BA5004QA – Business Research Methods
Do you need help for BA5004QA – Business Research Methods
BA5004QA – Business Research Methods Assignment 3
This coursework component is in two parts (Part one and Part two) and you should attempt both parts (contributes 50% to the overall module mark
Advice to students
This is a Turnitin assessment and students should submit their assignment as a single WORD file.
Ensure each part starts on a separate page.
For part one, make sure that each of the FIVE sub-sections should start on a separate page.
For part two, there are two case studies (1 and 2). Make sure that each case study starts on a separate page.
All references should be presented in the HARVARD referencing style.
The Deadline for this coursework is Monday 25thJuly 2022 before 3:00 p:m
Part one 25% of total marks
Title: An examination of users and non-users of self-checkout counters
In this part, you are asked to refer to and familiarise yourself with the research article entitled “An examination of users and non-users of self-checkout counters” and respond to the requirements below.
- Aim and Research questions
Explain briefly, the aim of this research article and state the research questions chosen by the authors of this research paper. [Max: 100 words]
- Survey instrument
- Referring to the “Survey instrument” used in this study, explain how this instrument was
organised and name each section. [Max: 100 words]
- Refer to the second section of this instrument, name the concept that is measured and in how many factors it was subdivided. How many items form each factor? [Max: 50 words]
- The article refers to the Cronbach 𝛼 coefficients. What do these represent and why it is important to include them in this paper? [Max: 100 words]
- Data collection
Name and explain the sampling method used for the collection of data. Explain whether the responses were random and independent by giving evidence from the text.
[Max: 100 words]
- Referring to the section “Demographic variables in the use of self-checkout counters”, the authors have concluded that there is no difference in the use of self-checkout counters across different demographic segments. What evidence have they given to evidence this conclusion? [Max: 50 words]
- In the same section, the report for the chi-squared test against the variable “Age” reads “𝜒2(4) = 4.06, 𝑝 = 0.40, 𝜙 = 0.07”. What is “4” in this report and explain how it was calculated? [Max: 30 words]
- Referring to the section “Evaluation of self-checkout counters”, an independent t-test was used to compare the average scores for all the measures between users and non-users. Explain what could be the reason that all the test results were found to be statistically significant but with moderate effect sizes. [Max: 50 words]
- Conclusion and further research
The authors referred to a “recent” study. What does this study suggest and what future
research could be conducted to test it? [Max: 50 words] Note: Any calculations or equations you will use will not be part of the general word count.
Part two 25% of total marks
This part is made out of TWO separate and unconnected case studies.
Case study 1: Amazon Fresh
The new Amazon Till-Less shop (Amazon Fresh) has just opened in London. It offers a shopping experience without the use of a till for payment. A study with an objective to examine the level of take-up for shopping Till-Less was conducted and has set the following research questions:
- RQ1: Is the proportion of people who consider shopping at Amazon Fresh greater than 50%?
- RQ2: Is the proportion of people who consider shopping at Amazon Fresh different between those who are comfortable with mobile technology and those who are not?
A simple random survey, conducted among shoppers at a traditional food supermarket, used an instrument in which the following two questions are of interest for this study.
The dataset for this survey is collated in the SPSS and Jamovi files “Amazon”.
For this case study, we are required to produce the following tasks
- Produce a frequency table for the dependent variable “Take up” and report your findings.
[Max: 50 words]
- Conduct an appropriate hypothesis test fully to inform on the RQ1 above. [Max: 50 words]
- Conduct an appropriate hypothesis test fully to inform on the RQ2 above. [Max: 50 words]
- General question: Explain clearly and in your own words the reason for conducting a hypothesis test instead of simply comparing sample statistics of RQ2 above. [Max: 100 words]
The output for the two tests above is included in the appendix at the end of this brief. You may decide to produce your own output by using the data available to you. You should insert the appropriate output to evidence your reports.
The reports should follow the classic research style adopted during the online classes. For full marks, you should clearly state the null and alternative hypotheses for each test.
Case study 2: Entrepreneurship intention
E. R. Thompson (2009) development an internationally reliable measurement scale for entrepreneurship intention based on the following instrument:
|Item||Statement||1. Very untrue||2.||3.||4.||5. Very true|
|1||I intend to set up a company in the future|
|2||I always search for business start-up opportunities|
|3||I read books on how to set up a firm|
|4||I have plans to launch my own business|
|5||I save money to start a business|
|6||I spend time learning about starting a firm|
There are two objectives for this study.
Objective 1: To test if the average entrepreneurship intention score is different between the two types of students, those who studied for an entrepreneurship module and those who didn’t.
Objective 2 To test if the university department they studied at has an effect on the average score for entrepreneurship intention.
The instrument above was a given to a random sample of students from London Met. Some of the students have done modules related to entrepreneurship and other did not. These students are indicated by (1=Yes, if they did receive an emtrepreneurship module) and (0=No, if they didn’t).
These students were further split by departments (1=GSBL, 2=CDM, and 3=CASS) where they studied. We have only considered these 3 schools.
The data is collated in an SPSS and Jamovi file named “Entrepreneurship”. The variable “Intention”
is the total score of the six items in the instrument above.
Required: For this case study, you are asked to produce the following tasks:
- Produce the descriptive statistics for the entrepreneurship intention scores split by the two groups of students, those who studied for an entrepreneurship module and those who didn’t and test the normality and the homogeneity of variance assumptions. Report your findings.
[Max: 50 words]
- Test if the average scores for entrepreneurship intention are significantly different and report your findings. [Max: 50 words]
- Test if the university department has an effect on the average score for entrepreneurship intention and report your findings. [Max: 50 words]
- General question: Explain in your words the concept of the p-value in hypothesis testing, how it is used and what is its limitation. [Max: 100 words]
All hypotheses and SPSS or Jamovi output are made available in the appendix. Your reports need to be clearly evidenced by the appropriate output for your work. The reports should follow the classic research style adopted during our online classes and word count does not include the output. For full marks, you should clearly state the hypotheses for each test.
End of assignment