HANOI UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT AND TOURISM

PROBABILITY AND STATISTIC PROJECT

THE TREND OF CHOOSING THE TYPES OF RENTAL

ACCOMMODATIONS AMONG HANU STUDENTS

Tutor: Mrs. Tran Thi Thu Hien

Tutorial class: 1CLC
Group 4

Nguyen Thi Ha Trang 2206190050

Nguyen Thi Kim Anh 2206190005
Trieu Van Ly 2206190021
Le Duong Minh Nguyet 2206190029
 ABSTRACT

The demand for housing in Ha Noi is increasing continuously due

to the rise of urbanization. Nowadays, there are more and more
people who choose to leave their hometown to work and study in
Ha Noi capital. The students - the ones with a very high demand
for rental housing, now face many problems when renting
accommodation since the types and prices of rental housing are
changing rapidly. To have a more overall view of how the trend
of choosing rental rooms fluctuates and to help students make
better decisions in choosing housing; our group has decided to
do this research to find out The trend in choosing rental
accommodations among HANU students. We held this survey
with a total of 131 randomized students of Ha Noi University in
different school year, genders, ages, budgets, and degrees of
satisfaction with their rental rooms. We hope that our study will
be a good resource for young students in deciding on a place to
live and the house rental business to design better housing to meet
the demand.

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................. i
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ iii
I. Introduction .......................................................................................................1
II. Research Methodology ......................................................................................2
1. 2

2. 2

3. 3

4. 3

III. Descriptive results and finding ......................................................................5

IV. Hypothesis testing ........................................................................................10
1. 10

2. 14

V. Project evaluation ............................................................................................14

1. Limitations .....................................................................................................14
2. Implications ...................................................................................................15
VI. Recommendation and conclusion ....................................................................15
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................17
APPENDIX A ....................................................................................................17
APPENDIX B ....................................................................................................18
APPENDIX C ....................................................................................................21
APPENDIX D ....................................................................................................24
APPENDIX E ....................................................................................................29
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................33

2
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. The trend of living in a rental house

Figure 2. Type of housing that Hanu students are living
Figure 3. Rental cost that Hanu students have to pay per month
Figure 4. Services fee that Hanu students have to pay per month
Figure 5. Distance from HANU student's rental house to the university
Figure 6. Number of HANU students sharing their rental room.
Figure 7. Level of satisfaction with the rental houses of HANU students
Figure 8. Degree of prioritizing different factors of rental housing

3
I. Introduction
In recent years, the trend of choosing rental accommodations has emerged as
a significant aspect of student life at Hanoi University (HANU), reflecting
broader changes in urban living, educational pursuit, and personal
preference. As the student population at HANU continues to diversify, so too
do their accommodation needs and preferences. This study aims to delve into
the multifaceted world of rental accommodations chosen by HANU students,
examining the various factors influencing their decisions, including but not
limited to financial considerations, location proximity to the university,
available amenities, and personal lifestyle choices.

Previous research, particularly studies examining the housing rental

preferences of students at Hanoi University of Industry, has shed light on the
intricate considerations students navigate when choosing rental
accommodations. For instance, a targeted study at the Hanoi University of
Industry revealed that 26.4% of participants (amounting to 66 out of 250
surveyed students) highlighted the significance of the accommodation's
proximity to the university. Meanwhile, 22.4% prioritized rental costs. These
concerns, along with other considerations such as the size of the rental
property (16,8%), and security issues (8,8%), etc.

Incorporating such pivotal findings, our study aims to further probe into the
accommodation preferences of HANU students, with a particular focus on
how these preferences align with or diverge from broader trends observed in
other Vietnamese urban centers. By doing so, it endeavors to offer nuanced
insights that could assist various stakeholders—including university
administrations, housing providers, and policymakers—in devising
strategies that align more closely with the needs and preferences of the
student body.

The analysis draws upon quantitative data from a comprehensive survey of

100 HANU students, this research seeks to delineate the trends in rental
accommodation selection and the attendant factors that guide HANU
students in their rental accommodation choices. In so doing, it not only
contributes to the existing body of knowledge on student housing preferences
1
 but also lays the groundwork for future research that could explore emergent
trends in this vital aspect of student life.

II. Research Methodology

1. Population and Sample
In the following paper, we examine the trend of choosing the types of rental
accommodation among HANU students. The purpose demographic for our
attention is the student population at Hanoi University (HANU). To achieve
the best findings from the study, a sample of 100 students from K20 to K23
at Hanoi University is randomly selected for auditing due to time constraints
and the considerable cost of conducting a survey and analyzing data for the
entire population.

