Khóa luận Phân tích các yếu tố tác động đến quyết định mua của khách hàng trên địa bàn thành phố Huế đối với mặt hàng rau quả

mua rau quả về một số yếu tố người dân quan tâm khi mua thịt đối với chợ và siêu thị One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test rau qua tai cho pho ng phu rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat rau qua tai cho dam bao an toan rau qua tai cho co gia phai cha ng cho la dia diem thua n tien di lai khon g gian ban hang tai cho sach se rau qua tai sieu thi phon g phu rau qua tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai cha ng sie u thi là dia die m thu an tien di lai kho ng gia n ban han g tai sie u thi sac h se dia die m ban rau qua an toan nhat mua rau qua tai sieu thi du kho ng thua n tien N 119 119 119 119 119 119 118 119 119 119 119 119 119 119 Norma l Param etersa Mean 4.05 3.78 3.98 4.37 4.49 3.12 4.54 3.90 4.39 3.20 3.30 4.7 6 2.89 1.61 Std. Deviat ion .687 1.001 .844 .675 .812 .904 .517 .960 .702 .671 1.1 09 .51 6 .447 .489 Most Extre me Differ ences Absol ute .269 .208 .223 .287 .383 .199 .363 .214 .321 .307 .18 7 .47 4 .538 .399 Positiv e .269 .161 .223 .246 .264 .199 .302 .153 .196 .307 .18 7 .32 4 .403 .282 Negati ve -.261 - .208 -.222 - .287 -.383 -.189 -.363 - .214 - .321 - .256 - .15 5 - .47 4 - .538 - .399 Kolmogorov- Smirnov Z 2.93 2 2.27 1 2.42 9 3.13 1 4.18 1 2.16 9 3.94 1 2.33 5 3.50 6 3.35 1 2.0 44 5.1 72 5.86 6 4.35 1 Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .00 0 .00 0 .000 .000 a. Test distribution is Normal. Descriptive Statistics N Mean Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum Percentiles 25th 50th (Median) 75th rau qua tai cho phong phu 119 4.05 .687 3 5 4.00 4.00 5.00 rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat 119 3.78 1.001 1 5 3.00 4.00 5.00 rau qua tai cho dam bao an toan 119 3.98 .844 2 5 3.00 4.00 5.00 rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang 119 4.37 .675 2 5 4.00 4.00 5.00 cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai 119 4.49 .812 2 5 4.00 5.00 5.00 khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se 119 3.12 .904 1 5 2.00 3.00 4.00 rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu 118 4.54 .517 3 5 4.00 5.00 5.00 rau qua tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat 119 3.90 .960 2 5 3.00 4.00 5.00 rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan 119 4.39 .702 3 5 4.00 5.00 5.00 rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang 119 3.20 .671 2 5 3.00 3.00 4.00 sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai 119 3.30 1.109 1 5 2.00 3.00 4.00 khong gian ban hang tai sieu thi sach se 119 4.76 .516 2 5 5.00 5.00 5.00 Kiểm định Wilcoxon đối với các tiêu chí cho chợ và siêu thị Test Statisticsc rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu - rau qua tai cho phong phu rau qua tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat - rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan - rau qua tai cho dam bao an toan rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang - rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai - cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai khong gian ban hang tai sieu thi sach se - khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se Z -5.487a -.807a -3.808a -8.403b -7.512b -9.201a Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .420 .000 .000 .000 .000 a. Based on negative ranks. b. Based on positive ranks. c. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test Kiểm định Chi – bình phương Mối quan hệ giữa những đặc điểm các nhân và đánh giá về các tiêu chí khi mua rau quả. rau qua tai cho phong phu * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi rau qua tai cho phong phu trung lap Count 3 17 4 1 25 % within nhom tuoi 25.0% 31.5% 10.5% 6.7% 21.0% dong y Count 5 23 24 11 63 % within nhom tuoi 41.7% 42.6% 63.2% 73.3% 52.9% rat dong y Count 4 14 10 3 31 % within nhom tuoi 33.3% 25.9% 26.3% 20.0% 26.1% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 10.131a 6 .119 Likelihood Ratio 10.665 6 .099 Linear-by-Linear Association .966 1 .326 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 4 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.52. rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total <25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat rat khong dong y Count 0 1 0 1 2 % within nhom tuoi .0% 1.9% .0% 6.7% 1.7% khong dong y Count 1 3 4 2 10 % within nhom tuoi 8.3% 5.6% 10.5% 13.3% 8.4% trung lap Count 1 17 11 4 33 % within nhom tuoi 8.3% 31.5% 28.9% 26.7% 27.7% dong y Count 6 23 10 2 41 % within nhom tuoi 50.0% 42.6% 26.3% 13.3% 34.5% rat dong y Count 4 10 13 6 33 % within nhom tuoi 33.3% 18.5% 34.2% 40.0% 27.7% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 13.886a 12 .308 Likelihood Ratio 14.927 12 .245 Linear-by-Linear Association .271 1 .603 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 13 cells (65.