8/2/2019 jamy

1/26

HYPOTHYSIS

One-Sample Statistics

N MEAN STD.DEVIATION STD.ERROR MEAN

Profile of responents 100 2.78 1.586 0.159

Education( the higher status currently possessed)100 2.95 1.048 0.105

Monthly income100 4.23 0.763 0.076

I consider myself a ___________ user of hand phone100 1.81 0.748 0.075

I am a user of mobile phone brand100 1.28 0.451 0.045

Mobile phone brand that is most preffered100 2.52 1.778 0.178

What does nokia gives you100 2.19 1.002 0.100

How important was product or service quality in yourdecision to use Nokia?

100 1.69 0.907 0.091

Compared to SAMSUNG, is our product qualitybetter, worse, or about the same

100 2.73 1.230 0.123

How useful would our smartphone be to you?100 2.09 1.074 0.107

Do you think prices of NOKIA are too high, ntoo lowor right?

100 2.92 1.220 0.122

How likely would you to be use our smartphone?100 2.19 1.061 0.106

If you are not likely to use nokia smartphone, whynot?

100 2.40 0.841 0.084

8/2/2019 jamy

2/26

One-Sample Test

Test Value = 0

t dfSig. (2-tailed)

MeanDifference

95% Confidence Intervalof the Difference

Lower Upper

Profile of respondents17.524 99 0.000 2.780 2.47 3.09

Education( the higher status currentlypossessed) 28.147 99 0.000 2.950 2.74 3.16

Monthly income55.403 99 0.000 4.230 4.08 4.38

I consider myself a ___________ user of handphone

24.198 99 0.000 1.810 1.66 1.96

I am a user of mobile phone brand28.365 99 0.000 1.280 1.19 1.37

Mobile phone brand that is most preffered14.173 99 0.000 2.520 2.17 2.87

What does nokia gives you21.857 99 0.000 2.190 1.99 2.39

How important was product or service qualityin your decision to use Nokia?

18.639 99 0.000 1.690 1.51 1.87

Compared to SAMSUNG, is our productquality better, worse, or about the same

22.200 99 0.000 2.730 2.49 2.97

How useful would our smartphone be to you?19.460 99 0.000 2.090 1.88 2.30

Do you think prices of NOKIA are too high, toolow or right?

23.934 99 0.000 2.920 2.68 3.16

How likely would you to be use oursmartphone?

20.646 99 0.000 2.190 1.98 2.40

If you are not likely to use nokia smartphone,why not? 28.542 99 0.000 2.400 2.23 2.57

8/2/2019 jamy

3/26

Frequency Table

1. Profile of respondents

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Age 40 4 4.0 4.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Age 40, 4

Total, 100

1. Profile of respondents

8/2/2019 jamy

4/26

2.Education( the higher status currently possessed)

Frequency PercentValid

PercentCumulative

Percent

Valid PHD 9 9.0 9.0 9.0

Masters 22 22.0 22.0 31.0

Bachlorsdegree

42 42.0 42.0 73.0

Diploma 19 19.0 19.0 92.0

Certificate 8 8.0 8.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

PHD

4%Masters

11%

Bachlors degree

21%

Diploma

10%

Certificate

4%

Total

50%

Education( the higher status currently possessed)

