

phone.

11

Sb) Comment on ttie extent to Which the perceptions of the Jnstaqram paqe differ across four

age groups. Provide your interpretation of why this may be.

Figure 10: Perception of lnstagram across age groups

35

30 28.72

.. 25.27 a,

8 25 21.25 21.07 I.I)

.E 20

15

10

5

0

18-22 23-30 31-47 48+

Age Groups

F=l.733,. p>0.05

The sample of respondents was separated into four age groups through a quartile split to

ensure that the groups were mostly even, and are displayed along the X axis in Figure 8. It

was determined t hat the difference in average perception of the GoGym lnstagram page

across the age groups was not stati stically significantly different (see footnote above). The

compariison test between the groups (see Appendix 8) further confirmed this, as there were

no stat.istiical siigni icant differences between any of the group comparisons.

The resu lits sug gest that the perception of the GoGym lnstagram page does not vary

significantly across age groups, with only a slightly higher average scoring by the 18-22 group

(28.72). This might suggest that GoGym's current lnstagram promotion is slightly more

appealiing to this group over others, and is perhaps more aligned with the self-image of this

age group, as over 40% are categorised as Social Posers (see Appendix 6). Across the board,

the mean scores show that GoGym is not overtly popular in comparison to Nike and Adidas,

most likely because of their global popularity and awareness . These findings suggest that

GoGym must improve the content of their lnstagram page by adopting a strong and clear

brand message in the way that Nike and Adidas have, to assist in enhancing the percept ion

across a ll age groups.

12

Sc) Determine what "factors" of fnstaqramlnvoJvement emerge. Provide conceptual

explanations for why these factors may have emerged.

Tablle 1: lnstagram involvement factor analysis results*

Information Dependence on

l ltems Source lnst.agram,

I often use information on Jnstog.rom to guide

decision making .956

I am influenced by posts on Jnstagram .956

Jnstagram helps make decisions of what to buy easier .952

I have to visit lnstagram multiple times every day .853

I log on to lnstagram within the first hour of when

I wakeup .803

I get bored by lnstagmm easily (REVERSE CODED) .774

All my friends use lnst.agram regularly

lnstagram is great for sharing my life with others

I care about what people think of my Ins ta gram

account *Associations <.300 supressed

Social

Influence

-.893

-.877

-.805

The factor analysis that was conducted has highlighted three distinct factors amongst

respondents. The "Information Source" factor suggests that participants val,ue lnstagram as

repository of product and service information that can assist in facilitating the consumer

decision-making process. Users of lnstagram receive the benefit of the relevant information

required to make a purchase decision. This factor may relate to the 'New-to-Health'

psychographi,c group, who might be using the GoGym lnstagram account to researc h the

products needed for their fitness regimes.

The second factor, "Dependence on lnstagram", proposes that participants are highly reliant

on lnstagram, to the point of being addicted. This factor suggests that consumers consider

the program as a source of entertainment, given that they are willing to visit lnstagram

rnultip'le times a, day to get their 'fix',. and are not easily bored wit h the platform. The third

factor of "Social Influence" puts forward the notion that some users utilize lnstagram to

project their self-image in order to gain acceptance from those around them. A psychographic

element is evident within this factor, in that certain respondents place a high value on being

accepted socially by conveying a particular lifestyle via their lnstagram account, which is

relative to the Social Poser psychographic group.

13

Sd) Compa1re how lnstaqram involvement {"factors 11

elucidated above), Interaction time, and

perception of the Jnstaqram site influences the number of monthly visits to the site for the three

psychographic groups. Provide interpretations of Why this may be.

Table 2: Predictors of Monthly visits (New-to-Health)

IV DV 13 Std.� R2 t Sig. Information Source .247 .127 1.304 .197

Depen dence on lnstagram .568 .195 1.702 .093 Social Influence Monthly Visits -.181 -.062 .508 -.622 .536 Interaction nme .015 .102 1.018 .312

Perception of lnstagram .108 . 521 4.858 ....

