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
Nông sản là một mặt hàng quan trọng, trong đó rau quả là những sản phẩm không
thể thiếu trong cuộc sống hằng ngày của con người. Rau quả tại Việt Nam không
những được tiêu dùng trong nước mà còn được xuất khẩu ra thị trường nước ngoài.
Với sự nâng cao về nhận thức của người dân, những yêu cầu về rau quả cũng ngày
càng một khắt khe. Do đó đáp ứng được mong muốn của người tiêu dùng là điều hiển
nhiên cần phải thực hiện, bản thân người nghiên cứu xin đề xuất một số biện pháp cần
thực hiện để việc phát triển sản xuất và cung ứng rau quả
159 trang |
Chia sẻ: phamthachthat | Lượt xem: 1463 | Lượt tải: 0
Bạn đang xem trước 20 trang tài liệu 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, để xem tài liệu hoàn chỉnh bạn click vào nút DOWNLOAD ở trên
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
Các file đính kèm theo tài liệu này:
- phan_tich_cac_yeu_to_tac_dong_den_quyet_dinh_mua_cua_khach_hang_tren_dia_ban_thanh_pho_hue_doi_voi_m.pdf