8/2/2019 jamy

5/26

3. Occupation

Frequency PercentValid

PercentCumulative

Percent

Valid 2 2.0 2.0 2.0

Business 10 10.0 10.0 12.0

Engineer 25 25.0 25.0 37.0

Manager 1 1.0 1.0 38.0

Mechanic 1 1.0 1.0 39.0

Professor 11 11.0 11.0 50.0

Student 50 50.0 50.0 100.0Total 100 100.0 100.0

Business

5%

Engineer

13%

Manager

0%Mechanic

0%

Professor

6%

Student

25%

Total

51%

Occupation

8/2/2019 jamy

6/26

4. Monthly income

Frequency PercentValid

PercentCumulative

Percent

Valid 1001-5000 3 3.0 3.0 3.0

5001-10000 11 11.0 11.0 14.0

>10001 46 46.0 46.0 60.0

Not applicable 40 40.0 40.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

1001-5000

1%

5001-

10000

6%

>1000123%

Not applicable

20%

Total

50%

Monthly income

8/2/2019 jamy

7/26

5. I consider myself a ___________ user of hand phone

Frequency PercentValid

PercentCumulative

Percent

Valid Heavy 39 39.0 39.0 39.0

Medium 41 41.0 41.0 80.0

Light 20 20.0 20.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Heavy

19%

Medium

21%

Light

10%

Total

50%

I consider myself a ___________ user of hand phone

8/2/2019 jamy

8/26

6. I am a user of mobile phone brand

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

PercentValid Yes 72 72.0 72.0 72.0

No 28 28.0 28.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Yes

36%

No

14%

Total

50%

I am a user of mobile phone brand

8/2/2019 jamy

9/26

7. Mobile phone brand that is most prefered

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

PercentValid Nokia 43 43.0 43.0 43.0

Samsung 21 21.0 21.0 64.0

LG 7 7.0 7.0 71.0

iPhone 11 11.0 11.0 82.0

Blackberry 6 6.0 6.0 88.0

Motorola 12 12.0 12.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Nokia

21%

Samsung

10%

LG

4%iPhone

6%

Blackberry

3%Motorola

6%

Total

50%

Mobile phone brand that is most prefered

8/2/2019 jamy

10/26

8. What does nokia gives you

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

PercentValid Recognition 28 28.0 28.0 28.0

Satisfaction 39 39.0 39.0 67.0

Value formoney

19 19.0 19.0 86.0

Praise frmfriend

14 14.0 14.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Recognition

14%

Satisfaction

19%

Value for

money

10%

Praise frm friend

7%

Total

50%

What does nokia gives you

8/2/2019 jamy

11/26

9. How important was product or service quality in your decision to

use Nokia?

Frequency PercentValid

PercentCumulative

Percent

Valid Very important 55 55.0 55.0 55.0

Moderatlyimportant

27 27.0 27.0 82.0

Slightlyimportant

12 12.0 12.0 94.0

Not at allimportant

6 6.0 6.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

27%

14%

6%3%

50%

Service

Very important

Moderatly important

Slightly important

Not at all important

Total

8/2/2019 jamy

12/26

10. Compared to SAMSUNG, is our product quality better, worse, or

about the same

Frequency PercentValid

PercentCumulative

Percent

Valid Somewhatbetter

11 11.0 11.0 11.0

Slightly batter 39 39.0 39.0 50.0

About thesame

31 31.0 31.0 81.0

Slightly worse 9 9.0 9.0 90.0

Somewhat

worse

5 5.0 5.0 95.0

Much more 5 5.0 5.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

5%

19%

15%

5%3%3%

50%

Comparision to SAMSUNG

Somewhat better

Slightly batter

About the same

Slightly worse

Somewhat worse

Much more

Total

8/2/2019 jamy

13/26

11. What changes would most improve our new service?

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

PercentValid Every thing isproper

1 1.0 1.0 1.0

Features 42 42.0 42.0 43.0

Quality 56 56.0 56.0 99.0

Quality of body 1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

CHANGES

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Every thing is

proper

Features Quality Quality of body Total

Series1

8/2/2019 jamy

14/26

12. How useful would our smartphone be to you?

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

PercentValid Very useful 37 37.0 37.0 37.0

Moderatlyuseful

33 33.0 33.0 70.0

Slightly useful 14 14.0 14.0 84.0

Not useful 16 16.0 16.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Usefulness of Smartphone

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Very useful Moderatly useful Slightly useful Not useful Total

Series1

8/2/2019 jamy

15/26

13. Do you think prices of NOKIA are too high, too low or right?

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

PercentValid Somewhat toohigh

15 15.0 15.0 15.0

Slightly tooright

21 21.0 21.0 36.0

About right 33 33.0 33.0 69.0

Slightly too low 19 19.0 19.0 88.0

Somewhat toolow

12 12.0 12.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Price of NOKIA

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Somewhat

too high

Slightly too

right

About right Slightly too

low

Somewhat

too low

Total

Series1

8/2/2019 jamy

16/26

14. How likely would you to be use our smartphone?

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

PercentValid Very likely 31 31.0 31.0 31.0

Moderatly likely 36 36.0 36.0 67.0

Slightly likely 16 16.0 16.0 83.0

Not at all likely 17 17.0 17.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Likely use NOKIA smartphone

