Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta)

THE ANALYSIS INFLUENCE OF BRAND IMAGE, PRICE, AND PERCEIVED QUALITY TOWARD PURCHASING DECISION FOR UNILEVER PRODUCT (A CASE STUDY OF MAGNUM ICE CREAM IN JAKARTA)

By Darren Kristofer Kosasih 014201100090

A skripsi presented to the Faculty of Business President University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for Bachelor Degree in Economics Major of Management

January 2015

PANEL OF EXAMINERS APROVAL SHEET

The Panel of Examiners declares that the skripsi entitled “THE ANALYSIS INFLUENCE OF BRAND IMAGE, PRICE, AND PERCEIVED QUALITY TOWARD PURCHASING DECISION FOR UNILEVER PRODUCT (A case study of Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta)” that was submitted by Darren Kristofer Kosasih majoring in Management from the Faculty of Business was assessed and approved to have passed the oral Examinations on February 2th 2015.

Filda Rahmiati , M.B.A Chair – Panel of Examiners

Ir. Erny Estiurlina Hutabarat , M.B.A. Examiner I

Liswandi.S.Pd.,MM. Examiner II

SKRIPSI ADVISER RECOMMENDATION LETTER

This skripsi entitled “THE ANALYSIS INFLUENCE OF BRAND IMAGE, PRICE, AND PERCEIVED QUALITY TOWARD PURCHASING DECISION FOR UNILEVER PRODUCT (A case study of Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta)” prepared and submitted by Darren Kristofer Kosasih in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor in the Faculty of Business has been reviewed and found to have satisfied the requirements for a skripsi fit to be examined. I therefore recommend this skripsi for Oral Defense.

Cikarang, Indonesia, January 22, 2015

Acknowledged by, Recommended by,

Vinsensius Jajat K., MM, MBA Liswandi.S.Pd.,MM. Head of Management Study Program Thesis Advisor

DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY

I declare that this skripsi, entitled “THE ANALYSIS INFLUENCE OF BRAND IMAGE, PRICE, AND PERCEIVED QUALITY TOWARD PURCHASING DECISION FOR UNILEVER PRODUCT (A case study of Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta)” is, to the best of my knowledge and beliefs, and original piece of work that has not been submitted, either in a whole or in a part, to another university to obtain a degree.

Cikarang, Indonesia, January 22, 2015

Darren Kristofer Kosasih

iii

ABSTRACT

Ice Cream is a frozen food usually made from dairy products, such as milk and cream and often combined with fruits or other ingredients and flavors. In Indonesia, ice cream is one of the foods that people consume at any time and it covers every class of people; from children, teenagers and adult. This research is based on the competitive conditions of ice cream industries in Indonesia, where Magnum’s market share is fluctuate that occurs can be an indication that its performance and strength of its brand is up and down. Variables used in this research are Brand Image (X1), Price (X2), and Perceived Quality (X3) toward Purchasing Decision (Y). The data are collected by distributing questionnaires to 100 consumers of ice cream. The researcher used quantitative analysis includes validity and reliability test, classical assumption and multiple linear regression to test the hypothesis through the T-test and F-test and coefficient of determination ( ). T-test Result is proving that three independent variables have significant impact toward purchasing decision. The F- test result is proving that all variable used in this research is simultaneously having significant impact towards consumer buying decision. From the adjusted test show the 0.736 indicates that 73.6% the dependent variable are impact by independent variables, while 26.4% are impacted by other factors. Keywords: brand image, price, perceived quality, purchase decision

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

“Don’t fall in love with money. Be satisfied with what you have. The Lord has promised that He will not leave us or desert us – Hebrews 13:5”

In the name of Jesus Christ,

Praise the Lord, let me worship Him who’s given me strength to stay strong during my skripsi writing. Finally, the moment that I’ve waited for is coming! After struggling for 3.5 years at President University, I finally finished my skripsi and Bachelor degree from President University.

Through this opportunity, I would like to show my gratitude for;

1. My parents, Papa and Mama. All greatest gratitude rose for you who always love me, and support me during my skripsi time. You always support me during my hard time and always remind me to finish my skripsi soon. Thank you Pa, Ma. 2. My grandfather, Opa Theo. Thank you for your support. 3. My skripsi adviser, Mr.Liswandi who always guides me and supervised me during my skripsi writing. 4. Mr.Orlando, who always help me with my statistic. Thank you sir for your guidance. 5. My brother and sister; Dave and Daicy. Thank you for your support. Especially my sister, Daicy, I would like to say thanks for your support and advice every night. 6. My girlfriend, Jessica PriciliaMiyako. Thank you for your support and love. I love you beb.

7. My ALPHABET friends, Rocky, Julius, Greggy, Stacey, Austin, Heidy. Thank you guys for your support. 8. My high school mates, Chavez, Albert, Wilten, Pison, and Kevin. Thank you bro for your support 9. My WOLFPACK guys, Andri, Petrus, Jona, Nasrul. You guys are the best. Thank you for always support me during my up and down time. 10. My university mates, Gerry, and Giovanni Thank you guys for always be there whenever I need you. 11. VLV girls, Ardisa, Rinda, Ayu, Kartika, Odel, and Cica. Thank you for the support. 12. All parties that involved in this research. Thank you for the support.

TABLE OF CONTENT

PANEL OF EXAMINERS……………………………………………………………... i

SKRIPSI ADVISER RECOMMENDATION LETTER……………………………... ii

DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY……………………………………………….... iii

ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………...... iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………………………. v

TABLE OF CONTENT………………………………………………………………… vii

LIST OF TABLE………………………………………………………………………… xi

LIST OF FIGURE………………………………………………………………………. xiii

CHAPTER I ...... 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1. Background of The Study ...... 1 1.2. Problem Identification...... 5 1.3. Statement of the problem ...... 6 1.4. Research Objectives ...... 6 1.5. Definition of terms ...... 7 1.6. Scope and limitation ...... 7 1.7. Signficance of the Study ...... 8 CHAPTER II ...... 9 REVIEW OFLITERATURE ...... 9 2.1. Theoretical review ...... 9 2.1.1. Purchase Desision ...... 9 2.1.1.1 Purchase Decision Making ...... 9 2.1.2. Brand ...... 12 2.1.3. Brand Image ...... 14 2.1.3.1. Brand Image and Purchase Decision Relationship ...... 16 2.1.4. Price ...... 17 2.1.4.1. Price with Purchase Decision Relationship ...... 18 2.1.5. Perceived Quality… .. ……………………………………………………19

vii

2.1.5.1 Perceived Quality with Purchase Decision Relationship ...... 19 2.2. Previous Research ...... 20 2.3. Theoretical Framework ...... 24 2.4. Operational Definition ...... 25 2.5. Hypothesis...... 26 CHAPTER III ...... 27 RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY ...... 27 3.1. Research Design ...... 27 3.2. Research Framework...... 28 3.3 Sampling Design ...... 29 3.3.1. Population ...... 29 3.3.2. Sample ...... 30 3.3.3. Sample Size ...... 30 3.4. Research instrument ...... 31 3.4.1. Primary Data ...... 31 3.4.2. Secondary Data ...... 32 3.4.3. Scaling ...... 32 3.4.4. Weighted Mean ...... 34 3.4.5. Standard Deviation ...... 35 3.5. Validity and Reliability ...... 35 3.5.1. Validity ...... 35 3.5.2. Reliability ...... 37 3.6. Data Collection Procedure ...... 38 3.7. Classical Assumption Test ...... 39 3.7.1 Normality Test ...... 39 3.7.2 Multicollinearity Test ...... 40 3.7.3 Heteroscedasticity Test ...... 40 3.7.4 t-Test (Partial Test) ...... 40 3.7.5 F-Test (Simultaneous Test) ...... 42 3.7.6 R2Test (Coefficient of Determination) ...... 43 3.8. Linear Multiple Regression ...... 44 CHAPTER IV...... 46 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION ...... 46

viii

4.1. Company Profile ...... 46 4.1.1. Unilever Worldwide ...... 46 4.1.2. Unilever in Indonesia ...... 46 4.1.3. Vision, Mission and Values ...... 48 4.1.4. Product and Services ...... 49 4.1.4.1. Food and Drinks ...... 49 4.1.4.2. Home Care………………………………………………………… 50 4.1.4.3. Personal Care ...... 50 4.1.5 Magnum ...... 51 4.1.6 Magnum Cafe ...... 52 4.1.7 Organizational Structure ...... 53 4.2. Data Result analysis ...... 54 4.2.1. Validity Test ...... 54 4.2.2. Reliability Test ...... 58 4.3. Respondent Profiles ...... 60 4.3.1. Gender ...... 60 4.3.2. Age ...... 61 4.4 Respondent Responses……………………………………………………… 62 4.4.1. Respondent Responses Assessing Brand Image (X1) ...... 62 4.4.2. Respodent Responses Assessing Price (X2) ...... ………………………65 4.4.3. Respodent Responses Assessing Perceived Quality (X3) ...... 67 4.4.4. Respondent Responses Assessing Purchase Decision (Y) ...... 70 4.5 Descriptive Analysis ...... 73 4.6 Classic Assumption Test ...... 77 4.6.1 Normality Test ...... 77 4.6.2 Heteroscedasticity Testing ...... 78 4.6.3 Multicollinearity Test ...... 79 4.7 Coefficient Determination of R ...... 81 4.8 Multiple Regression Analysis ...... 82 4.8.1 T-test ...... 83 4.8.2 F-Test ...... 85 4.8.3 Coefficient Determination (R2) ...... 86 4.9 Interpretation of Results ...... 86

CHAPTER V ...... 91 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ...... 91 5.1 Conclusions ...... 91 5.2. Recommendations ...... 93 5.2.1 For Unilever ...... 93 5.2.2 For Future Research ...... 93 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………….95 APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………… 102

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Operational Definition 25 Table 3.1 Pearson Model Correlation 36 Table 3.2 Cronbach Alpha 38 Table 4.1 Pearson Correlation of Brand Image 54 Table 4.2 Pearson Correlation of Price 55 Table 4.3 Pearson Correlation of Perceived Quality 56 Table 4.4 Pearson Correlation of Purchase Decision 57 Table 4.5 Cronbach’s Alpha of Brand Image 58 Table 4.6 Cronbach’s Alpha of Price 58 Table 4.7 Cronbach’s Alpha of Perceived Quality 59 Table 4.8 Cronbach’s Alpha of Purchase Decision 59 Table 4.9 Respondent Profile: Gender 60 Table 4.10 Respondent Profiles: Age 61 Table 4.11 Variable 1 Description 62 Table 4.12 Variable 2 Description 63 Table 4.13 Variable 3 Description 63 Table 4.14 Variable 4 Description 64 Table 4.15Variable 5 Description 65 Table 4.16Variable 6 Description 65 Table 4.17Variable 7 Description 66 Table 4.18Variable 8 Description 67 Table 4.19Variable 9 Description 67 Table 4.20Variable 10 Description 68

Table 4.21Variable 11 Description 69 Table 4.22Variable 12 Description 69 Table 4.23Variable 13 Description 70 Table 4.24Variable 14 Description 71 Table 4.25Variable 15 Description 72 Table 4.26Variable 16 Description 72 Table 4.27Mean score of Brand Image (X1) 73 Table 4.28Mean score of Price (X2 74 Table 4.29Mean score of Perceived Quality (X3) 75 Table 4.30Mean of Purchase Decision (Y) 75 Table 4.31Weighted Mean of Brand Image,Price,and Purchase Decision 76 Table 4.32Multicollinearity Test: Tolerance and VIF Value 80 Table 4.33Multicollinearity Test: Coefficient Correlations 80 Table 4.34Multiple Regression Analysis Coefficient Determination (R2) 81 Table 4.35Multiple Regression Analysis: Coefficient 82 Table 4.36Multiple Regression Analysis: F-Test (ANOVA) 85