.... = p< .000

Table 3: Predictors of Monthly visits (Social Posers)

IV DV 13 Std.� R2 t Sig. Information Source -.212 -.118 -1.313 .194

Dependence on lnstagram .242 .098 .919 .362 Social Influence Monthly Visits -.061 -.025 .665 -.281 .780 Interaction Time .020 -.132 1.341 .185

Peroeption of lnstagram .104 .657 6.936 ***

0 = p< .000

Table 4: Predictors of Monthly visits (Gym Junkies)

IV DV 13 Std.� R2 r Sig. Information Source .228 .128 1.223 .231

Dependence on lnstagram .184 .088 .590 .560 Social Influence Monthly Vi sits -.241 -.080 .740 -.726 .474 ln teractio1n Tiime .001 .008 .065 .949

Peroeption of lnstagram .144 .808 6.281 •••

.... = p < .000

In observing the results displayed in Tables 2-4 it is evident that the respondent's perception

of the GoGym lnstagram pa,ge is a strong a,nd significant influencer of monthly visi ts to the

page across the three psychographic groups (New-to-Health Std. � = .521, p < .ooo I Social Poser Std.13

= .657, p < .ooo I Gym Junkies std. 13 = .808, p < .oooJ. It is apparent that the remaining Independent

Variables, being the three "factors" and interaietion time, were not significantlly strong

influencers of the dependent variable across the three groups.

The findings in relation to the perception of lnstagram independent variable make practical

sense, as it is reasonable to assume that an increase in monthly visits to the page would follow

when consumers choose to dedicate more time to the GoGym llnstagram page as opposed to

the Nike and Adidas pages, As consumers develop a more favourable perception ofthe brand,

perhaps through the content shared or an increase in brand loyallty, they are !likely to visit the

page more ohen, hence the strong statistical significance between these two variablles. It

appears that psycho,graphic elements,. such as the lifestyle and value differences between the

three groups, do not impact this notion, given that the si gnificance results for all three groups

14

were exactly the same. It can thus be inferred that in order to increase monthly visits to the

page, GoGym must focus on improving the perception of the page amongst the different

psychographiic groups, appealing to all three groups equally.

15

6) What strategies should GoGym put in place to ensure consumers with differing perceptions of

Jnstaqram and monthly visits iincrease Interact/on time on the GoGym lnstagram page?

Table 5: Predictors of Interaction Time

IV D•V ll Std. ll Rz r Sig.

Perception of lnstag,ram .362 .276 .229 2.768 Interaction, Time Monthly Visits 1.714 .237 .229 2.378 *

* = p < .OS

To assist in determining suitable recommendations for GoGym for increasing interaction time,

a linear regression analysis wa,s performed to determine the strength of lnistagram perception

and monthly visits in influencing the dependent variable of interaction time. The results

displayed in Table 5 have revealed that both independent variables have a strong and

statistically significant influence upon interaction time [Perception of lnstagra,m Std.�= .276, p < .OS

I Monthly Visits Std.�= .237, p < .os]. In a practical sense, these correlations are valid as it is safe

to assume that if a, consumer has a higher perception of a brand's lnstag ram page, they will

likely dedicate more time to viewing and interacting with the page. The same can be said for

monthly visits, as it makes sense that the more times a consumer visits a page over a month,

the more their interaction time will increase.

When combining these findings with previous results, it can be pro posed that GoGym should

focus on increasing the perceptions of the lnstagram page, thus incrnaslng monthly visits and

influencing the interaction time. Previous findings suggest that no particular gender, age or

psychographi:c group stands out, therefore a generalized campaign should suffice.

A strategic promotional tool that GoGym can utilize is the use of opinion leaders within their

lnstagram content to encourage engagement with the brand, using a celebrity endorser that

is considered attractive and credible to the target audience (Lamb, Hair and McDaniel 2014).

Figure 11 highlights Nike's ta,ctic of using Lebron James to appeal to sporting enthusiasts, and

Figure 12 shows Adidas' use of Lionel Messi for the same purpose. Celebrity endorsers can

positivelly impact brand equity if they a re seen to be congruent with the brand and the

audience (Dwivedi, Johnson and McDonald 2015). This strategy can assist GoGym in

increasing the perception of the brand to influence interaction time on the page, as this

variab.le has been identified as a significant influencer as seen in the data above.

16

I

Figure 11: Image of Nike lnstagram Post

Figure 12: Image of Adidas lnstagram Post

•nllu> I N 'J.Jond HNdqua_

Fallaw

nilu> W!'JOn ,r, yOu<)Ol>«ll!Cl :,Our l><!il. -··· "°"'"'9 mo<<> "'-1,anl. ll'IMI 9"""'11

l'l �f\411)pN!flf\CttS. e\l'et'ICS D!Od �,ng:5. I0�"'""1,l,li:"1,C,11'1!o1 �s .nfflei_EBROriii12.

lml-.ntia_l ME CH'AIAA. ORA SER -LO "'"""'•••11,U F>Olt FAVOf/. -�IN SOt/ MUITO FBI> l"60

omanc•..t•U F>Olt FAVOf/.