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .20. rau qua tai cho dam bao an toan * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi rau qua tai cho dam bao an toan khong dong y Count 0 0 1 0 1 % within nhom tuoi .0% .0% 2.6% .0% .8% trung lap Count 4 19 13 4 40 % within nhom tuoi 33.3% 35.2% 34.2% 26.7% 33.6% dong y Count 3 18 13 4 38 % within nhom tuoi 25.0% 33.3% 34.2% 26.7% 31.9% rat dong y Count 5 17 11 7 40 % within nhom tuoi 41.7% 31.5% 28.9% 46.7% 33.6% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 4.108a 9 .904 Likelihood Ratio 4.210 9 .897 Linear-by-Linear Association .063 1 .801 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 8 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .10. rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 0 1 1 0 2 % within nhom tuoi .0% 1.9% 2.6% .0% 1.7% trung lap Count 0 4 1 2 7 % within nhom tuoi .0% 7.4% 2.6% 13.3% 5.9% dong y Count 9 21 21 4 55 % within nhom tuoi 75.0% 38.9% 55.3% 26.7% 46.2% rat dong y Count 3 28 15 9 55 % within nhom tuoi 25.0% 51.9% 39.5% 60.0% 46.2% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 10.907a 9 .282 Likelihood Ratio 11.887 9 .220 Linear-by-Linear Association .138 1 .710 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 8 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .20. cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai khong dong y Count 0 4 1 0 5 % within nhom tuoi .0% 7.4% 2.6% .0% 4.2% trung lap Count 1 3 5 0 9 % within nhom tuoi 8.3% 5.6% 13.2% .0% 7.6% dong y Count 1 12 9 6 28 % within nhom tuoi 8.3% 22.2% 23.7% 40.0% 23.5% rat dong y Count 10 35 23 9 77 % within nhom tuoi 83.3% 64.8% 60.5% 60.0% 64.7% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 9.427a 9 .399 Likelihood Ratio 11.266 9 .258 Linear-by-Linear Association .096 1 .757 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 10 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .50. khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se rat khong dong y Count 0 0 2 0 2 % within nhom tuoi .0% .0% 5.3% .0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 4 11 10 5 30 % within nhom tuoi 33.3% 20.4% 26.3% 33.3% 25.2% trung lap Count 5 23 14 3 45 % within nhom tuoi 41.7% 42.6% 36.8% 20.0% 37.8% dong y Count 1 19 10 6 36 % within nhom tuoi 8.3% 35.2% 26.3% 40.0% 30.3% rat dong y Count 2 1 2 1 6 % within nhom tuoi 16.7% 1.9% 5.3% 6.7% 5.0% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 14.526a 12 .268 Likelihood Ratio 14.889 12 .248 Linear-by-Linear Association .037 1 .848 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 13 cells (65.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .20. rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu trung lap Count 0 0 0 1 1 % within nhom tuoi .0% .0% .0% 6.7% .8% dong y Count 7 22 16 7 52 % within nhom tuoi 58.3% 41.5% 42.1% 46.7% 44.1% rat dong y Count 5 31 22 7 65 % within nhom tuoi 41.7% 58.5% 57.9% 46.7% 55.1% Total Count 12 53 38 15 118 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 8.307a 6 .216 Likelihood Ratio 5.560 6 .474 Linear-by-Linear Association .084 1 .771 N of Valid Cases 118 a. 4 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .10. rau qua tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi rau qua khong Count 2 5 3 1 11 tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat dong y % within nhom tuoi 16.7% 9.3% 7.9% 6.7% 9.2% trung lap Count 2 14 11 1 28 % within nhom tuoi 16.7% 25.9% 28.9% 6.7% 23.5% dong y Count 1 20 13 8 42 % within nhom tuoi 8.3% 37.0% 34.2% 53.3% 35.3% rat dong y Count 7 15 11 5 38 % within nhom tuoi 58.3% 27.8% 28.9% 33.3% 31.9% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 10.497a 9 .312 Likelihood Ratio 11.507 9 .243 Linear-by-Linear Association .091 1 .763 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 9 cells (56.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.11. rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan trung lap Count 2 5 7 1 15 % within nhom tuoi 16.7% 9.3% 18.4% 6.7% 12.6% dong y Count 5 16 15 7 43 % within nhom tuoi 41.7% 29.6% 39.5% 46.7% 36.1% rat dong y Count 5 33 16 7 61 % within nhom tuoi 41.7% 61.1% 42.1% 46.7% 51.3% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 5.308a 6 .505 Likelihood Ratio 5.295 6 .507 Linear-by-Linear Association .322 1 .570 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 4 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.51. rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 2 5 6 2 15 % within nhom tuoi 16.7% 9.3% 15.8% 13.3% 12.6% trung lap Count 6 35 17 9 67 % within nhom tuoi 50.0% 64.8% 44.7% 60.0% 56.3% dong y Count 4 13 14 4 35 % within nhom tuoi 33.3% 24.1% 36.8% 26.7% 29.4% rat dong y Count 0 1 1 0 2 % within nhom tuoi .0% 1.9% 2.6% .0% 1.7% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 4.673a 9 .862 Likelihood Ratio 5.126 9 .823 Linear-by-Linear Association .013 1 .908 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 9 cells (56.