2. Questionnaire design
To gain information, our project was conducted by delivering an online
questionnaire to random students. To gather information for this project, a
questionnaire is considered the most effective tool because the respondents
have enough time to think and evaluate each option before answering
questions, which can guarantee the data’s reliability. Based on this
evaluation, a set of questionnaires that can collect both quantitative and
qualitative data was designed to ask for students’ opinions on some factors
affecting the choice of the types of rental accommodation among HANU
students. In particular, the process of collecting data is divided into two main
sections. The first part is spent on personal identity to ensure the reliable
source of data derived for the project. The first four questions that
participants are required to provide are their personal information, including
their name, gender, student ID,... The other section consists of a list of seven
questions to get information serving for the Hypothesis testing and
descriptive statistics of our project.
1. What type of housing are you currently living in?
2. How much is the rent per month?
3. How much is the utilities per month? (include electricity, water, wifi,
service bill)
4. How long is the distance from the boarding house to your university?
2
 5. Do you have roommates?
6. Rate your level of satisfaction with the house you have rented
7. Rate your level of priorities when renting a house
In detail, the five questions are some general questions designed with the
purpose of analyzing HANU’s students’ information about their rental
houses. Next, question 6 and 7 to evaluate the factors affecting choosing the
types of rental accommodation among HANU students. This form of
questions designed for the quick survey is tied to the purpose and assumption
of the report to get the most realistic and meaningful results for our
evaluation.

3. Sample size
Theoretically, the estimated results will be more accurate regardless of the
sample size. We were unable to evaluate a big sample size as a result of
several types of reasons. To accomplish the primary objectives of this study,
it was determined that our project would be concentrated on a sample of 100
randomly selected HANU students.

4. Sampling method and Data collection

a. Sampling method
Simple random sampling stands as an exceptionally effective method for
accurate data collection. Leveraging technological advancements, such a
technique can be applied to collect data from 131 students at HANU using
Google Forms. This process demonstrates how technology facilitates the
implementation of statistically robust methods like simple random sampling
by simplifying the distribution and collection of survey data.
b. Data collection
We initiated our research by first crafting a questionnaire and determining a
sample group. For the collection of data, we chose Google Forms,
recognizing it as the most efficient and appropriate platform for our needs,
with all submissions being treated uniformly. We then distributed the
questionnaire to 131 students through several social media channels such as
Facebook and Messenger, from which we received complete responses from
all randomly selected participants. After that, the data was shown and
explained using pie charts, graphs, and other visual aids created with
3
 Microsoft Word and Excel. In the end, we test hypotheses using Rstudio to
obtain the findings.
> #Data pre-processing
> getwd()
[1] "C:/Users/surfa/pas"
> setwd("C:/Users/surfa/pas")
> library(readr)
> renthouse <- read.csv("C:/Users/surfa/pas/PASS PROJECT.csv")
> View(renthouse)
> fix(renthouse)
> table(renthouse$var1)

No Yes
31 100
> # Numerical descriptive method
> Swirl <- table(renthouse$var1)
> prop.table(Swirl)# Relative frequency table

No Yes
0.2366412 0.7633588
> summary(renthouse$var1)
Length Class Mode
131 character character

5. Level of significance Commented [1]: cíuuu, tớ kbiett làm cái nàyyy, ai giúp
tớ xem đâyy là gì voiwiisi
This hypothesis test has a significance level of 5% (0.05). In this case, the ideal
Commented [2]: chịu chếc, nhắn hỏi cô đi, hoặc mai
significance threshold is 5%, meaning that even if there is no difference, there is a hỏi trực tiếp trên lớp

95% chance of correctly identifying its existence. Commented [3]: ua cau chua lam a

4
III. Descriptive results and finding Commented [4]: oo nma Ngueyt cũng làm phần này à

Figures 1: The trend of living in a rental house

This section outlines the results of the survey conducted to learn about the trend of
choosing the types of rental accommodation among HANU students.
The pie chart displays the results of a survey asking the question "Are you renting
a place to live?". There were 131 responses to the survey. According to the chart,
23.7% of the respondents answered "Yes" while the majority, 76.3%, answered
"No". We might say that the odds ratio of a respondent renting versus not renting
is approximately 0.31 (23.7% divided by 76.3%), which suggests that not renting
is more common than renting within the sample surveyed.