�

Jtormannorm&r171 I IQYI' � I ....... lt.:;t,;(' in the' S,llJTN: (dor' .--_mio�•

rhffdl)ra.:e HC!\.mw,� MtBfflffiMld lovf,r '°'5 nlll'TN!' 15 IIBl'nN

ll(IICIM \'= )'Ou"r 1l>t QI t or OH time. crealinll nistory comes eas . 2 222

xvarol Bae al 11} a ,iyn -•rtyn rxvarol ht-I yr,,11 . e 11} )01uS-C>:2098 Cr7 i� !)CM< tnan """sJ mellt,Ykl.__ R, d)l'SLJsval<ieZ:2098

17

Reference List

Dwivedi, Abhishek, Lester W. Johnson,. and Robert E. McDonald. 2015. "Celebrity

Endorsement, Self-Bra,nd Connection and Consumer-Based Brand Equity." The Journal

of Product and Brand Management 24 (5): 449-461.

http ://search .proguest.com .d bgw .lis.curtin.edu .au/ docview /1700061667?accou ntid=

Jll.0382.

Lamb, Charles W., Joseph F. Hair, Jr., and Carl McDaniel. 2014. MKTG. 7th ed. Mason, OH: South-Western

Satell, Greg. 2012. Brand Engagement and Value Exchange. Digital Tonto. http :// www. dig it a Ito nto .com/2012/b rand-engagement-an d-va I ue-ex ch a nge/

18

Appendices

Appendix 1

Statistics ii

182549e2_1 = MOB!LE. Z=TASt.ET, 3=COMPIJ1'1:R N V.illd 72

IJiss1n D Mean 1 §4 tOdlan 1.00 r•ode

a. 18264962_ 1 a N&W­ lo-He Ith. 2 = Socl al Poser. 3 • Gym Junkl&" 1 O

182$4$62_1 • MOBILE, 2 • TABLET, 3• COMPUTE�

Cumuirtrv,

Fre�u ncy Peitenl \lal•d Pertenl Pe,cenl \lahd 45 H 62.5 62 5

15 20.8 20.8 83-J 12 16.7 16. 100.0

TOI I 72 100.0 100.0 11 , 826'962_ 1 • New-10-Me3ith, 2 • S0cl11I Pose,. 3 = Gym Junkie=

