1.

1 Is there a significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to GENDER?

1. Ho: There is no significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to gender.
2. Ha: There is a significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to gender.
3. Set level of significance (alpha)=5% or 0.05
4. Test stat: t-test
5. Compute: Prob.Value=.196
6. Analyze/Decide
Prob.Value vs Alpha
0.196>0.05
Decision: Accept Ho
There is no significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to gender.

T-TEST GROUPS=gender(0 1)
/MISSING=ANALYSIS
/VARIABLES=income
/ES DISPLAY(TRUE)
/CRITERIA=CI(.95).

T-Test

Group Statistics

Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Household income in thousands Male 2449 55.5872 60.56787 1.22391

Female 2551 54.5159 50.25882 .99508

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. Std. 95% Confidence
(2- Mean Error Interval of the
tailed Differ Differ Difference
F Sig. t df ) ence ence Lower Upper
Household Equal 1.675 .196 . 499 .495 1.071 1.571 - 4.152
income in variances 68 8 30 45 2.009 04
thousands assumed 2 44
Equal . 475 .497 1.071 1.577 - 4.163
variances not 67 8.1 30 38 2.021 70
assumed 9 25 09

Independent Samples Effect Sizes

95% Confidence Interval
Standardizera Point Estimate Lower Upper
Household income in Cohen's d 55.54772 .019 -.036 .075
thousands
Hedges' correction 55.55606 .019 -.036 .075
Glass's delta 50.25882 .021 -.034 .077
a. The denominator used in estimating the effect sizes.
Cohen's d uses the pooled standard deviation.
Hedges' correction uses the pooled standard deviation, plus a correction factor.
Glass's delta uses the sample standard deviation of the control group.
1.2 Is there a significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to LEVEL OF EDUCATION?

1. Ho: There is no significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to level of education.
2. Ha: There is a significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to the level of education.
3. Set level of significance (alpha)=5% or 0.05
4. Test stat: ANOVA
5. Compute: Prob.Value=. 000
6. Analyze/Decide
Prob.Value vs Alpha
0.000<0.05
Decision: Reject Ho
There is a significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to the level of education.

ONEWAY income BY edcat

/MISSING ANALYSIS
/CRITERIA=CILEVEL(0.95)
/POSTHOC=TUKEY ALPHA(0.05).

Oneway

ANOVA
Household income in thousands

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 516309.531 4 129077.383 43.252 .000

Within Groups 14906701.227 4995 2984.325

Total 15423010.758 4999

Post Hoc Tests

Multiple Comparisons
Dependent Variable: Household income in thousands
Tukey HSD
Mean 95% Confidence Interval
Difference Std. Lower Upper
(I) Level of education (J) Level of education (I-J) Error Sig. Bound Bound
Did not complete high High school degree -2.63419 2.2430 .766 -8.7549 3.4865
school 2
Some college -9.83115* 2.4718 .001 -16.5762 -3.0861
2
College degree -20.14305* 2.4109 .000 -26.7221 -13.5640
8
Post-undergraduate -34.76793* 3.3761 .000 -43.9807 -25.5552
degree 4
High school degree Did not complete high 2.63419 2.2430 .766 -3.4865 8.7549
school 2
Some college -7.19696* 2.2086 .010 -13.2238 -1.1701
2
College degree -17.50886* 2.1403 .000 -23.3493 -11.6684
2
Post-undergraduate -32.13374* 3.1884 .000 -40.8344 -23.4331
degree 9
Some college Did not complete high 9.83115* 2.4718 .001 3.0861 16.5762
school 2
High school degree 7.19696* 2.2086 .010 1.1701 13.2238
2
College degree -10.31189* 2.3790 .000 -16.8037 -3.8201
 1
Post-undergraduate -24.93678* 3.3533 .000 -34.0874 -15.7862
degree 9
College degree Did not complete high 20.14305* 2.4109 .000 13.5640 26.7221
school 8
High school degree 17.50886* 2.1403 .000 11.6684 23.3493
2
Some college 10.31189* 2.3790 .000 3.8201 16.8037
1
Post-undergraduate -14.62489* 3.3088 .000 -23.6538 -5.5959
degree 0
Post-undergraduate Did not complete high 34.76793* 3.3761 .000 25.5552 43.9807
degree school 4
High school degree 32.13374* 3.1884 .000 23.4331 40.8344
9
Some college 24.93678* 3.3533 .000 15.7862 34.0874
9
College degree 14.62489* 3.3088 .000 5.5959 23.6538
0
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

Homogeneous Subsets

Household income in thousands

a,b
Tukey HSD
Subset for alpha = 0.05
Level of education N 1 2 3 4
Did not complete high school 953 45.2487
High school degree 1571 47.8829 47.8829
Some college 1002 55.0798
College degree 1113 65.3917
Post-undergraduate degree 361 80.0166
Sig. .874 .068 1.000 1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 787.102.
b. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used. Type I error levels are not guaranteed.
 2. Is there a significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to age? (cutpoint: 47 OR recode age: below 47; 47 and above)

1. Ho: There is no significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to recoded age (below 47; 47 and above).
2. Ha: There is a significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to recoded age
(below 47; 47 and above).
3. Set level of significance (alpha)=5% or 0.05
4. Test stat: t-test
5. Compute: Prob.Value=. 000
6. Analyze/Decide
Prob.Value vs Alpha
0.000<0.05
Decision: Reject Ho
There is a significant difference in the household income of the respondents when grouped
according to recoded age (below 47; 47 and above)

T-TEST GROUPS=recodedage(1 2)
/MISSING=ANALYSIS
/VARIABLES=income
/ES DISPLAY(TRUE)
/CRITERIA=CI(.95).