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .20. sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai rat khong dong y Count 0 1 1 0 2 % within nhom tuoi .0% 1.9% 2.6% .0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 3 17 8 4 32 % within nhom tuoi 25.0% 31.5% 21.1% 26.7% 26.9% trung lap Count 4 14 14 3 35 % within nhom tuoi 33.3% 25.9% 36.8% 20.0% 29.4% dong y Count 4 10 7 7 28 % within nhom tuoi 33.3% 18.5% 18.4% 46.7% 23.5% rat dong y Count 1 12 8 1 22 % within nhom tuoi 8.3% 22.2% 21.1% 6.7% 18.5% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 Crosstab nhom tuoi Total<25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai rat khong dong y Count 0 1 1 0 2 % within nhom tuoi .0% 1.9% 2.6% .0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 3 17 8 4 32 % within nhom tuoi 25.0% 31.5% 21.1% 26.7% 26.9% trung lap Count 4 14 14 3 35 % within nhom tuoi 33.3% 25.9% 36.8% 20.0% 29.4% dong y Count 4 10 7 7 28 % within nhom tuoi 33.3% 18.5% 18.4% 46.7% 23.5% rat dong y Count 1 12 8 1 22 % within nhom tuoi 8.3% 22.2% 21.1% 6.7% 18.5% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 10.286a 12 .591 Likelihood Ratio 10.510 12 .571 Linear-by-Linear Association .091 1 .763 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 12 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .20. khong gian ban hang tai sieu thi sach se * nhom tuoi Crosstab nhom tuoi Total <25 tuoi 26-40 tuoi 41-55 tuoi >55 tuoi khong gian ban hang tai sieu thi sach se khong dong y Count 0 0 1 0 1 % within nhom tuoi .0% .0% 2.6% .0% .8% trung lap Count 0 1 1 0 2 % within nhom tuoi .0% 1.9% 2.6% .0% 1.7% dong y Count 2 9 6 4 21 % within nhom tuoi 16.7% 16.7% 15.8% 26.7% 17.6% rat dong y Count 10 44 30 11 95 % within nhom tuoi 83.3% 81.5% 78.9% 73.3% 79.8% Total Count 12 54 38 15 119 % within nhom tuoi 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 3.721a 9 .929 Likelihood Ratio 4.206 9 .897 Linear-by-Linear Association .657 1 .418 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 10 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .10. rau qua tai cho phong phu * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua tai cho phong phu trung lap Count 1 1 6 6 11 25 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% 7.7% 31.6% 24.0% 20.8% 21.0% dong y Count 4 10 8 10 31 63 % within nghe nghiep 44.4% 76.9% 42.1% 40.0% 58.5% 52.9% rat dong y Count 4 2 5 9 11 31 % within nghe nghiep 44.4% 15.4% 26.3% 36.0% 20.8% 26.1% Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 8.949a 8 .347 Likelihood Ratio 9.012 8 .341 Linear-by-Linear Association .858 1 .354 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 7 cells (46.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.89. rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat rat khong dong y Count 0 0 1 1 0 2 % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% 5.3% 4.0% .0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 1 2 0 2 5 10 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% 15.4 % .0% 8.0% 9.4% 8.4% trung lap Count 0 4 3 8 18 33 % within nghe nghiep .0% 30.8 % 15.8% 32.0% 34.0 % 27.7% dong y Count 5 2 7 8 19 41 % within nghe nghiep 55.6% 15.4 % 36.8% 32.0% 35.8 % 34.5% rat dong y Count 3 5 8 6 11 33 % within nghe nghiep 33.3% 38.5 % 42.1% 24.0% 20.8 % 27.7% Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 16.188a 16 .440 Likelihood Ratio 20.760 16 .188 Linear-by-Linear Association 2.005 1 .157 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 16 cells (64.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .15. rau qua tai cho dam bao an toan * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua tai khong Count 0 0 0 0 1 1 cho dam bao an toan dong y % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% .0% .0% 1.9% .8% trung lap Count 3 4 6 8 19 40 % within nghe nghiep 33.3% 30.8 % 31.6% 32.0% 35.8% 33.6 % dong y Count 1 3 7 9 18 38 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% 23.1 % 36.8% 36.0% 34.0% 31.9 % rat dong y Count 5 6 6 8 15 40 % within nghe nghiep 55.6% 46.2 % 31.6% 32.0% 28.3% 33.6 % Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0 % 100. 0% 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 5.666a 12 .932 Likelihood Ratio 6.222 12 .904 Linear-by-Linear Association 1.853 1 .173 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 11 cells (55.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .08. rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 0 0 0 0 2 2 % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% .0% .0% 3.8% 1.7% trung lap Count 0 2 0 1 4 7 % within nghe nghiep .0% 15.4 % .0% 4.0% 7.5% 5.9% dong y Count 7 4 7 17 20 55 % within nghe nghiep 77.8% 30.8 % 36.8 % 68.0% 37.7% 46.2% rat dong y Count 2 7 12 7 27 55 % within nghe nghiep 22.2% 53.8 % 63.2 % 28.0% 50.9% 46.2% Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 17.413a 12 .135 Likelihood Ratio 19.122 12 .086 Linear-by-Linear Association .042 1 .837 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 12 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .15. cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai khong dong y Count 0 0 0 3 2 5 % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% .0% 12.0% 3.8% 4.2% trung lap Count 1 0 1 3 4 9 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% .0% 5.3% 12.0% 7.5% 7.6% dong y Count 0 6 7 6 9 28 % within nghe nghiep .0% 46.2 % 36.8 % 24.0% 17.0% 23.5% rat dong y Count 8 7 11 13 38 77 % within nghe nghiep 88.9% 53.8 % 57.9 % 52.0% 71.7% 64.7% Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 16.837a 12 .156 Likelihood Ratio 19.569 12 .076 Linear-by-Linear Association .248 1 .619 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 13 cells (65.