1 0

Statistics" 182fOSU r.lOBLE. 2 TABLET. 3 COMPUTER I� V>lld 36

IA "ng 0 iAoan t ae

�&dJ 1 00 IAOdi

a 18l6-1�6l 1 : Ngw. 10- 1t-1tm. 2 � Socl:al Posor, 3= Gjm Junkta,;;; 3.0

18264962_1 • MOBILE. 2 • TA8LET. 3 • COMPUTER" cumu1.211,v

Fre-qu;;inq, P,u;ent Valid Ferc"nt Pen;en1

Vi d 19 52.9 52.9 �2.8 8.3 8.3 61.1

... 38 9 3U 100 0 1,,.11 J6 1000 100.0

:a 1826496?._ 1 = NBwaiD-Hl�lttl. 'J = Sa,tJ:lliPcistr. l= OtffiJunktt= 3.0

N V· lld ee M1s,1no 0

Mean 1.04

Medl.;in 1.00 Mode

a 182U9�2_1 -H!!W'­ t H;r.in�. 2= soe1�1 Poser, J� Gym �nkle-20

18264962_11 • MOBILE, 2 ,. TABLET, 3 • COMPUTER� Cum111:wr

F1�QU n(l Pt1ttnt V�l1dPo,um P rcon1 V1Nd 41 53.8 U5 n.e

6 Iii !II 12.1 18 li.l '73 100.0

To1a1 66 10D.O 100.0

19

Appendix 2

Statlstlcs a

18264962_1 = l�ORN NG, 2 = MIDDAY, 3 = AFTE'RNOON, 4 = N GHT

JII VaNd 43

u, s,ng

Me�n

1,1 ci,an

,44

3 00

a. 18264962_ 1-18-22, 2-2J.·31l, 3-31•47, 4-48+- 1

18264962 1 • MORNING, 2 • MIDDAY, 3 '"AFTERNOON. 4 - ,. NIGHT8

Cumula Fr quency Pereeot llal1d Percent Percent

Val d 1i 39.5 39.5 39.5

'.? 9.3 9.3 48.B

18.6 18.6 61'.4

14 32.6 J2.6 100.0

olal 43 100.0 100.0 a. 1826•9ij2_ 1=>18-22, 2=23-JO. 3=31-47, 4=48• = 1

Stati sti c;s a

18264962_1: I.IOR ING, 2= IODAY, 3 = AFTERNOON, 4 = NJGHT

N 1121d

lsslnu a

M an 2 27

Medliln 2.00

r.tode

a 18264 62_ 1=18·22. 2-23-J , ,3-31•47, 4=48•= J

18264962 1 • MORNING, 2 • MIDDAY, 3 • AFTERNOON, 4 - = NIGHT8

FrequenCJ P IC@nt V.illd Psrtant

Valid 17 38.6 JB.6

2 10 22.7 22.7

3 5 11 4 11.4

12 27.3 27.3

Total 44 1 0 0 100.0 a. 18264962_ 1=111·22, 2=23-30, 3=31·•7. 4-48•.:: 3

Cumulative Percent

38.6

61 .4

72.7

100.0

Sta.listlQ$ a

18l&4Q6l_1; ht{)RN 0, 2; Mil:)0-'Y, $ ;.oFfERNOON

, 4; NIOHT

N Valid 45

Mean

Wedi.in

llode

"11�!1•0 0

131

200

a. 18lij4S�2- t;JS-22. i,,n .. Jo. J<eJl-47. 4-·0·; i

18264962_1" MORNING. 2 = MIDDAY. 3 = AFTERNOON. ( = NIGHT"

Cumula ,� f,.quoncy Pll!t1ctn1 va�d Perc•ll1 Pircen1

V.at,d 17 37 e 11 e n e

8 1178 118 sse

� 20.0 20.0 TM

11 H4 2• 4 100 0

Tolal 45 100.0 100D

a. 182S15lti.2_ 1;1&22 2:a2J.30, J-.J1-tl, 4;48• - 2

Statistics"

18'.16496:?_1 =l�ORNJNG, 2= MIDDAY, 3= AFTERNOON, 4 = NIGHT

N Valle! 42

t,11ss1ng 0

ean 2.48

"' �I n 3.00

Mod 3

a. 18264962_ 1-18-22. 2=2>30, 3=31 .47 -48•" 4

18264962_1 = MORNING, 2" MIDDAY, 3 =AFTERNOOINI, 4 =NIGHf!

Vahel

2

3

Fr que C'/

14

3

16

9

Pertent Valid Percen1

n, 33.3 7.1 7.1

38.1 38.1

ZH 21 4

TOt31 42 '1000 1000

Cumurauve Perce,11

:33.3

•D.5

78.6

1DD0

20

Appendix 3

18264962_ 1 : FEMAI..!;., 2: "'1.AI..E:: 1

St�t:htit1 8

18284902_1=0-n. 2=2J.J8, J=,J/• 2. 4:c63•

N V•lld 79

hHt-Jn M Cl•il!fl

M SS 0 2$2 200

a 1826�90_, • FEMALE, 2 • MALE =,

FriQuintr Prent Valid PiiC n1

Valid 203 101 2� Jj)4 30 � 21 266 26_6 e 'n.l 2i.11

To�I 79 100-0 100.0 ;, ,e1uu2_, • F roAALE. 2•1AALE• 1

Appendix 4

Statlstics 11

c ... ...,1- f>i<C

,H �o �

112

100.0

1 B264962_PERCEPTION OF INSTAGRAM (Constant SU,

Mean

Median

Vall 72

"issing O -----

22.42

20.00

Mode O

a_ 18264962_1 = New­ to-Health, 2 = Social Poser,),= Gym Junkje" 1.0

18264962_1:: FEMALE, .2:: MALE:: 2

St.ltistics 8

18?64962_1=0-n, :1=13-36, 3=JH?, 4=63•

N 1/all<I

M,n1n11 95 0

2 4 ll�d,an 3 ,oo

Mod� 2

; 826•962_1. FEMALE, l • l!W.E •2

18264.962_ 1-0-22, 2•23-38, •3-37 -82, 4-63+ <1

Cum l�tn•

rrequency Percent va11a Ptrcent P ,cen

Valid 1S 15-8 15.8 IS8

32 n1 )37 495 20 21 I ?1 I 105 28 29-5 19.5 100.0

Tab 95 1oo_o 100.0

a 18.�t9Gl_1 = FEIAALE, l = MALE= 2

Statiistic s 8

1826�952.}'ERCloPTlOM OF INSTAGRA/14 (Cons1ant sum)

