CHAPTER – IV

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of data collected through a
structured questionnaire to study the level of financial literacy and the savings habits among
the youth in Kanyakumari district. The primary objective of this analysis is to understand the
extent of financial awareness, the influence of various financial attitudes, and the actual
saving behaviours practiced by young individuals. The collected data has been systematically
organized and analyzed using statistical tools. Frequency tables and relevant statistical tests
have been used to present the findings clearly. Interpretation of the data aims to draw
meaningful insights into how financial literacy impacts the saving habits of the youth. The
analysis not only provides insights into the youth’s current financial practices but also
highlights areas needing improvement for better financial decision-making and future
security.
Age
This helps to analyze how responses differ across various age groups. Age-wise
classification also reveals which group is more informed, active, or responsive regarding the
topic studied.
TABLE 4.1
Age of the Respondents

Age Frequency Percentage

15 -18 Years 20 30.8
19 – 22 Years 24 36.9
23 – 25 Years 21 32.3
Total 65 100.0

Gender
This helps to compare responses based on male and female participants. Gender based
analysis allows us to differences in priorities, awareness, and preferences.
TABLE 4.2
Gender of the Respondents

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Male 31 47.7 47.7 47.7

Female 34 52.3 52.3 100.0

 Total 65 100.0 100.0

The above table shows the gender distribution of the 65 respondents in the study. Among
them, 34 respondents (52.3%) are female, and 31 respondents (47.7%) are male. This
indicates that the sample includes a slightly higher proportion of females compared to males.
The difference is marginal, suggesting a fairly balanced gender representation in the survey,
which helps ensure that the findings reflect the perspectives of both genders reasonably well.
Education Qualification
This indicates the level of education attained by the respondents. Education often shapes
awareness, understanding, and the ability to make informed choices related to the topic.
TABLE 4.3
Education Qualification of the Respondents

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Higher Education 12 18.5 18.5 18.5

UG 21 32.3 32.3 50.8

PG 22 33.8 33.8 84.6

Diploma 10 15.4 15.4 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

The above table presents the educational qualification of the respondents. Among the 65
participants, the majority are well-educated, with 33.8% having completed Post-
Graduation (PG) and 32.3% holding Under-Graduate (UG) degrees. Additionally, 18.5%
of the respondents have completed Higher Secondary Education, while 15.4% possess a
Diploma qualification. This indicates that a significant portion of the respondents (66.1%)
have attained graduate-level or higher education. The overall distribution suggests that the
sample is composed mostly of individuals with a strong academic background, which could
positively influence their understanding of financial concepts and savings behaviour.
Residence
This shows whether the respondent is from a rural or urban area, which may influence their
perspective. It helps identify how access to facilities and awareness levels vary between
different geographical locations.
TABLE 4.4
Residence of the Respondents
 Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Urban 26 40.0 40.0 40.0

Rural 39 60.0 60.0 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

The table shows the residential distribution of the 65 respondents. Out of the total, 39
respondents (60.0%) reside in rural areas, while 26 respondents (40.0%) are from urban
areas. This indicates that a majority of the participants in the study come from rural
backgrounds. The higher rural representation may provide valuable insights into the financial
literacy and saving habits of youth in less urbanized settings, which can differ significantly
from those in urban areas due to differences in access to financial resources, educational
opportunities, and exposure to financial institutions.
Personal Income
This indicates the respondent’s earning level and understand financial behaviour. Higher or
lower income levels may affect decision-making, savings patterns, and overall participation.
TABLE 4.5
Personal Income of the Respondents

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Below 3000 25 38.5 38.5 38.5

3000 - 5000 13 20.0 20.0 58.5

5000 - 8000 15 23.1 23.1 81.5

Above 8000 12 18.5 18.5 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

The table presents the personal income distribution of the 65 respondents. It shows that the
largest group, 25 respondents (38.5%), earn below ₹3000 per month. This is followed by 15
respondents (23.1%) earning between ₹5000 and ₹8000, 13 respondents (20.0%) earning
between ₹3000 and ₹5000, and 12 respondents (18.5%) earning above ₹8000. The data
indicates that a significant portion of the respondents have low-income levels, with nearly
60% earning ₹5000 or less. This suggests that the majority of the participants may have
limited financial resources, which could impact their saving capacity and financial decision-
making.
Awareness of Financial Literacy
 This part examines whether respondents are familiar with the term “financial literacy”. It
serves as a basic indicator of financial awareness and readiness for effective money
management.
TABLE 4.6
Awareness of Financial Literacy