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .38. khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se rat khong dong y Count 0 0 0 1 1 2 % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% .0% 4.0% 1.9% 1.7% khong dong y Count 3 5 2 5 15 30 % within nghe nghiep 33.3% 38.5 % 10.5 % 20.0% 28.3% 25.2 % trung lap Count 3 4 5 12 21 45 % within nghe nghiep 33.3% 30.8 % 26.3 % 48.0% 39.6% 37.8 % dong y Count 1 4 10 7 14 36 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% 30.8 % 52.6 % 28.0% 26.4% 30.3 % rat dong y Count 2 0 2 0 2 6 % within nghe nghiep 22.2% .0% 10.5 % .0% 3.8% 5.0% Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0% 100.0 % 100. 0% 100.0% 100.0 % 100. 0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 19.377a 16 .250 Likelihood Ratio 19.226 16 .257 Linear-by-Linear Association .988 1 .320 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 17 cells (68.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .15. rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu trung lap Count 0 1 0 0 0 1 % within nghe nghiep .0% 7.7% .0% .0% .0% .8% dong y Count 5 7 5 7 28 52 % within nghe nghiep 55.6% 53.8% 26.3% 28.0% 53.8% 44.1% rat dong y Count 4 5 14 18 24 65 % within nghe nghiep 44.4% 38.5% 73.7% 72.0% 46.2% 55.1% Total Count 9 13 19 25 52 118 Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu trung lap Count 0 1 0 0 0 1 % within nghe nghiep .0% 7.7% .0% .0% .0% .8% dong y Count 5 7 5 7 28 52 % within nghe nghiep 55.6% 53.8% 26.3% 28.0% 53.8% 44.1% rat dong y Count 4 5 14 18 24 65 % within nghe nghiep 44.4% 38.5% 73.7% 72.0% 46.2% 55.1% Total Count 9 13 19 25 52 118 % within nghe nghiep 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 16.662a 8 .034 Likelihood Ratio 13.237 8 .104 Linear-by-Linear Association .013 1 .908 N of Valid Cases 118 a. 7 cells (46.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .08. rau qua tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua khong Count 2 1 1 3 4 11 tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat dong y % within nghe nghiep 22.2% 7.7% 5.3% 12.0% 7.5% 9.2% trung lap Count 1 0 6 7 14 28 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% .0% 31.6 % 28.0% 26.4% 23.5% dong y Count 1 6 6 9 20 42 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% 46.2 % 31.6 % 36.0% 37.7% 35.3% rat dong y Count 5 6 6 6 15 38 % within nghe nghiep 55.6% 46.2 % 31.6 % 24.0% 28.3% 31.9% Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 12.143a 12 .434 Likelihood Ratio 15.044 12 .239 Linear-by-Linear Association 1.195 1 .274 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 12 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .83. rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan trung lap Count 2 1 1 5 6 15 % within nghe nghiep 22.2% 7.7% 5.3% 20.0% 11.3% 12.6 % dong y Count 4 7 6 12 14 43 % within nghe nghiep 44.4% 53.8 % 31.6% 48.0% 26.4% 36.1 % rat dong y Count 3 5 12 8 33 61 % within nghe nghiep 33.3% 38.5 % 63.2% 32.0% 62.3% 51.3 % Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 11.211a 8 .190 Likelihood Ratio 11.376 8 .181 Linear-by-Linear Association 1.529 1 .216 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 7 cells (46.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.13. rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 1 3 3 2 6 15 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% 23.1 % 15.8% 8.0% 11.3% 12.6 % trung lap Count 5 7 12 13 30 67 % within nghe nghiep 55.6% 53.8 % 63.2% 52.0% 56.6% 56.3 % dong y Count 3 3 3 9 17 35 % within nghe nghiep 33.3% 23.1 % 15.8% 36.0% 32.1% 29.4 % rat dong y Count 0 0 1 1 0 2 % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% 5.3% 4.0% .0% 1.7% Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 1 3 3 2 6 15 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% 23.1 % 15.8% 8.0% 11.3% 12.6 % trung lap Count 5 7 12 13 30 67 % within nghe nghiep 55.6% 53.8 % 63.2% 52.0% 56.6% 56.3 % dong y Count 3 3 3 9 17 35 % within nghe nghiep 33.3% 23.1 % 15.8% 36.0% 32.1% 29.4 % rat dong y Count 0 0 1 1 0 2 % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% 5.3% 4.0% .0% 1.7% Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 7.478a 12 .824 Likelihood Ratio 8.039 12 .782 Linear-by-Linear Association .513 1 .474 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 11 cells (55.