Valid 66

rAlsslno 0

6.82

noo

a. 18264962_1 = EW• t;>-Healll'I, 2" S0Cl8I P ser 3aa Gym Junjie" 2.0

b. r�ulriple moctes e,isl The s allesivalue IS ShO�'!'O

0�

18.264�2-PERCEPTION OF INSTAGRAM (CoMtont tum)°

c1,;m1,;1aa�·•

Ht uin� Plr(:UII V�IIC,Ptrctr, F"trnm Y�II� " 67 16.1 16 I

J.O J. 19-1

ro Hi '-5 21 2 12 15 1.5 2:!'7

1• 1 ! 1,5 242

IS " 1&.1 <011

9_1 9.1 50.0 2, Hi 1.5 51 5 25 15 1.6 580

30 91 9. 1 521 1, 1 S 1. �3

JS J. ). 66-1

40 ·� <.5 71 2 43 15 '-5 1'17 4� 1 ! 1.5 7'1 45 1,6 Bia

J. e,_,

s, I.S s ' 55 6.1 9'.!'•

so 7.6 ,ooo Tctal 60 100 100.0

,. !264'96 _I= 11.,,c .. Heall!>, = Socia PO Hr. J = O'IM J� •= 21 20

Appendix S

Statistics

18264962_

18264962_11_ Reverse 5: lnstagra m Coded: I 18�64962_11_ is grealfor cou11190 a 8 All my slla�ng my week 1110U1 frienels use

II \t<llh Vismn11 1ns1a9ram ath rs 1n,tagram regularl1

N Valid 36 38 38

ls sing 0 D 0

Jean uo 3.25 4.11

r ea1an 5.00 2.50 4.00

t ode 4 2 3

Std De,iHon 1 595 2.0D5 I 859

a. Mu pie modes e�ist. The small HI �alua is shown

Appendix 6

S1al!lstlcs•

82&4 &lJIRSTr!ONTH OF lAIJNCH ln•m�or ol "'" .,,; �J

N \'al d �5

P.IIHflQ

a ,al�4i� _, = MORNIN01'2;: "'ODAY, J= AFTE�flOON, 4 = NIGHT• I

:st�ti stic:s 3

3 2

J.00

18264962_1L 10 I care

about what

people thin ofmy

1ns1aoram eeounl

36

0

4.42

S 00

6

1.763

Sta.t1stie:s 8

I 9264S62JlRST !AON OF l.AUNC!i (num!m al limes ·,is fled)

N Id 2

'In � 0

M an 4 80

4 00

Mo4e

a. 10, 4ije:u = llORr-flNG, 1= ll1DD4Y 3= AFTE NO ON, � a t,IGHTa 2

Statistics 3

18264962_FIRSTMOtlTHOF UNCHO um�ilfO!ti n'lisil8 18264S62JIRS r.tONTH OF LAUNCH (nu miler ornmesVislled)

tl Valid

MISS:ln

N8�n

M do•n

MOM

;i, 182G•9GU = MORNING, 2 = MIDDAY, 3a

TERNOot�. �" NIGHT= 3

38

4 53

4 00

N Ya IU •6

�, S$1n!l ___

a _

M8an

l,le�ian

r.,oae

a.182 4 62_, = MOR NINO,. 2 = MIDD/W.3� AFTER �OON. • = NIGHT=�

3.55

2.00

18264962_ 1 = 1New 0to-Healt!h, 2 = Social Poser, 3 = Gym Junkie • 18264962_ 1=18-22,

2=23-30, 3=31-47, 4=48+ Crosstabulation

18264962_1 = New-to- Health, 2"' Socia I Poser, 3" Gym Junkie

Total

Counl

% ofTotal

Count

% �fTolal

3 Count

% ofTotal

Count

% ofToial

1 8264962_ 1=18·22, 2=2J..30, 3=31·4 7, 4=48+

1 2 3 4 Tolal

13 B 14 37 72

7.5% 4.6% B.0% 21.3% 41.4%

18 25 20 3 66

10.3% 144% 11.5% 1.7'll> 37.9%

12 12 10 2 36

6.9% 6.9% 5.7% 1.1% 20.7%

43 �5 44 42 174

24.7% 25.9% 25.3% 24.1% 100.0%

22

Appendix 7

Group Statl11les

1826'96 l_ 1 = FEU• E,

18164S62J_l'NGTH OF TIME (SECO IDS)

1 B2�•9S:!_l£NGTH OF TII.IE (SECONDSI

Ecauil ._-.an11TlC'in J!l�um-e-:J

;!•MALE

EQUa! 'rllflallt� Mi an m d

Appendix 8

M Mun s�d o,·,11� PA

79 4?'92' � �·

95 • J5 l5.058

lndepe.ndtnt Samples Tu1

'j\'1!11 ;;i's Test ror E�ualltr o' V.1narites

A7:!

