STATISTICAL PACKAGE FOR SOCIAL

SCIENCE

ASSIGNMENT 2

Correlation & Regression Analysis

Name – Pradnya Rajendra Wadekar

UID No. – 2023-0509-0001-0012
Section – MBA – Business Analytics
 Correlation & Regression Analysis

Correlation
Hypothesis

H0: There is no significant relationship between

sale and No. of outlet.

H1: There is no significant relationship between

sale and No. of outlet.

Statical Test: Bivariate Correlation Analysis

LOS: 5% Level of significant
Output Table:
Correlations
sales Numbe Advertisin Numb Pizza Competito Custome
r of g Spend er of varietie r Activity r base
Deliver Outlets s for Home
y boys served deliverie
s
Pearson 1 .902** .934** .953** .395 -.040 .880**
Correlatio
n
sales
Sig. (2- .000 .000 .000 .145 .886 .000
tailed)
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Pearson .902* 1 .905** .845** .352 -.103 .841**
*
Correlatio
Number of
n
Delivery
Sig. (2- .000 .000 .000 .198 .715 .000
boys
tailed)
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Pearson .934* .905** 1 .904** .343 -.189 .867**
*
Correlatio
Advertisin n
g Spend Sig. (2- .000 .000 .000 .210 .500 .000
tailed)
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
* ** **
Pearson .953 .845 .904 1 .416 -.036 .856**
*
Correlatio
Number n
of Outlets Sig. (2- .000 .000 .000 .123 .897 .000
tailed)
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Pizza Pearson .395 .352 .343 .416 1 -.044 .581*
varieties Correlatio
served n
 Sig. (2- .145 .198 .210 .123 .875 .023
tailed)
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Pearson -.040 -.103 -.189 -.036 -.044 1 .006
Correlatio
Competito n
r Activity Sig. (2- .886 .715 .500 .897 .875 .983
tailed)
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
* ** ** ** *
Pearson .880 .841 .867 .856 .581 .006 1
*
Customer Correlatio
base for n
Home Sig. (2- .000 .000 .000 .000 .023 .983
deliveries tailed)
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

INTERPRETATION:
 A strong correlation exists between sales and the
number of delivery boys.
 Sales show a significant relationship with
advertisement spending.
 There is a notable connection between sales and the
number of outlets.
 There is no statistically significant relationship
between sales and the variety of pizzas served.
 There is no significant association between sales and
competitors' activities.
 Sales demonstrate a significant correlation with the
customer base for home deliveries.
 Regression Analysis
Hypothesis
Null Hypothesis: There is no significant influence of all
the IV (Number of Delivery boys, Advertising Spend, Number
of Outlets, Pizza varieties served, Competitor Activity,
Customer base for home deliveries) and DV (sale) on the
sales of the company.

Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant influence

of all the IV (Number of Delivery boys, Advertising Spend,
Number of Outlets, Pizza varieties served, Competitor Activity,
Customer base for home deliveries) and DV (sale) on the
sales of the company.

Statical Test: Multiple regression Analysis

LOS: 5% Level of significant
Output table.
Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the
Square Estimate
a
1 .974 .949 .911 6.538
a. Predictors: (Constant), Customer base for home deliveries, Competitor
Activity, Pizza varieties served, Number of Outlets, Number of Delivery
boys, Advertising Spend

Interpretation:
Based on the modern summary table, an R-squared value
of .949 indicates that approximately 94.9% of the
variability in Pizza Hut sales can be explained by changes
in the variables considered.
a) Number of Delivery boys

b) Advertising Spend
c) Number of Outlets
d) Pizza varieties served
e) Competitor Activity
f) Customer base for home deliveries
Conclusion:
In summary model R2 value 0.949 also indicates that
above regression model or regression equation are
showing that sale of the Pizza hut desires product due to
changes in variables.
 ANOVAa
Model Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Regression 6380.396 6 1063.399 24.875 .000b
1 Residual 342.004 8 42.751
Total 6722.400 14
a. Dependent Variable: Sales
b. Predictors: (Constant), Customer base for home deliveries, Competitor
Activity, Pizza varieties served, Number of Outlets, Number of Delivery
boys, Advertising Spend

Interpretation:
Based on the ANOVA table, the observed p-value
of .000092 is less than 0.05, which indicates that at a 5%
level of significance, the above regression model is
indeed significant. Therefore, we accept the alternative
hypothesis and reject the null hypothesis.
Conclusion:
Absolutely, based on the analysis, it can be concluded that
all the independent variables (Number of Delivery Boys,
Advertising Spend, Number of Outlets, Pizza Varieties
Served, Competitor Activity, and Customer Base for
Home Deliveries) have a significant influence on the
dependent variable (sales) of the company. This suggests
that these factors play a crucial role in shaping the sales
performance of the company.
 Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) -18.617 23.505 -.792 .451
Number of Delivery .958 .951 .197 1.008 .343
boys
Advertising Spend 1.149 1.311 .250 .876 .406
Number of Outlets 1.331 .541 .507 2.458 .039
1
Pizza varieties -.119 1.498 -.009 -.079 .939
served
Competitor Activity .995 2.059 .045 .483 .642
Customer base for .092 .302 .069 .304 .769
home deliveries
a. Dependent Variable: Sales

Interpretation:
It appears that the p-value for the number of outlets
is .039, indicating that it is less than 0.05, which
demonstrates higher significance at the 5% level.

Additionally, in terms of absolute coefficient value,

market potential exhibits the highest significance for
sales, followed by the number of staff.