T-Test

Group Statistics

recoded agegroup N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Household income in below 47 2510 41.5139 28.75675 .57399
thousands
47 and above 2490 68.6759 70.65666 1.41597

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Std.
Interval of the
Mean Error
Difference
Sig. (2- Differen Differen
F Sig. t df tailed) ce ce Lower Upper
Household Equal 471.254 .000 - 4998 .000 - 1.52351 - -
income in variances 17.8 27.1619 30.1487 24.1752
thousands assumed 28 6 2 0
Equal - 3286. .000 - 1.52788 - -
variances not 17.7 183 27.1619 30.1576 24.1662
assumed 78 6 6 6

Independent Samples Effect Sizes

95% Confidence Interval
a
Standardizer Point Estimate Lower Upper
Household income in Cohen's d 53.86393 -.504 -.561 -.448
thousands Hedges' correction 53.87201 -.504 -.560 -.448
Glass's delta 70.65666 -.384 -.441 -.328
a. The denominator used in estimating the effect sizes.
Cohen's d uses the pooled standard deviation.
Hedges' correction uses the pooled standard deviation, plus a correction factor.
Glass's delta uses the sample standard deviation of the control group.

3. Is there a significant difference in the credit card debt of the respondents when grouped
according to marital status?

1. Ho: There is no significant difference in the credit card debt of the respondents when grouped
according to marital status.
2. Ha: There is a significant difference in the credit card debt of the respondents when grouped
according to marital status.
3. Set level of significance (alpha)=5% or 0.05
4. Test stat: t-test
5. Compute: Prob.Value=. 641
6. Analyze/Decide
Prob.Value vs Alpha
0.641>0.05
Decision: Accept Ho
There is no significant difference in the credit card debt of the respondents when grouped according
to marital status.

T-TEST GROUPS=marital(0 1)
/MISSING=ANALYSIS
/VARIABLES=creddebt
/ES DISPLAY(TRUE)
/CRITERIA=CI(.95).

T-Test

Group Statistics
Marital status N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Credit card debt in thousands Unmarried 2559 1.8978 3.19307 .06312

Married 2441 1.8509 3.68428 .07457

Independent Samples Test

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

95% Confidence
Sig. Std. Interval of the
(2- Mean Error Difference
tailed Differ Differ
F Sig. t df ) ence ence Lower Upper
Credit card Equal .218 .641 . 49 .630 . . -.143 .
debt in variances 48 98 0469 0973 97 2378
thousands assumed 2 2 7 1
Equal . 48 .631 . . -.144 .
variances 48 25. 0469 0977 62 2384
not assumed 0 92 2 0 5
2

Independent Samples Effect Sizes

95% Confidence Interval
a
Standardizer Point Estimate Lower Upper
Credit card debt in Cohen's d 3.44165 .014 -.042 .069
thousands
Hedges' correction 3.44216 .014 -.042 .069
Glass's delta 3.68428 .013 -.043 .068
 a. The denominator used in estimating the effect sizes.
Cohen's d uses the pooled standard deviation.
Hedges' correction uses the pooled standard deviation, plus a correction factor.
Glass's delta uses the sample standard deviation of the control group.

4. Is there a significant relationship between job category and level of education?

1. Ho: There is no significant relationship between job category and level of education.
2. Ha: There is a significant relationship between job category and level of education.
3. Set level of significance (alpha)=5% or 0.05
4. Test stat: Chi Square test
5. Compute: Prob.Value=. 003
6.Analyze/Decide
Prob.Value vs Alpha
0.003<0.05
Decision: Reject Ho
There is a significant relationship between job category and level of education.

CROSSTABS
/TABLES=jobcat BY edcat
/FORMAT=AVALUE TABLES
/STATISTICS=CHISQ
/CELLS=COUNT
/COUNT ROUND CELL.

Crosstabs
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid Missing Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

Job category * Level of 5000 100.0% 0 0.0% 5000 100.0%
education

Job category * Level of education Crosstabulation

Count
Level of education
Did not Post-
complete High undergrad
high school Some College uate
school degree college degree degree Total
Job Managerial and 239 388 282 350 120 1379
category Professional
Sales and Office 285 526 335 370 114 1630
Service 138 204 121 121 44 628
Agricultural and 41 73 45 41 18 218
Natural Resources
Precision 93 143 89 94 27 446
Production, Craft,
Repair
Operation, 157 237 130 137 38 699
Fabrication, General
Labor
Total 953 1571 1002 1113 361 5000

Chi-Square Tests

Asymptotic Significance
Value df (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 41.394a 20 .003
 Likelihood Ratio 41.369 20 .003

Linear-by-Linear Association 27.937 1 .000

N of Valid Cases 5000

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 15.74.

5. Is there a significant correlation between household income and credit card debt?

1. Ho: There is no significant correlation between household income and credit card debt.
2. Ha: There is a significant correlation between household income and credit card debt.
3. Set level of significance (alpha)=5% or 0.05
4. Test stat: Bivariate Correlation
5. Compute: Prob.Value=. 000
6.Analyze/Decide
Prob.Value vs Alpha
0.000<0.05
Decision: Reject Ho
There is a significant correlation between household income and credit card debt.
CORRELATIONS
/VARIABLES=income creddebt
/PRINT=TWOTAIL NOSIG FULL
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.

Correlations

Correlations

Household income Credit card debt in

in thousands thousands
Household income in thousands Pearson Correlation 1 .663**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 5000 5000

Credit card debt in thousands Pearson Correlation .663** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 5000 5000

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).