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Time Series Ice Cream’s Brand based on TBI 4 Figure 2.1 Purchase Decision Making Model 12 Figure 2.2 Conceptual Model of “The Belief Attitude Intention Link 16 Figure 2.3 Theoretical Framework 24 Figure 3.1 Research Framework 29 Figure 3.2 Likert Scale 33 Figure 3.3 Likert Scale Questionnaire 33 Figure 3.4 Data Collection Procedure 39 Figure 4.1 Unilever Products: Food and Drinks 49 Figure 4.2 Unilever Products: Home Care 50 Figure 4.3 Unilever Products: Personal Care 50 Figure 4.4 Magnum’s Collection 52 Figure 4.5 Unilever Organizational Structure 53 Figure 4.6 Respondent Profile: Gender 60 Figure 4.7 Respondent Profile: Age 61 Figure 4.8 Normality Test: Histogram 77 Figure 4.9 Normality Test: P-P Plot Graph 78 Figure 4.10 Heteroscedasticity 79

xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Ice Cream is a frozen food usually made from dairy products, such as milk and cream and often combined with fruits or other ingredients and flavors. In Indonesia, ice cream is one of the foods that people consume at any time and it covers every class of people; from children, teenagers and adult. In current days, one of the manufacturing companies that produce ice cream is PT. Unilever Indonesia under Wall‟s brand. For the past few years, one of the products that stole customer‟s mind is Magnum ice cream. Since the late 90s, Magnum firstly introduce in Indonesia. As soon as the first product hit the market, it has already had a strong popularity among customers. It reached its highest popularity in 2010, almost everyone in Indonesia want to buy Magnum ice cream. Magnum product contains plain ice cream and cover with Sweden chocolate which makes it on unique type of ice cream.Wall's Magnum, one of the leading brands of Unilever's ice cream that brings the true delights of chocolate ice cream for mature markets, now comes with a new variant offers an incredible and intense experience pampering like a princess.With the presence of variants Wall's Magnum, consumers in Indonesia can feel the pleasure of premium ice cream with a thick layer of Belgian chocolate and crunchy.

At first, Magnum had difficulties for maintaining its passion in market because the product has a high price without a good branding and this leads into confusion in which the actual target

1 market of Wall‟s. Having a strong brand and being the preferred choice among competitors is important. Brodie (2009) described Brand as the important resource to create value or equity to the company. Because of these barriers, in 2010 Magnum re-branding itself and delivered a whole new image of Magnum ice cream. Re- branding according to Anholt (2006) is defined as the process of designing, planning, and communicating over the name or identity of the products or services that aim to manage reputation in the community. Activities reposition the brand itself requires a change in shape and image to be achieved. The general objective of the rebranding yourself is to influence consumer perception of a product or service to revitalize the brand and make it more modern and more relevant to the needs of consumers. But rebranding also includes changes to the message, change the way consumers approach, provision of new services, or even a change of what is promised to consumers.The current images of Magnum are the richness of the chocolate, elegant, and luxury ice cream and it leads into a whole new target market especially customer who follow the trend product. In Jakarta, it is believe that most customers buy a product which has a strong brand image besides its usability. The concept of Magnum is very applicable to be applied for customers in Jakarta.

Meila Putri Handayani, Senior Brand Manager of Wall's Magnum said, "Born with a new platform that provides experience class, namely pleasure indulgence or enjoyment of high taste that can be felt at first bite layer of Belgian chocolate and blend with vanilla ice cream that gently create new variants Wall's Magnum feels very different. ""With the selection of the finest quality Belgian chocolate, we believe Wall's Magnum is able to provide premium enjoyment anywhere. Wall's Magnum gives a different sensation where consumers are given the opportunity to indulge in the

2 pleasure of visual special taste, perception, and sensory through three variants of Wall's Magnum ice cream newest - Classic, Almond, Chocolate Truffle, "added Meila.

Each variant has a symbol of Wall's Magnum / perception of its own such as Wall's Magnum Classic symbolizes the original flavor of Wall's Magnum is capable of providing the highest quality flavor unequaled from the first bite to the Belgian chocolate layer vanilla ice cream is so smooth. Then Wall's Magnum Almond, synonymous with sexy and adventurous who fished with a smooth vanilla ice cream coated with a thick Belgian milk chocolate and crispy plus the delicious almonds. Then, for the consumer who wants to radiate and feel the luxury, Wall's Magnum Chocolate Truffle available with chocolate ice cream mixed with chocolate truffles coated and thick Belgian chocolate and crunchy.For consumers who are always struggling with time and bustle of modern life, the moment of indulgence pleasure to feel like this is difficult to be realized. The need pampering like a vacation out of town, relaxing in the spa, and so is the complementary needs and become part of the personal rights of each person. Seeing this need, "Wall's Magnum role is to help the consumer to escape from modern life is very busy to feel the immense pleasure, intense and sensorial like pampered like a princess," closed Meila .

8,00%

7,00%

6,00%

5,00% Magnum 4,00% Conello 3,00% Diamond 2,00%

1,00%

0,00% 2012 2013 2014

Figure 1.1 Ice Cream’s Brand based on Top Brand Index Source: Topbrand-award.com

Based on Top Brand Index from year 2012, 2013, and 2014, there are 3 largest brand of ice cream in Indonesia. The biggest market share is magnum with 5.2% market share in 2012, at 2013, the market share increase to 6.87%, and decrease to 3.2% at 2014. Although the market share is fluctuate every year, but Magnum still the Top Brand on Ice cream‟s brand in Indonesia followed by Conello.

As it is mentioned above, in Jakarta most of customers do the impulsive buying and following the current trend market, which specify the reason behind buying decision process. In food‟s category, ice cream is not a primary food that people consume every day, however Magnum intend to prove it other ways. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky (2000) develop a theory about customer decision making which have two major elements of value and endowment. Value itself propose that customers make decision

based on the expected outcomes of their decision, while endowment is a thinking in which an item is more precious if one owns it then if someone else owns it. One of the first marketing theories is called Consideration in which customer form a subset of brands from which the decision making strategies are applied. In this case of Magnum, if people asked to buy an ice cream, it will direct the customer‟s mind to buy a Magnum ice cream.

1.2 Problem Identification The chart above on Figure 1.1 shows that Magnum has up and down market share from 2012-2014. In 2012, the market share is 5.2%, in 2013 the market share is 6.87%, and 3.2% market share in 2014. But Magnum still at the top brand of ice cream followed by Conello and Diamond. Magnum needs to realize these phenomena. Competition among companies is getting tougher in ice cream industry. Company try to attract customers by influencing their attitude, thoughts, view point of consumer through advertising, price, brand image, perceived quality, events, and etc. to buy their product. This research is based on the considerations who are ice cream consumer in Jakarta. Magnum brand image becomes stronger every time it hit the market, including when they introduce a new product. Magnum ice cream has already attached its product to specify upper middle-upper class of customers. The high price of Magnum ice cream, compare to other ice cream in the market makes it not too suitable for lower middle class of customers. Besides Magnum‟s good branding, the productof Magnum itself has many dominant advantages compare to other ice cream product in market. The perceived qualityof Magnum‟s brand becomes the considerations for customers to buy the products; specifically in Jakarta. Based on the data and some explanation on the background of the study, this research takes the

title: The Analysis Influence of Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality Toward Purchasing Decision for Unilever Product (A Case study of Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta).

1.3 Statement of Problem

This research aim to answer the following question:

a) Does Brand Image have a positive and partial significant influence toward purchasing decision? b) Does Price have a positive and partial significant influence towardpurchasing decision? c) Does Perceived Quality have a positive and partial significant influence toward purchasing decision? d) Do Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality have a positive and simultaneous significant influence toward purchasing decision?

1.4 Research Objectives

Based on the proceeding research questions, the research objectives of the study can be translated as follows:

a) To find out if Brand Image has positive and partial significant influence towardpurchasing decision. b) To find out if Price has positive and partial significant influence towardpurchasing decision. c) To find out if Perceived Quality has positive and partial significant influence towardpurchasing decision. d) To find out if Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality have positive and simultaneous significant influence toward purchasing decision.

1.5 Definition of Term a) Brand: a type of product made by particular company. b) Brand Image: The impression in the consumers‟ mind of a brand‟s total personality. c) Price: A value that will purchase a finite quantity, weight, or other measure of a good or services. d) Perceived: to come to an opinion about something, or have a belief about something. e) Perceived Quality: the extent to which a brand is considered to provide good quality product. f) Purchase: to obtain in exchange for money or its equivalent; buy g) Purchase Decision: a series of choices made by a consumer prior to making a purchase that begins once the consumer has established a willingness to buy.

1.6 Scope and Limitations

The scope of this research is only examining three factors which may impact purchasing decision which are brand image, price, and perceived quality. There may also other factors that affect the purchasing decision which are not discussed in this research.

The limitation in this research is focused on purchasing decision on Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta. And the questionnaires are spread to people who are ice cream consumers and had ever purchase Magnum ice cream.

1.7 Significance of the Study

Through this research hopefully could expand knowledge, information, and suggestion for:

1. For PT Unilever: The output of the research would become the reference for PT Unilever to manage the brand image, price, and product of Magnum ice cream; especially for Jakarta‟s customers. 2. For Researcher: This Skripsi is a prerequisite and must be fulfilled as a part of achieving Bachelor Degree of Management. 3. For President University Student: This skripsi can be a journal for reference and additional literature for the next research.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Theoretical Review

2.1.1 Purchase Decision

Consumer buying behavior is considered to be an inseparable part of marketing. Consumer behavior describes how consumers make purchase decisions and how they use and dispose of the purchase goods or services. Lamb et al, (2010). Kotler and Keller (2011) state that consuming buying behavior is the study of the ways of buying and disposing of goods, services, ideas or experience by the individuals, groups and organizations in order to satisfy their needs and wants. Consumer buyer behavior refers to the buying behavior of final consumer individuals and households who buy goods and services for personal consumption (Kotler, et al., 2008).

2.1.1.1 Purchase Decision Making

Consumer decision making process comprises five stages: need recognition, information search, evaluation of alternatives, purchase, and post-purchase behavior.

1. Need Recognition Need recognition is the first stage of consumer decision making process and it can be explained as “result of an imbalance between actual and desired needs” (Lamb et al, 2011). Interestingly, need recognition may relate to actual need of a perspective customer to a specific product or service, as well as, „perceived‟ customer need

imposed by businesses through effective marketing communication strategies.

2. Information Search The second stage of consumer decision making process relates to information search. Once a need is recognised by a perspective customer, he would seek for information about the available ways to satisfy the need. It is important to stress that “the extent to which the consumer needs to search for information depends on his current information levels and the perceived value of the additional information” (Pradhan, 2009).

Customers are greatly influenced by marketing strategies of retailers during this stage of the decision – making process as well. Namely, retailers communicate information about the brand through various communication channels that might include any combination of advertising, direct marketing, public relations and publicity, personal selling, events and experiences and sales promotion (Kotler and Keller, 2009).