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative

Percent Percent

Yes 30 46.2 46.2 46.2

Valid No 35 53.8 53.8 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

Importance of Financial Education

This analyzes respondents view on the inclusion of financial education in schools and
colleges. It reflects their opinion on the need for early financial learning and the best stage to
implement it.
TABLE 4.7
Cross Tabulation

Importance of Financial Total

Education

Yes No

Count 12 19 31

% within Gender 38.7% 61.3% 100.0%

Male
% within Importance of Financial
40.0% 54.3% 47.7%
Education
Gender
Count 18 16 34

Femal % within Gender 52.9% 47.1% 100.0%

e
% within Importance of Financial
60.0% 45.7% 52.3%
Education
Total Count 30 35 65

% within Gender 46.2% 53.8% 100.0%

 % within Importance of Financial
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Education

The crosstab analysis between gender and the importance of financial education reveals
notable differences in perception among male and female respondents. Among males, only
38.7% consider financial education important, whereas 61.3% do not, indicating a relatively
lower awareness or value placed on financial education. In contrast, a higher proportion of
females—52.9%—recognize its importance, while 47.1% do not. This suggests that female
respondents are more inclined to acknowledge the significance of financial education
compared to their male counterparts. Overall, out of the total 65 respondents, 46.2% consider
financial education important, while 53.8% do not. These results indicate a general need to
raise awareness and promote financial literacy, particularly among male youth.
TABLE 4.8
Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1-

(2-sided) sided) sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 1.321a 1 .250

Continuity Correction .811 1 .368
Likelihood Ratio 1.327 1 .249
Fisher's Exact Test .321 .184
Linear-by-Linear
1.301 1 .254
Association
N of Valid Cases 65

The Chi-Square test results assess the relationship between gender and the importance of
financial education. The Pearson Chi-Square value is 1.321 with a p-value of 0.250, which
is greater than the standard significance level of 0.05. This indicates that there is no
statistically significant association between gender and the importance of financial
education among the respondents.
Additionally, other related tests such as the Likelihood Ratio (p = 0.249) and Fisher’s Exact
Test (p = 0.321) also support this conclusion, as their p-values are similarly above 0.05. The
Continuity Correction and Linear-by-Linear Association also show non-significant
results.
In summary, based on the Chi-Square analysis, gender does not have a significant influence
on whether a respondent considers financial education important, suggesting that both male
and female respondents hold relatively similar views in statistical terms.
Preferred level for Financial Education
For those who believe financial education is necessary, this section identifies where they
think it should be included – schools, colleges, or both. This helps understand at which stage
respondents feel financial literacy would be most effective.
TABLE 4.9
Cross Tabulation

Preferred Level of Financial Total

Education

School College Both

Count 4 7 9 20
15 - 18 Years
% within Age 20.0% 35.0% 45.0% 100.0%

Count 11 6 7 24
Age 19 - 22 Years
% within Age 45.8% 25.0% 29.2% 100.0%

Count 2 8 11 21
23 - 25 Years
% within Age 9.5% 38.1% 52.4% 100.0%

The crosstab analysis between age and the preferred level of financial education shows
varying preferences among different age groups. Among respondents aged 15–18 years, 45%
prefer financial education at both school and college levels, 35% prefer it at the college level
only, and 20% at the school level. In the 19–22 years group, the majority (45.8%) prefer
school-level education, followed by 29.2% who prefer both, and 25% who prefer college-
level education alone. For those aged 23–25 years, the majority (52.4%) prefer financial
education at both levels, 38.1% at the college level, and only 9.5% at the school level.
When observing the distribution within each preferred education level, most of those who
prefer school-level financial education (64.7%) fall into the 19–22 years group. Those who
prefer college-level education (38.1%) are mainly from the 23–25 years group, which also
has the highest percentage (40.7%) preferring both levels.
Overall, out of the total 65 respondents, 41.5% prefer financial education at both school
and college levels, 32.3% prefer it at the college level, and 26.2% prefer it only at the
school level. This suggests that while preferences vary by age, there is a general trend toward
integrating financial education across both school and college to ensure comprehensive
learning.
 TABLE 4.10
Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 8.260a 4 .083

