Chapter III

RESULTS

This section includes the results of data gathered from the survey and other related

observations. The data were analyzed and interpreted to provide specific answers to the problems

presented in the statement of the problem.

The researchers distributed seventy-five (75) survey questionnaires through Google

Forms which were answered by the respondents who have experienced the promotional sales

strategy of selected casual dining restaurants. The purpose of this study is to explore the benefits

of promotional sales strategy that correlates to the customer buying behavior of customers as a

basis for improvement of loyalty programs.

The respondents have also been given the assurance that all the data they gave were used

for the purpose of the research and their identities were considered confidential. The objective is

to determine the perceptions of customers with regards to sales promotional benefits and

customer behavioral intention of the selected casual dining restaurants. This is the manner in

which the study accounts for the factors and the perception of the criteria themselves.
Part I. Socio-Demographic Profile of the respondents

Table 3. Demographic Profile in terms of Age

Age Frequency Percentage%

18-30 years old 28 37.33%

31-40 years old 33 44.00%

41-50 years old 8 10.67%

51 years old and above 6 8.00%

Total 75 100.00%

Based on age, results show that the majority of the respondents belong to the age group

of 31-40 years old with 33 or 44.00% of the total participants. Followed by the age group of 18-

30 years old, having 28 or 33.37% of the total respondents. Next, age bracket 41-50 years old 8

or 10.67% respondents. and the least is the age group of 51 years old and above with only 6

respondents or 8.00% participated. It entails that most of the respondents belong to millennials.

Table 4. Demographic Profile in terms of Sex

Sex Frequency Percentage%

 Male 33 44.00%

Female 42 56.00%

Total 75 100.00%

Table 4 presents the distribution frequency of the respondents of the selected casual

dining restaurants based on Sex. Results provide that most of the respondents are female with 42

or 56.00% percent respondents greater than male with only 33 or 44.00% out of the total

respondents. It can be surmised that female dominated male respondents.

Table 5. Demographic Profile in terms of Monthly Income

Monthly Income Frequency Percentage%

P10,000 and below 31 41.33%

P10,001 to 20,000 2 2.67%

P20,001 to 30,000 10 13.33%

P30,001 to 40,000 19 25.33%

P40,001 to 50,000 5 6.67%

P50,001 and above 8 10.67%

Total 75 100.00%
 In terms of monthly income, respondents with an income of 10,000 and below got the

highest frequency of 31 with 13.33% respondents. Followed by 30,001 to 40,000 with 19 or

25.33% participants. Next is from 20,001-30,000 with 10 or 15.33% respondents. While eight or

10.67% participated with a monthly salary of 50,001 and above. For 40,001 to 50,000 there are

five or 6.67% participants. Finally, the least is 10,001 to 20,0001 with only two respondents or

2.67% participating. It shows that most of the respondents are not on the minimum wage and or

having an income of 10,000 and below.

Table 6. Demographic Profile in terms of Civil Status

Civil Status Frequency Percentage%

Single 52 69.33%

Married 23 30.67%

Separated 0 0

Widowed 0 0

Total 75 100.00%

Table 6 exhibits that the majority of the respondents are single with 52 or 69.33%

participants while 23 or 30.67% are married. However, for separated and widowed both have no

participants. It shows that single customers are more likened interested in the loyalty program of

the selected casual dining restaurants.

 Table 7. Demographic Profile in terms of Educational Attainment

Educational Attainment Frequency Percentage%

Elementary Level 0 0

Elementary Graduate 0 0

High School Level 3 4.00%

High School Graduate 5 6.67%

College Level 18 24.00%

College Graduate 45 60.00%

Vocational 4 5.33%

Post-Graduate 0 0
 Total 75 100.00%

Based on educational attainment, most respondents are college graduates with 45 or

60.00% participating. Followed by college level 18 or 24.00% respondents. Next is the high

school graduate having 5 or 6.67% participants. For vocational study, 4 or 5.33% participated.