3. Evaluation of Alternatives During the third stage of consumer decision making process perspective customers are engaged in evaluation of alternatives. In other words, during this stage “consumers consider the relative importance of each attribute of the product-service mix” (Reid and Bojanic, 2009). Influencing customer behaviour at this stage of decision making process is critical for retailers in terms of improving their levels of customer attraction and retention. Accordingly, retailers attempt to attract customers with their competitive edges that are usually based in one or more elements of marketing mix.It worth to be noted that “the marketing mix principles are controllable variables which have to be carefully

10 managed and must meet the needs of the defined target group” (Kumar, 2010).

4. Purchase Decision Making the purchase corresponds to the fourth stage of customer decision making process. Factors playing significant role on the choice of retailer to make a purchase from at this stage include the level of satisfaction from past shopping experiences, product return policy, store atmosphere and the intensity of time pressure associated with the purchase.

Moreover, it has to be stated that “if the need isn‟t great and the solutions the consumer finds aren‟t desirable enough to motivate a purchase, the consumer may postpone the purchase until a satisfactory opportunity presents itself” (Lake, 2009)

5. Post-Purchase Behavior The last stage of customer decision making process involves post- purchase behaviour of customers. It goes without saying that “the post-purchase phase of the decision-making process is essential for marketers to ensure that consumers are satisfied after the purchase” (Ramesh, 2008). The level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction associated with specific shopping experience customer value brand perceptions and the nature of their repeat – purchase behavior.

Need Recognition

Information Search

Evaluation of Alternatives

Purchase Decision

Post-Purchase behavior

Figure 2.1 Adapted from Kotler et al (2008)

2.1.2 Brand

Brands are omnipresent; they penetrate almost every aspect of our life: economic, social, cultural, sporting, even religion. Due to its tendency to pervade everywhere they have come under growing criticism.In postmodern societies where individuals wants to give name to their consumption, brands can and should beanalyzed through various perspectives: macroeconomics; microeconomics, sociology, anthropology, history, semiotics, philosophy and so on (Kapferer, 2004).

Branding is not a new concept. Branding has been used since earliest times byproducers wanting to identify their products. According to Van den Heever (2000), the word brand comes from the old German word “brandr”, which means to burn. Brandinghas

12 from earliest times been associated with proclaiming ownership of property, and although the concept of branding has become considerably more complex in the last hundred years, the idea of ownership still exists. Consumers soon began to have preferences for the goods of particular manufacturers or began to develop loyalties to certain merchants whose wares were of satisfactory quality.

According to Van den Heever (2000), consumers accept or reject a brand for several reasons; some of them are perceived quality, price and emotional benefits of the brand. An example identified by the author can be seen in the liquor industry where certain loyal consumers will only drink a specific brand that suits their lifestyle and personality.

Brands as they are known today are more than just convenient ways to distinguish one product from another. Keller (2003) states that organizations have come to the realization that one of their most valuable assets is the brand associated with theirproducts or services. Brands have become sophisticated marketing tools, as well as having considerable monetary value in their own right. Brands provide functional, emotional and self-expressive benefits and provide value to the consumer, as well as the reason for making one brand choice over another.

According to Keller (2003:3), the key to creating a brand is to be able to choose a name, logo, symbol, package design or other attributes that identify a product and distinguish it from others.

2.1.3 Brand Image According to Hsieh, Pan, and Setiono (2004), "a successful brand image enables consumers to identify the needs that the brand satisfies and to differentiate thebrand from its competitors, and consequently increases the likelihood thatconsumers will purchase the brand". Brand image can be measured from the physical appearance of a product or service. This physical appearance can lead to the high-low perception in the customers‟ mind (Martinez, 2002). Furthermore, Keller (2009) suggests Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) approach to measure brand image. This includes the whole elements of brand image, such as favorability of brand association,strength of brandassociation, and uniqueness of brand association.

Kotler (2001) defined image as "the set of beliefs, ideas, and impression that a person holds regarding an object". On the other hand, Keller (2003) considered brand image as "a set of perceptions about a brand as reflected by brand associations in consumer's memory". A similar definition to Keller's was proposed by Aaker (2001), whereby brand image is referred to as "a set of associations, usually organized in some meaningful way".

Keller (2003) describedthat this brand image benefits can be classified into functional, experiential and symbolic benefits, which was originally derived from the work of Park et al. (1986). Here, the functional benefits are related to the intrinsic advantages of product or services consumption and usually correspond to the product related attributes. For example, experiential benefits refer to "what it feltlike to use the product or services and usually correspond to the product related attributes", while symbolic benefits were associated with the underlying needs for social

14 approval or personalexpression and outer-directed self-esteem and basically corresponded to non-product related attributes.

Zooming into Keller's (2003) conceptualization of brand image, it is considered a perception about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumers' memory. He suggested that "brand associations" comprise of brand attributes, brand benefits, and overall brand attitudes. To Keller (2003), attributes are "descriptive features that characterized a product or service - what a consumer thought the product or service is or has and what is involved with its purchase or consumption". Attributes can be classified into product-related attributes and non product-related attributes (i.e. price, packaging or product appearance information, user and usage imagery). Product-related attributes refer tothe ingredients necessary for performing the product or service function sought by consumers while non product-related attributes refer to theexternal aspects of the product or services that relate to its purchase orconsumption. As for benefits, these are considered "the personal value consumers attach to the product or service attributes –that is, what consumers think the product or service can do for them".

According to Kotler and Keller (2007: 346) brand image is the perception and belief performed by consumers, as reflected in association occurs in memory consumers. Meanwhile, according to Fandy (2005: 49) "Brand image is a description of the associations and consumer confidence about the brand certain ". While the association, is an attribute which is in the brand and have a level of strength.Conclusively, brand image can be said to be the brand association or consumer‟s perception about a particular brand as a result of their association with the brand.

2.1.3.1 Brand Image and Purchase Decision Relationship

Brand image can provide a sustainable competitive advantage that can moderate the impact of price and other product attributeson consumers‟ purchase decisions. Brand image is pivotal in purchase behavior because it impacts consumers‟ preferences and purchase intentions as well astheir willingness to pay a premium price and recommend the brand to others.

Figure 2.2 Conceptual Model of „The Belief-Attitude-Intention link‟

There are two cognitive psychology theories that can apply to brand image and customer purchase decision: the theory of reasoned action (TRA and a theory of cognitive dissonance Based on the TRA, we postulate that a consumer‟s overall attitude toward the product is a function of his beliefs (or evaluation) about product attributes, and leads to intention to purchase.The theory of cognitive dissonance explains why the effect of other (inconsistent) attributes is moderated by strong brand image. When consumers

hold a strong image of the brand, they will likely engage in a psychologicalmechanism to reduce dissonance created by cues that are inconsistent with their strong brand image When brand image is strong, the relative importance of brand image will be 'bolstered' while other attributes are 'trivialized' whenever they are inconsistent with the consumer‟s strong brand image, in order to maintain cognitive consonance. Thus, when consumers hold a strong and favorable brand image, they will be more likely to evaluate the product positively, regardless of price.

Yasin et al (2007) noted that brand image is important for product development in that it can be instilled in customer‟s minds and hence it could have a beneficial or detrimental effect on customers buying decision.

Consumers‟ brand attitude and purchase intention will be higher when a product has high preference image and familiarity (Kamins& Marks, 2001; Laroche, et al., 2006). Wang (2006) used brand image as independent variable, product category as moderator, and purchase intention as dependent variable and found that the higher the brand image is, the higher the purchase intention is.

2.1.4 Price

Price indicates some amount of money that needs to be paidto achieve something(Friedrich, 2004). Some products or services are purchased based on customer‟s perception of price instead of the actual money price (E. S. Asamoah, 2011).

According to Kotler (2003), no matter how a product is, some people will be unable to pay more than a certain price.Others may

17 be able to afford it but believe that another way of that spending sum of money would give them greatersatisfaction. Conversely, simple being cheap is not enough; the product must come up to some level of expectedperformance.

Price is only one of the several costs faced by consumers. Other purchase related costs include the timespent, displacement cost and emotional costs. However, price is the cost that consumer can best determine, and thusplays an important role in their decision.

According to Professor Hetter in the American Economic Review, “Price is the quantity of goods given or received in exchange for another good”. In explanation of this proposed agreement, Fetter stated that “in practice, actual practices by non-monetary definitions in most cases (and increasingly with the extensions of the money-economy) are quoted in terms of money.

2.1.4.1 Price with Purchase Decision Relationship Some earlier studies have shown price still as an important factor in purchase decision, especially for frequently purchased products, affecting choices for store, product and brand (Rondan, 2004). Price is not equally important in all sectors and markets, although it is highly relevant in the retail of frequently purchased products. This is corroborated by frequent mention of price in the advertising of this sector (Barreiro and Ruzo, 2000). Research of price has frequently included the importance of price on purchase decisions; the present study, however, differs from them with regard its focus. The potential influence of price importance on the degree of price awareness among consumers was analyzed, and a significant percentage of those lacking price awareness affirmed they considered price as irrelevant (Rosa, 2004).

2.1.5 Perceived Quality Perceived quality is the extent to which a brand is brilliant and considered to provide good quality of product and service in comparing with the rivalry products, Perceived quality is at the heart of what customers purchase and in order to generate high quality, an understanding of what quality means to various customer segments is required. Creating a quality product or service is only a partial victory; perceptions must be created as well (Aaker, 2010).

Perceived quality is attached to consumers; a perception that describes the total quality of product (Hajipour, et al., 2013). Erenkol and Duygun (2010) explained that perceived quality is different from quality of the product itself because the perceived quality is the buyer‟s subjective judgment of the product. Perceived quality can be explained through the consumer‟s evaluation on degree of excellence of a product (Alfred, 2013). Positive impression of quality can be built through identification of the dimensions of quality that are important to customers, and build on th equality perception of the brand on that important dimension (Zhou &Ziang, 2011).

2.1.5.1 Perceived Quality with Purchase Decision Relationship

Perceived quality of the brand described overall customer response to the quality and benefits offered by the brand (Lee &Leh, 2011). Perceived quality is a factor that is the reason why the brand is being considered and purchased (Khasanah, 2013). This perception of quality affects what brand will be selected by the customer to the next can take the decision to make a purchase on a brand (Yaseen etal., 2011). Hajipour, et al. (2013) also added that high quality will directly affect to purchase decision, supporting the

price and also the loyalty. Perception of quality is the reason to buy a product (Moradi &Zarei, 2011). Perceived quality towards the purchasing decision of consumers according to the study conducted by (Choy, et al., 2011). Jalilvand, Samiei, Mahdavinia (2011) added that Perceived quality influence the consumer purchasing decision through the reason to buy and differentiating the brand from competing brands.

2.2 Previous Research Some previous research has been conducted regarding to the Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality and Purchase Decision, namely:

1. Andrea ElokHoraga, OtnielOzora, and Stiefanie (2012) conducted a research of The Factors of Brand Image which Influence Customer Loyalty of J.CO. The researcher using factor analysis and multiple regressions to measure the validity and reliability of data and to find out relationship among factors of brand image and customer loyalty. The result of this research are strength of brand image gives influence to customer satisfaction and customer satisfaction gives influence to customer loyalty.

2. CecepPrabudi (2014) conducted a research of The effect of product quality, price and brand image on purchase decision of Bakpia Willis product in Magelang, Semarang and Jogjakarta. The independent variable in this research is product quality(X₁), price (X₂), and brand image (X₃) while the dependent variable is the purchase decision. The population of this research is consumers of Bakpia Willis. Samples are taken

of 100 respondents by using accidental sampling technique. The data were collected by survey method through questionnaires filled by customers of Bakpia Willis. Then the data were analyzed by using regression analysis. This analysis includes the Validity Test,Reliability Test, Classic Assumption Test, Linear Regression Analysis,Hypothesis Test through The Coefficient Determination Analysis, Test F and Test T. Based on the research results, the regression equation Y = 0,341X₁+0,023X₂+ 0,470X₃. Based on statistical data analysis, these research indicators are valid and reliable. The variable which has the greatest influence is brand image, followed by product quality variable while the price indicates negative effect. Hypothesis testing using T test showed that the product quality variable and brand image variable shown to significantly affect the dependent variable purchase decision, while the price variable not.