Likelihood Ratio 8.428 4 .077
Linear-by-Linear
.544 1 .461
Association
N of Valid Cases 65

The Chi-Square test examining the relationship between age and the preferred level of
financial education shows a Pearson Chi-Square value of 8.260 with a p-value of 0.083,
which is above the standard 0.05 level of significance but below 0.10. This indicates that
the association between age and preference for receiving financial education (in school,
college, or both) is not statistically significant at the 5% level, but it does suggest a
marginal association at the 10% level. In other words, while there is no strong evidence to
confirm a significant relationship, the data implies that age may have some influence on
when individuals prefer to receive financial education. This trend is supported by the
Likelihood Ratio (p = 0.077), though the Linear-by-Linear Association (p = 0.461) shows
no clear linear trend. Overall, the findings suggest that different age groups may have varying
preferences, but further research with a larger sample may be needed to draw firmer
conclusions.
View on Borrowing as a Financial Solution
This assesses attitudes towards borrowing to solve financial problems. It provides insight
into how young individuals perceive debt and their understanding of its impact.
TABLE 4.11
View on Borrowing as a Financial Solution

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly Agree 6 9.2 9.2 9.2

Agree 9 13.8 13.8 23.1

Neutral 15 23.1 23.1 46.2

Disagree 15 23.1 23.1 69.2

 Strongly Disagree 20 30.8 30.8 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

The frequency distribution shows respondents' level of agreement with a particular statement
related to financial education or saving habits. Among the 65 participants, the highest
proportion — 30.8% (20 respondents) — strongly disagree with the statement, followed by
23.1% each who are neutral and who disagree. Only 13.8% (9 respondents) agree, and
9.2% (6 respondents) strongly agree.
This indicates that a majority of respondents (53.9%) either disagree or strongly disagree
with the statement, while only 23% show any level of agreement. The remaining 23.1% are
neutral. Overall, the data suggests a generally negative attitude or disagreement toward the
statement in question, with a relatively low level of agreement among the participants.
Primary Source of Income
The source of income – whether self-earned, pocket money, or scholarship – helps to
determine financial independence. It also affects how respondents handle and value the
money.
TABLE 4.12
Primary source of Income

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative

Percent Percent

Parents Pocket
28 43.1 43.1 43.1
Money

Valid Scholarship 18 27.7 27.7 70.8

Self-earned 19 29.2 29.2 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

Regular Saving Habits

This explores whether respondents save regularly and through what means. It reflects their
commitment to financial discipline and their familiarity with saving tools.
TABLE 4.14
Crosstab
 Regular Saving Total
Habits

Yes No

Count 15 16 31

% within Gender 48.4% 51.6% 100.0%

Male
% within Regular Saving
45.5% 50.0% 47.7%
Habits
Gender
Count 18 16 34

% within Gender 52.9% 47.1% 100.0%

Female
% within Regular Saving
54.5% 50.0% 52.3%
Habits
Count 33 32 65

% within Gender 50.8% 49.2% 100.0%

Total
% within Regular Saving
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Habits

The crosstab analysis between gender and regular saving habits shows a fairly balanced
pattern among male and female respondents. Among males, 48.4% reported having regular
saving habits, while 51.6% do not. In comparison, 52.9% of females reported saving
regularly, and 47.1% do not. This suggests that females are slightly more likely to have
regular saving habits than males.
When looking at the distribution within each category of saving habits, 45.5% of those who
save regularly are males, while 54.5% are females. Among those who do not save
regularly, the proportion is equal—50% male and 50% female.
Overall, out of 65 respondents, 50.8% report having regular saving habits, and 49.2% do
not, indicating that the habit of regular saving is evenly distributed among the youth, with
only a slight gender difference in favour of females.
TABLE 4.15
Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1-

