An Analysis of response delivery times of Dominos Pizza on three factors viz.

Crust, Coke and Bread

Introduction

Although Pizza has existed since time immemorial in Middle Eastern and Mediterranean cuisine, the term originated in Italy, sometime in 997 AD. A dish of the poor people, it was sold on the street and was not considered a kitchen recipe for a long time. However, by the late 18th century, the dish gained popularity, and soon pizza became a tourist attraction for visitors to Naples, Italy. Pizza first made its appearance in the United States with the arrival of Italian immigrants in the late 19th century. Before the 1940s, pizza consumption was limited mostly to Italian immigrants and their descendants. The international breakthrough came after World War II. Allied troops occupying Italy, weary of their rations, were constantly on the lookout for good food. They discovered the pizzeria, and local bakers were hard-pressed to satisfy the demand from the soldiers. The American troops involved in the Italian campaign took their appreciation for the dish back home. Today pizza has become just as American as baseball and apple pie, with the Worldwide Pizza business is dominated by American companies like Pizza Hut and Domino's. This phenomenon has led to the coining of the term "The pizza effect". The emphasis has shifted away from pizza parlours towards home delivery. In 1973, Domino's Pizza introduced an offer that customers would receive their pizzas within 30 minutes of placing an order, or they would receive the pizzas free.

Our friend, Bill Afantenou, a second year Statistics graduate student at Queensland University of Technology, conducted an experiment to nd out how, by varying whether he ordered thick or thin crust, whether Coke was ordered with the pizza and whether garlic bread was ordered with the pizza, affect the time it took for a pizza to be delivered to the front door of his house. This Statistical report tries to draw conclusion based on the experiment.

At first place, we present the table that contains data pertaining to the problem.

Crust 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1

Coke 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

Bread 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1

Delivery 14 21 18 17 19 17 19 20 16 19 18 22 19 16 20 18

An Analysis of the data tells us that we are seeking to understand the response of a Quantitative dependent variable on three Qualitative Independent variables. Quantitative Dependent Variable: Delivery Times Qualitative Independent Variables: Crust, Coke and Bread Number of Factors: 3 Number of Levels in each of the three factors: 2 Number of Treatments: 23 = 8 Number of Replications: 2 Total Number of observations: 16 Since the Independent variables are qualitative, we do an ANOVA model.

Model: 3 factor ANOVA model

Yijkl = + i + j + k + ()ij + ()jk + ()kl + ()ijk + ijkl

Assumptions of the model:

1. ijkl is independent and identically distributed. 2. ijkl ~ N(0, )

3. The variances of each of the treatments is same i.e. Homoschedasticity.

Residual Analysis: We carry out the following tests to check the above assumptions.

normtest(res) Method P.value 1 2 3 4 5 Shapiro-Wilk normality test 0.3607613 Anderson-Darling normality test 0.4712468 Cramer-von Mises normality test 0.5079630 Lilliefors (Kolmogorov-Smirnov) normality test 0.6053916 Shapiro-Francia normality test 0.5500471

Normal QQ Plot:

Bartlett test of homogeneity of variances: res by Crust Bartlett's K-squared = 0.8209, df = 1, p-value = 0.3649

res by Coke Bartlett's K-squared = 0.2276, df = 1, p-value = 0.6333

res by Bread Bartlett's K-squared = 0.2061, df = 1, p-value = 0.6499

So, we have validated all the assumptions of our model.

ANOVA Table: Hypothesis: H01: No interactions among Crust, Coke and Bread. Note: There are 3 two factor intearctions and 1 three factor interaction. H02: Crust has no effect. H03: Coke has no effect. H04: Bread has no effect.

Firstly, we carry out an ANOVA analysis to find if there are any interactions among various factors.

Response: DeliveryTime Df Sum Sq treatment 7 48.937 Mean Sq 6.9911 1.5625 F value 4.4743 Pr(>F) 0.02586 *

Residuals 8 12.500

Hence we conclude that there is some effect due to interactions among factors.

Secondly, we carry out a 3 factor ANOVA analysis to find the effect of individuals as well as interactions, viz. 2 factor and 3 factor.

Response: DeliveryTime Df Crust Coke Bread Crust:Coke 1 1 1 1 Sum Sq 18.0625 0.5625 18.0625 10.5625 Mean Sq 18.0625 0.5625 18.0625 10.5625 F value 11.56 0.36 11.56 6.76 Pr(>F) 0.00936 ** 0.56511 0.00936 ** 0.03162 *

Crust:Bread Coke:Bread 1

1 1.5625 1 8

0.0625 1.5625 0.0625 12.5000

0.0625 1.00 0.0625 1.5625

0.04

0.84647 0.34659

Crust:Coke:Bread Residuals

0.04

0.84647

From the above table, we conclude that there is no three way interaction. Henceforth we can say that the P values obtained for two way interactions are valid and thus there is no two way interactions between Crust and Bread; Coke and Bread. We also find that there is some effect due to the two factor interaction of crust and coke. Since there is some effect due to the two way interaction of Crust and Coke, we try to find out the kind of interaction that exist between them by means of the below graph:

We have a synergistic interaction between Crust and Coke. Hence we can conclude that the P values obtained for individual effects are valid. There is some individual effect due to Crust and Bread.

Now we try to decipher the effect due to individual factors using Tukeys HSD.

TukeyHSD(model)$Crust Diff 1-0 2.125 lwr 0.8751908 upr 3.374809 p adj 0.003253457

TukeyHSD(model)$Coke diff 1-0 -0.375 lwr -1.624809 upr 0.8748092 p adj 0.5225883

TukeyHSD(model)$Bread diff 1-0 -2.125 lwr -3.374809 upr -0.8751908 p adj 0.003253457

Here 0 and 1 represent the levels of each of the factors where Crust_0 Thin Crust Crust_1 - Thick Crust Coke_0 Not ordered Coke_1 Ordered Bread_0 - Not ordered Bread_1 Ordered From the above analysis, we conclude that it takes more time to deliver a pizza if Crust is thick. We also find that delivery time increases if bread is not ordered.