3. Nurul Istiqomah (2012) conducted a research of The correlation between perceived quality and purchasing decisions on consumers product jamu “X” in Nologaten. The sample of the research included 110 peoplein Nologaten, Catur Tunggal, DepokSleman, Yogyakarta.The data were collected by using purchasing decisions and perceived quality scales and product moment is used as a statistical analysis technique. The analysis results showed that there was positive correlation between consumer purchasing decisions and perceived quality. It means consumers often judge the quality of a product on the basis of variety of informational cues that associate with the product. Perceived quality has direct impact on consumer purchase decision. The result of the data analysis acquired the values of (rxy) = 0,654 and p= 0,000 (p< 0,01). Therefore, hypothesis was accepted. Then, R square (r2)=0,427 that means the effective

contribution of perceived quality to purchasing decisions was 42,7% and as well as on the contrary. So that while as many 57,3% contributions by another factors.

4. Oghojafor Ben Akpoyomare, Ladipo Patrick KunleAdeosun and Rahim AjaoGaniyu (2012)conducted the research of The Influence of Product Attributes on Consumer Purchase Decision in the Nigerian Food and Beverages Industry: A Study of Lagos Metropolis.This study investigates the influence of product attributes on consumer purchase decisionin Nigerian food and beverages industry: A study of Lagos Metropolis. Descriptive research method was usedto survey 400 customers of the selected two companies in food and beverages industry. Data were collected through questionnaire administered. Descriptive statistic and Pearson correlation coefficientwas used as a method of data analysis.The result of the analysis reveals a positive correlation between product attribute and consumer purchase decision. Indeed, consumer purchase decision can be viewed as a process in which consumers evaluate alternative products on the strength of various attributes and on the basis of which marketers differentiate and set their brand apart from competition.

5. RiaFitriani (2008) conducted the research of Analysis of brand image on ULTRAMILK towards consumer purchasing decision. The authors distributed questionnaires to 100 respondents. From the results of the responder, the researcher uses the analysis with statistical methods with the Spearman Rank Correlation, Coefficient of Determination r, and t test statistics. Based on the research that the consumer response to

22 the brand image ULTRAMILK is good, which is indicated by the average value of the overall respondents to the above statement ULTRAMILK brand image is 4.07. And from the research, the purchasing decision of consumers to buy products ULTRAMILK is good, which is indicated by the average value as a whole over the respondents' statements on consumer purchasing decisions is of 4.14. To determine how much influence the brand image ULTRAMILK on consumer buying decision process, the researcher used statistical analysis based on data obtained through questionnaires. Results of Spearman Rank correlation coefficient of rs=0.695. This shows that there is a strong and direct relationship between the two variables. From the calculation of the coefficient of determination obtained a figure of 48.30%, which shows the influence of brand image on consumer purchasing decisions, while the remaining 51.70% of consumer purchasing decisions are influenced by other variables not measured in this study. Then testing the hypothesis using the t distribution table, from the calculation turns obtained t value greater than t table (9.568>1.663), which means Hi Ho rejected and accepted. This means that there is a significant positive relationship between brand image with the consumer buying decision process, the authors proposed hypothesis, namely: a Good Brand image has a positive relationship on consumer purchasing decisions on products ULTRAMILK, acceptable.

2.3 Theoretical Framework

Brand Image (X1)

Price (X2) Purchasing Decision H2 (Y)

H3 Perceived Quality (X3)

Figure 2.3: Theoretical Framework

The Figure 2.3 illustrates the process of Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality on Purchasing Decision for Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta. The researcher use 3 variables which consist of independent and dependent variables. Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality act as independent variable influences the purchase decision as dependent variable.

2.4 Operational Definition

Table 2.1 Operational Definition Terms Meaning Benefit Brand Image A set of perceptions Providing early warning signs about a brand as that an emotional-branding reflected by story is beginning to lose its brandassociations in cultural resonance. consumer's memory (Keller,2003)

Price Some amount of Attract consumers to buy the money that needs to product based on the quality be paidto achieve provided. something(Friedrich, 2004). Perceived A perception that Consumers can compare the Quality describes the total quality from one product to quality of product another product. (Hajipour, et al., 2013). Purchasing A process, which To identify factors why the Decision though inputs and consumers finally purchase the their use though product. process and actions lead to satisfaction of needs and wants (Enis, 1974).

2.5 Hypothesis

Ho1 There is no positive partial significant influence between Brand Image toward Purchasing Decision.

Ha1 There is positive partial significant influence between Brand Image toward Purchasing Decision.

Ho2 There is no positive partial significant influence between Price toward Purchasing Decision.

Ha2 There is positive partial significant influence between Price toward Purchasing Decision.

Ho3 There is no positive partial significant influence between Perceived Quality toward Purchasing Decision.

Ha3 There is positive partial significant influence between Perceived Quality toward Purchasing Decision.

Ho4 There is no positive simultaneous significant influence between Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality toward Purchasing Decision.

Ha4 There is positive simultaneous significant influence between Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality toward Purchasing Decision.

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design

There are two methods in doing scientific research; those are qualitative and quantitative research. The differences between qualitative and quantitative research are the type of data, research process, instrument in collecting data and the purpose of research.

 Qualitative method usually gathered by observations, interviews or focus groups and the data also gathered from written documents and through case studies, it less emphasis on counting numbers of people who think or behave in certain ways and more emphasis on explaining why people think and behave in certain ways.  Quantitative method emphasis on objective measurements and numerical analysis of data collected through polls, questionnaires, or surveys. In, quantitative method pieces of information that can be counted mathematically, it is usually gathered by surveys from large numbers of respondents selected randomly and it is analyzed using statistical method, best used to answer what, when and who questions (Civicpartnership.org, 2013). Quantitative research focuses on gathering numerical data and generalizing it across groups of people (Babbie, Earl R, 2010).

Based on the explanation above, this research will categorized as quantitative research, the aim of this research is to measures the criteria‟s of brand image, price, and perceived quality as the independent variable, toward purchasing decision as the dependent variable.

There are four variables which are measured in this research. Three variables are independent variables as the indicators are Brand Image(X1), Price(X2), and Perceived Quality(X3). Another variable which is dependent variable as the indicator is Purchasing Decision(Y), in which the variable influenced by the independent variables. It will be reflected on the questionnaires which will be given to the sample of whom the researcher can obtain accurate information, and questions provided will be regarding the factors of brand image, price, and perceived quality toward purchasing decision for magnum ice cream.

3.2. Research Framework

The researcher framework is the structure of the research that shows the process of the analysis in order to achieve the best results. The flow chart is shown as below:

Problem Statement

Literature Review

Pre Questionnaire

NO Validity

NO YES

Reliability

Real Questionnaire

Data Collection

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Conclusion and Recommendation

Figure 3.1 Research Framework Source: Constructed by Researcher

3.3. Sampling Design

Sampling Design is part of statistical methodology that related in taking a portion of the population. If a sampling is done correctly, statistical analysis can be used to generalize a whole population. There are two major types of sampling design: probability and non- probability sampling. In probability sampling, the elements in the population have some known non-zero chance or probability of being selected as sample subjects. In non-probability sampling, the elements do not have a known or predetermined chance of being selected as subjects (Sekaran, Bougie, 2010).

3.3.1. Population Population is all elements, individuals, or units that meet the selectioncriteria for a group to be studied (businessdictionary.com, 2013). The Population refers to the entire group of people, events, or things of interest that the researcher wishes to investigate (Sekaran, Bougie, 2010). In this study, research population is focused on people in Jakarta who are ice cream consumers and had ever purchase the Magnum ice cream.

3.3.2. Sample Sample is a subset of population (Sekaran, Bougie, 2010). Sample on this research will be used to investigate the research problems. Ferdinand (2006), if the sample is subset of the population that consists of some member population, these subset should be taken because in many case it is impossible to conduct the research with all members of population, therefore, we formed a representative population that is called sample.

In determining data to be examined, researchers use the technique of non-probability sampling method in which every element in the population doesn‟t have the opportunity or the same opportunities to be selected as the sample (Santoso 2009). In the determining respondents, researcher uses the technique of purposive sampling. This method is also referred as non-random or non-probability sampling. It plays a major role in the selection of a particular item and/or in making decisions in cases of incomplete responses or observation.

3.3.3. Sample Size In this research the population of Magnum ice cream consumers in Jakarta that are in large and the amount is unknown with certainty. Because the total population can‟t be predicted, thus determining the number of samples used in this study based on the statistical formula (Raopurba in Faela 2012): n = Z2 4(moe)2 Which: n= total of samples

Z= the level of the normal distribution at a significant level 5% = 1.96

Moe = Margin of Error, maximum sampling error rate which is tolerated or desired 10%

n = 1,962 4(0,10)2

= 96.04 and rounded to 100 respondents.

Therefore the researcher takes 100 samples in this research by using purposive sampling. Questionnaires then are distributed to 100 people who are ice cream consumers in Jakarta.

3.4. Research Instrument Research Instrument is the tool that used to answer the research questions that stated in the previous chapter. The Researcher intention is to gather the information from as much various sources. Data can be obtained from primary or secondary data, Primary data refers to information obtained first-hand by the researcher on the variables of interest for specific purpose of the study and secondary data refer to information gathered from sources that already exist (Sekaran, Bougie, 2010).

3.4.1. Primary Data Primary data is the specific information collected by the person who is doing the research. It can be obtained through clinical trials, case studies, observation, discussion, interview, true experiments and randomized controlled studies. This information can be analyzed by other experts who may decide to test the validity of the data by repeating the same experiments (Ehow.com, 2013).

Primary data in this research of “The Analysis of Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality Influence Toward Purchasing

Decision for Unilever Product (A case study of Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta) is obtained directly from the questionnaire that used for survey. Questionnaires are a technique of data collection done by giving series of written statements that are consists of research variables. These questionnaires will be spread to the numbers of samples.

3.4.2. Secondary Data Secondary data isan information gathered for purposes other than the completion of a research project. Secondary data also used to gain initial insight into the research problem (steppingstones.ca, 2013). Secondary data is the data that have been already collected by and readily available from other sources. Such data are cheaper and more quickly obtainable than the primary data and also may be available when primary data cannot be obtained at all (managementstudyguide.com, 2013).

Secondary data on this research is the literature studies. A literature studies is a technique of data collection based on information gathered from books and journals related to the research discussion. Data collected by learning and selecting from previous literature studies, books, journals and related websites.

3.4.3. Scaling This research use Likert Scale as a tool to measure the degree of agreement from the respondents. In the Likert Scale, the distance between different categories cannot be quantified. The only possible operation is to determine whether a certain state is greater or smaller than another. In this sense, the measured properties are considered to be continuous, while its states are reviewed as discrete (Cristina Davino, 2012). The Likert Scale is designed to examine how strongly subjects agree or disagree with statements

32 on a five-point scale with the following anchors (Sekaran, Bougie, 2010):

Figure 3.2Likert Scale Source: Sekaran, Bougie, 2010

The Questionnaire uses Likert Scale and all statements that express either a favorable and unfavorable attitude will be scaled through Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, and Strongly Agree.

