Factor Analysis Report Brand Benefits, Overall Satisfaction and Loyalty.

First run
Remove SOBapprov
Rotated Component Matrix(a)
Component
1

SOBimpres
SOBaccept

.838
.831

SOBimprov

.810

SOBapprov

.727

.360

EBfeelgood

.837

EBdelight

.810

EBpleasure

.654

EBconfiden

.317

.625

EBfeelsexy

.538

.355

FBsuitable

.795

FBreliable

.772

FBconvnien

.647

FBsolution

.611

FBremove

.596

FBbeauty

.558

SYBprestig

.786

SYBtaste

.774

SYBdesire

.749

SYBfitsocia

.340
.728
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

Second run (remove- EBfeelsexy)

Rotated Component Matrix(a)
Component
1

EBfeelgood
EBdelight

.838
.813

EBpleasure

.654

EBconfiden

.628

EBfeelsexy

.546

.310
.364

FBsuitable

.793

FBreliable

.774

FBconvnien

.651

FBsolution

.609

FBremove

.595

FBbeauty

.553

SYBprestig

.794

SYBtaste

.778

SYBdesire

.760

SYBfitsocia

.741

.304

SOBimpres

.841

SOBaccept

.826

SOBimprov

.799

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a Rotation converged in 6 iterations.

Third run (FBremove- due to low communalities)

Rotated Component Matrix(a)
Component
1

FBsuitable
FBreliable

.785
.776

FBconvnien

.657

FBsolution

.612

FBremove

.590

FBbeauty

.554

SYBprestig

.804

SYBdesire

.779

SYBtaste

.772

SYBfitsocia

.757

EBfeelgood

.845

EBdelight

.833

EBconfiden

.653

EBpleasure

.636

SOBimpres

.835

SOBaccept

.825

SOBimprov

.816

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

Fourth run (remove EBpleasure)

Rotated Component Matrix(a)
Component
1

SYBprestig
SYBdesire

.803
.778

SYBtaste

.771

SYBfitsocia

.757

FBreliable

.795

FBsuitable

.793

FBsolution

.659

FBconvnien

.656

FBbeauty

.597

EBfeelgood

.844

EBdelight

.837

EBconfiden

.655

EBpleasure

.320

.626

SOBimpres

.836

SOBaccept

.824

SOBimprov

.816

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

Final Run
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling
Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of
Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square

.873
4151.032

df

105

Sig.

.000

Total Variance Explained

Initial Eigenvalues
Component
1
2

Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings

Total
5.823
2.000

% of Variance
38.819
13.335

Cumulative %
38.819
52.154

Total
5.823
2.000

% of Variance
38.819
13.335

Cumulative %
38.819
52.154

Total
2.814
2.728

% of Variance
18.763
18.184

Cumulative %
18.763
36.947

1.284

8.559

60.713

1.284

8.559

60.713

2.525

16.833

53.780

1.191

7.938

68.651

1.191

7.938

68.651

2.231

14.871

68.651

.738

4.922

73.573

.633

4.221

77.794

.558

3.720

81.514

.521

3.473

84.987

.439

2.927

87.914

10

.370

2.465

90.380

11

.353

2.351

92.730

12

.312

2.083

94.813

13

.294

1.960

96.773

14

.254

1.697

98.470

15

.229
1.530
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

100.000

Rotated Component Matrix(a)

Component
1

SYBprestig
SYBtaste

.800
.779

SYBdesire

.777

SYBfitsocia

.761

FBreliable

.803

FBsuitable

.799

FBsolution

.668

FBconvnien

.653

FBbeauty

.605

SOBimpres

.840

SOBaccept

.827

SOBimprov

.818

EBdelight

.861

EBfeelgood

.853

EBconfiden

.642

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

REPORTING FACTOR ANALYSIS

Factor Analysis of Brand Image Benefits

The brand image benefits construct in this study is a multidimensional construct. This construct were
represented by nineteen items; i.e. functional benefits (6 items), social benefits (4 items), symbolic
benefits (4 items) and experiential benefits (5 items). A principal component method with a varimax
rotation (note: or promax rotation) was utilized in order to reduce a large number of variables to a
smaller numbers of factors.
The results of factor analysis on brand image benefits are presented in Table 4.5. The initial run of
the factor analysis on 19 items of brand image benefits produced four factors with eigenvalues above one.
The Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin value was .898 and the Bartlett test of sphericity was significant at 0.00. Antiimage correlation for the entire brand image benefits variables were greater than 0.5. However, some
items were cross-loaded on other factors or different dimensions. For example, the first item the brand
gives social approval was removed due to cross loading on other factors (i.e. factor 4, symbolic
benefits construct) see Appendix CXX on page XX. After this item was removed, the factor analysis was
run again.
The second run of the factor analysis also extracted four factors with eigenvalues greater than
one. The Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin value was .885 and the Bartlett test of sphericity was significant at 0.00.
Anti-image correlation for the entire brand image variables were greater than 0.5. Second item was
removed (i.e. the brand makes me feel sexy) as it cross-loaded on other factor (i.e. factor 3 symbolic
benefits). The details of this exercise can be referred to Appendix C1 (p.376).
The third run of factor analysis produced four factors with eigenvalues greater than one. The
Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin value was .883 and the Bartlett test of sphericity was significant at 0.00. The Antiimage correlation was above 0.5. The result of this factor analysis indicates that the item the brands
color can be easily removed achieved very low communalities (.357). Thus, this item was deleted and
the data reduction process was re-run again.