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Very likely Moderatly

likely

Slightly

likely

Not at all

likely

Total

Series1

8/2/2019 jamy

17/26

15. If you are not likely to use nokia smartphone, why not?

Frequency PercentValid

PercentCumulative

Percent

Valid Do not want aproduct like this

7 7.0 7.0 7.0

Satisfied withcompetingproduct currentlyavailable

62 62.0 62.0 69.0

Cannot pay for aproduct like this

15 15.0 15.0 84.0

Not willing to payfor a product likethis

16 16.0 16.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Reason if not using.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Do not want a

product like this

Satisfied with

competing

product

currently

available

Cannot pay for

a product like

this

Not willing to

pay for a

product like this

Total

Series1

8/2/2019 jamy

18/26

Crosstabs

Case Processing Summary

Cases

Valid Missing Total

NPercen

t N Percent N Percent

Profile ofresponents *Education( thehigher statuscurrently

possessed)

100100.0

%0 0.0% 100 100.0%

Profile of responents * Education( the higher statuscurrently possessed) Crosstabulation

Education( the higher status currentlypossessed)

TotalPHDMaster

sBachlorsdegree

Diploma

Certificate

Profile of responents 40 3 1 0 0 0 4

Total 9 22 42 19 8 100

8/2/2019 jamy

19/26

ANNOVA

ANOVA

Profile of responents

Sum of Squares dfMean

Square F Sig.

Between Groups 106.358 4 26.589 17.689 0.000

Within Groups 142.802 95 1.503

Total 249.160 99

8/2/2019 jamy

20/26

Correlations(1 tailed)

Correlations

Profileof

responents

Education( thehigherstatus

currently

possessed)

Monthly

income

I considermyself a

___________ user

of handphone

I ama

userof

mobile

phone

brand

Mobilephonebrandthat ismost

preffered

What

does

nokia

gives

you

Howimport

antwas

product or

service

qualityin yourdecisio

n touse

Nokia?

Compared to

SAMSUNG, is

ourproductqualitybetter,worse,

or aboutthe

same

Howusefulwould

oursmartphone beto you?

Doyouthinkprices ofNOK

IAaretoo

high,ntoolowor

right?

Howlikelywould

you to beuse our

smartphone?

If youare notlikely to

usenokia

smartphone, why

not?

Profile ofresponents

PearsonCorrelation

1 -0.371-

0.700-0.112

-0.12

50.016

0.166

-0.062 -0.062 0.113-

0.260

-0.221 0.089

Sig. (1-tailed)

. 0.000 0.000 0.1330.10

80.438

0.049

0.270 0.271 0.1330.00

50.014 0.188

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Education( thehigherstatuscurrentlypossessed)

PearsonCorrelation

-0.371 1 0.216 -0.0900.13

70.177

0.115

0.015 0.373 -0.0950.15

50.372 -0.160

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.000 . 0.015 0.1880.08

80.039

0.127

0.440 0.000 0.1740.06

20.000 0.055

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Monthlyincome

PearsonCorrelation

-0.700 0.216 1 0.0770.01

60.030

-0.084

-0.115 0.067 -0.1240.33

40.145 -0.082

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.000 0.015 . 0.2220.43

60.383

0.203

0.128 0.254 0.1090.00

00.075 0.209

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100I considermyself a

___________ userof handphone

PearsonCorrelation

-0.112 -0.090 0.077 1-

0.110

-0.0010.076

0.017 -0.265 0.172-

0.227

-0.005 0.218

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.133 0.188 0.222 .0.13

80.496

0.227

0.435 0.004 0.0430.01

20.480 0.015

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100I am auser ofmobilephone

brand

PearsonCorrelation

-0.125 0.137 0.016 -0.110 1 -0.183-

0.097

0.091 0.065 0.0310.02

3-0.154 -0.138

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.108 0.088 0.436 0.138 . 0.034 0.170

0.184 0.261 0.380 0.411

0.062 0.085

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Mobilephone

Pearson

0.016 0.177 0.030 -0.001-

0.181

-0.1

-0.031 0.176 0.0970.08

00.451 0.380

8/2/2019 jamy

21/26

brand thatis mostpreffered

Correlation

3 75

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.438 0.039 0.383 0.4960.03

4.

0.041

0.381 0.040 0.1690.21

50.000 0.000

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100What

doesnokiagives you

Pearso

nCorrelation

0.166 0.115 -0.084 0.076

-

0.097

-0.175 1 -0.257 -0.056 0.125

-

0.095

0.051 -0.115

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.049 0.127 0.203 0.2270.17

00.041 . 0.005 0.289 0.108

0.174

0.306 0.127

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Howimportantwasproduct orservicequality inyourdecisionto useNokia?