· 945 170 7]5

1De,criptivu

182!1H2_PERCEPT10N OF lt-lSTA.eAAW. (Con•l•"11um)

95!1 ConMonce int.ml k>r Ile.an

S�d Error �nri

2.553

::.571

II LO' r Bound 1n1Mum IM:litll'UJm

-J4]3 ].623

'9511\i. Corf11je-11c;e lnle�lollhe Dtfferente

LIJ�u, Upper

·1D S75

ANOIIA llHl"I �fl DIIYi�ti�n Std Euor DPOI Boun�

I B261i�2_PERCEPTION Of INSTMlRAl,I (C<>n'1al11 wm) 43 2172 11.n� 2r10

45 25 :N 20.11'9 3.�1111

•• 21 25 17361 2 611

42 Z1 07 17 21� 2651

Tcl>I 171 2UJ9 IB 313 1'.ll!ll

THt of Homogeneity o-fVarhnc.s

1 e2�1,�2__P�CePTION Qr lti$TI\GRAli (C�n$l�"I ,um)

L , Af Str., on

170 • 7

232� 3419 60

19.2a l1.3l 60

1H7 26 5J 60 BeNl"llen <kous,!.

·1571 2fl � ... 60 1nO•oup,

:n.3s 26 83 60 '""''

F>ost Hoc Tests

hhilllpla Ct:tnipul:ton:t

n111Jk!lmt,i,riV.rt;it11•· IA.'lYGl�J.PFRCFPTOfJ C:F llt.iiTMRAU (C:nM.b� 1mm)

... .,

un,n.nctll-

SumoC $quart$ di

17220,t2'

5jll'95,487 HO

1$019519 ,n

liltanSqi.i •

57ADU

331 158

i1S-�C�tnc:tl

UJl 162

nco1 c-. 1t2e•!M-2 .. 1::19.,::i, w 1t:e�11:!.1==1e.21. ?=Z).3l, l=11•41. 4-=48• �':),30. l=]l,41, 4=41• .JJ SU ftrN ;,o i..c-... etou,d VPP•IBOund

Tulo IHSO 1

Appendix 9

'T .ot1J V:1ri.anee E,:p1:aln itd

Cttir«nen: 1

rrui11e irl'3JP11 Tcto '!iol'�rl.x• CUfff.JJ�o• 'Ill

H�l -ll,G:?? O .. S::.! 11155 21:n.? .Siii4-.C. I ?r5 1<.1it 7961J

St3 li.01-4 H !1 1'2J ·U'I>? !H:JN }j1 •.:t•'i 55 78 '!13 2.3Jlt 5i I )2 b

U l,I :i'l�l)a

,:,., . .191 1Q,)Q.)i)

Ed:r.tkin •;ainiaii.PlinC11ni c«illlM'tHI M:alr;1ts.

i;;QIQt\:11'S1,1msOf'S111,,11tOL.c-�;J "ill

T l "-"c•v.ir;anc" Cllllll.Jl.-.111·11'!1:i

15il U,OlZ Ulnl �:i'S 211n 6,S, 6,� ...

1275 1116�1 lUIJ

a. Yli1"tl coll"f)o,new,1 a cotrtlllto, um1 d:114-UilliOloac:ngs nf111411 Of ae,.a to 1ero11l ¥1f1:l!l)IQI.

3'� Ji81 ilO -6S1 7 HI 3'02 m •:U$

7154 J'll8 216 -259 ·3 .. $4 3Qi1 ,,o .,�u: .I Cl7 3658 711i .5g9 "� 3904 1o«I -n, -1m J'lOl m -1700

-.IC17 3858 m -Ul])

IH n:e I QQD -,or,,

-7 !54 3918 216 -17B9 .... v.. 1-,0, 70<) _,,12 • 179 !'llB I 000 ·10]6

Rec Cl'I euru1'4 SQIJQ"Ud

l.Dal.ll�I J

lctil

).,Ill

W<J

2.m

23

,J 52 11 ie;o

17.89 u,

,41.0J Hl):J

HI

5t9

10.)1.'1

2 S9 !i.t3

10.D1

Appendix 10

.113• .508

192t3il9R _ll_ll lct.an U'SO ln�rrn.1Drt CHI ln�:lldt1Mfll�U:tlf dN 1o1anmilk1t1,g