No. Statements 1 2 3 4 5 1

Figure 3.3Likert Scale Questionnaire Source: Sekaran, Bougie, 2010

Note:

1. For Strongly Disagree 2. For Disagree

3. For Neutral 4. For Agree 5. For Strongly Agree

Each of the five responses would have a numerical value which would be used to measure the attitude under investigation. Likert Scale have the advantage that they do not expect a simple yes / no answer from the respondent, but rather allow for degrees of opinion, and even no opinion at all. Therefore quantitative data is obtained, which means that the data can be analyzed with relative ease.

3.4.4. Weighted Mean Arithmetic mean computed by considering relative importance of each items is called weighted mean. To give due importance to each item under consideration, numberis called weight to each item in proportion to its relative importance. Weighted Mean is computed by using following formula (Emathzone.com, 2013):

Which means:

Where: = Weighted Mean of the factors related W = Corresponding Weight X = A set of number designated / rate of importance

3.4.5. Standard Deviation The Standard Deviation is a measure of how spreads out numbers are. Standard Deviation is used when data is drawn from a larger set chemistry.about.com (2013).

The sample standard deviation is used when a sample of data is analyzed. In this equation: s = sample standard deviation N= number of scores in a sample N-1 = degrees of freedom or Bessel's correction x = value of a sample x bar = mean or average of the sample

3.5. Validity and Reliability 3.5.1. Validity The purpose of validity testing is to eliminate the proper question that will answer the research objectives. Validity test is used to determine whether the questionnaire is valid or not. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (or Pearson correlation coefficient for short) is a measure of the strength of a linear association between two variables and is denoted by r. Basically, a Pearson product-moment correlation attempts to draw a line of best fit through the data of two variables, and the Pearson correlation coefficient, r, indicates how far away all these data points are to this line of best fit (how well the data points fit this new model/line of best fit) (Statistic.laerd.com ,2013). The valid data is a

representative statement of variables that are ready to spread to the respondents.

In Pearson Correlations, results are between -1 and 1. A result of -1 means that there is a perfect negative correlation between the two values at all, while a result of 1 means that there is a perfect positive correlation between the two variables. A result of 0, on the other hand, means that there is no linear relationship between the two variables. Most research will very rarely get a correlation of 0, -1 or 1. Result would be somewhere inbetween. The closer the value of r gets to zero, the greater the variation the data points are around the line of best fit.

The Quantitative interpretation of the degree of linear relationship existing is shown in the table below:

Table 3.1 Pearson Model Correlation

Guidelines for Interpreting Pearson Product-Moment Correlation (Applicable For Both Postive and Negative Correlation) .8 – 1 Is considered a very strong relationship .6 - .79 Is considered a strong relationship .4 - .59 Is considered a moderate relationship .2 - .39 Is considered a weak relationship Less than .2 Is considered a very weak relationship Correlation r formula:

For any two variables, X and Y, the correlation coefficient between them is given by the formula:

Where: n = number pair of scores

∑ = sum of the products of pair scores

∑ = sum of x scores

∑ = sum of y scores

∑ = sum of squared x scores

∑ = sum of squared y scores

The first requirement of a good instrument was validity. Thus, the researcher chooses Pearson Product Moment Correlation by using the software SPSS 16.0 to fulfill the requirement of the instrument‟s validity.

3.5.2. Reliability Reliability refers to the consistency or stability of a measuring instrument. It is to determine a measure to measure exactly the same way each time it is used (Jackson, 2011). According to Imam Ghozali (2005), reliability is actually a tool to measure a questionnaire which is an indicator of the variables or constructs. As with Validity, Reliability testing in this research will be conducted by using software SPSS 16.0.Accurate questionnaire may deflect the right question which is means when the question is asked for several times, the interpretation would be the same from one respondent to another.

Measurement of Reliability (Internal-Consistency) in this research will use the Cronbach‟s Alpha Coefficient in which the equation is (Janzengroup.net, 2013):

Where:

k = number of items r = average correlation between any two items α = reliability of the average or sum

Table 3.2Cronbach Alpha

Cronbach's alpha Internal consistency

α ≥ 0.9 Excellent

0.8 ≤ α < 0.9 Good

0.7 ≤ α < 0.8 Acceptable

0.6 ≤ α < 0.7 Questionable

0.5 ≤ α < 0.6 Poor

α < 0.5 Unacceptable

Source: Imam Ghozali (2005)

3.6. Data Collection Procedure In this research, the researcher use primary data as a tool for data collection by spreading questionnaires for the survey as a purpose that the data is obtained from first-hand of respondents. And secondary data in this research is literature studies. Surveys only consist of two components which are questions and responses. In fact, surveys are typically selected when information is to be collected from a large number of people or when answers are needed to a clearly defined set of questions. Surveys are good tools for obtaining information on a wide range of topics when indepth probing of responses is not necessary, and they are useful for both formative and summative purposes.

DATA COLLECTION

PRIMARY & SECONDARY DATA

SURVEY

DATA SELECTION

Figure 3.4 Data Collection Procedure

3.7. Classical Assumption Test Classical assumption is the statistical requirements that must be met in multiple linear regression analysis. In order to use multiple regression models, classic assumption test need to implement such as normality testing, autocorrelation, heteroscedasticity, and multicollinearity testing.

3.7.1. Normality Test Normality tests are used to determine if a data set is well-modeled by a normal distribution and to compute how likely it is for a random variable underlying the data set to be normally distributed.

The basic indicator that stated if the data is normally distributed is when the histogram chart shows the bell-shaped curve, and if the P Plot of regression standardized residual shows the residual distributed in the pattern of diagonal line. Normality can be detected by analyzing the distribution of residuals in diagonally shaped on the Normal P-Plot of Regression Standardized Residual graph (Santoso, 2009).

3.7.2. Multicollinearity Test Multicollinearity is a term used when to x variables are highly correlated. Means that one can be linearly predicted from the others with a non-trivial degree of accuracy. In this situation, the coefficient estimates of the multiple regressions may change erratically in response to small changes in the model or the data. In SPSS 16.0 software for Windows, to compute tolerance for each independent variable, SPSS runs a separate regression analysis (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2006).

3.7.3. Heteroscedasticity Test Collection of random variables is heteroscedastic if there are sub- populations that have different variability from others. Variability could be quantified by the variance or any other measure of statistical dispersion. Thus, heteroscedasticity is the absence of homoscedasticity.

Heteroscedasticity typically occurs when a variable is not distributed in a normal manner or when a data transformation procedure has produced an anticipated distribution of a variable (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2006). Heteroscedasticity reflects inconstant error variance, which in turn may compromise the validity of significance tests and goddess-of-fit indicators. Specifically, the variance of residuals may vary with expected values of the dependent variable and with individual explanatory variables (Farag, 2009).

3.7.4. t-Test (Partial Test) The t-test is a test to determine the effect of the independent variables could individually affect the dependent variable (Ghozali, 2005). The t-test can be used to determine if two sets of data are significantly different from one another, and mostly applied when the statistics test follow the normal distribution.

The formula of t-test for manual calculation is stated as follows:

t = bj – βj

Sbj

Where: t = statistic test for t-distribution bj = sample slope

βj= slope of the population

Sbj = standard error of the slope

To interpret the result of the t-test, the following criteria needs to be as followed: a. Null Hypothesis (Ho) and Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) Formulation:

Ho : β1 = 0 Then;The independent variables have neither positive nor negative impact towards the dependent variable.

Ha : β1≠ 0 Then; The independent variables have either positive or negative impact towards the dependent variable. b. The significant factor being used for the t-test significant; Significant Factor = 0.05 (5%)

3.7.5. F-Test (Simultaneous Test) The F-test is a test to determine whether the independent variable could simultaneously or collectively affect to dependent variable. For the F-testing that will be conducted in this research, the researcher uses confidence interval at 95% , and the 5% significance (α = 0.05) outside the confidence level will leads to the rejection of null hypothesis. The significance level at 5% is applied since the research is categorized as social science, in which the 5% significance is customary (Krehbiel, 2006).

The formula of F-test for manual calculation is stated as follows:

F = [ R2 / k ]

[ ( 1 – R2 ) / ( n – k – 1 ) ]

Where:

F = statistics test for F distribution

R2= coefficient of determination k = number of independent variables in the regression model n = number of samples

To interpret the result of the F-test, the following criteria needs to be as followed: a. Ho : β1 = β2 =β3 = 0

Then;

The independent variables are not simultaneously affecting the dependent variable. b. Ha : β1 = β2 =β3 ≠ 0 Then;

The independent variables are simultaneously affecting the dependent variable.

3.7.6. R2Test (Coefficient of Determination) The R2test is a test to determine how far the independent variables could describe the dependent variable. The determination coefficient value goes around zero to one. Low R2value means that the ability of the independent variables to describe the dependent variable are limited. If the value of R2goes near one, it means that the independent variables give almost all information that needed to predict the dependent variable (Ghozali, 2005).

3.8. Linear Multiple Regression The researcher will be using linear multiple regression in order to answer the research questions in this research. Regression analysis is a statistical process for estimating the relationships among variables. The regression analysis is basically done to determine the dependency of the dependent variable towards one or more independent variable (Ghozali, 2005). Regression model in which the independent variables are more than one is called multiple regression or multiple linear regression, therefore since the researcher have three independent variables, the research will conducted with multiple linear regressions.

The multiple regression model contain dependent variable (Y),

more than one independent variables (X1, X2, X3,.....,Xn), the β‟s are the regression coefficients and the random error term (ε), where Y depend on Xs, and, Y and the Xs are continuous variables. The regression model in this research is applied to determine the impact

of the independent variables which are Brand Image (X1), Price

(X2), and Perceived Quality (X3) towards Purchasing Decision (Y).

The mathematical model for above regression model is as follows:

Y = a + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + e

Where:

Y = Purchasing Decision

a = Constanta

β1 = Coefficient between Brand Image towards Purchasing Decision

β2 = Coefficient between Price towards Purchasing Decision

β3 = Coefficient between Perceived Quality towards Purchasing Decision

X1 = Brand Image

X2 = Price

X3 = Perceived Quality e = Error disturbance

The result from this regression analysis will be used to accept or reject the hypothesis as to observe whether there is any dependency between dependent variable and independent variables.

Chapter IV ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1. Company Profile

4.1.1. Unilever Worldwide

PT Unilever as one of the largest multinational consumer package goods in the world has a long history since initiated until today. Unilever history began in 1930 as a result of the merger of two large companies, namely the level of brothers (English origin) with Marine Unie (Dutch origin) into one company named Unilever. The head office is located in each state that Unilever Limited in London, UK, and Unilever NV in Rotterdam, Netherlands. Unilever is an Anglo-Dutch multinational consumer goods company co-headquartered in London, England and Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Its products include food, beverages, cleaning agents, and personal care products. It is the world‟s third largest consumer‟s good company measured by 2012 revenue, after Procter & Gamble and Nestlé. Unilever is the world‟s largest producer of food spreads, such as margarine, with a 30+% global market share. One of the oldest multinational companies, its products are available in around 190 countries. Unilever celebrated its 85th anniversary year of business in 2014.

4.1.2. Unilever in Indonesia 1993 - Unilever was established under the name Lever‟s Zeepfabrieken N.V. in Angke, Jakarta

1936 - Blue Band margarine and Lux soap are marketed in Indonesia.

1980 -The company is renamed as PT Unilever Indonesia Yamani Hasan is the first Indonesian citizen to be appointed as the Company‟s President Director.

1982 - Unilever Indonesia goes public, listing 15% of its shares on the Indonesia Stock Exchange.

1990 -The personal care factory is opened in Rungkut, Surabaya. The company enters the tea business with the acquisition of SariWangi.