(2-sided) sided) sided)

Pearson Chi-Square .135a 1 .714

 Continuity Correction .014 1 .906
Likelihood Ratio .135 1 .714
Fisher's Exact Test .806 .453
Linear-by-Linear
.132 1 .716
Association
N of Valid Cases 65

The Chi-Square test results indicate that there is no significant association between gender
and regular saving habits among the respondents. The Pearson Chi-Square value is 0.135
with a p-value of 0.714, which is much higher than the standard significance level of 0.05.
This suggests that any observed differences in saving habits between males and females are
statistically insignificant. Supporting tests such as the Likelihood Ratio (p = 0.714),
Continuity Correction (p = 0.906), and Fisher’s Exact Test (p = 0.806) also show non-
significant values, confirming the same conclusion. Therefore, the findings imply that gender
does not have a meaningful impact on whether respondents practice regular saving habits,
and saving behavior appears to be similar across both genders in this study.
Method of Saving
Among those who save money regularly, this part analyses the methods uses whether saving
in a bank, post office, at home, or through digital wallets. It reflects the respondent’s trust in
financial institutions and their level of digital financial engagement.
TABLE 4.16
Method of Saving (Multiple Response)

Responses Percent of
Cases
N Percent

Method of Bank
38 25.5% 58.5%
Saving Account

Cash at home 38 25.5% 58.5%

Post Office 37 24.8% 56.9%

Digital
36 24.2% 55.4%
Wallets
Total 149 100.0% 229.2%
The frequency analysis of saving methods among youth reveals that bank accounts and
keeping cash at home are the most commonly used methods, each selected by 38
respondents (25.5% of total responses), representing 58.5% of the participants. Post office
savings were chosen by 37 respondents (24.8%), accounting for 56.9% of the cases, while
digital wallets were selected by 36 respondents (24.2%), used by 55.4% of the
participants. These findings indicate that youth utilize a mix of both formal and informal
saving methods. The relatively high usage of digital wallets shows an emerging preference
for digital financial tools. Since the question allowed multiple responses, the total percent of
cases exceeds 100% (229.2%), suggesting that many respondents use more than one saving
method. Overall, the data reflects diverse saving preferences, with a balanced use of
traditional and modern financial tools among the youth.
Achievement of Savings Goals
This identifies how consistently respondents meet their savings targets. It helps evaluate their
goal-setting behaviour and financial consistency.
Achievement of Savings Goals

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Always 21 32.3 32.3 32.3

Occasionally 22 33.8 33.8 66.2

Valid Never 21 32.3 32.3 98.5

13 1 1.5 1.5 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

Ownership of Savings Account

Having a savings account shows a respondent’s inclusion in the formal banking system. It
also indicates their level of financial responsibility and practice.
Ownership of Savings Account

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid Yes 59 90.8 90.8 90.8

No 6 9.2 9.2 100.0

 Total 65 100.0 100.0

Belief in the Importance of Saving

This reflects respondent’s personal values regarding saving. It helps understand whether they
see saving as a necessary and meaningful financial habit.
Belief in the Importance of Saving

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Yes 50 76.9 76.9 76.9

Valid No 15 23.1 23.1 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

Participation in Family Investment

This explores the level of involvement in household financial planning. It highlights real-life
exposure to financial decision-making and awareness of investment options.
Participation in Family Investment Decisions

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Always 22 33.8 33.8 33.8

Sometimes 19 29.2 29.2 63.1

Valid
Never 24 36.9 36.9 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

Awareness of Financial Schemes

This section measures how familiar respondents are with various financial schemes such as
insurance, bank deposits, and mutual funds. It reveals their depth of financial knowledge.