The fourth run of the factor analysis also extracted four factors with eigenvalues greater than one.
The Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin value was .881 and the Bartlett test of sphericity was significant at 0.00. Antiimage correlation for the entire brand image variables were greater than 0.5. Fourth item was removed
(i.e. the brand gives me pleasure) as it cross-loaded on other factor (i.e. factor 2 functional benefits).
The details of this exercise can be referred to Appendix C1 (p.376).
The final run of factor analysis produced four factors with eigenvalues more than one, which
explained 68.65% of the total variance (see Table 4.5). The Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin value was .873 and
Bartlett Test of Sphericity was significant at 0.000. Anti-image correlation of the remaining 15 items of
brand image benefits exceeded 0.50. The communalities of the 15 variables ranged from 0.450 to 0.819
(note: lowest to the highest communalities).
The factor loadings for the remaining 15 brand image benefits variables were in the range of .605
to .861, which indicates above the recommended cutoff point value of 0.3 for practical and statistical
significance. Overall, all the variables were loaded significantly on four factors as conceptualized,
therefore the same label was used to label these factors.
As indicated in Table 4.5, factor one symbolic benefits consists of four variables: they were the
brand prevents me from looking less prestigious., the brand indicates that I am a person with taste.,
the brand enhances the perceptions that I have a desirable life style and the brand helps me to better fit
into my social group. It has an eigenvalue of 5.82 which accounted of 18.72% of the total variance.
Factor two was labeled functional benefits since the items portrayed the perception of the
functional benefits acquired from usage of the brand. The 5 items measured include the brand is suitable
for my usage, the brand is reliable for its usage, the brand is convenient to use, the brand makes me
beautiful, and the brand provides a solution to my expectations. Approximately 18.18% of the variance
was captured by factor two that has an eigenvalue of 2.00.
Factor three social benefits consists of three variables: they were the brand improves the way I
am perceived by others, the brand helps me feel accepted by others and the brand makes a good

impression of me on other people. It has an eigenvalue of 1.28 which accounted of 16.83% of the total
variance.
Factor four was labeled as experiential benefits and includes items related to customers
perceptions of the experiential benefits attainable from using the brand such as the brand makes me feel
good, the brand makes me feel delighted, and the brand enhances my self confidence. This factor
has an eigenvalue of 1.19 and explained 14.87% of the total variance.
Table 4.5
Factor Analysis of Brand Image Benefits
Items
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
1
2
3

Factor 1: Symbolic Benefits

The brand prevents me from looking less prestigious.
The brand indicates that I am a person with taste.
The brand enhances the perceptions that I have a
desirable life style.
The brand helps me to better fit into my social group.
Factor 2: Functional Benefits
The brand is reliable for its usage
The brand is suitable for my usage.
The brand provides a solution to my expectations.
The brand is convenient to use.
The brand makes me beautiful.
Factor 3: Social Benefits
The brand makes a good impression of me on other
people.
The brand helps me feel accepted by others.
The brand improves the way I am perceived by others.
Factor 4: Experiential Benefits
The brand makes me feel delighted.
The brand makes me feel good.
The brand enhances my self confidence.

F1

Factor Analysis of Overall Customer Satisfaction

F3

F4

.800
.779
.777
.761

5.82
Eigen Value
18.763
% of Variance
Total Variance Explained
68.651
Measure of Sampling Adequacy
.873
Bartletts Test of Sphericity
4151.032
Signifcant
0.00
Reporting unidimensional/one dimensional construct Factor Analysis

4.4.2

F2

.803
.799
.668
.653
.605
.840
.827
.818
.861
.853
.642
2.00
18.184

1.28
16.833

1.19
14.871

The factor analysis for the overall satisfaction variables produced only one factor that had an eigenvalue
of 3.31 and explained 66.11% of the total variance. The Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin value was 0.84, and the
Bartletts test of sphericity was significant at 0.00, indicating that the items were correlated and suitable
for factor analysis (see Table 4.6). The communalities of the five variables ranged from 0.53 to 0.75 and
factor loadings of the variables ranged from 0.73-0.87. Table 4.6 below displays the factor loadings of the
items measuring overall customer satisfaction.

Table 4.6
Factor Analysis of Overall Customer Satisfaction
Factor
Loadings

Items

4.4.3

Overall Satisfaction
I am very satisfied with my decision to use this brand.

2
3
4
5

I did the right thing using the brand.

My choice to use this brand has been a wise one.
I believe that using this brand is usually a very satisfying experience.
The brand does a good job in satisfying my needs.
Eigen Value
Total Variance Explained
Measure of Sampling Adequacy
Bartletts test of Sphericity
Significant
Factor Analysis of Loyalty Intention

.867
.866
.817
.777
.730

3.31
66.11
.84
1456.32
.00

As shown in Table 4.7, the factor analysis of the six loyalty intention items/variables only extracted one
factor that had an eigenvalue of 3.64 and accounted for 60.58% of the total variance. The Kaiser-MeyerOklin value was 0.85, and the Bartletts test of sphericity was significant at 0.00, which indicates that the
data was suitable for factor analysis (see Table 4.7). The communalities of the 6 variables ranged from
0.56 to 0.68 and factor loadings of the variables ranged from 0.734 to 0.823.
Table 4.7
Factor Analysis of Loyalty Intention
Items

Factor Loadings

Loyalty Intention
I intend to continue using the brand in the future.

.823

2
3
4
5
6

I am more likely to repurchase the brand in the future.

I will recommend this brand to anyone who seeks my advice.
I will say positive things about the brand to other people.
I will encourage friends and relatives to use with the brand.
The brand is my first choice.

.806
.800
.757
.746
.734

Eigenvalue
Total Variance Explained
Measure of Sampling Adequacy
Bartletts test of Sphericity
Significant

3.64
60.58
.85
1653.08
.00