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .15. sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai rat khong dong y Count 0 0 0 1 1 2 % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% .0% 4.0% 1.9% 1.7% khong dong y Count 2 5 1 8 16 32 % within nghe nghiep 22.2% 38.5 % 5.3% 32.0% 30.2% 26.9 % trung lap Count 2 2 9 8 14 35 % within nghe nghiep 22.2% 15.4 % 47.4 % 32.0% 26.4% 29.4 % dong y Count 4 5 6 6 7 28 % within nghe nghiep 44.4% 38.5 % 31.6 % 24.0% 13.2% 23.5 % rat dong y Count 1 1 3 2 15 22 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% 7.7% 15.8 % 8.0% 28.3% 18.5 % Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 20.553a 16 .196 Likelihood Ratio 22.602 16 .125 Linear-by-Linear Association .020 1 .886 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 16 cells (64.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .15. khong gian ban hang tai sieu thi sach se * nghe nghiep Crosstab nghe nghiep Total sinh vien huu tri noi tro cong nhan vien chuc viec tu do khong gian ban hang tai sieu thi sach se khong dong y Count 0 0 0 0 1 1 % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% .0% .0% 1.9% .8% trung lap Count 0 0 0 1 1 2 % within nghe nghiep .0% .0% .0% 4.0% 1.9% 1.7% dong y Count 1 4 2 4 10 21 % within nghe nghiep 11.1% 30.8 % 10.5 % 16.0% 18.9 % 17.6% rat dong y Count 8 9 17 20 41 95 % within nghe nghiep 88.9% 69.2 % 89.5 % 80.0% 77.4 % 79.8% Total Count 9 13 19 25 53 119 % within nghe nghiep 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 5.401a 12 .943 Likelihood Ratio 6.128 12 .910 Linear-by-Linear Association .779 1 .378 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 14 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .08. rau qua tai cho phong phu * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc rau qua tai cho phong phu trung lap Count 18 5 2 25 % within trinh do hoc van 23.7% 12.8% 50.0% 21.0% dong y Count 43 18 2 63 % within trinh do hoc van 56.6% 46.2% 50.0% 52.9% rat dong y Count 15 16 0 31 % within trinh do hoc van 19.7% 41.0% .0% 26.1% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 9.202a 4 .056 Likelihood Ratio 9.600 4 .048 Linear-by-Linear Association 1.247 1 .264 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 3 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .84. rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc rau qua tai rat khong Count 1 1 0 2 cho ghi ro noi san xuat dong y % within trinh do hoc van 1.3% 2.6% .0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 5 5 0 10 % within trinh do hoc van 6.6% 12.8% .0% 8.4% trung lap Count 24 7 2 33 % within trinh do hoc van 31.6% 17.9% 50.0% 27.7% dong y Count 27 12 2 41 % within trinh do hoc van 35.5% 30.8% 50.0% 34.5% rat dong y Count 19 14 0 33 % within trinh do hoc van 25.0% 35.9% .0% 27.7% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 7.029a 8 .533 Likelihood Ratio 8.354 8 .400 Linear-by-Linear Association .002 1 .965 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 8 cells (53.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. rau qua tai cho dam bao an toan * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc rau qua tai cho dam bao khong dong y Count 1 0 0 1 % within trinh do hoc van 1.3% .0% .0% .8% an toan trung lap Count 26 13 1 40 % within trinh do hoc van 34.2% 33.3% 25.0% 33.6% dong y Count 27 8 3 38 % within trinh do hoc van 35.5% 20.5% 75.0% 31.9% rat dong y Count 22 18 0 40 % within trinh do hoc van 28.9% 46.2% .0% 33.6% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 8.548a 6 .201 Likelihood Ratio 9.641 6 .141 Linear-by-Linear Association .554 1 .457 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 6 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .03. rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 2 0 0 2 % within trinh do hoc van 2.6% .0% .0% 1.7% trung lap Count 6 1 0 7 % within trinh do hoc van 7.9% 2.6% .0% 5.9% dong y Count 29 24 2 55 % within trinh do hoc van 38.2% 61.5% 50.0% 46.2% rat dong y Count 39 14 2 55 % within trinh do hoc van 51.3% 35.9% 50.0% 46.2% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 7.020a 6 .319 Likelihood Ratio 8.003 6 .238 Linear-by-Linear Association .009 1 .926 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 8 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai khong dong y Count 2 3 0 5 % within trinh do hoc van 2.6% 7.7% .0% 4.2% trung lap Count 5 4 0 9 % within trinh do hoc van 6.6% 10.3% .0% 7.6% dong y Count 19 7 2 28 % within trinh do hoc van 25.0% 17.9% 50.0% 23.5% rat dong y Count 50 25 2 77 % within trinh do hoc van 65.8% 64.1% 50.0% 64.7% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 4.446a 6 .617 Likelihood Ratio 4.490 6 .611 Linear-by-Linear Association .636 1 .425 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 7 cells (58.