Residence * Aware of Financial Schemes Crosstabulation

Aware of Financial Total

Schemes
 Yes No

Count 10 16 26

% within Residence 38.5% 61.5% 100.0%

Urban
% within Aware of
35.7% 43.2% 40.0%
Financial Schemes
Residence
Count 18 21 39

% within Residence 46.2% 53.8% 100.0%

Rural
% within Aware of
64.3% 56.8% 60.0%
Financial Schemes
Count 28 37 65

% within Residence 43.1% 56.9% 100.0%

Total
% within Aware of
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Financial Schemes

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1-

(2-sided) sided) sided)

Pearson Chi-Square .376a 1 .540

Continuity Correctionb .128 1 .720
Likelihood Ratio .378 1 .539
Fisher's Exact Test .614 .361
Linear-by-Linear
.371 1 .543
Association
N of Valid Cases 65

Awareness level of Financial Schemes

This part assesses how familiar respondents are with various financial schemes. It helps
identity which schemes are well known and which need greater awareness.
Saving Tools Used
This identifies the methods used by respondents to save money. Whether traditional or
formal, the tools used reflect accessibility and financial maturity.

Responses Percent of
Cases
N Percent

Piggy Bank 40 27.4% 61.5%

Money Envelopes 29 19.9% 44.6%

Saving Tools Useda
BankAccount 48 32.9% 73.8%

Recurring Deposits 29 19.9% 44.6%

Total 146 100.0% 224.6%

The analysis of the multiple response question on tools used for saving reveals that the most
commonly used method among youth respondents is the bank account, with 48 individuals
(32.9% of total responses) choosing it, representing 73.8% of all respondents. This indicates
a strong inclination towards formal saving mechanisms. Piggy banks were the second most
preferred tool, selected by 40 respondents (27.4%), accounting for 61.5% of cases, showing
that traditional methods are still popular among many youths. Both money envelopes and
recurring deposits were chosen by 29 respondents each (19.9%), with 44.6% of
respondents using each of these tools. Since this was a multiple-response item, the total
percent of cases adds up to more than 100% (224.6%), indicating that many respondents use
more than one saving method. Overall, the data suggest that while formal saving tools are
widely used, informal methods also continue to play a significant role in the saving habits of
young individuals.
Purpose of Saving
Understanding why individuals save money provides insight into their financial goals.
Whether it’s for emergencies, future needs, or education, it reveals their planning mindset.
Purpose of Saving

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid For Emergency 9 13.8 13.8 13.8

For Future 11 16.9 16.9 30.8

As a habit 15 23.1 23.1 53.8

 For Higher studies 21 32.3 32.3 86.2

Investment 9 13.8 13.8 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

Financial Attitude
This part analyzes how respondents think and feel about money management. Statements
related to planning, goal-setting, and spending provide insight into their financial attitude.
KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

.805
Adequacy.
Approx. Chi-Square 106.383
Bartlett's Test of
df 10
Sphericity
Sig. .000

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy is 0.805, which is

considered "meritorious" according to standard interpretation guidelines. A KMO value
above 0.80 indicates that the sample is suitable for factor analysis and that the patterns of
correlations are relatively compact, allowing reliable extraction of factors.
The Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity shows a Chi-Square value of 106.383 with 10 degrees of
freedom and a significance value (Sig.) of 0.000. Since the p-value is less than 0.05, the
result is statistically significant, indicating that the correlation matrix is not an identity
matrix. This means that there are significant relationships among variables, making it
appropriate to proceed with factor analysis.
In summary, both tests confirm that the data is adequate and appropriate for factor analysis.
Financial Behaviour
This evaluates actual financial practices like budgeting, timely payments, and attending
financial programs. It helps measure how financial knowledge is applied in everyday life.
KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

.880
Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 226.556
Sphericity
df 10
 Sig. .000

Achievement of Savings Goals

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Always 22 33.8 33.8 33.8

Occasionally 22 33.8 33.8 67.7

Valid
Never 21 32.3 32.3 100.0

Total 65 100.0 100.0

Component Matrixa

Component

AttitudeSetGoals .875
AttitudeCompareProdu
.824
ct
AttitudeFinImportant .810
AttitudeSpendWisely .476
AttitudeSavFuture .685

Extraction Method: Principal

Component Analysis.
a. 1 components extracted.

