Question 4 is worth 10 marks total. Answer all parts of Question 4.

Notes:

This is a hypothetical scenario and hypothetical company.

The contents of the provided news article referred to and the concept of greenwashing are authentic.

Background

Imagine you work for a market research company. You have received some data analysis results for a research study conducted at the request of a client organisation to examine consumer perceptions of its corporate social responsibility practices. Your client produces and sells a range of self-proclaimed organically grown coffee beans that are marketed as being 'locally sourced and packaged', however some consumers have recently raised concerns about the authenticity of this claim in the marketing of the product. Some concerns are around how the concept 'local' is defined, as well as which parts of the production process - if not all - are organic and sustainable.

The research was designed to explore how consumers' purchase intention could be affected if greenwashing claims were found to be true by an external regulating body. For the purpose of this research, greenwashing is defined consistent with the following recent article published in the Sydney Morning Herald (Koob, 2022) as: "...misrepresenting the extent to which something is sustainable, environmentally friendly or ethical - as consumers shift towards greener options."

Reference

Koob, Simone Fox (2022), "Internet Sweep to Target Greenwashing and Fake Online Reviews in ACCC crackdown" The Sydney Morning Herald, accessed 4^th October 2022,

Study

There are five metric variables - one DV and four IVs - each measured on 7-point Likert scales. 1 indicates the lowest score on the scale and 7 indicates the highest score on the scale.

ID is set up to represent each participant in the study as a nominal variable. All others are scale level. There were 100 participants.

• PURCHASE - How likely are you to purchase from this organisation? (DV)
• ATTITUDE - Negative attitude towards greenwashing malpractice in general
• SATISFACTION - Satisfaction with coffee from this organisation
• CREDIBILITY - Credibility of organisation's sustainability claims
• PRIORITY - Priority of organic coffee option over other options

The results of the statistical analysis are presented below.

Descriptive Statistics
	N	Range	Min.	Max.	Mean	Std. Dev.	Variance	Skewness	Kurtosis
Stat	Std. Error	Stat	Std. Error
PURCHASE	100	5	2	7	5.39	1.399	1.957	-.616	.241	-.379	.478
ATTITUDE	100	4	3	7	5.55	1.201	1.442	-.388	.241	-.739	.478
SATISFACTION	100	6	1	7	5.23	1.530	2.341	-.657	.241	-.270	.478
CREDIBILITY	100	5	2	7	5.66	1.224	1.499	-.666	.241	-.160	.478
PRIORITY	100	4	3	7	5.56	1.157	1.340	-.348	.241	-.809	.478
Valid N (listwise)	100

Correlations
	PURCHASE	ATTITUDE	SATISFACTION	CREDIBILITY	PRIORITY
PURCHASE	1.000	.701**	.675**	.797**	.668**
ATTITUDE	.701**	1.000	.436**	.719**	.561**
SATISFACTION	.675**	.436**	1.000	.608**	.731**
CREDIBILITY	.797**	.719**	.608**	1.000	.663**
PRIORITY	.668**	.561**	.731**	.663**	1.000

Model Summary
Model	R	R Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate	Change Statistics
R Square Change	F Change	df1	df2	Sig. F Change
1	.853a	.728	.716	.745	.728	63.505	4	95	<.001
a. Predictors: (Constant), Priority of organic coffee option over other options, Attitude towards greenwashing malpractice in general, Satisfaction with coffee from this organisation, Credibility of organisation's sustainability claims

ANOVAa
Model	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	141.042	4	35.261	63.505	<.001b
Residual	52.748	95	.555
Total	193.790	99
a. Dependent Variable: How likely are you to purchase from this organisation?
b. Predictors: (Constant), Priority of organic coffee option over other options, Attitude towards greenwashing malpractice in general, Satisfaction with coffee from this organisation, Credibility of organisation's sustainability claims

Note: For the below table, the order of which is the strongest to least strongest relationship is different depending on whether the standardized coefficient or unstandardised coefficient column is interpreted in the below table. This is accurate to the output from the datafile.

Coefficientsa
Model	Unstandardized Coefficients	Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.	95.0% Confidence Interval for B
B	Std. Error	Beta	Lower Bound	Upper Bound
1	(Constant)	-.586	.412		-1.422	.158	-1.403	.232
ATTITUDE	.298	.092	.256	3.253	.002	.116	.479
SATISFACTION	.253	.074	.276	3.396	<.001	.105	.400
CREDIBILITY	.472	.102	.413	4.617	<.001	.269	.675
PRIORITY	.060	.106	.049	.565	.573	-.150	.269
a. Dependent Variable: How likely are you to purchase from this organisation?

1. Interpret the statistical output and write up the results of your interpretation. Be sure to identify the type of statistical analysis that has been conducted, and include all of the relevant statistics (2) that you are able to interpret from the information provided, including a conclusion of whether and how well the model fits the data. Include checking the assumptions required of this technique are satisfied (2), and explain what each statistical results means based on what each statistic indicates for the researcher (2). Include as much detail as possible based on the input you have been provided (8 marks)
2. Draw a conceptual model diagram to depict the relationships between each of the IVs that are significant and the DV. (2 marks)