A study of relationship between service advertising strategies and Dissertation

A study of relationship between service advertising strategies and consumers responses within hospitality industry - Dissertation Example Results The following mean ranges have been used for the substantive interpretations of the means: 1.00-1.49 – strongly disagree; 1.50-2.49 – slightly disagree; 2.50 – 3.49 – neutral; 3.50-4.49 – slightly agree; and 4.50 – 5.00 – strongly agree. Table 1a. Descriptive statistics: The advertisement caught my attention. Mean Std. Deviation Advert 1 3.94 0.80 Advert 2 3.76 0.86 Advert 3 4.17 0.66 Total 3.96 0.79 On the capacity of the advertisement to catch their attention, the means for all three advertisements all suggest agreement. Table 1b. One-way ANOVA: The advertisement caught my attention. Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 12.40 2.00 6.20 10.30 0.00 Within Groups 261.77 435.00 0.60 Â   Â   Total 274.18 437.00 Â   Â   Â   The one-way ANOVA suggests that there is a significant difference among the three advertisements’ ratings on attention getting capacity (F=10.30, p=.00). The post hoc tests in Table A1 (Appendix A) indicates that Ad 3 received significantly higher means than the other two advertisements. Ad 1 is likewise more effective than Ad 2 on this aspect. Table 2a. Descriptive statistics: The advertisement elicited my interest in the hotel being advertised. Mean Std. Deviation Advert 1 3.84 0.63 Advert 2 3.79 0.72 Advert 3 3.99 0.58 On the capability of the advertisement to elicit interest in the hotel, all means suggest agreement by the respondents. Table 2b. One-way ANOVA: The advertisement elicited my interest in the hotel being advertised Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.31 2.00 1.65 3.98 0.02 Within Groups 180.79 435.00 0.42 Â   Â   Total 184.09 437.00 Â   Â   Â   On the capability of the advertisement to elicit interest in the hotel being advertised, the F-value indicates that there is indeed a significant difference among the ratings given to the 3 advertisements (F=3.98, p=.02). Table A2 (Appendix A) indicates that Ad 3 garnered significant ly higher ratings than the other two advertisements on this facet. Table 3a. Descriptive statistics: I felt the conviction that what is shown in this advertisement must be true, and developed a positive disposition on my part. Mean Std. Deviation Advert 1 3.33 0.82 Advert 2 4.10 0.78 Advert 3 4.26 0.62 On the conviction that what is shown in this advertisement must be true and developing a positive disposition on the respondents, Ad 2 and 3 garnered agreement. However, Ad 1 received a neutral rating. Table 3b. One-way ANOVA: I felt the conviction that what is shown in this advertisement must be true, and developed a positive disposition on my part. Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 72.18 2.00 36.09 64.61 0.00 Within Groups 242.99 435.00 0.56 Â   Â   Total 315.17 437.00 Â   Â   Â   The one-way ANOVA for statement 3 suggests that there are significant differences yielded for the ratings given to the 3 groups (F=64.61, p=.00). The results in Table A3 (Appendix A) indicates that Ad 3 got higher ratings than the other two ads on this facet, whereas Ad 2 received a higher rating compared to Ad 1. Table 4a. Descriptive statistics: I would like to know more information about this hotel by looking it up in the telephone directory and calling this hote