Figure 2: Type of housing that Hanu students are living

5
The pie chart shows the information about the type of housing that Hanoi
University’s students are living in. Room rentals dominate at 38%, which may
reflect the high level of flexibility and access to finance in this segment. Next is the
mini apartment type, accounting for 32%, providing an independent living solution
at a relatively low price. The choice of renting an apartment accounts for only 8%,
which may prove that although apartments can provide many amenities, the price
may not be the optimal choice for students. The homestay type also only accounts
for a small proportion of 8%, possibly due to its short-term nature and lack of
privacy. Overall, student rental trends clearly show a preference for cost and
flexibility. This is reflected in the high rate of renting rooms and mini apartments
compared to other options.

Figure 3: Rental cost that Hanu students have to pay per month

This pie chart displays the results of a survey asking the question “How much is
the rent
per month?”. There were 100 responses to the survey. According to the chart, 49%
of the respondents paid 1.000.000 VND - 2.000.000 VND per month for renting a
house while the majority, 10% just paid less than 1.000.000 VND per month. Based
on this result, it is very clear that most students at Hanoi University have an income
suitable for this rental price (1.000.000 VND - 2.000.000 VND), or that this is the
limit of the rental payment they feel comfortable with.

6
 Figure 4: Services fee that Hanu students have to pay per month

The pie chart shows the cost that Hanoi university students have to pay for the
utilities per month (including electricity, water, wifi, and service bill). According
to the chart, the most popular type is priced under 500,000 VND, using nearly a
half-rate of 47%. This shows that this price is the most preferred by renters in the
surveyed area. Meanwhile, only a few students (5%) have to pay over 2,000,000
VND per month for service fees. In general, from the chart, it can be seen that
students' needs for electricity, water, etc. consumption are at a moderate or low
level.

7
 Figure 5: Distance from HANU students’ rental house to the university

The pie chart gives information about the distance from the rental house to the
University of the respondents. Among 100 students who did the survey, almost 50%
of students chose to live near their university less than 1 km away. The distance
from 1-3 km also takes a considerable proportion which is 30%, followed by 10%
of students who lived more than 5 km away from their school. The choice with the
least number of students is the 3-5 km distance. According to this chart, most of
the students prioritized the near distance between their rental house and their
university and approximately 80% of the students chose to live less than 5km away
from their school.

Figure 6: Number of HANU students sharing their rental room.

The chart shows the rate of students who chose to share their rental rooms with
others. The majority of students have at least one roommate with approximately
90%. The 13% left is the number of students who chose to live alone. Through the
survey results, it is clear that most of the students chose house sharing as a way to
reduce the rental and service fees.

8
 Figure 7: Level of satisfaction with the rental houses of HANU students

The graph demonstrates the level of satisfaction with each factor of students’ rental
houses. The security sector is on top of satisfaction with 60 votes, followed by the
distance sector with more than 50 votes and after that, the satisfaction about the
host ranks third with more than 40 votes. The fourth and fifth places are the
infrastructure and the price with approximately 40 votes. The neighborhood sector
is at the bottom. However, most of the students feel neutral about the neighborhood.
Many of them also feel neutral about other criteria. The most dissatisfied sector is
the distance and the price and the least dissatisfied is the security sector.

9
 Figure 8: Degree of prioritizing different factors of rental housing

This bar graph illustrates how HANU students prioritize each criterion of their
rental house. The top important factors are the rental price and security. The rental
price is considered “very important” and “important” with 50 votes and 40 votes
respectively (90 votes in total). The second prioritized sector is the security sector
with less than 90 votes in terms of important criteria and more than 30 votes as
“very important”. The distance and infrastructure sector ranks third with more
neutral votes than the top 2. The host and neighborhood are the bottom sectors to
prioritize as they had the least “important“ and “very important” votes and the most
“neutral” and “unimportant” votes.

