Data Analysis and Conclusion

Download this 'data analysis' chapter in word format (.doc)

Note: Essay below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files will contain proper formatting

Excerpt from 'Data Analysis' chapter:



* he mean score of CP 6 is 3.67 with a standard deviation of 1.25 indicating that citizens are often concerned about governments' emergency management operations.

* The overall mean score of CITIZEN PARTICIPATION is 2.78 with a standard deviation of 1.04 indicating that citizens of Kaohsiung City and Pingtung County are generally below the mid-level of citizen participation.

Table 15

Note: N=1066.

Organizational Accountability

Table 16 shows the descriptive statistics of organizational accountability responses as assessed in the survey questionnaire in this study. As descried earlier, the potential range of scores for all accountability questions on Table 16 is from 1 to 5 with the same assessment categories. With exceptions of Fin7C and Fin8L, the mean scores for the organizational accountability items in the respondents' responses prove to be relatively high (3.50 to 4.23). In this study, a mean between 3.50 to 4.23 indicates that citizens rate fair to good level of accountability for the central and local governments as perceived with respect to the questions.

Table 16

Note: N=1066.

Table 17 shows the descriptive statistics of government responsiveness through emergency management operations as measured by the questions in this study. As descried earlier, the potential range of scores for all responsiveness questions on Table 17 is from 1 to 5 with the same assessment categories. In this study, the mean score for Res21C is 2.38 with a standard deviation of 1.27. A mean score of 2.38 indicates that citizens of Kaohsiung City and Pingtung County, to some degree, disagree about the level responsiveness of the Taiwanese central government in the Typhoon Morakot disaster. With an exception of Res21C, the mean scores for the responsiveness items measure from 2.84 to 3.31. In this study, a mean between 2.84 to 3.31 indicates that citizens (overall) rate the central and local governments with a fair level of responsiveness as perceived.

Table 18 shows the descriptive statistics of the aftermath of the disaster and emergency management procedures as assessed by the questions in this study. As descried earlier, the potential range of scores for all aftermath questions on Table 18 is from 1 to 5 with the same categories for assessment. Within this study, the mean score for Trust25C is 2.56 with a standard deviation of 1.26 indicating that citizens of Kaohsiung City and Pingtung County have less trust in the Taiwanese central government after the Typhoon Morakot disaster. The respondents' mean score for Trust26L is 2.96 with a standard deviation of 1.18 indicating that citizens of Kaohsiung City and Pingtung County do not feel that they have more or less trust in the Taiwanese local government after the Typhoon Morakot disaster. The mean score for Affect27 is 2.98 with a standard deviation of 1.28. In this study, a mean of 2.98 indicates that citizens of Kaohsiung City and Pingtung County believed their life would be affected by the Typhoon Morakot disaster and its aftermath.

Table 17

Note: N=1066.

Table 18

Note: N=1066.

Table 19 shows descriptive statistics of the survey questionnaire in regards to the Taiwanese central and local governments. The potential range of scores for the survey questionnaire for the central and local government on Table 19 is from 10 to 50. The mean score for the Central Government is 32.67 (SD = 7.25) and the mean score for the Local Government is 34.41 (SD = 6.86). As it relates to this study, the mean scores indicate that most of the citizens of Kaohsiung City and Pingtung County give a better evaluation on the Taiwanese local government versus the central government.

Table 19

Note: N=1066.

Correlation among the research variables

The correlations between citizen participation, accountability, and responsiveness are summarized in Table 20. The Pearson's correlations between the research variables are in the predicted directions. Citizen participation is positively r = .114, p = .000 correlated with the dependent variables except for Responsiveness r =.032, p = .301. The correlation between accountability and responsiveness is statistically significant, r = .235, p = .000.

Table 20

Inferential Analysis of the Survey Responses

In the study, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) is computed using SPSS. ANOVA is used to determine the significant difference between (a) demographics and the level of citizen participation, (b) demographics and citizens' perception of the governments' accountability, (c), demographics and citizens' perception of the governments' response, (d) the level of citizen participation and citizens' perception of the governments' accountability, and (e) the level of citizen participation and citizens' perception of the governments' response. In addition, the mean scores for citizens' perception of the Taiwanese central government are compared with the mean scores for citizens' perception of the Taiwanese local government using a paired-samples t test.