And high school level with 3 or 4% respondents. While for elementary level, elementary

graduate and post-graduate profiles no one participated. It implies that the majority of the

respondents are college graduates who seem to be taking advantage of the availing a loyalty

program.

Table 8. Perceptions of the respondents on promotional sales strategy in terms of Utilitarian

Benefits: (Savings)

Weighted Verbal
Savings
Mean Interpretation

Their sales promotion gives me an opportunity to 3.22 Agree

purchase more.

Their sales promotion gives me a large discount. 2.78 Agree

Their sales promotion provides a better value for the

2.57 Agree
product.
 GRAND MEAN 2.86 Agree

Table 8 presents the perception of the respondents on the utilitarian benefits of selected

casual dining restaurants on promotional sales strategy in terms of savings. The statement that

sales promotion gives me an opportunity to purchase more has the highest weighted mean of

3.22 with a verbal interpretation of agree. Followed by the statement sales promotion gives me a

large discount which obtained a weighted mean of 2.78 interpreted as agree. Finally, sales

promotion provides a better value for the product that has the lowest weighted mean of 2.57 with

a verbal interpretation of agree. It appears that generally all the respondents agreed on the

benefits of promotional strategy in terms of savings as shown by the average mean of 2.86.

Table 9. Perceptions of the respondents on promotional sales strategy in terms of Utilitarian

Benefits: (Quality)

Weighted Verbal
Quality
Mean Interpretation

Through their sales promotion, I have an awesome 3.62 Strongly Agree

dining experience.

Their sales promotion also gives me a high-quality

3.59 Strongly Agree
taste of food.
 I find their food and service excellent because of
3.56 Strongly Agree
their sales promotion.

GRAND MEAN 3.59 Strongly Agree

The table above shows the perception of the respondents based on the quality as

utilitarian benefits of promotional sales strategy of the selected casual dining restaurants.

On the statement I have an awesome dining experience” obtained the highest weighted

mean of 3.62 verbally interpreted and strongly agree. Following their sales promotion gives me a

high-quality taste of food with a weighted mean of 3.59 and a verbal interpretation of strongly

agree lastly, “I find their food and service excellent because of their sales promotion” garnered

the lowest weighted mean of 3.56 interpreted as strongly agree. It implies that all the respondents

strongly agree when it comes to quality among the utilitarian benefits as evidenced by the grand

mean of 3.59.

Table 10. Perceptions of the respondents on promotional sales strategy used in terms of

Utilitarian Benefits: (Convenience)

Weighted Verbal
Convenience
Mean Interpretation

I don’t need too much effort just to avail their sales 3.78 Strongly Agree
promotion.
 Their sales promotional tools are easy to use. 3.69 Strongly Agree

The mechanics of their sales promotion are not

3.70 Strongly Agree
complicated to follow.

GRAND MEAN 3.72 Strongly Agree

Table 10 presents the respondents' answer about their perception on the utilitarian

benefits in terms of convenience. The question “I don’t need too much effort just to avail their

sales promotion” has earned the highest mean of 3.78 interpreted as strongly agree. followed by

“the mechanics of their sales promotional are not complicated to follow obtained a weighted

mean of 2.70 also interpreted strongly agree. On the other hand, “Their sales promotional tools

are easy to use” garnered the lowest mean of the value of 3.69 with a verbal interpretation of

strongly agree. The results of the data analysis fall in the interpretation of “Strongly Agree” with

a grand mean of 3.72.

Table 11. Perceptions of the respondents on promotional sales strategy in terms of Hedonic

Benefits: (Value Expression)

Weighted Verbal
Value Expression
Mean Interpretation

2.10 Disagree
I feel good about myself after availing their sales
 promotion.

I am satisfied with my purchase. 2.87 Agree

I feel like I'm a smart buyer. 2.91 Agree

GRAND MEAN 2.63 Agree

The above table exhibits the various perceptions of the respondents on the hedonic

benefits in terms of value expression. Statements “I feel like I'm a smart buyer” and I am

satisfied with my purchase” both garnered the highest mean of 2.91 and 2.87 verbally interpreted

as agree. On the other hand, the statement “I feel good about myself after availing their sales

promotion” has the lowest mean of the value of 2.10 with verbal interpretation of disagree. The

results indicate that all the respondents agree with a grand mean of 2.63.