IV. Hypothesis testing

1. Research questions
The purpose of this hypothesis test is to look into how Hanu students often choose
the kinds of rental housing. After reading through a number of online articles
regarding the trend of selecting rental housing, we found that, out of 30,000
undergraduate participants, 90% of them admitted to renting a place to live
("Research on rental behavior of students at Hanoi University of Industry”, 2020).
For that reason, our hypothesis for this project is “There are more than 90% of
HANU students involved in the survey who have the trend of choosing the types of
rental accommodation to live in”. We must determine the percentage of students in
10
our sample who have positive attitudes toward renting an apartment in order to
obtain the necessary data for the study. Consequently, the following particular
question has been created and disseminated in order to gather data at random for
our sample, which is:
“ Are you renting a place to live?”
In addition, we conducted two possible outcomes for this question:
▪ Yes
▪ No

2. Hypothesis Tests
2.1. Assumption checking
● There are two categorical outcomes: “Yes” is for those who rent a place to live
while “No” is for those who do not rent a place to live. There are two qualitative
outcomes in this test question from our survey; as a result, this data type is
qualitative, and we can not calculate the mean. It indicates that the method of Z
test population proportion will be applied. In this method, the parameter of
interest is the proportion population p, and the point estimator of this parameter
is the population sample 𝑝̂.
● Population follows binomial distribution:
- The research comprises 131 identical trials, each of which contains one
respondent’s response.
- Each trial has two outcomes: “Yes” is denoted success and “No” is denoted
as failure.
- In all of the trials, the probability of “Yes” outcome and “No” outcome is the
same.
- The trials are independent because each respondent answered the question
independently and separately.
● After doing the survey, we have the result:

11
 Yes No

100 31

Let 𝑝̂ be the sample proportion of Hanoi University students who rent a place to
live.
Therefore, we have:
𝑝̂ = 100/131 = 0.763
The sample size (n) is 131 students, and the hypothesized population proportion
(po) is 0.90; therefore the following conditions are satisfied:
● n×po = 131×0.90 = 117.9 > 5
● n× (1-po) = 131×0.10 = 13.1 > 5
-> The sampling distribution of p could be considered a normal distribution
In fact, all the above information is to prove that we will use z – test for this
proportion
test.
2.2. Data analysis:
● The sample size: n = 131
● The number of successes: x = 100
● Sample proportion 𝑝̂ = 0.763
● Upper-tailed test
● Level of significant: ∝=0.05
2.3. Hypothesis testing procedure:
Step 1: Identification of null and alternative hypotheses
Ho: p ≤ 0.90
Ha: p > 0.90
🡺 This is an Upper-tailed test for proportion.
12
Step 2: Test statistics

𝑝̂−𝑝̂𝑜 0.763−0.90
Z* = = ≈ -5.227
𝑝𝑜91−𝑝𝑜) 0.90(1−0.90)
√ 𝑛
√ 131

Step 3: Identify the level of significance

We have the level of significance for this test: α = 0.05

Step 4: Critical value approach

Critical value: Zα = Z0.05 = 1.645
We would reject the null hypothesis (Ho) if Z* ≥ Zα

Step 5: Rejection rule

Reject Ho if Z* ≥ Zα

Step 6: Conclusion
Because Z*= -5.227 < Zα = 1.645 => We do not reject the null hypothesis (Ho)

Conclusion: At the level of significance of 0.05, there is not enough evidence to

conclude that more than 90% of Hanu students involved in the surveys rent a place
to live. Commented [5]: ew không đủ thì viết discusstion of the
findings kiểu gì zz nhỉ??

Step 7: R Studio
n <- 131
p <- 0.9
if ("n*p < 5| n*(1-p) < 5")
return(print("one of the assumptions was not satisfied"))

13
 prop.test(100,131,0.9,correct = FALSE,alternative = c("greater"),conf.level =
0.95)
1-sample proportions test without continuity correction
data: 100 out of 131, null probability 0.9
X-squared = 27.176, df = 1, p-value = 1
alternative hypothesis: true p is greater than 0.9
95 percent confidence interval:
0.6973361 1.0000000
sample estimates:
p
0.7633588
p-value > 0.05 => Do not reject Ho

2. Discussions of the findings Commented [6]: MINH NGUYETT

This paper attempts to ascertain the rental trends of FMT students using information
gathered from a survey of 131 randomly selected students. The Z-test hypothesis at
a significance level of 5% allows us to conclude that the hypothesis testing findings
do not support the assumption made by our group. But a sizable portion of students
also opt to live in rental homes while they pursue their education.

V. Project evaluation
1. Limitations
Although our survey was completed and helped the research paper to answer the
main problems it concerned, which is about the trends of choosing types of rental
accommodation among HANU students, this survey still has some limitations.
Firstly, there is still a limitation in the number of respondents. Our survey has a
total of 131 respondents and this amount of people does not accurately reflect the
opinions of every HANU student but somehow partly.

