2010 - Public Relations Society of America
2010 - Public Relations Society of America
2010 - Public Relations Society of America
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Table 1<br />
Impact <strong>of</strong> Corporate Reputation on Purchase and Investment Decisions as Affected by Income<br />
Response mean for income levels<br />
Survey<br />
question < $20k<br />
$20k-<br />
$39,000<br />
$40k-<br />
$59,999<br />
$60k-<br />
$79,999<br />
$80k-<br />
$99,999<br />
$100k-<br />
149,999 $150k+<br />
Decision to<br />
purchase<br />
2.24 2.47 2.73 2.63 2.63 2.68 2.61<br />
Decision to<br />
invest<br />
3.00 2.77 2.65 2.43 2.56 2.34 2.56<br />
Note. N=691 for purchase question, 689 for investment question.<br />
As with income level, age category does not appear to reveal significant variation. Table<br />
2 depicts responses segmented by age. Mean responses for each age category rest between<br />
“occasionally” and “frequently,” as they did by income level. Cumulative means for all age<br />
categories were 2.61 for purchase decisions (sd = 1.24) and 2.59 for investment decisions (sd =<br />
1.74). Again responses by age were compared using a one-way ANOVA. No significant<br />
difference was found for intent to purchase (F(4, 828) = 1.369, p = .243) or for intent to invest<br />
(F(4, 827) = 1.232, p = .169). Tukey’s HSD post-hoc test revealed no significant differences<br />
across the entire range <strong>of</strong> comparisons by age segment.<br />
Table 2<br />
Impact <strong>of</strong> Corporate Reputation on Purchase and Investment Decisions as Affected by Age<br />
Response mean for age segments<br />
Survey<br />
question 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+<br />
Decision to<br />
purchase<br />
2.65 2.60 2.65 2.72 2.39<br />
Decision to<br />
invest<br />
2.42 2.44 2.79 2.61 2.72<br />
Note. N=833 for purchase question, 832 for investment question.<br />
Continuing the pattern <strong>of</strong> examining demographically segmented respondent groups,<br />
level <strong>of</strong> education also fails to produce significant differences for purchase decisions, but<br />
education level does appear to matter in regard to investment decisions. Table 3 shows that<br />
regardless <strong>of</strong> education level, mean response levels again fall between “occasionally” and<br />
“frequently” for goods and services purchase decisions. For investment decisions, though,<br />
respondents with only a high school diploma or less education appear to be affected less by a<br />
company’s reputation, reporting means between “occasionally” and “rarely” to describe<br />
reputation’s impact on their investment calculations. Cumulative means for all education levels<br />
were 2.60 for purchase decisions (sd = 1.24) and 2.59 for investment decisions (sd = 1.74).<br />
When responses by education level were compared using a one-way ANOVA, no significant<br />
difference was found for intent to purchase (F(4, 832) = 1.861, p = .115), and Tukey’s HSD<br />
post-hoc test confirms that this is true for all cross-comparisons among education levels.<br />
Differences are significant, however, for intent to invest (F(4, 831) = 5.381, p = .000). To<br />
determine specific comparisons among education level segments, Tukey’s HSD post-hoc test<br />
60