Zero extreme variations was basically located getting access, length of need, log on frequency, gender and years, while Bonferroni correction pairwise evaluations out-of estimated limited means announced the newest significant difference between the second details

Facebook try reached because of the a majority of participants (64.5 %) thru one another Pc and smart phone; more than sixty percent logged to Myspace relaxed; spent that (58.5 %) so you’re able to a couple of (twenty two.8 percent) period for each and every join; and most 72 % current their reputation at the least regarding once a week. The attempt integrated hook majority of women (54.8 %); and ethnic groups truthfully portrayed this new ethnicity of the West Cape, along with mainly black colored (thirty five.2 per cent) and you can colored (36.4 %) cultural communities (Analytics SA, 2012).

Table II also provides the full report about employing properties and you can demographics of Millennials participants which use Fb

As stated, brand new respondents’ behavioral attitude on the Facebook advertisements was determined because of the 9-product balances per of your own steps reaction membership (Dining tables III and you can IV).

Cronbach’s ? was 0.843 for the Facebook advertising intention-to-purchase scale (Table III) and 0.742 for the Facebook advertising purchase scale (Table IV), which indicated good internal consistencies. A non-parametric one-sample bi-nominal standardised test was utilised to determine if there was a significant difference. The test showed that for both of the nine-item scales, there was a significant difference at p < 0.001 and p < 0.05, with the exception of one item in the intention-to-purchase scale. Pearson's correlation coefficient analysis (Tables III and IV) showed a positive medium (r > 0.3) to strong (r > 0.5) relationship between a majority of the variables for the intention-to-purchase and purchase measurement scales, but there was weak positive correlation between a minority of the variables, especially in terms of the negatively reversed variables that were recoded.

The fresh new GLM ANOVA, because the talked about for the prior text, was applied since research includes a special amount of observations for sure separate parameters, and that is seen by big standard problems (a typical example of this is basically the lower level of participants you to definitely logged onto Twitter one or more times a month) datingranking.net/nl/chatki-overzicht/. Van Schalkwyk (2012) shows that the GLM takes this under consideration and you will “normalises” the outcome. Tables V and VI show the result regarding Wald ?2 try, that’s according to the Bonferroni modification pairwise article hoc attempt one of the projected limited form.

The Wald ?2 test revealed that there was a significant difference at p < 0.001 for intention-to-purchase (M=2.94, SD=0.805) because of Facebook advertising.

Log on duration (p < 0.001): respondents who logged on for ?1 hour (M=2.82, SE=0.033) resulted in lower intention-to-purchase levels in comparison to those who logged on for two hours (M=2.98, SE=0.039).

Profile update incidence (p < 0.001): respondents who updated their Facebook status daily (M=3.06, SE=0.041) resulted in greater intention-to-purchase compared to those who updated once a week (M=2.93, SE=0.044), two to four times a month (M=2.81, SE=0.050) and once a month (M=2.81, SE=0.042); those who updated their Facebook status two to four times a week (M=2.98, SE=0.043) showed an increase in intention-to-purchase compared to those who updated it two to four times a month (M=2.81, SE=0.050) and once a month (M=2.81, SE=0.042).

Ethnic group (p < 0.001): white respondents (M=2.79, SE=0.041) exhibited lower intention-to-purchase levels than black (M=3.01, SE=0.035) and coloured (M=2.96, SE=0.037) respondents.

The Wald ?2 test disclosed that there was a significant difference at p < 0.001 for purchase (M=2.94, SD=0.656), which was caused by Facebook advertising. No significant differences were found for access, length of usage, log on frequency, age, gender and race; however, Bonferroni correction pairwise comparisons of estimated ongst the following variables.