Secondly, the survey was in Google form and handed out online, so perhaps some
people may not take it seriously and give dishonest answers. Moreover, the question

14
set was mostly multiple choice questions so it is not as flexible as other methods
like direct interviews to get the most accurate answers.
Finally, our question set has 12 questions which is still a limited number for
research. For these reasons, our group may not give an accurate description of the
issue.

2. Implications
Despite some limitations, completing the research paper did not cause us many
problems. As a result, we can demonstrate the major trends of how HANU students
choose types of rental accommodations. 76.3% of students who did the survey
currently live in a rental house.
Among the criteria of the rental rooms, most of the students prioritize the price, the
security, and the distance away from their university with almost 50% of them
voting for these categories. In addition, 87% of the students who are living in rental
rooms chose to have roommates. It is understandable because one of their top
priorities is the rental fees, so they chose to share the house with others to reduce
the financial burden. Besides, 1 minor students who have a better budget and prefer
privacy chose to live alone.
We hope that the project’s results will help HANU students and house rental
businesses in the HANU area to launch better types of housing with more
appropriate prices for the students.

VI. Recommendation and conclusion

Among 131 HANU students who did our survey, 100 students are currently living
in a rental room. It can be concluded that more than 70% of HANU students are
renting accommodations for their daily life. Throughout our research, the results
said that approximately 50% of students paid rental fees from 1 million VND to 2
million VND, this price is considered appropriate among the students community.
Besides, the housing service which is less than 500,000 VND is the most popular
price among HANU students with 47%. It is clearly that most students have budgets
of less than 3 million VND per month so they are likely to choose houses with the
most affordable rental fees. Moreover, HANU students claimed that they are very
aware of outside factors of rental accommodations. The most crucial factor is
security with almost 100 votes. It can be said that students prioritized safety above
anything else. The distance is also an important factor with more than 80% of votes.
15
Students tend to live near their university less than 3 km for convenience in moving
from place to place. The price is as important as the distance factor with
approximately 80 votes out of 100 respondents. Most HANU students have humble
budgets so they choose to live in cheap rooms with poor infrastructure or share their
rooms with others. Although our study has some limitations in the questions set,
method of survey, and number of people participating, our research has partly
reflected the changes in rental decisions among HANU students that they are
concerned with price, security, and distance mostly.
From this study, we have some recommendations for students who are going to find
a place to live near Ha Noi University. For those who want to live near the campus
but want good security, we highly recommend renting the dormitories of Ha Noi
University. However, it has some drawbacks as students will have a curfew, are
usually confronted with water loss, and more importantly, the number of rooms is
limited and youngsters will have to enroll early for a slot in the dorm. Besides,
HANU-ers can also choose to rent a room behind the campus and on Luong The
Vinh Street. The rental fees there are affordable and diverse, and this area also has
a high level of security. Near the HANU campus, there are two famous areas which
are Trieu Khuc Street and Phung Khoang Market. Although these areas are pretty
near the University and the types and prices are also diversified from middle to high
price, we don’t suggest staying here due to these reasons: densely populated, bad
conditions of traffic congestion and low security. In the further distance (2-3 km),
we recommend renting a room in Ha Dong district, the rental fees there are pretty
affordable with decent security. It is best for those who own a vehicle if not students
can use the public transport systems. These recommendations may somehow help
HANU students to have better options while choosing a place to live and also be a
sample for rental businesses to design better housing.

16
 APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Project bonus mark form

Probability and Statistics, Spring 2024

Our group would like to be considered for a bonus mark for doing substantial
additional work.

We have completed the following parts of the project using the R programing
language:

Part Completed Where to find the Where to find the

R code R output
(e.g.Appendix A) (e.g.Appendix B)
Data pre- Yes Appendix E Appendix E
processing (e.g.
reading data file,

17
converting
relevant variables
into factors)
Sampling method No
Graphical Yes Appendix E Appendix E
descriptive
methods
(including grapes
for checking test’s
assumptions)
Numerical Yes Appendix E Appendix E
descriptive
methods
Inferential Yes Appendix E Appendix E
methods

APPENDIX B
QUESTIONNAIRE
The trend of choosing the types of rental accommodation among HANU
students.

Question 1:Are you renting a place to live?

- Yes
- No
Question 2: What is your full name?
………………………………..
Question 3: What's your student ID ?
………………………………..