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .17. khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se rat khong dong y Count 1 0 1 2 % within trinh do hoc van 1.3% .0% 25.0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 20 10 0 30 % within trinh do hoc van 26.3% 25.6% .0% 25.2 % trung lap Count 27 17 1 45 % within trinh do hoc van 35.5% 43.6% 25.0% 37.8 % dong y Count 25 9 2 36 % within trinh do hoc van 32.9% 23.1% 50.0% 30.3 % rat dong y Count 3 3 0 6 % within trinh do hoc van 3.9% 7.7% .0% 5.0% Total Count 76 39 4 119 Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se rat khong dong y Count 1 0 1 2 % within trinh do hoc van 1.3% .0% 25.0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 20 10 0 30 % within trinh do hoc van 26.3% 25.6% .0% 25.2 % trung lap Count 27 17 1 45 % within trinh do hoc van 35.5% 43.6% 25.0% 37.8 % dong y Count 25 9 2 36 % within trinh do hoc van 32.9% 23.1% 50.0% 30.3 % rat dong y Count 3 3 0 6 % within trinh do hoc van 3.9% 7.7% .0% 5.0% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 17.609a 8 .024 Likelihood Ratio 9.988 8 .266 Linear-by-Linear Association .009 1 .923 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 9 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu trung lap Count 1 0 0 1 % within trinh do hoc van 1.3% .0% .0% .8% dong y Count 37 15 0 52 % within trinh do hoc van 49.3% 38.5% .0% 44.1% rat dong y Count 37 24 4 65 % within trinh do hoc van 49.3% 61.5% 100.0% 55.1% Total Count 75 39 4 118 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 5.296a 4 .258 Likelihood Ratio 7.105 4 .130 Linear-by-Linear Association 4.366 1 .037 N of Valid Cases 118 a. 5 cells (55.6%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .03. rau qua tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc rau qua tai khong Count 6 5 0 11 sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat dong y % within trinh do hoc van 7.9% 12.8% .0% 9.2% trung lap Count 18 9 1 28 % within trinh do hoc van 23.7% 23.1% 25.0% 23.5% dong y Count 30 11 1 42 % within trinh do hoc van 39.5% 28.2% 25.0% 35.3% rat dong y Count 22 14 2 38 % within trinh do hoc van 28.9% 35.9% 50.0% 31.9% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 2.932a 6 .817 Likelihood Ratio 3.230 6 .779 Linear-by-Linear Association .090 1 .764 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 5 cells (41.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .37. rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan trung lap Count 8 7 0 15 % within trinh do hoc van 10.5% 17.9% .0% 12.6% dong y Count 21 20 2 43 % within trinh do hoc van 27.6% 51.3% 50.0% 36.1% rat dong y Count 47 12 2 61 % within trinh do hoc van 61.8% 30.8% 50.0% 51.3% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 10.714a 4 .030 Likelihood Ratio 11.390 4 .023 Linear-by-Linear Association 4.676 1 .031 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 4 cells (44.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .50. rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 11 4 0 15 % within trinh do hoc van 14.5% 10.3% .0% 12.6% trung lap Count 45 21 1 67 % within trinh do hoc van 59.2% 53.8% 25.0% 56.3% dong y Count 20 13 2 35 % within trinh do hoc van 26.3% 33.3% 50.0% 29.4% rat dong y Count 0 1 1 2 % within trinh do hoc van .0% 2.6% 25.0% 1.7% Total Count 76 39 4 119 Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 11 4 0 15 % within trinh do hoc van 14.5% 10.3% .0% 12.6% trung lap Count 45 21 1 67 % within trinh do hoc van 59.2% 53.8% 25.0% 56.3% dong y Count 20 13 2 35 % within trinh do hoc van 26.3% 33.3% 50.0% 29.4% rat dong y Count 0 1 1 2 % within trinh do hoc van .0% 2.6% 25.0% 1.7% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 17.166a 6 .009 Likelihood Ratio 9.599 6 .143 Linear-by-Linear Association 5.522 1 .019 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 7 cells (58.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai rat khong dong y Count 1 1 0 2 % within trinh do hoc van 1.3% 2.6% .0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 18 13 1 32 % within trinh do hoc van 23.7% 33.3% 25.0% 26.9% trung lap Count 22 10 3 35 % within trinh do hoc van 28.9% 25.6% 75.0% 29.4% dong y Count 16 12 0 28 % within trinh do hoc van 21.1% 30.8% .0% 23.5% rat dong y Count 19 3 0 22 % within trinh do hoc van 25.0% 7.7% .0% 18.5% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 11.177a 8 .192 Likelihood Ratio 12.481 8 .131 Linear-by-Linear Association 3.899 1 .048 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 7 cells (46.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. khong gian ban hang tai sieu thi sach se * trinh do hoc van Crosstab trinh do hoc van Total cap 3 tro xuong trung cap, cao dang, dai hoc tren dai hoc khong gian ban hang tai khong dong y Count 1 0 0 1 % within trinh do hoc van 1.3% .0% .0% .8% sieu thi sach se trung lap Count 1 1 0 2 % within trinh do hoc van 1.3% 2.6% .0% 1.7% dong y Count 15 4 2 21 % within trinh do hoc van 19.7% 10.3% 50.0% 17.6% rat dong y Count 59 34 2 95 % within trinh do hoc van 77.6% 87.2% 50.0% 79.8% Total Count 76 39 4 119 % within trinh do hoc van 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 5.398a 6 .494 Likelihood Ratio 5.252 6 .512 Linear-by-Linear Association .116 1 .734 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 8 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .03. rau