1992 -The Wall‟s ice cream factory opens in Cikarang. Conello and Paddle Pop appear on the market for the first time.

2000 -The company enters the soy sauce business, with Bango acquisition.

2004 -Knorr Indonesia is acquired from Unilever Overseas Holding Ltd and merged with Unilever Indonesia. The hair care factory relocates from Rungkut to Cikarang.

2008 -Asia‟s largest Skin Care factory is built at our Cikarang Site. The company enters the fruit juice business by acquiring Buavita and Gogo brands. SAP is implemented throughout Unilever Indonesia.

2010 -The company enters the water purification business by launching Pureit.

2012 -Unilever Indonesia succeeded in doubling the business within five years and recorded a sales more than 2 billion euro.

2013 - Unilever Indonesia celebrate its 80-years journey in Indonesia, by launching “Project Sunlight” to inspire people to create a brighter future not only for our children, but for future generations as well.

4.1.3. Vision, Mission and Values

1. Vision To earn love and respect of Indonesia by touching the lives of every Indonesian every day.

2. Mission  We work to create a better future every day.  We help people feel good, look good and get more out of life with brands and services that are good for them and good for others.  We will inspire people to take small every day actions that can add up to a big difference for the world.  We will develop new ways of doing business that allow us to double the size of our company while reducing our environment impact.

3. Values  Integrity We are committed to integrity because it creates our reputation, so we never compromise on it. It defines how we behave, wherever we are. It guides us to do the right thing for the longterm success of Unilever.

 Respect We are committed to respect because people should be treated with dignity, honesty, and fairness. We celebrate the diversity of people and we respect people for who they are and what they bring.  Responsibility We are committed to responsibility because we want to take care of our consumers, customers, and employees, as well as the environment and the communities in which we operate. We take this personally and always do what we say we will do.

 Pioneering We are committed to pioneering spirit because it created us and still drives us as a business. It gives us the passion for winning and for creating a better future. It means that we are always willing to take intelligent risks.

4.1.4. Product and Services 4.1.4.1. Food and Drinks

Figure 4.1 Unilever Products; Food and Drinks

Source: Unilever.com

4.1.4.2. Home Care

Figure 4.2 Unilever Products; Home Care

Source: Unilever.com

4.1.4.3. Personal Care

Figure 4.3 Unilever Products; Personal Care

Source: Unilever.com

4.1.5. Magnum

Magnum is vanilla ice cream stick which coated with dark chocolate. Magnum is produced by a famous brand named Wall‟s from British Unilever Company. First launched in 1987 with Classical Magnum. Starting in 1992, the company added some new flavors, namely Magnum Mint, Double Chocolate, etc. In 2002, Magnum launched Magnum Frozen Yoghurt with several of flavors. In many countries, Magnum also launched several new flavors and unique types of ice cream. Approximately there are 25 or more variants of Magnum ice cream which are widely spread in other countries with Magnum limited edition series, for example in Australia, the limited edition is The Sixties Nine. Taste Bombonierain Italy, and so on.

In 2010, Magnum Indonesia launched 3 new variants; Wall‟s Magnum Classic, Wall‟s Magnum Almond, and Wall‟s Magnum Chocolate Truffle. Wall‟s Magnum Classic has a taste of vanilla with a layer of Belgian chocolate. Wall‟s Magnum Almond has the vanilla flavor Belgian milk chocolate coated with peanuts and savory almond. And Wall‟s Magnum Chocolate Truffle has a taste of chocolate mixed chocolate truffle and a thick Belgian chocolate covered and crispy. With the presence of a variant Wall‟s Magnum, ice cream lovers in Indonesia can enjoy an ice cream with a premium thick chocolate layer which directly imported from Belgia.

Figure 4.4 Magnum’s Collection Source: mymagnum.co.id/collection

4.1.6. Magnum Café Walls Magnum Ice Cream presents a Magnum Café, located on 5th floor West Mall Area of Grand Indonesia Shopping Mall. It was established on 24th February 2011. This cafe presents a modern touch and invites any personal dynamic person that can spoil you to explore a variety of ways to enjoy the luscious Magnum. In Magnum Café, ice cream lovers will not only meet ice cream sticks, but the visitors can taste another unique creations ala Magnum, from appetizers, main course, dessert and refreshing mocktails, through copyrighted original Italian Chef, Aldo Volpi.Special menus at Magnum Cafe, among others: Waffle Cafe De Aristocrat; creme de la creme (Dessert): Goblet of Chocolate; Razzle Dazzle, The Crown Jewel; Nobble niibble (Small Bites): Pas De Trois, A Knight's Tale, the Court Jester; The Emperor, Commander's Fried Rice, Royal Kingdom, royal feast (Main Course).While the creative drinks offered include: signature magnum: Summer Tango, magnum shake: chocolate truffles

52 royale, magnum: Ice Queen. In addition, visitors can feel the atmosphere of royal offered in Magnum Cafe, also create own experience Magnum ice cream with chocolate topping and Belgium in booth Magnum Dipping where certainly can only be found at Magnum Café.

4.1.7. Organizational Structure

Figure 4.5 Unilever Organizational Structure

Source: Unilever.com

4.2. Data Result Analysis

4.2.1 Validity Test

Validity test was conducted by employing SPSS to tabulate pearson correlation matrix of the questionnaires. Data was first arranged in Microsoft Excel and then analyzed in SPSS. The results are as followed.

Table 4.1: Pearson Correlation of Brand Image

Correlations

BI1 BI2 BI3 BI4 TBI

Pearson Correlation 1 .470* .459* .698** .816** BI1 Sig. (2-tailed) .036 .042 .001 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .470* 1 .468* .471* .775** BI2 Sig. (2-tailed) .036 .038 .036 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .459* .468* 1 .587** .768** BI3 Sig. (2-tailed) .042 .038 .006 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .698** .471* .587** 1 .849** BI4 Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .036 .006 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .816** .775** .768** .849** 1 TBI Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000

N 20 20 20 20 20 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.1 Pearson Correlation of Brand Image shows BI1-BI4 in place of Question 1-4 with TBI as its total. BI1 was rated .816 in Pearson Correlation Analysis which means that there is a very strong relationship with brand image. BI2 was rated .775 which means that there is a strong relationship. BI3 also shows a strong

relationship with Pearson correlation of .768. Similar with the BI1, BI2 and BI3, the BI4 indicates a very strong relationship at .849. All in all, table 4.1 indicated that question 1-4 is correlated with Brand Image.

Table 4.2 Pearson Correlation of Price

Correlations

P1 P2 P3 P4 TP

Pearson Correlation 1 .586** .322 .331 .715** P1 Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .167 .155 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .586** 1 .607** .669** .918** P2 Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .005 .001 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .322 .607** 1 .394 .725** P3 Sig. (2-tailed) .167 .005 .085 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .331 .669** .394 1 .774** P4 Sig. (2-tailed) .155 .001 .085 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .715** .918** .725** .774** 1 TP Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.2 Pearson Correlation of Price shows P1-P4 in place of Question 1-4 with TP as its total. P1 was rated .715 in Pearson Correlation Analysis which means that there is a strong relationship with price. P2 was rated .918 which means that there is a very strong relationship. P3 also shows a strong relationship with Pearson correlation of .725. Similar with the P1, P2 and P3, the Pearson correlation of .774 indicates that there is a strong

relationship of P4 with price. All in all, table 4.2 indicated that question 1-4 is correlated with price.

Table 4.3 Pearson Correlation of Perceived Quality Correlations

PQ1 PQ2 PQ3 PQ4 TPQ

Pearson Correlation 1 .429 .311 .424 .613** PQ1 Sig. (2-tailed) .059 .182 .062 .004

N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .429 1 .630** .606** .840** PQ2 Sig. (2-tailed) .059 .003 .005 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .311 .630** 1 .703** .862** PQ3 Sig. (2-tailed) .182 .003 .001 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .424 .606** .703** 1 .867** PQ4 Sig. (2-tailed) .062 .005 .001 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .613** .840** .862** .867** 1

TPQ Sig. (2-tailed) .004 .000 .000 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.3 Pearson Correlation of Perceived Quality shows PQ1- PQ4 in place of Question 1-4 with TPQ as its total. PQ1 was rated .613 in Pearson Correlation Analysis which means that there is a strong relationship with perceived quality. PQ2 was rated .840 which means that there is a very strong relationship. PQ3 also shows a very strong relationship with Pearson correlation of .862. Similar with the PQ1, PQ2 and PQ3, the Pearson correlation of .867 indicates that there is a very strong relationship of PQ4 with perceived quality. All in all, table 4.3 indicated that question 1-4 is correlated with perceived quality.

Table 4.4 Pearson Correlation of Purchase Decision Correlations

PD1 PD2 PD3 PD4 TPD

Pearson Correlation 1 .899** .284 .497* .819** PD1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .224 .026 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .899** 1 .287 .645** .877** PD2 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .220 .002 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .284 .287 1 .477* .642** PD3 Sig. (2-tailed) .224 .220 .034 .002 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .497* .645** .477* 1 .849** PD4 Sig. (2-tailed) .026 .002 .034 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .819** .877** .642** .849** 1 TPD Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .002 .000

N 20 20 20 20 20 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.4 Pearson Correlation of Purchase Decision shows PD1- PD4 in place of Question 1-4 with TPD as its total. PD1 was rated .819 in Pearson Correlation Analysis which means that there is a very strong relationship with purchase decision. PD2 was rated .877 which means that there is a very strong relationship with the purchase decision. PD3 also shows a strong relationship with Pearson correlation of .642. Similar with the PD1-PD3, the PD4 indicates another very strong relationship at .849. All in all, table 4.4 indicated that question 1-4 is correlated with Purchase Decision.

4.2.2 Reliability Test

Reliability test was conducted by employing SPSS and arranged data from Microsoft Excel to tabulate Cronbach‟s Alpha of the research instruments. The results are as followed.

Table 4.5Cronbach’s Alpha of Brand Image

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Based on Standardized Items .810 .816 4

Table 4.5 shows reliability coefficient of Cronbach‟s Alpha of .810 on Brand Image which means that this parameter had a good reliability rate (over 0.8).

Table 4.6 Cronbach’s Alpha of Price

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Based on Standardized Items .793 .790 4

Table 4.6 shows reliability coefficient of Cronbach‟s Alpha of .793 on Price which means that this parameter had an acceptable reliability rate (over 0.7).

Table 4.7 Cronbach’s Alpha of Perceived Quality

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

Based on Standardized

Items .814 .811 4

Table 4.7 shows reliability coefficient of Cronbach‟s Alpha of .814 on Perceived Quality which means that this parameter had a good reliability rate (over 0.8).

Table 4.8 Cronbach’s Alpha of Purchase Decision

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Based on Standardized Items .804 .809 4

Table 4.8 shows reliability coefficient of Cronbach‟s Alpha of .804 on Purchase Decision which means that this parameter had a good reliability rate (over 0.8).

4.3. Respondent Profiles

The Respondent profiles data gathered to gain insight about the characteristics of respondents in this study through the questionnaires. Data obtained were recorded as follows:

4.3.1 Gender Table 4.9 Respondent Profiles: Gender

Gender Sample Percentage (%)

Male 48 48 Female 52 52

Total 100 100

Figure 4.6 Respondent Profiles: Gender

Respondent Profiles: Gender

Male 52% 48% Female

As it is shown in table 4.9 and figure 4.6 about respondent profiles of gender in this research, 48 people (48%) were male respondents and 52 people (52%) were female respondents. Therefore, the majority respondents were female.

