1.

Univariate analysis

 Table no 1:- Age

Frequenc Percent Valid Cumulative

y Percent Percent
15-25 104 90.4 90.4 90.4
Valid 26-35 11 9.6 9.6 100.0
Total 115 100.0 100.0

Age
120

100

80

60
Frequency

40

20

0
15-25 26-35

exhibited the age classification of the respondents. There were total 115 respondents. Out of
which majority of the respondents of the study i.e. 90.4% which are 104 respondents out of 115
were of the age group 15-25 years, followed by 9.6% respondents which belonged to the age
group of 26-35 years.
  Table no 2 .Occupation

Occupation Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative

Percent Percent
Student 85 73.9 73.9 73.9
Self employed 11 9.6 9.6 83.5
Service 13 11.3 11.3 94.8
Government
1 .9 .9 95.7
servant
Other 5 4.3 4.3 100.0
Total 115 100.0 100.0

Occupation
1
5
13

11

85

Student Self employed Service Government servant Other

Table No.2 gives us the information about the occupation that the respondent is perusing.
Maximum of them are Students with 73.9% that is 85 respondents out of total, followed by
respondents from service sector who are 11.3%, followed by self employed , Others and
Government services with 9.6%, 4.3% and 0.9% respectively.
 Table 3 . Area of locality

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Rural 14 12.2 12.2 12.2
Urban 79 68.7 68.7 80.9
Metro
22 19.1 19.1 100.0
city
Total 115 100.0 100.0

Area of locality

Metro city 22

Urban 79

Rural 14

0 20 40 60 80 100

Frequency

Table No.3 is a classification of are of locality of respondents into Rural area, Urban area and
Metro City. Out of 115 respondents, 79 of them are from Urban Area with a total percentage of
68.7%, which is followed by Metro City with 22 respondents that is 19.1% and the least is of
Rural Area with only 12.2%. This shows our study is mainly focused on people of Urban Area
and Metro City.
 Table no 4 :- Favourable app for digital
payment

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Paytm 88 76.5 76.5 76.5

Google Pay 27 23.5 23.5 100.0

Total 115 100.0 100.0

Usages of Application for payment

100
90
80
70
60
50
Frequency
40
30
20
10
0
Paytm Google Pay

Table no. indicate the usage of app for digital payment.Out of 115 respondents, 88
are using the Paytm whereas only 27 respondent are using the Gpay for the digital
payment. If we compare the paytm and Gpay in percentage the data shows 76.5%
using Paytm and 23.5% are using Gpay . the usage of paytm is merely triple as
compare to the Gpay,
  Table no 5. Income

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

0 105 91.3 91.3 91.3

Below Rs 2,00,000 10 8.7 8.7 100.0

Total 115 100.0 100.0

Annual income

Below Rs 2,00,000

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Frequency

Table No.4 gives us information about annual Income of the respondents. As there are maximum
students in our respondents, generally they have no income which are 105 respondents that is
91.3% , moreover the people who have income below 200,000 are 10 out of 115 respondents
which are 8.7%
Table 6. Monthly Spending Through Paytm

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Below 5000 88 76.5 76.5 76.5

5000-10000 18 15.7 15.7 92.2

Valid 10000-15000 4 3.5 3.5 95.7

Above 15000 5 4.3 4.3 100.0

Total 115 100.0 100.0

Spending money through paytm

100
90
80
70
60
50
Frequency
40
30
20
10
0
Below 5000 5000-10000 10000-15000 Above 15000
Table 6 :- Know about paytm

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Advertisement 32 27.8 27.8 27.8

Friends and relative 43 37.4 37.4 65.2

Through internet 30 26.1 26.1 91.3

Other sources 10 8.7 8.7 100.0

Total 115 100.0 100.0

How people know about paytm

50

40

30

20

10

0
Advertisement Friends and relative Through internet Other sources

Frequency

Table no. shows that from where the respondent get to know about the paytm application. And
out of 115 respondent 43 (37.4%) get know about paytm from the friends and relative which is
highest according to data, 32 (27.8%) respondents from the advertisement , through internet 30
(26.1%) respondent and 10 (8.7%) respondents from the other sources.
 2.Chi square test

Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 12.544a 3 .006
Likelihood Ratio 13.580 3 .004
Linear-by-Linear
12.082 1 .001
Association
N of Valid Cases 115
a. 3 cells (37.5%) have expected count less than 5. The
minimum expected count is 3.55.
  Cross tabulation

Table 1:-

_How_often_do_you_use_Paytm *
Monthly_spending_through_Paytm Crosstabulation
Count
Q12_Monthly_spending_through_Paytm Total
Below 5000-10000 10000-15000 Above
5000 15000
Everyday 11 10 2 3 26
Once a week 19 4 1 1 25
Q10_How_often_do_yo
2-3 times a
u_use_Paytm 21 2 1 0 24
week
Once a month 37 2 0 1 40
Total 88 18 4 5 115

Table 2

Occupation *Area_of_locality Crosstabulation

Count
Area_of_locality Total
Rural Urban Metro
city
Student 9 62 14 85
Self employed 2 7 2 11
Occupation Service 3 7 3 13
Government servant 0 1 0 1
Other 0 2 3 5
Total 14 79 22 115
Table no 3:-

Using_digital_payments_applications *
Digital_payments_over_cash_transactions Crosstabulation
Count
Q7_Digital_payments_over_cash_tr Total
ansactions
Yes No 3 4
0 7 11 9 29 56
From 0-6
2 4 3 25 34
Months
Using_digital_paym
From 6-12
ents_applications 1 2 2 11 16
Months
Over a year 0 0 1 5 6
5 0 0 1 2 3
Total 10 17 16 72 115
5. t test

1.One way

One-Sample Test

Test Value = 0

t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Easy_to_use 22.941 114 .000 1.617 1.48 1.76

Hassle_free 27.061 114 .000 1.991 1.85 2.14
Relaible 26.409 114 .000 1.852 1.71 1.99
Security 23.424 114 .000 1.878 1.72 2.04
Saving 21.704 114 .000 1.739 1.58 1.90
2.Independent Sample Test

Levene's Test for Equality of t-test for Equality of Means

Variances

F Sig. t df Sig. Mean Std. Error 95%

(2- Difference Difference Confidence
tailed) Interval of the
Difference

Lower Upper

Equal variances
1.594 .209 2.070 113 .041 .536 .259 .023 1.048
assumed
Easy_to_use
Equal variances
1.688 8.860 .126 .536 .317 -.184 1.255
not assumed
Equal variances
2.512 .116 1.812 113 .073 .492 .271 -.046 1.029
assumed
Hassle_free
Equal variances
1.421 8.782 .190 .492 .346 -.294 1.277
not assumed
Equal variances
.448 .505 1.547 113 .125 .401 .260 -.113 .916
assumed
Relaible
Equal variances
1.399 9.106 .195 .401 .287 -.246 1.049
not assumed
Equal variances
.001 .980 .441 113 .660 .132 .300 -.462 .726
assumed
Security
Equal variances
.385 9.013 .709 .132 .343 -.645 .909
not assumed
Equal variances
10.992 .001 2.631 113 .010 .765 .291 .189 1.341
assumed
Saving
Equal variances
1.592 8.407 .148 .765 .481 -.334 1.864
not assumed
 Anova

ANOVA

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 2.981 3 .994 1.774 .156

Easy to use Within Groups 62.184 111 .560

Total 65.165 114

Between Groups 1.914 3 .638 1.025 .384
Hassle free Within Groups 69.077 111 .622
Total 70.991 114
Between Groups 2.714 3 .905 1.626 .187
Relaible Within Groups 61.773 111 .557
Total 64.487 114
Between Groups 1.575 3 .525 .704 .551
Security Within Groups 82.721 111 .745
Total 84.296 114
Between Groups .435 3 .145 .192 .901

Time Saving Within Groups 83.739 111 .754

Total 84.174 114