Table 12. Perceptions of the respondents on promotional sales strategy in terms of Hedonic

Benefits: (Exploration)

Weighted Verbal
Exploration
Mean Interpretation

3.67 Strongly Agree

I feel the need to try their sales promotion.
 I feel like trying their other sales promotion after
availing one. 3.59 Strongly Agree

I want to know more about the different sales

3.32 Agree
promotions they are offering.

GRAND MEAN 3.53 Strongly Agree

Table 12 shows perceptions of the respondents on the hedonic benefits of selected casual

dining restaurants on promotional sales strategy in terms of exploration.

The statement “I feel the need to try again their sales promotion” has the highest mean of

3.67 with a verbal interpretation strongly agree. followed by the statement “I feel trying their

other sales promotion after availing one” with a mean of 3.59 interpreted strongly agree. Finally,

for “I want to know more about the different sales promotional they are offering” obtained the

lowest mean of 3.32 verbally interpreted only agree. The results of the data analysis fall in the

interpretation of “Strongly Agree” with the computed grand mean of 3.53 points.

Table 13. Perceptions of the respondents on promotional sales strategy in terms of Hedonic

Benefits: (Entertainment)

Weighted Verbal
Entertainment
Mean Interpretation
 2.96 Agree
The promotions are very satisfying.

The promotions give delight to me.

2.77 Agree

The promotions are enjoyable. 2.89 Agree

GRAND MEAN 2.87 Agree

Table 13 presents the respondents' answers about their perception on the hedonic benefits

of promotional sales strategy in terms of entertainment. For statement “the promotions are very

satisfying” has the highest weighted mean of 2.96 verbally interpreted agree. Followed by

“promotions are enjoyable'' has a weighted mean of 2.89 with a verbal interpretation of agree,

while for statement “the promotions give delight to me garnered a lowest weighted mean of 2.77

with a verbal interpretation of agree. The results of the data analysis implies that generally all

respondents agree as shown by the computed grand mean of 2.87 points.

Table 14. Buying behavior of the customers-respondents in terms of Food Quality

Food Quality Weighted Verbal

Interpretation
 Mean

I will recommend the restaurant to others because of 3.49 Agree

their best food.

I tend to come back to the restaurant because of

2.54 Agree
their quality food at affordable prices.

GRAND MEAN 3.02 Agree

The above table reveals the buying behavior of the respondents in terms of Food Quality.

For the statement “I will recommend the restaurant to others because of their best food” earned

the highest weighted mean of 3.49 with a verbal interpretation of agree. On the other hand, the

statement “I tend to come back to the restaurant because of their quality of food at affordable

prices” garnered the lowest mean of the value of 2.54 verbally interpreted agree. The results of

the data analysis fall in the interpretation of “Agree”. as evidenced by the computed grand mean

of 3.02 points. with it affirms that the respondents want to come back and visit again because

they love the food and taste better compared to other foods offered by other casual dining

restaurants.
 Table 15. Buying behavior of the customers-respondent of in terms of Service Quality

Weighted Verbal
Service Quality
Mean Interpretation

I will recommend the restaurant to others because of 3.48 Agree

its quality service.

I tend to come back to the restaurant because their

3.31 Agree
staff are courteous and customer centered.

GRAND MEAN 3.40 Agree

It can be gleaned on Table 16 the respondents answer about buying behavior of the

customers-respondent in terms of Service Quality. The statement “I will recommend the

restaurant to others because of its quality service” has earned the highest mean of 3.48 verbally

interpreted agree. On the other hand, “I tend to come back to the restaurant because their staff

are courteous and customer-centered” obtained the lowest mean of 3. 31 with a verbal

interpretation of agree. Generally, the results of the data analysis affirms that all respondents

agree.as manifested by a computed grand mean of 3.40 points.