18
Question 4: What's your gender?
● Male
● Female
Question 5: Which year are you in?
● Freshmen
● Sophomore
● Junior
● Senior
Question 6: What type of housing are you currently living in?
● Apartment (Chung cư)
● Mini apartment (Chung cư mini)
● Room rental (Phòng trọ)
● Homestay
● Host house (Nhà dân)
● Others
Question 7: How much is the rent per month?
● less than 1.000.000 VNĐ
● 1.000.000 VNĐ - 2.000.000 VNĐ
● 2.000.000 VNĐ - 3.000.000 VNĐ
● more than 3.000.000 VNĐ
Question 8: How much is the utilities per month? ( include electricity, water,
wifi, service bill)
● less than 500.000 VNĐ
● 500.000 VNĐ - 1.000.000VNĐ
● 1.000.000 VNĐ - 2.000.000 VNĐ
● more than 2.000.000 VNĐ
Question 9: How long is the distance from the boarding house to your
university?
● less 1 km
● 1 - 3 km
● 3 - 5 km
● more than 5 km
Question 10: Do you have roommates?
● Yes
● No
19
Question 11: Rate your level of satisfaction with the house you have rented:
Unsatisfied, Neutral, Satisfied
● Security (An ninh)
● Host (Chủ nhà)
● Infrastructure (Cơ sở vật chất)
● Neighborhood (Hàng xóm)
● Rental price (Giá thuê)
● Distance (Khoảng cách)
Question 12: Rate your level of priorities when renting a house:
Unimportant, Neutral, Important, Very important
● Security (An ninh)
● Host (Chủ nhà)
● Infrastructure (Cơ sở vật chất)
● Neighborhood (Hàng xóm)
● Rental price (Giá thuê)
● Distance (Khoảng cách)

20
APPENDIX C
QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS

Question 4: What's your gender?

Male 13
Female 87

Question 5: Which year are you in?

Freshmen 36
Sophomore 47
Junior 8
Senior 9

Question 6: What type of housing are you currently living in?

Apartment (Chung cư) 8

Mini apartment (Chung cư mini) 32
Room rental (Phòng trọ) 38
Homestay 1
Host house (Nhà dân) 13
Others 8

Question 7: How much is the rent per month?

less than 1.000.000 VNĐ 10

1.000.000 VNĐ - 2.000.000 VNĐ 49

21
2.000.000 VNĐ - 3.000.000 VNĐ 21
more than 3.000.000 VNĐ 20

Question 8: How much is the utilities per month? ( include electricity, water,
wifi, service bill)

less than 500.000 VNĐ 47

500.000 VNĐ - 1.000.000VNĐ 35
1.000.000 VNĐ - 2.000.000 VNĐ 13
more than 2.000.000 VNĐ 5

Question 9: How long is the distance from the boarding house to your
university?

less 1 km 47
1 - 3 km 30
3 - 5 km 10
more than 5 km 13

Question 10: Do you have roommates?

Yes 87
No 13

Question 11: Rate your level of satisfaction with the house you have rented

Unsatisfied Neutral Satisfied

Security (An ninh) 1 38 61

22
Host (Chủ nhà) 8 47 45
Infrastructure (Cơ 8 53 39
sở vật chất)

Neighborhood 9 62 29
(Hàng xóm)
Rental price (Giá 13 44 43
thuê)
Distance (Khoảng 15 33 55
cách)

Question 12: Rate your level of priorities when renting a house:

Unimportant Neutral Important Very

important
Security (An 0 9 56 35
ninh)
Host (Chủ 0 25 57 18
nhà)
Infrastructure 0 12 60 28
(Cơ sở vật
chất)
Neighborhood 9 41 35 15
(Hàng xóm)
Rental price 1 8 59 41
(Giá thuê)
Distance 3 18 50 29
(Khoảng
cách)

23
APPENDIX D
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Order Full name Gender Student ID

1 Nguyễn Thị Linh Female 2307010138

2 Trương Thị Khánh Ly Female 2206190022

3 Phạm Thị Thuỳ Female 2307090063
4 Trịnh Phương Anh Female 2207170009
5 Nguyễn Thị Thanh Hoa Female 2307010091
6 Nguyễn Thị Anh Thư Female 2307010249
7 Van Anh Female 2206080022
8 Nguyễn Phương Thảo Female 2206190033
9 Đinh Thị Thanh Thảo Female 2207090065
10 Nguyễn Huyền Phương Male 2307080077
11 Nguyễn Mỹ Linh Female 2204010048
12 Hoàng Nhung Female 2206190031
13 Vu Huyen Trang Female 11226548
14 Trần Thị Thu Hoài Female 2007070035