18261.962_11_2 Jam lnt!Ullft�•:t D1POl1I on lfl1411J m 1826•&e:J II 4. lnAg ml'ltiPJrrll• .. die-c shine ofwh:ill io twr Qi15h1r- 181 •962_11_6 t,;,,,1, '11etln'i13Qtam lllllpla 1m9:lew�'d� 18215C.9t12_11_1 I gor, lO IA!i139lafi"llfl 11'1 n lfti 11rs, ll'IIM.lr V.N!l"IIWF!o up 18:!6Ul6:?_ Rt...rs, CCli:fM I ,J:E!H.•OII ad bl ln.Jt.1q mH9•:s:n11ty 19��<HZ_IL8 All , 111r.tif�uulMIJ�ram i•utJa 181 •961-ILS lflS".11oram 3ttc.1 snm1n11mJ "'"" Olh�IS

MJu•1•d F< s1� E11or 01 SQuareo L13 E-.:1L a�e

_;"iii

-.Ml

-.817

Cha ;• Sia:1&11"

R Squ ri Cltonge F C�>nga

.508 l'.1.616

a. 1816H61_1 = N-lo-HHll� 2= S�tl�I og8r, 3= C Jun),13 = 1

S1; F C J ;a-

.000

b. PredlCWI� [Con�t:a� .1i2���62J'l:RCE:iFTIONOf lllSTIIGM'� (CO�SI, I $Unl).182e4�e:Lfaclof � l,!ean · 1Le.11_5.ILRC_7. 1 aiuaelJa,�or I Iii an- ll_l, 11_t, 11_, 1 tl� lUl_U:tlGnJ O' lth1E cs;cor-: DS), 1 e2a,1aa2_Facio1 , hl .. n - IL&, 11_ 1, 1LR<:_�

S'landard�IJ t.-is:U.o o.lr-d -ct Coe•1uents fllcl rlls gs O'!i Connd•11< 1111 1r<1r B

I.IO<ltl e Sld Error Beta s,� �rBound V�trB""'d ccon,unQ -1 SU �OSII -IIOl 370 -I 051 2285 18�15Ull!ll'_Fattot I Miall ?<1 190 121 1JOI 1111 • IJ1 SN -M_1, 1._II M_•

182S01!12'_Fat1or 2 MitlM'I .�ii,8 .33<1 .1115 1.702 .Olll -.091 1 2l5 • ._0.1_1 ._RC_J 1sie11ei_Fot10< J "•"" -.191 l91 . 06' -6'2 -�36 -.75l tM

1_e. ,._s \.RC_7 18:6196?_LE lOTHOf .015 01• IOZ 1.018 .J1:! -.014 cu 11\lf (Sl:COIIOSI 11ce196!_PeRCEPTIOtl .108 02l 511 oss .OOD .Ml 151 OF l�S WRA11

(C 00$1ani ,um)

a 182U9e2_1 a N��Hea ... 2;So«a1Postr, Ja Orm Jun e= I b DOQndQO[Yana�1, 18:!641i�2_ $11101'1™ OF U.UNCH (OOM081 Ol ll!'IH ,mad)

Model Summ11rl

Chan�e S1absbcs

MJuste4R St�. Euor o' r.1od I R RSQ.uare squar,i r ,Esbmal3

R SQu�re Change F Charge d'f df.1

SIQ F Change

.816' 6!5 637 i 861 665 23.8311 5 60

a.18264962_1 = Ne,,,to-Health, 2= S'Ocl�IPoser, 3 = ·� Junkie= 2

b P1ed1olo1S: (Con•lanl), 182�49S1_PERCEPllO OF STAORA'.I {Cons!an1 sum), ·t82649Sl_Fa,101 I �lean-11_2, 11_9, 11_4, 18264962_LENGTH OF TIME (SECONDS), ! 6l64S62_Faetor J Mun· IL8, 111_5, l_�C_7, 1826491,Ua�or 2 Ms3a• 11_6, 11_1. II_RC_J

.000

24

St;1nda 1.»&d U1>Sta11aaralla<J co Cl OIS Co fflclt'111 �5 K Conndeoc.i 1n:..n-a1101 B

,111odel g Std E.1rar Bara SIii l..owl1 Bollfld Upp.e.1 Bound {Co11'ilio'Q 511 1 l15 <61 UI -2.022 3113 1812,U!iiti�-F:mo,1 MUfl - 2t2 162 _,,a -1313 ,g, -�35 1,1 -11_:.!.ILi. _c 18:?tiH62Jtc:1.M2MHA l•l l6• 011$ t1 I m -285 710 u_e. 11_1,1.RC_l