Table 16. Buying behavior of the customers -respondent in terms of Ambience

Weighted Verbal
Ambience
Mean Interpretation

3.84 Strongly Agree

I will recommend the restaurant to others because of
its relaxing ambience.

3.73 Strongly Agree

I tend to come back to the restaurant because of
 their attractive interior design.

GRAND MEAN 3.79 Strongly Agree

Table 16 presents the respondents' answer about buying behavior of the customers-

respondent of the selected casual dining restaurants in terms of ambience. For statements I will

recommend the restaurant to others because of its relaxing ambience and I tend to come back to

the restaurants because of their attractive interior design. Both have a verbal interpretation of

strongly agree with a weighted mean of 3.84 and 3.73 respectively. The results of the data

analysis indicates that all the participants strongly agree as shown by the computed grand mean

of 3.79.

Table 17. Relationship between utilitarian benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected

casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the demographic profile of customers

Profile R-Value/ Significant Decision on

Interpretation Value Hypothesis/Statistically
Significant

Age -0.129/Slight 0.271 Accept Null

Relationship Hypothesis/Not
Significant

Sex 0.136/Slight 0.245 Accept Null

Relationship Hypothesis/Not
Significant

Monthly -0.356/Moderate 0.002 Reject Null

Income Relationship Hypothesis/Significant

Civil Status 0.102/Slight 0.385 Accept Null

Relationship Hypothesis/Not
Significant
 Educational -0.113/Slight 0.336 Accept Null
Attainment Relationship Hypothesis/Not
Significant

Shown in the table above are the data regarding the significant relationship between

utilitarian benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when

grouped according to the age of their customers. As illustrated, the significance level was 0.271,

which is larger than the alpha level of 0.05. Thus, the null hypothesis failed to be rejected. There

was no significant relationship between utilitarian benefits as sale’s promotion strategy of

selected casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the age of their customers. With

this being the case, age is not revealed as a factor that affects how customers avail utilitarian

benefits that were offered by the restaurant. Additionally, the r= -1.29, which means that there

was a negative and slight relationship between utilitarian benefits and age. Thus, as customers

age, they will unlikely avail the mentioned benefits; however, this relationship is very weak.

These findings can be supported by the study of Sorce, Perotti, and Widrick (2015) where they

revealed that older consumers have no significant difference with younger consumers when it

comes to purchasing in various shops. Instead, there was another factor that influences the age

variance in some cases, which was exposure to the products that actually caused interest.

Further, the table above illustrates the data regarding the significant relationship between

utilitarian benefits as sale’s promotion strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when

grouped according to the sex of their customers. As seen, the significance level was 0.245, which

is larger than the alpha level of 0.05. Thus, the null hypothesis failed to be rejected. There was no

significant relationship between utilitarian benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected

casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the sex of their customers. Therefore, sex is
not revealed as a factor that affects how customers avail utilitarian benefits that were offered by

restaurant. Additionally, the r= 0.136, which means that there was a positive and slight

relationship between utilitarian benefits and sex. On the other hand, the research results are

different with the study of Pradhana and Sastiano (2019) where they found that there was a

gender difference when it comes to availing sales deals. However, this gender disparity suggests

that women spend more time in choosing the product to avail, while males spend more money.

Shown in the table was the significant relationship between utilitarian benefits as

promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the

monthly income of their customers. As manifested, the significance level was 0.002, which is

smaller than the alpha level of 0.05. Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected. There was a

significant relationship between utilitarian benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected

casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the monthly income of their customers.

With this being the case, the monthly of the respondents can affect how respondents purchase

products with the utilitarian benefits. Additionally, the r= -0.356, which means that there was a

negative and moderate correlation between utilitarian benefits and monthly income of the

participants. Thus, as the monthly income increases, customers will less likely avail products in

the restaurant that have utilitarian benefits. This data can be supported by Pradhana and Sastiono

(2019) that revealed that there was a significant difference in the availing promotions when it

comes to the amount of monthly income of the customers.