PearsonCorrelation

-0.062 0.015-

0.1150.017

0.091

-0.031-

0.257

1 0.087 0.0390.11

4-0.064 0.045

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.270 0.440 0.128 0.4350.18

40.381

0.005

. 0.194 0.3490.12

90.263 0.328

N

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Compared toSAMSUNG, is ourproductqualitybetter,worse, orabout thesame

PearsonCorrelation

-0.062 0.373 0.067 -0.2650.06

50.176

-0.056

0.087 1 0.0190.16

10.202 -0.041

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.271 0.000 0.254 0.0040.26

10.040

0.289

0.194 . 0.4270.05

50.022 0.343

N

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Howusefulwould oursmartphone be toyou?

PearsonCorrelation

0.113 -0.095-

0.1240.172

0.031

0.0970.125

0.039 0.019 1-

0.195

0.038 -0.029

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.133 0.174 0.109 0.0430.38

00.169

0.108

0.349 0.427 .0.02

60.354 0.387

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Do youthinkprices ofNOKIA

are toohigh, ntoolow orright?

PearsonCorrelation

-0.260 0.155 0.334 -0.2270.02

30.080

-0.095

0.114 0.161 -0.195 1 0.340 -0.175

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.005 0.062 0.000 0.012 0.411

0.215 0.174

0.129 0.055 0.026 . 0.000 0.041

N100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

How likelywould youto be useoursmartphone?

PearsonCorrelation

-0.221 0.372 0.145 -0.005-

0.154

0.4510.051

-0.064 0.202 0.0380.34

01 0.208

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.014 0.000 0.075 0.4800.06

20.000

0.306

0.263 0.022 0.3540.00

0. 0.019

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100If you are

not likelyto usenokiasmartphone, why

Pearso

nCorrelation

0.089 -0.160 -0.082

0.218 -0.138

0.380 -0.115

0.045 -0.041 -0.029 -0.175

0.208 1

Sig. (1-tailed)

0.188 0.055 0.209 0.0150.08

50.000

0.127

0.328 0.343 0.3870.04

10.019 .

8/2/2019 jamy

22/26

not? N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed).*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed).

Correlations(2 tailed)

Profile

ofrespon

ents

Education( thehigherstatus

currentl

yposses

sed)

Mont

hlyincome

Iconsidermyself a

___________

user ofhandphone

I ama

userof

mobile

pho

nebran

d

Mobile

phone

brandthat is

mostpreffe

red

What

does

nokia

givesyou

Howimport

antwas

product or

service

quality inyour

decision to

useNokia

?

Compared to

SAMSUNG, is

ourproductqualitybetter,worse,

or

aboutthe

same

Howusefulwould

our

smartphone beto you?

Doyouthinkpricesof

NOKIAaretoohigh

,ntoolow

orright

?

Howlikelywouldyou tobe use

oursmartph

one?

If youare notlikely to

usenokia

smartph

one,whynot?

Profile ofresponents

PearsonCorrelation

1 -0.371-

0.700

-0.112-

0.125

0.0160.166

-0.062 -0.062 0.113-

0.260

-0.221 0.089

Sig. (2-tailed)

. 0.0000.00

00.266

0.216

0.8750.098

0.540 0.541 0.2650.00

90.027 0.377

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Educatio

n( thehigherstatuscurrentlypossessed)

Pearso

nCorrelation

-0.371 1 0.216

-0.090 0.137

0.177 0.115

0.015 0.373 -0.095 0.155

0.372 -0.160

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.000 .0.03

10.376

0.175

0.0790.255

0.879 0.000 0.3490.12

40.000 0.111

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Monthlyincome

PearsonCorrelation

-0.700 0.216 1 0.0770.01

60.030

-0.084

-0.115 0.067 -0.1240.33

40.145 -0.082

Sig. (2-

tailed) 0.000 0.031 . 0.445

0.87

1 0.767

0.4

05 0.255 0.509 0.219

0.00

1 0.150 0.418N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Iconsidermyself a

PearsonCorrela

-0.112 -0.0900.07

71

-0.11

0

-0.001

0.076

0.017 -0.265 0.172-

0.227

-0.005 0.218

8/2/2019 jamy

23/26

___________user ofhandphone

tionSig. (2-tailed)

0.266 0.3760.44

5.