qua tai cho phong phu * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu rau qua tai cho phong phu trung lap Count 15 9 1 25 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 28.3% 14.5% 25.0% 21.0% dong y Count 26 36 1 63 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 49.1% 58.1% 25.0% 52.9% rat dong Count 12 17 2 31 y % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 22.6% 27.4% 50.0% 26.1% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 4.826a 4 .306 Likelihood Ratio 4.805 4 .308 Linear-by-Linear Association 2.409 1 .121 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 3 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .84. rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu rau qua tai cho ghi ro noi san xuat rat khong dong y Count 1 1 0 2 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 1.9% 1.6% .0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 6 4 0 10 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 11.3% 6.5% .0% 8.4% trung lap Count 17 16 0 33 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 32.1% 25.8% .0% 27.7% dong y Count 18 21 2 41 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 34.0% 33.9% 50.0% 34.5% rat dong y Count 11 20 2 33 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 20.8% 32.3% 50.0% 27.7% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 5.183a 8 .738 Likelihood Ratio 6.544 8 .587 Linear-by-Linear Association 4.094 1 .043 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 8 cells (53.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. rau qua tai cho dam bao an toan * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu rau qua tai cho dam bao an toan khong dong y Count 0 1 0 1 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh .0% 1.6% .0% .8% trung lap Count 14 25 1 40 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 26.4% 40.3% 25.0% 33.6% dong y Count 23 14 1 38 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 43.4% 22.6% 25.0% 31.9% rat dong y Count 16 22 2 40 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 30.2% 35.5% 50.0% 33.6% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 7.163a 6 .306 Likelihood Ratio 7.513 6 .276 Linear-by-Linear Association .127 1 .722 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 6 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .03. rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu rau qua tai cho co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 1 1 0 2 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 1.9% 1.6% .0% 1.7% trung lap Count 2 5 0 7 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 3.8% 8.1% .0% 5.9% dong y Count 19 33 3 55 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 35.8% 53.2% 75.0% 46.2% rat dong y Count 31 23 1 55 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 58.5% 37.1% 25.0% 46.2% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 7.062a 6 .315 Likelihood Ratio 7.354 6 .289 Linear-by-Linear Association 3.705 1 .054 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 8 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu cho la dia diem thuan tien di lai khong dong y Count 0 5 0 5 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh .0% 8.1% .0% 4.2% trung lap Count 3 6 0 9 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 5.7% 9.7% .0% 7.6% dong y Count 12 15 1 28 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 22.6% 24.2% 25.0% 23.5% rat dong y Count 38 36 3 77 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 71.7% 58.1% 75.0% 64.7% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 6.441a 6 .376 Likelihood Ratio 8.660 6 .194 Linear-by-Linear Association 2.717 1 .099 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 8 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .17. khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu khong gian ban hang tai cho sach se rat khong dong y Count 0 2 0 2 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh .0% 3.2% .0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 12 18 0 30 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 22.6% 29.0% .0% 25.2% trung lap Count 18 24 3 45 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 34.0% 38.7% 75.0% 37.8% dong y Count 20 15 1 36 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 37.7% 24.2% 25.0% 30.3% rat dong y Count 3 3 0 6 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 5.7% 4.8% .0% 5.0% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 7.046a 8 .532 Likelihood Ratio 8.676 8 .370 Linear-by-Linear Association 1.741 1 .187 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 9 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu rau qua tai sieu thi phong phu trung lap Count 1 0 0 1 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 1.9% .0% .0% .8% dong y Count 22 29 1 52 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 41.5% 47.5% 25.0% 44.1% rat dong Count 30 32 3 65 y % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 