The table above illustrates the data regarding the significant relationship between

utilitarian benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when

grouped according to the civil status of their customers. As manifested, the significance level

was 0.385, which is larger than the alpha level of 0.05. Thus, the null hypothesis failed to be
rejected. There was no significant relationship between utilitarian benefits as promotional sales

strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the civil status of their

customers. Therefore, civil status was not revealed as a factor that affects how customers avail

utilitarian benefits that were offered by the selected restaurants. Further, the r= 0.102, which

means that there was a positive and slight relationship between utilitarian benefits and civil

status.

Shown in the table was the significant relationship between utilitarian benefits as

promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the

monthly income of their customers. As manifested, the significance level was 0.336, which is

greater than the alpha level of 0.05. Thus, the null hypothesis failed to be rejected. There was no

significant relationship between utilitarian benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected

casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the educational attainment of their

customers. With this being the case, the educational attainment of the respondents was not

proven to affect how respondents purchase products with the utilitarian benefits. Additionally,

the r= -0.113, which means that there was a negative and slight correlation between utilitarian

benefits and educational attainment of the participants. Thus, as the educational attainment

increases, customers will less likely avail products in the restaurant that have utilitarian benefits.

Meanwhile, Alusen (2018) revealed that there was a significant relationship between

promotional sales and educational attainment. Thus, the findings of the current study was not

congruent with the mentioned study.

 Table 18. Relationship between hedonic benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected

casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the demographic profile of customers

Profile R-Value/ Significant Decision on

Interpretation Value Hypothesis/Statistically
Significant

Age -0.187/Slight 0.108 Accept Null

Relationship Hypothesis/Not
Significant

Sex -0.135/Slight 0.247 Accept Null

Relationship Hypothesis/Not
Significant

Monthly -0.247/Slight 0.033 Reject Null

Income Relationship Hypothesis/Significant

Civil Status 0.046/Slight 0.693 Accept Null

Relationship Hypothesis/Not
Significant

Educational -0.214/Slight 0.065 Accept Null

Attainment Relationship Hypothesis/Not
Significant

The table above illustrates the data regarding the significant relationship between hedonic

benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when grouped

according to the age of their customers. As seen, the significance level was 0.108, which is larger

than the alpha level of 0.05. Thus, the null hypothesis failed to be rejected. There was no

significant relationship between hedonic benefits as sale’s promotion strategy of selected casual
dining restaurants when grouped according to the age of their customers. Therefore, age is not

revealed as a factor that affects how customers avail hedonic benefits that were offered by the

restaurant. Additionally, the r= -0.187, which means that there was a negative and slight

relationship between hedonic benefits and age. Thus, as age increases, the less likely participants

would avail hedonic benefits as sales promotion. Similarly, Khan (2019) revealed that

promotions and buying behavior have significant relationships; however, age was not considered

in the determination of this relationship.

The table above disclosed the data regarding the significant relationship between the

hedonic benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when

grouped according to the sex of their customers. As shown, the significance level is 0.247,

which is larger than the alpha level of 0.05. This denotes that the null hypothesis failed to be

rejected. There was no significant relationship between the hedonic benefits as promotional sales

strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the sex of their

customers. Additionally, the r= -0.135 which means there was a negative but very weak

correlation between the variables. These findings can be supported Bynha and Verma (2018)

who revealed in their study that sex affects the availing of sales promotion, especially among

women consumers who prefer hedonic benefits. This data can be supported by Foroughi et al.

(2013) that revealed that gender is not a moderating factor in availing consumers of sales

promotions.

The table above revealed the data regarding the significant relationship between the

hedonic benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when

grouped according to the monthly income of their customers. As shown, the significance level is

0.033, which is larger than the alpha level of 0.05. which is smaller than the alpha level of 0.05.
Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected. There was a significant relationship between the hedonic

benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when grouped

according to the monthly of their customers. Therefore, there is an association between hedonic

benefits and monthly income of customers. Additionally, the r= -0.247 which means that there

was a negative but slight correlation between the variables. Meanwhile, the study of Akram et

al. (2018) revealed that instead of monthly income, it was the nature of job of the participants

that allowed them to have their respective monthly income that affects availing of sales

promotion.