18:l'8illifi2,_Fict� 3M ·ifl • 081 2HI -0?5, • 281 7BD ._;99 315 -ILB.ILS. RC_1 18::!ieillH2_LE .JGTHOf OM 015 ,n I J'1 ,as -010 019 TlllE (SECONDS) 1 lil2CIC!ie2JERCEP1'10N ,o, 015 U7 UJI 000 014 •l• Of INSTAGR,W (Co.n:U10, ium)

a 182&4962_1 = t,tew.t>Htaltf), 2= S0U11P0:1er, 3=�JIJ�t= 2 b. D9Pt!'JHl13n1 V,iin ,� 182&4962_flRST MONTH OF LAUrtCH cnmntl� or lmi!'S, Mnad}

Cttan,oe t:ilhi5""CS t'.-:t,us:�:JIR SUI Erw o· R Squa"

R$Qu�r� Squ� • 1e Est I a:� c��•g� FC 3009 r., d'2

.860b HO .691 I 11< H9 HO 30

a. 182154952_1 • Nei,'¥-bt-iealltl, 2 • Sor.Lid P,o�e,. 3• Gy,mJunkis-• 3: b. Pri�i<1ors. (Co�ita,-,�. 1e2�•11,LPEJIC5F'TIO I OF :<IST.O.vRAlol (Con1tant1um), 182ij41ie;t_Faelor 1 j/,ia�· IU, �-9, IL4,

1 82649&2Jocr.or3 Me• - �_8, 11_5 II_RC_1 11lM4S62_1.£110THOFTlllc (SECONDS), 18264S62_Fat1or 2 r.taoo-�_6, 11_1, II_RC_3

Codficiontsa,J,

SI, ard,zed

.000

un,tallOli1dW.d co, Cl nts co,m,kl�s 95 0'11, Collflden,e 1n1,m1 r., 8

MOOtl B Std Error 8iti1 s,u [Con,tonij .,01 I ,,5 • )54 126 18i606l_F�tor1 Me"" 228 ,u 129 '21) n, - II_�. 1_9 11_, 18?UHZ_F:icior 2 M;i .1tl ,)12 .088 .590 .50 • ll_�.1_1 II_RC_3

18!505!�Foc1or 3 Moan ._;,, )31 •,080 • .725 .4H • 11_8 I_> II_RC_l 18l61HZ_U:IJGTH or .u, .Ou .009 065 _90 TIME (SECO 09)

! 825495Z_PERCEPTION HI on 808 S ZS1 000 OFINSTM,P..o.11 (Constilnt 11um1

a l8J6•!IS2_I a PJ-�H!llllll, 2 a SOCl:IIP<>Ur, 3• GymJunluta 3 b 08IHIOd!ln1Vlol1>�1iJ: 182UQ62]1RSTMONTH OF LA.UNCH(llL1111lorarumu, .. rt;ul)

Appendix 11

tAodel R

,:ro•

Ad1U&lid rt: 9QU!lrili3 $oJir�

_22 no

1d Error r Uu!Es.-t!mat.E'

21.198

R'S�1n t< c anoe

C ange Sb1lsllcs

f cnange ,m

LiYn , Sound

•),)91

-_!SJ

•.H4

•.917

-.028

,097

111

UPP r 8oood

2J QO .M9

.822

.�38

.030

191

ODO 3 Pradictcw.s tCond3nQ, 182i64,9S2.JIRST.L.tOr 0:f LAUN.C (num!leroUim-as � si�ad.), 1:826oilfH>2_PEFi!CEPTIONO.F I� STAORAM

cconit1n1 s.irnl

JO<J•I

(Con,t;in1)

182$<� 2_PERCEPTION OF INBTAllRMI (Con,t;int sum)

18261162 Fl'IST i• CINn-1 Of l.AUl4CH (n11mbilr or me!. 11S11e-11J

Co•fficienu8

S,a"n3rdcu

Uli&tJ :IJn:HZ.a.lfCH11lCJ!3nti COlifflClanl'S

8 sta E:ror Beta

n.030 2.73� .lS2 .131 Z16

uu -721 231

95,o� cai'" dii'lca, 1r1.1:r,.a1 rorB

s � LOwar i3ourd UJlpor l,'CUJMI

IC611 UCD 23.633 34.0& HES uoa .104 .610

2_318 _01 .2�1 ).131

25