4.3.2 Age Table 4.10 Respondent Profiles: Age

Age Sample Percentage (%) <20 years old 36 36 20–30 years old 33 33 31–40 years old 19 19 41 – 50 years old 8 8 > 50 years old 4 4 Total 100 100

Figure 4.7 Respondent Profiles: Age

Respondent Profiles: Age

4% 8% <20 years old 20 – 30 years old 19% 36% 31 – 40 years old 41 – 50 years old 33% >50 years old

As it is described in table 4.10 and figure 4.7 about respondent profiles of age in this research, 36 respondents (36%) were below 20 years old; 33 respondents (33%) were between 20 - 30 years old; 19 respondents (19%) were between 31 – 40 years old, 8 respondents (8%) were between 41 – 50 years old; and only 4 respondents (4%) were more than 50 years old. All in all, the group

age of below 20 years old and 20 – 30 years old dominate the respondent profiles in this research.

4.4. Respondent Responses

Based on the questionnaires, the respondent‟s assessment refers to the Brand Image, Price, Perceived Quality and Purchase Decision. To facilitate the assessment of the respondents, answers will be based on the Likert scales as followed:

Strongly Agree 5 Agree 4 Neither Agree or Disagree 3 Disagree 2 Strongly Disagree 1

4.4.1 Respondent Responses Assessing Brand Image (X1)

Table 4.11: Variable 1 Description

Variable 1: Magnum ice cream is a premium class of ice cream. Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent SD 2 2 2

D 10 10 12 N 24 24 36 A 40 40 76

SA 24 24 100 Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 1 (Magnum ice cream is a premium class of ice cream) is presented in Table 4.11 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 24 respondents (24%) strongly agree and neutral with the statement; 40 respondents (40%) agree

62 with the statement; 10 respondents (10%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 2 respondents (2%) strongly disagree with the statement. From the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents (40% agree) have tendency to be agree with the statement that Magnum ice cream is a premium class of ice cream.

Table 4.12 : Variable 2 Description

Variable 2: Magnum ice cream is one of the leading ice creams in Indonesia. Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent SD 0 0 0 D 16 16 16 N 23 23 39 A 46 46 85 SA 15 15 100 Total 100 100 The distribution frequency of Variable 2 (Magnum ice cream is one of the leading ice creams in Indonesia) is presented in Table 4.12 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 15 respondents (15%) strongly agree with the statement; 46 respondents (46%) agree with the statement; 23 respondents (23%) are neutral; 16 respondents (16%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 0 respondents (0%) strongly disagree with the statement. From the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents have tendency to be agree with the statement that Magnum ice cream is one of the leading ice creams in Indonesia.

Table 4.13: Variable 3 Description Variable 3: Magnum ice cream is familiar for me. Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent SD 2 2 2 D 14 14 16 N 26 26 42

A 38 38 80 SA 20 20 100 Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 3 (Magnum ice cream is familiar for me) is presented in Table 4.13 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 20 respondents (20%) strongly agree with the statement; 38 respondents (38%) agree with the statement; 26 respondents (26%) are neutral; 14 respondents (14%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 2 respondents (2%) strongly disagree with the statement. From the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents have tendency to be agree with the statement that Magnum ice cream is familiar for me.

Table 4.14: Variable 4 Description Variable 4: Magnum ice cream has an unique brand (logo, quality, packaging, etc) Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent SD 4 4 4 D 11 11 15 N 41 41 56 A 37 37 93 SA 7 7 100 Total 100 100 The distribution frequency of Variable 4 (Magnum ice cream has an unique brand (logo, quality, packaging, etc)) is presented in Table 4.14 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 7 respondents (7%) strongly agree with the statement; 37 respondents (37%) agree with the statement; 41 respondents (41%) are neutral; 11 respondents (11%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 4 respondents (4%) strongly disagree with the statement. From the

64 percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents have tendency to be neutral with the statement that Magnum ice cream has an unique brand (logo, quality, packaging, etc).

4.4.2. Respondent Responses Assessing Price (X2)

Table 4.15: Variable 5 Description Variable 5: Magnum ice cream has an affordable price Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent SD 3 3 3 D 7 7 10 N 29 29 39 A 42 42 81 SA 19 19 100 Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 5 (Magnum ice cream has an affordable price) is presented in Table 4.15 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 19 respondents (19%) strongly agree with the statement; 42 respondents (42%) agree with the statement; 29 respondents (29%) are neutral; 7 respondents (7%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 3 respondents (3%) strongly disagree with the statement. From the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents agree with the statement that Magnum ice cream has an affordable price.

Table 4.16: Variable 6 Description

Variable 6: Magnum ice cream’s price is accordance with the quality and taste Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent SD 1 1 1 D 8 8 9 N 30 30 39

A 48 48 87 SA 13 13 100

Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 6 (Magnum ice cream‟s price is accordance with the quality and taste) is presented in Table 4.16 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 13 respondents (13%) strongly agree with the statement; 48 respondents (48%) agree with the statement; 30 respondents (30%) are neutral; 8 respondents (8%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 1 respondents (1%) strongly disagree with the statement. From the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents agree with the statement that Magnum ice cream‟s price is accordance with the quality and taste.

Table 4.17: Variable 7 Description

Variable 7: Magnum ice cream’s price is competing with competitor Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent SD 4 4 4 D 17 17 21 N 30 30 51 A 32 32 83 SA 17 17 100 Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 7 (Magnum ice cream‟s price is competing with competitor) is presented in Table 4.17 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 17 respondents (17%)

66 strongly agree with the statement; 32 respondents (32%) agree with the statement; 30 respondents (30%) are neutral; 17 respondents (17%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 4 respondents (4%) strongly disagree with the statement. From the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents agree with the statement that Magnum ice cream‟s price is competing with competitor.

Table 4.18: Variable 8 Description

Variable 8: Magnum ice cream’s price is accordance with the brand

Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent SD 4 4 4 D 14 14 18 N 32 32 50 A 36 36 86 SA 14 14 100 Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 8 (Magnum ice cream‟s price is accordance with the brand) is presented in Table 4.18 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 14 respondents (14%) strongly agree with the statement; 36 respondents (36%) agree with the statement; 32 respondents (32%) are neutral; 14 respondents (14%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 4 respondents (4%) strongly disagree with the statement. Looking at the percentage, it can be summarized that Magnum ice cream‟s price is accordance with the brand.

4.4.3. Respondent Responses Assessing Perceived Quality (X3) Table 4.19: Variable 9 Description

Variable 9: Magnum ice cream has many variation of taste. Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

SD 2 2 2 D 9 9 11

N 17 17 28

A 54 54 82 SA 18 18 100

Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 9 (Magnum ice cream has many variation of taste) is presented in Table 4.19 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 18 respondents (185%) strongly agree with the statement; 54 respondents (54%) agree with the statement; 17 respondents (17%) are neutral; 9 respondents (9%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 2 respondents (2%) strongly disagree with the statement. Looking at the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents agree that Magnum ice cream has many variation of taste.

Table 4.20: Variable 10 Description

Variable 10: Products from Magnum ice cream offer excellent features. (Packaging, seal, etc) Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

SD 3 3 3

D 6 6 9 N 34 34 43 A 42 42 85 SA 15 15 100 Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 10 (Products from Magnum ice cream offers excellent features. (Packaging, seal, etc)) is presented in Table 4.20 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 15 respondents (15%) strongly agree with the statement; 42 respondents (42%) agree with the statement; 34 respondents (34%)

68 are neutral; 6 respondents (6%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 3 respondents (3%) strongly disagree with the statement. Looking at the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents agree that products from Magnum ice cream offer excellent features(Packaging, seal, etc).

Table 4.21: Variable 11 Description

Variable 11: Magnum ice cream is made from pure Belgian chocolate. Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

SD 1 1 1

D 18 18 19 N 32 32 51 A 35 35 86 SA 14 14 100 Total 100 100 The distribution frequency of Variable 11 (Magnum ice cream is made from pure Belgian chocolate) is presented in Table 4.21 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 14 respondents (14%) strongly agree with the statement; 35 respondents (35%) agree with the statement; 32 respondents (32%) are neutral; 18 respondents (18%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 1 respondents (1%) strongly disagree with the statement. Looking at the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents agree that Magnum ice cream is made from pure Belgian chocolate.

Table 4.22: Variable 12 Description

Variable 12: Magnum ice cream is very reliable. Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

SD 5 5 5 D 14 14 19

N 23 23 42 A 43 43 85 SA 15 15 100 Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 12 (Magnum ice cream is very reliable) is presented in Table 4.22 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 15 respondents (15%) strongly agree with the statement; 43 respondents (43%) agree with the statement; 23 respondents (23%) are neutral; 14 respondents (14%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 5 respondents (5%) strongly disagree with the statement. Looking at the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents agree that Magnum ice cream is very reliable.

4.4.4. Respondent Responses Assessing Purchase Decision (Y)

Table 4.23: Variable 13 Description

Variable 13:I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because of its quality. Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

SD 2 2 2

D 8 8 10 N 22 22 32 A 55 55 87 SA 13 13 100 Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 13 (I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because of its quality) is presented in Table

4.23 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 13 respondents (13%) strongly agree with the statement; 55 respondents (55%) agree with the statement; 22 respondents (22%) are neutral; 8 respondents (8%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 2 respondents (2%) strongly disagree with the statement. Looking at the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents are agree that they purchase Magnum ice cream because of its quality.

Table 4.24: Variable 14 Description

Variable 14:I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because of its taste. Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

SD 1 1 1 D 11 11 12 N 21 21 33

A 54 54 87 SA 13 13 100

Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 14 (I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because of its taste) is presented in Table 4.24 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 13 respondents (13%) strongly agree with the statement; 54 respondents (54%) agree with the statement; 21 respondents (21%) are neutral; 11 respondents (11%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 1 respondents (1%) strongly disagree with the statement. Looking at the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents are agree that they purchase Magnum ice cream because of its taste.

Table4.25 : Variable 15 Description

Variable 15:I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because of the price is affordable for me.

Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent SD 3 3 3 D 10 10 13 N 31 31 44 A 47 47 91 SA 9 9 100 Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 15 (I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because of the price is affordable for me) is presented in Table 4.25 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 9 respondents (9%) strongly agree with the statement; 47 respondents (47%) agree with the statement; 31 respondents (31%) are neutral; 10 respondents (10%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 3 respondents (3%) strongly disagree with the statement. Looking at the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents are agree that they purchase Magnum ice cream because of the price is affordable.

Table 4.26: Variable 16 Description

Variable 16:I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because I feel satisfy with the product. Scale Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

SD 5 5 5 D 8 8 13 N 29 29 42

A 49 49 91 SA 9 9 100

Total 100 100

The distribution frequency of Variable 16 (I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because I feel satisfy with the product) is presented in Table 4.26 above. From the total of 100 respondents, 9 respondents (9%) strongly agree with the statement; 49 respondents (49%) agree with the statement; 29 respondents (29%) are neutral; 8 respondents (8%) disagree with the statement; and the rest 5 respondents (5%) strongly disagree with the statement. Looking at the percentage, it can be summarized that most respondents are agree with the statement that they purchase Magnum ice cream because I feel satisfy with the product.

4.5. Descriptive Analysis

This section will comprehensively elaborate the result of the research as the researcher received from the filled questionnaire in descriptive analysis. Descriptive analysis shows the mean and standard deviation on; Brand Image (X1), Price (X2), Perceived Quality (X3) and Purchase Decision (Y). The result will be elaborate into frequency distribution of each variable.