Data analysis indicates that there are some aspects of significance and correlation between (a) demographics and the level of citizen participation, (b) demographics and citizens' perception of the governments' accountability, (c), demographics and citizens' perception of the governments' response, (d) the level of citizen participation and citizens' perception of the governments' accountability, (e) the level of citizen participation and citizens' perception of the governments' response, (f) correlations between citizens' perception of the Taiwanese central and local governments, and (g) the paired t test results for the mean scores of citizens' perception of the Taiwanese central and local governments.

The Relationship between Demographics and Level of Citizen Participation

Table 21 presents the means and standard errors for level of citizen participation by gender. The potential range scores for citizen participation (CP3 + CP5 + CP6) is from 3 to 15. The mean differences in Table 21 are quite small, varying by less than one point from the grand mean of 8.34 (N = 1066, SE = .096). The ANOVA summary table for these data also presents in Table 21. The results F (1, 1064) = 1.742, p = .187 indicate that there is no statistically significant main or interaction effects.

Table 21

Table 22 presents the means and standard errors for level of citizen participation by age. The mean differences in Table 22 are quite small, varying by one point from the grand mean of 8.34 (N = 1066, SE = .096). The ANOVA summary table for these data is presented in Table 22. The results F (4, 1061) = 9.648, p = .000 reveal that the main effect of age is statistically significant. Therefore, a Scheff?'s method post hoc test is conducted. The Scheff?'s method indicates that level of citizen participation in 20-29 years of age is less than 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, and 60+ years of age.

Table 22

* The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

** 20-2930-39, 20-2940-49, 20-2950-59, and 20-2960+

Table 23 presents the means and standard errors for level of citizen participation by level of education. The mean differences in Table 23 are quite small, varying by less than one point from the grand mean of 8.34 (N = 1066, SE = .096). The ANOVA summary table for these data are also presented in Table 23. The results F (2, 1063) = .191, p = .826 indicate that there is no statistically significant main or interaction effects.

Table 23

Table 24 presents the means and standard errors for level of citizen participation by income range. The mean differences in Table 24 are quite small, varying by less than one point from the grand mean of 8.35 (N = 1066, SE = .100). The ANOVA summary table for these data are presented in Table 24. The results F (4, 976) = 1.123, p = .344 indicates that there is no statistically significant main or interaction effects.

Table 24

Table 25 presents the means and standard deviations for level of citizen participation by political views. The mean differences in Table 25 are quite small, varying by less than one point from the grand mean of 8.34 (N = 1066, SE = .096). The ANOVA summary table for these data are summarized in Table 31. The results F (2, 1063) = 1.644, p = .194 indicate that there is no statistically significant main or interaction effects.

Table 25

Table 26 presents the means and standard errors for level of citizen participation by geopraphic location. The mean differences in Table 26 are quite small, varying by less than one point from the grand mean of 8.34 (N = 1066, SE = .096). The ANOVA summary table for these data is summarized in Table 26. The results F (1, 1064) = .646, p = .422 indicate that there is no statistically significant main or interaction effects.

Table 26

The Relationship between Demographics and Citizens' Perception of Governments' Accountability

Table 27 presents the means and standard errors for citizens' perception of governments' accountability by gender. The potential range scores for accountability (Fin7C + Fin8L + Fin9C + Fin10L + Fair11C + Fair12L + Fair 13C + Fair14L + Per15C + Per16L + Per17C + Per18L) is from 12 to 60. The mean differences in Table 27 are quite small, varying by less than one point from the grand mean of 44.11 (N…[continue]

Cite this 'data analysis' chapter

"Data Analysis And Conclusion" (2011, March 25) Retrieved July 29, 2015, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/data-analysis-and-conclusion-3397

"Data Analysis And Conclusion" 25 March 2011. Web.29 July. 2015. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/data-analysis-and-conclusion-3397>

"Data Analysis And Conclusion", 25 March 2011, Accessed.29 July. 2015, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/data-analysis-and-conclusion-3397

Leave a Comment

Register now or post as guest, members login to their existing accounts to post comment.

Copyright 2015 . All Rights Reserved