15 Trần Yến Nhi Female 2307080073

16 Hoàng Việt Hương Female 2307040063
17 Hoang Thu Ha Female 2007010072
18 Bùi Thị Mỹ Linh Female 2304000047
19 Bùi Linh Nhi Female 2307010194
20 Luong Phuong Thao Female 2307010239

24
21 Nguyễn Thị Ngọc Mỹ Female 2307050097
22 Bùi Thị Ngọc Ánh Female 2307010032
23 Phùng Thanh Huyền Female 2307020079
24 Nguyen Mai Phuong Female 2207030090
25 Khuong Viet Chau Female 2207060029
26 Nguyen Thi Thuong Female 2007010294
27 Đặng Hà Phương Female 2307010213
28 Vũ Thế Nam Male 2001040145
29 Lê Minh Hằng Female 2104000038
30 Tran Thi Van Female 2307010282
31 Trần Ngọc Anh Female 2206090004
32 Nguyễn Diễm Quỳnh Female 2207020153
33 Nguyen Thi Xuan Female 2206190036
34 Hoàng Khánh Male 2204040050

35 Vũ Mai Hương Female 2204040048

36 Lê Ngọc Quỳnh Anh Female 2206180037

37 Le Minh Hieu Male 2307010089
38 Đàm Quỳnh Anh Female 2206190002
39 Nguyễn Thị Khánh Female 2307070027
Huyền
40 Nguyễn Thị Kim Nhi Female 2206190030
41 Tạ Thảo Nguyên Female 2206090072
42 Nguyễn Thị Hoài Thu Female 2204010093

25
43 Lê Thị Phương Trang Female 2206190049
44 Bùi Thị Giang Female 2204000034
45 Nguyễn Bá Ngọc Hưng Male 2307020080
46 Phạm Ngọc Anh Female 2307010022
47 Tu Thi Ngoc Ha Female 2307190015
48 Nguyen Anh Tu Male 2006090125
49 Bùi Phương Linh Female 2206090056
50 Nguyễn Thị Thục Female 2206190028
Nguyên
51 Au Thao Ngoc Female 2007010204
52 Nguyễn Thu Hường Female 2106190023
53 Dương Thị Minh Huyền Female 2307010097
54 Lê Dương Minh Nguyệt Female 2206190029
55 Phạm Thị Mai Female 2307080108
56 Trương Thị Huyền Trang Female 2206190051
57 Lại Tuấn Hùng Male 2206090046
58 Phạm Minh Đông Male 2307100019
59 Nguyễn Thị Như Ý Female 2307040181
60 Nguyễn Thị Phương Female 2207170029
Giang
61 Nguyen Thi Hai Yen Female 2007010359
62 Nguyễn Tuấn Dương Male 2201040036
63 Hà Thị Minh Châu Female 2201040022
64 Đoàn Thuý An Female 2307010002

26
65 Phạm Thu Huyền Female 2107030046
66 Nguyễn Trần An Trinh Female 2207010292
67 Nguyễn Thu Trang Female 1207040189
68 Nguyen Thi My Hanh Female 2007010092
69 Linh docata Female 20271947293
70 Đỗ Quỳnh Anh Female 2307010008
71 Nguyễn Thị Hoài Thu Female 2206190044
72 Bùi Thị Thanh Nga Female 2206190024
73 Nguyễn Diệp Linh Female 2307010132
74 Nguyên Thảo Chinh Female 2207060034
75 Mai Ngoc Linh Female 2207040095
76 Dinh Thi Mai Anh Female 2307010011
77 Uông Thị Hằng Female 2206190014
78 Nguyen Thi Tra My Female 2007010190
79 Trần Thị Lan Anh Female 2307010026
80 Đặng Thị Dung Female 2204000025
81 Tăng Thị Phương Mai Female 2307010158
82 Nguyễn Thị Hà Trang Female 2206190050
83 Trần Thảo Nguyên Female 2104010075
84 Nguyễn Diệu Chi Female 2307010042
85 Nguyễn Phương Linh Female 2204040058
86 Ngọc Lê Hồng Female 2206080089
87 Nguyen Thu Ha Female 2207040050