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

.869
Adequacy.
 Approx. Chi-Square 130.164
Bartlett's Test of
df 10
Sphericity
Sig. .000

Communalities

Initial Extraction

Behaviour Buy Low cost

1.000 .719
Products
Behaviour Pay Bills on
1.000 .764
Time
Behaviour Make Budget 1.000 .856
Behaviour Family
1.000 .803
Financial Decision
Behaviour Attend
1.000 .630
Programmes

Extraction Method: Principal Component

Analysis.

Component Matrixa

Component

Behaviour Buy Low cost

.848
Products
Behaviour Pay Bills on
.874
Time
Behaviour Make Budget .925
Behaviour Family
.896
Financial Decision
Behaviour Attend
.793
Programmes
Extraction Method: Principal
Component Analysis.
a. 1 components extracted.

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %

1 3.771 75.422 75.422 3.771 75.422 75.422

2 .476 9.524 84.946
3 .339 6.778 91.724
4 .246 4.917 96.641
5 .168 3.359 100.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

[Link] Behaviour Factor Eigen Percent of

Variable Loading Values Variance
1 Buy Low 3.771 75.422%
Cost 0.848
Products
2 Pay Bills on
0.874
Time
3 Make
0.925
Budget
4 Family
Financial 0.896
Decisions
5 Attend
Financial 0.793
Programmes

Financial Attitude
This part analyzes how respondents think and feel about money management.
Statements related to planning, goal-setting, and spending provide insight into their financial
attitude.
TABLE 4.22
 Reliability Statistics for the Financial Attitude

Particulars Cronbach’s Alpha No. of Items

Financial Attitude 0.803 5

The Financial Attitude scale showed good reliability with a Cronbach’s Alpha of
0.803 for 5 items. This indicates that the items have strong internal consistency and
effectively measure the same underlying concept, making the scale suitable for further
analysis.
TABLE 4.23
Financial Attitude of the Respondents (KMO and Bartlett’s Test)

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0.800

Approx. Chi-Square 68.253
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity df 10
Sig. .000

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy is 0.800, which is

considered meritorious and indicates that the sample is adequate for factor analysis. A KMO
value above 0.7 is generally acceptable, and values closer to 1.0 suggest stronger correlations
among variables, suitable for factor extraction.
The Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity has a Chi-Square value of 68.253 with 10 degrees of
freedom and a significance level (p-value) of 0.000, which is highly significant (p < 0.05).
This means that the correlation matrix is not an identity matrix, and the variables are
sufficiently correlated to justify the use of factor analysis.
Overall, the test results confirm that the dataset related to financial attitude is
statistically appropriate for factor analysis, suggesting reliable patterns and groupings can be
identified among the variables.
Financial Behaviour
This evaluates actual financial practices like budgeting, timely payments, and
attending financial programs. It helps measure how financial knowledge is applied in
everyday life.
TABLE 4.24
Reliability Statistics for the Financial Behaviour

Particulars Cronbach’s Alpha No. of Items

Financial Behaviour 0.915 5
 The Financial Behaviour scale has a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.915 for 5 items, indicating
excellent internal consistency. This means the items reliably measure the same concept and
the scale is highly suitable for further analysis.
TABLE 4.25
Financial Behaviour of the Respondents (KMO and Bartlett’s Test)

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0.869

Approx. Chi-Square 130.164
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity df 10
Sig. .000

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy is 0.869, which is

considered excellent, indicating that the sample is highly suitable for factor analysis. A value
above 0.8 reflects strong correlations among variables, which enhances the reliability of the
factor analysis results.
The Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity shows a Chi-Square value of 130.164 with 10
degrees of freedom and a significance level of 0.000. Since the p-value is less than 0.05, the
result is highly significant, confirming that the correlation matrix is not an identity matrix and
that there are meaningful relationships among the variables.
In summary, the test results indicate that the data on financial behaviour is statistically
valid for factor analysis, suggesting that underlying patterns or factors can be effectively
identified from the responses.