The table above revealed the data regarding the significant relationship between the

hedonic benefits as sale’s promotion strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when grouped

according to the civil status of their customers. As shown, the significance level is 0.693, which

is larger than the alpha level of 0.05. This means that the null hypothesis failed to be rejected.

There was no significant relationship between the hedonic benefits as sale’s promotion strategy

of selected casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the civil status of their

customers. Additionally, the r= 0.046 which means that there was a positive but very weak

correlation between the variables.

The table above disclosed the data regarding the significant relationship between the

hedonic benefits as promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when

grouped according to the educational attainment of their customers. As shown, the significance

level is 0.065, which is larger than the alpha level of 0.05. This denotes that the null hypothesis

failed to be rejected. There was no significant relationship between the hedonic benefits as

promotional sales strategy of selected casual dining restaurants when grouped according to the

education of their customers. Thus, there was no proven association between the hedonic
 benefits as sales promotion and educational attainment of the participants Additionally, the r= -

0.214 which means the there was a negative but very weak correlation between the variables.

Thus, as the educational attainment increases, the less likely the participants will avail hedonic

benefits as sales promotion. On the other hand, Alusen (2018) revealed that there was a

significant relationship between sales promotion and educational attainment. Thus, the findings

of the current study was not congruent with the mentioned study.

Table 19 The correlation between promotional sales strategy and customer buying behavior of
the selected casual dining restaurants using Pearson Product-
Moment Correlation Coefficient

Level of
Weighted Significance r- t- t- Verbal
Variable N
Mean computed computed critical Interpretation
(α)

Promotional 3.20
Sales

-0.22 Accept Null

0.50 6 -0.45 2.78
Hypothesis

Customer
3.40
Buying
Behavior

In determining if there is a correlation between promotional sales strategy and customer

buying behavior of the selected casual dining restaurants, the researchers used Pearson Product-

Moment Correlation Coefficient. Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient is used to

measure the strength of a linear association between two variables and is denoted by r.
 The Pearson correlation coefficient, r, can take a range of values from +1 to -1. A value

of 0 indicates that there is no association between the two variables. A value greater than 0

indicates a positive association; that is, as the value of one variable increases, so does the value

of the other variable. A value less than 0 indicates a negative association; that is, as the value of

one variable increases, the value of the other variable decreases. 

First step in setting up the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient is to state the

hypothesis, the researchers state their null hypothesis: Ho: There is no significant relationship

between promotional sales of the selected casual dining restaurants and its customer behavioral

intention.

The level of significance is α = 0.05. In determining the degrees of freedom and the

critical values of t, researchers referred to tabular value (Introduction to Business Statistics by

Winston S. Sirug, p.338) df= N-2 = 6 -2 = 4 and t = ±2.78.

Next step is computing the value of r.

Formula for r-computed:

6 ( 65.0112 ) − (19.2 )( 20.39)

r=
√[ 6 ( 65.5208 ) − ( 19.2 ) ] [ 6 ( 70.3567 ) − ( 20.39 ) ]
2 2

r = -0.22

The coefficient of correlation, r = -0.22, between the sales promotion and customer

behavioral intention indicates a slight negative correlation (definite but small relationship)- that

is an increase in sales promotion is slightly associated with the decrease in total customer

behavioral intention.
 In order to make a decision on the significant relationship we need to determine the value

of t.

r √ N −2
t=
√1 −r 2
− 0.221 √ 6 − 2
t=
√1 −(−0.221)2
t = -0.45

Since the computed t-value of -0.45 is lower than the tabular value of 2.78 at level of

significance of 0.05, the null hypothesis is accepted. Therefore, there is no correlation between

sales promotional strategy and customer buying behavior of the selected casual dining

restaurants.