27
88 Đỗ Tuấn Hiệp Male 2304000034
89 Nguyễn Hải Triều Male 2307010270
90 Lê Quang Điệp Male 2206190012
91 Hoang Thi Quynh Female 2307010224
92 Trần Thùy Trang Female 2206090099
93 Nguyễn Nhật Hạ Female 23171811
94 Nguyễn Vân Khánh Linh Female 2206190020
95 Nguyễn Thị Mai Hương Female 2004000045
96 Nguyen Ha Ninh Female 2307010304
97 Ngo Binh Long Male 2101140048
98 Đinh Thị Yến Nga Female 2204010026
99 Trieu Van Ly Female 2206190021
100 Huynh Le Phuong Du Female 22061990011

28
APPENDIX E
R CODE
#Data pre-processing
getwd()
setwd("C:/Users/surfa/pas")
library(readr)
renthouse <- read.csv("C:/Users/surfa/pas/PASS PROJECT.csv")
View(renthouse)
fix(renthouse)

table(renthouse$var1)

# Numerical descriptive method

Swirl <- table(renthouse$var1)
prop.table(Swirl)# Relative frequency table
x<-c(0.2366412, 0.7633588)
round(x,digits=2)
summary(renthouse$var1)

# Inferential method
n <- 100
p <- 0.6
if (n * p < 5 | n * (1 - p) < 5) + {
return(print("One of the assumptions for the proportion test was not satisfied"))
}
prop.test(76,100,0.6,correct=FALSE,alternative = c("greater"),conf.level = 0.95)

# Assuming 'Swirl' contains counts of responses

prop_swirl <- prop.table(Swirl) * 100 # Convert counts to percentages
learn <- paste(round(prop_swirl), "%", sep="") # Create percentage labels
dynamically

#Graphical descriptive method

Nay<- c("24%","76%")
29
pie(Swirl, labels = Nay,main = "Are you renting a house", col = c("pink","black"))

R OUTPUT
> #Data pre-processing
> getwd()
[1] "C:/Users/surfa/pas"
> setwd("C:/Users/surfa/pas")
> library(readr)
> renthouse <- read.csv("C:/Users/surfa/pas/PASS PROJECT.csv")
> View(renthouse)
> fix(renthouse)
> table(renthouse$var1)

No Yes
31 100
> # Numerical descriptive method
> Swirl <- table(renthouse$var1)
> prop.table(Swirl)# Relative frequency table

No Yes
0.2366412 0.7633588
> summary(renthouse$var1)
Length Class Mode
131 character character
> # Numerical descriptive method
> Swirl <- table(renthouse$var1)
> prop.table(Swirl)# Relative frequency table

No Yes
0.2366412 0.7633588
> x<-c(0.2366412, 0.7633588)
> round(x,digits=2)
[1] 0.24 0.76
> summary(renthouse$var1)
Length Class Mode
30
 131 character character
> # Inferential method
> n <- 100
> p <- 0.6
> if (n * p < 5 | n * (1 - p) < 5) + {
+ return(print("One of the assumptions for the proportion test was not satisfied"))
+}
> prop.test(76,100,0.6,correct=FALSE,alternative = c("greater"),conf.level = 0.95)

1-sample proportions test without continuity

correction

data: 76 out of 100, null probability 0.6

X-squared = 10.667, df = 1, p-value = 0.0005454
alternative hypothesis: true p is greater than 0.6
95 percent confidence interval:
0.6834959 1.0000000
sample estimates:
p
0.76

> # Assuming 'Swirl' contains counts of responses

> prop_swirl <- prop.table(Swirl) * 100 # Convert counts to percentages
> learn <- paste(round(prop_swirl), "%", sep="") # Create percentage labels
dynamically
> #Graphical descriptive method
> Nay<- c("24%","76%")
> pie(Swirl, labels = Nay,main = "Are you renting a house", col =
c("pink","black"))

31
32
 REFERENCES

Ly, T.L, Huy, Q.B, Huyen, T.T.L, Anh, M.B & Tu, T.B. (2021), Nghiên cứu các
yếu tố ảnh hưởng đến quyết định thuê nhà trọ của sinh viên Tp. Hồ Chí Minh.
Retrieved from: https://tailieu.vn/doc/nghien-cuu-cac-yeu-to-anh-huong-den-
quyet-dinh-thue-nha-tro-cua-sinh-vien-tp-ho-chi-minh-
2472623.html?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR3QVNjdmCDBgyEEMYIH
RyU8pL6S5LKscanTZ_vmC7ZegEPwLJHaDoO4Yjg_aem_AYJRwE6Xw_6Aki
nsWW91CbNdxN9y-
TWec6zjIxDlZVT5PNSAM2JyHyEbo6jyxnpnsys2hldCwXvQIN9ivQzxr0dK

33