56.6% 52.5% 75.0% 55.1% Total Count 53 61 4 118 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 2.189a 4 .701 Likelihood Ratio 2.594 4 .628 Linear-by-Linear Association .034 1 .854 N of Valid Cases 118 a. 5 cells (55.6%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .03. rau qua tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu rau qua tai sieu thi ghi ro noi san xuat khong dong y Count 4 7 0 11 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 7.5% 11.3% .0% 9.2% trung lap Count 14 13 1 28 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 26.4% 21.0% 25.0% 23.5% dong y Count 18 23 1 42 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 34.0% 37.1% 25.0% 35.3% rat dong y Count 17 19 2 38 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 32.1% 30.6% 50.0% 31.9% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 1.825a 6 .935 Likelihood Ratio 2.140 6 .906 Linear-by-Linear Association .033 1 .856 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 5 cells (41.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .37. rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan trung lap Count 3 10 2 15 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 5.7% 16.1% 50.0% 12.6% dong y Count 18 24 1 43 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 34.0% 38.7% 25.0% 36.1% rat dong y Count 32 28 1 61 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 60.4% 45.2% 25.0% 51.3% Total Count 53 62 4 119 Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu rau qua tai sieu thi dam bao an toan trung lap Count 3 10 2 15 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 5.7% 16.1% 50.0% 12.6% dong y Count 18 24 1 43 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 34.0% 38.7% 25.0% 36.1% rat dong y Count 32 28 1 61 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 60.4% 45.2% 25.0% 51.3% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 9.244a 4 .055 Likelihood Ratio 7.921 4 .095 Linear-by-Linear Association 6.732 1 .009 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 3 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .50. rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu rau qua tai sieu thi co gia phai chang khong dong y Count 6 7 2 15 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 11.3% 11.3% 50.0% 12.6% trung lap Count 34 31 2 67 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 64.2% 50.0% 50.0% 56.3% dong y Count 12 23 0 35 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 22.6% 37.1% .0% 29.4% rat dong y Count 1 1 0 2 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 1.9% 1.6% .0% 1.7% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 8.967a 6 .175 Likelihood Ratio 8.267 6 .219 Linear-by-Linear Association .001 1 .977 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 6 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu sieu thi là dia diem thuan tien di lai rat khong dong y Count 0 2 0 2 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh .0% 3.2% .0% 1.7% khong dong y Count 15 16 1 32 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 28.3% 25.8% 25.0% 26.9% trung lap Count 17 17 1 35 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 32.1% 27.4% 25.0% 29.4% dong y Count 11 15 2 28 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 20.8% 24.2% 50.0% 23.5% rat dong y Count 10 12 0 22 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 18.9% 19.4% .0% 18.5% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 4.293a 8 .830 Likelihood Ratio 5.515 8 .701 Linear-by-Linear Association .001 1 .979 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 7 cells (46.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. khong gian ban hang tai sieu thi sach se * thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Crosstab thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh Total<10 trieu 10-20 trieu 20-30 trieu khong gian ban hang tai sieu thi sach se khong dong y Count 1 0 0 1 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 1.9% .0% .0% .8% trung lap Count 0 2 0 2 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh .0% 3.2% .0% 1.7% dong y Count 9 12 0 21 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 17.0% 19.4% .0% 17.6% rat dong y Count 43 48 4 95 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 81.1% 77.4% 100.0% 79.8% Total Count 53 62 4 119 % within thu nhap hang thang ca gia dinh 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 4.166a 6 .654 Likelihood Ratio 5.996 6 .424 Linear-by-Linear Association .023 1 .881 N of Valid Cases 119 a. 8 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .03. Đánh giá của người dân về địa điểm bán an toàn dia diem ban rau qua an toan nhat Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid cho lom 6 5.0 5.0 5.0 cho coc 1 .8 .8 5.9 sieu thi 112 94.1 94.1 100.0 Total 119 100.0 100.0 mua rau qua tai sieu thi du khong thuan tien Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid co 46 38.7 38.7 38.7 khong 73 61.3 61.3 100.0 Total 119 100.0 100.0