0.275

0.9930.455

0.870 0.008 0.0860.02

30.961 0.029

N100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

I am a

user ofmobilephonebrand

Pearso

nCorrelation

-0.125 0.137 0.016

-0.110 1 -0.183

-0.097

0.091 0.065 0.031 0.023

-0.154 -0.138

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.216 0.1750.87

10.275 . 0.068

0.339

0.369 0.522 0.7610.82

20.125 0.170

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Mobilephonebrandthat ismost

preffered

PearsonCorrelation

0.016 0.1770.03

0-0.001

-0.18

31

-0.175

-0.031 0.176 0.0970.08

00.451 0.380

Sig. (2-

tailed)0.875 0.079

0.76

70.993

0.06

8.

0.0

810.763 0.080 0.337

0.42

90.000 0.000

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Whatdoesnokiagivesyou

PearsonCorrelation

0.166 0.115-

0.084

0.076-

0.097

-0.175

1 -0.257 -0.056 0.125-

0.095

0.051 -0.115

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.098 0.2550.40

50.455

0.339

0.081 . 0.010 0.578 0.2160.34

80.613 0.254

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Howimportant

wasproductorservicequality inyourdecisionto useNokia?

Pearson

Correlation

-0.062 0.015-

0.115

0.0170.09

1

-

0.031

-0.257

1 0.087 0.0390.11

4-0.064 0.045

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.540 0.8790.25

50.870

0.369

0.7630.010

. 0.388 0.6980.25

70.526 0.656

N

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Compared to

SAMSUNG, isourproductqualitybetter,worse, orabout thesame

Pearson

Correlation

-0.062 0.3730.06

7

-0.2650.06

5

0.176-

0.0

56

0.087 1 0.0190.16

1

0.202 -0.041

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.541 0.0000.50

90.008

0.522

0.0800.578

0.388 . 0.8540.11

10.043 0.685

N

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Howuseful

wouldoursmartphone be toyou?

Pearson

Correlation

0.113 -0.095-

0.12

4

0.1720.03

1

0.0970.1

25

0.039 0.019 1-

0.19

5

0.038 -0.029

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.265 0.3490.21

90.086

0.761

0.3370.216

0.698 0.854 .0.05

20.707 0.774

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

8/2/2019 jamy

24/26

Do youthinkprices ofNOKIAare toohigh,

ntoo lowor right?

PearsonCorrelation

-0.260 0.1550.33

4-0.227

0.023

0.080-

0.095

0.114 0.161 -0.195 1 0.340 -0.175

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.009 0.1240.00

10.023

0.822

0.4290.348

0.257 0.111 0.052 . 0.001 0.081

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Howlikelywouldyou to beuse oursmartphone?

PearsonCorrelation

-0.221 0.3720.14

5-0.005

-0.15

40.451

0.051

-0.064 0.202 0.0380.34

01 0.208

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.027 0.0000.15

00.961

0.125

0.0000.613

0.526 0.043 0.7070.00

1. 0.037

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100If you arenot likely

to usenokiasmartphone, whynot?

Pearson

Correlation

0.089 -0.160-

0.082

0.218-

0.138

0.380-

0.115

0.045 -0.041 -0.029-

0.175

0.208 1

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.377 0.1110.41

80.029

0.170

0.0000.254

0.656 0.685 0.7740.08

10.037 .

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

8/2/2019 jamy

25/26

Regression

Variables Entered/Removed(a)

ModelVariablesEntered

VariablesRemoved Method

1

Education(the higherstatuscurrentlypossessed)

.

Stepwise(Criteria:Probability-of-F-to-enter =.100).

a. Dependent Variable: Profile of responents

Model Summary

Model R R SquareAdjusted R

SquareStd. Error of the

Estimate

1 0.371 0.138 0.129 1.481

a. Predictors: (Constant), Education( the higher status currently possessed)

ANOVA(b)

ModelSum ofSquares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 34.328 1 34.328 15.660 0.000

Residual 214.832 98 2.192

Total 249.160 99

8/2/2019 jamy

26/26

CROSSTABS

Case Processing SummaryCases

Valid Missing Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

Profile of responents * Education( thehigher status currently possessed) 100 100.0% 0 0.0% 100 100.0%

Profile of responents * Education( the higher status currently possessed) Crosstabulation

Count

Education( the higher status currently possessed)

TotalPHD Masters Bachlors degree Diploma Certificate

Profile of responents Age 40 3 1 0 0 0 4

Total 9 22 42 19 8 100