Table 4.27 Mean score of Brand Image (X1)

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Brand Image (X1-1) 100 1.00 5.00 3.7400 1.00121

Brand Image (X1-2) 100 2.00 5.00 3.6000 .93203

Brand Image (X1-3) 100 1.00 5.00 3.6000 1.02494

Brand Image (X1-4) 100 1.00 5.00 3.3200 .90877

Valid N (listwise) 100

Table 4.27 show the elaborated statements used in variable Brand Image (X1) and the score of mean and standard deviation. In

statements X1-1, X1-2,X1-3and X1-4 the mean score are 3.7400, 3.6000, 3.6000 and 3.3200 which are tend to Agree. The researcher concludes that respondents are mostly agree which brand image has an impact on their buying decision of Magnum Ice Cream.

Table 4.28 Mean score of Price (X2)

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Price (X2-1) 100 1.00 5.00 3.6700 .96457

Price (X2-2) 100 1.00 5.00 3.6400 .84710

Price (X2-3) 100 1.00 5.00 3.4100 1.08334

Price (X2-4) 100 1.00 5.00 3.4200 1.02671

Valid N (listwise) 100

Table 4.28 shows the elaborated statements used in variable Price (X2) and the score of mean and standard deviation. In statements X2-1, X2-2,X2-3and X2-4 the mean score are 3.6700, 3.6400, 3.4100 and 3.4200 which are tend to Agree. The researcher concludes that respondents are mostly agree which price has an impact on their buying decision of Magnum Ice Cream.

Table 4.29 Mean score of Perceived Quality (X3)

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Perceived Quality (X3-1) 100 1.00 5.00 3.7700 .91954

Perceived Quality (X3-2) 100 1.00 5.00 3.6000 .92113

Perceived Quality (X3-3) 100 1.00 5.00 3.4300 .97706

Perceived Quality (X3-4) 100 1.00 5.00 3.4900 1.06832

Valid N (listwise) 100

Table 4.29 show the elaborated statements used in variable Perceived Quality (X3) and the score of mean and standard deviation. In statements X3-1, X3-2,X3-3and X3-4 the mean score are 3.7700, 3.6000, 3.4300 and 3.4900 which are tend to Agree. The researcher concludes that respondents are mostly agree which perceived quality has an impact on their buying decision of Magnum Ice Cream.

Table 4.30 Mean score of Purchase Decision (Y)

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Purchase Decision (Y-1) 100 1.00 5.00 3.6900 .87265

Purchase Decision (Y-2) 100 1.00 5.00 3.6700 .87681

Purchase Decision (Y-3) 100 1.00 5.00 3.4900 .90448

Purchase Decision (Y-4) 100 1.00 5.00 3.4900 .94810

Valid N (listwise) 100

Table 4.30 show the elaborated statements used in variable Purchase Decision (Y) and the score of mean and standard deviation. In statements Y-1, Y-2,Y-3and Y-4 the mean score are 3.6900, 3.6700, 3.4900 and 3.4900 which are tending to Agree. From the result above, the researcher concludes that most of the respondents are agree with the statements that represent brand image, price, and perceived quality have an impact on consumer buying decision of Magnum Ice Cream.

Table 4.31Weighted Mean of Brand Image (X1), Price (X2),

Perceived Quality (X3), and Purchase Decision (Y)

Descriptive Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation

PurchaseDecision 100 14.3400 3.16298

BrandImage 100 14.2600 3.37735

Price 100 14.1400 3.40831

PerceivedQuality 100 14.2900 3.28540

Valid N (listwise) 100

Table 4.31 show the dominant factor in this study is Perceived Quality with the mean value of 14.2900 and then the dominant factor after Perceived Quality is Brand Image with the mean value of 14.2600, and then Price with the mean of 14.1400. The consumer of Magnum Ice Cream might be feel satisfy with the product and of its quality.

4.6. Classic Assumption Test

In order to use multiple regression models, classic assumption test need to implement such as normality testing, heteroscedasticity testing and multicollinearity.

4.6.1 Normality Test

Normality Test used to testthe independent variable(X) and the dependent variable(Y) on the resulting regression equation, whether normally distributed or not distributed normally. Normality Tests performed using the test chartHistogram and P-P plots to test the regression model residuals are shown in Figure 4.8 and 4.9 following.

Figure 4.8 Normality Test: Histogram

Constructed in SPSS

From figure 4.8 Histogram normality test distribution, it shows the histogram is bell-shaped curve. The researcher concludes this research is normally distributed

Figure 4.9 Normality Test: P-P Plot Graph Constructed in SPSS

Graphs of normal probability p-p plot in figure 4.9 suggests that the data spread in around the diagonal line and follow the direction of the diagonal line, then the researcher conclude that the regression model meet the assumption of normality.

4.6.2 Heteroscedascity Testing

In a multiple regression equation, it is needed to be tested for the same or not the variance of the residuals of the observations with other observations.

If the residuals have the same variance, it is called homoscedascity. And if the residuals have the difference variance, it is called

78 heteroscedascity(dawaisimfoni.wordpress.com,2013). Multiple regressions equation is good if there is no heteroscedasticity. Heteroscedasticity test generates chart patterns point spread (scatterplot) as shown in Figure 4.10 below.

Figure 4.10 Heteroscedascity Test: Scatter Plot Graph Constructed in SPSS

Heteroscedasticity test results on Figure 4.10 indicate that the points are notform a certain pattern or no clear pattern and the points spread above and below the number 0 (zero) on the Y axis, then there is no heteroscedasticity.

4.6.3 Multicollinearity test

Multicollinearity test aims to test whether the regression model found a correlation between the independent variables.Good Regression model should not have correlation between independent variables (dawaisimfoni.wordpress.com, 2013).

Multicollinearity occurs when the coefficient of correlation between independent variables is greater than 0.50. And 79

multicollinearity occurs when the VIF value is more than 10 and tolerance values less than 10%. The Multicollinearity test is shown in following table 4.32 and table 4.33.

Table4.32Multicollinearity Test: Tolerance and VIF Value

Coefficientsa

Model Collinearity Statistics Tolerance VIF BrandImage .417 2.398 1 Price .308 3.244 PerceivedQuality .345 2.896 a. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision

Constructed in SPSS

Table 4.33Multicollinearity Test: Coefficient Correlations

Coefficient Correlationsa

Model PerceivedQuality BrandImage Price 1 PerceivedQuality 1.000 -.284 -.566 Correlations BrandImage -.284 1.000 -.423 Price -.566 -.423 1.000 PerceivedQuality .007 -.002 -.004 Covariances BrandImage -.002 .006 -.003 Price -.004 -.003 .007 a. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision

Constructed in SPSS

From the Table 4.32Multicollinearity Test: Tolerance and VIF Value, there is no variable that have VIF value more than 10 and no tolerance value less than 10% indicating that there is no multicollinearity (dawaisimfoni.wordpress.com, 2013). From the

table 4.33, the coefficients correlations are far away below 0.5 indicate there is no multicollinearity.

Thus, the assumptions of normality, heteroscedasticity and multicollinearity in the regression model can be met from this model.

4.7. Coefficient Determination of R

Correlation Analysis aims to measure the strength of association

(relationship) linear between two or more variables. The magnitude

of the correlation coefficient between Brand Image, Price, and

Perceived Quality of the Purchase Decision is computed using

product moment correlation results are shown in the table below

4:38.

Table 4.34 Multiple Regression Analysis: Coefficient

Determination(R²)

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the Square Estimate 1 .863a .744 .736 1.62432

a. Predictors: (Constant), PerceivedQuality, BrandImage, Price b. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision

Constructed in SPSS

From the results of calculations using the computer program SPSS

for windows version 20.0, the correlation coefficient or R is 0.863.

It shows that there is a very strong relationship between Brand

Image, Price, and Perceived Quality of the Purchase Decision.

4.8. Multiple Regression Analysis

Multiple linear regression analysis was used in this research to determine whether there is the influence of independent variables on the dependent variable.

Statistical calculations in a multiple linear regression analysis were used in SPSS. Summary of results of data processing by using The SPSS program was as follows.

Table 4.35 Multiple Regression Analysis: Coefficients

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig. Coefficients B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 1.584 .781 2.029 .045 BrandImage .296 .075 .316 3.953 .000 Price .172 .086 .185 1.993 .049 PerceivedQuality .427 .085 .444 5.053 .000 a. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision

Constructed in SPSS

From the result in Table 4.35, if written in the unstandardized form of the equation, the regression is as follows:

Y = 1.584 + 0.296 X1 + 0.172 X2+ 0.427 X3+e

Where,

Y = Purchase Decision

X1 = Brand Image

X2 = Price

X3 = Perceived Quality e = error disturbance

4.8.1 T-Test

T-test for the partial regression coefficient is intended to determinehow farthe influence ofone variableindependent(brand image, price, and perceived quality) individually inexplainingthe dependentvariable(purchase decision). T-test results inthisstudycanbeseen in Table4.35. a. Brand Image

Ho1There is no positive partial significant influence between Brand Image towards Purchasing Decision. Ha2There is positive partial significant influence between Brand Image towards Purchasing Decision.

The test using SPSS for the variable X1 (Brand Image) obtained the t value = 3.953 with significance level of 0.000. By using the 0.05 limit, the significance value is smaller than the level of 5%, the t value is > t table (1.66) with df = 96 which means that Ho is rejected and Ha accepted. Thus, the second hypothesis is accepted that there is a positive partial significant influence between Brand Image towards Purchasing Decision. b. Price

Ho2There is no positive partial significant influence between Pricetowards Purchasing Decision.

Ha2There is positive partial significant influence between Price towards Purchasing Decision.

The test using SPSS for the variable X2 (Price) obtained the t value = 1.993 with significance level of 0.049. By using the 0.05 limit, the significance value is smaller than the level of 5%, the t value is > t table (1.66) with df = 96 which means that Ho is rejected and Ha accepted. Thus, the second hypothesis is accepted that there is a positive partial significant influence between Pricetowards Purchasing Decision c. Perceived Quality

Ho3 There is no positive partial significant influence between Perceived Quality towards Purchasing Decision Ha3There is positive partial significant influence between Perceived Quality towards Purchasing Decision.

The test using SPSS for the variable X3 (Perceived Quality) obtained the t value = 5.053 with significance level of 0.000. By using the 0.05 limit, the significance value is smaller than the level of 5%, the t value is > t table (1.66) with df = 96 which means that Ho is rejected and Ha accepted. Thus, the second hypothesis is accepted that there is a positive partial significant influence between Perceived Quality towards Purchasing Decision.

From the results of multiple linear regression and t-test in table 4.39 shows that 3 of the regression coefficient is positive and significant. From the regression model above, it can be further described as follows:

1. Variable Brand Image (X1) has a positive partial significant influence towards Purchase Decision(Y) with aregressionvalue 0.296 andt value= 3.953 with a significance level of 0.000.

2. Variable Price(X2) has a positivepartial significant influence towards Purchase Decision(Y) with aregressionvalue0.172 andt value= 1.993 with a significance level of 0.049. 3. Variable Perceived Quality(X3) has a positive partial significant influence towards Purchase Decision(Y) with aregressionvalue 0.427 andt value= 5.053 with a significance level of 0.000.

4.8.2 F-Test

F-Test is also used to determine the simultaneous significant influence of brand image, price, and perceived quality toward purchase decision. If F value > F table, Ho rejected and Ha accepted. Oppositely, if F value < F table, then Ho accepted and Ha rejected. The result of F-Test (ANOVA) is shown in the following Table 4.36.

Table 4.36 Multiple Regression Analysis: F-Test (ANOVA)

ANOVA

Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. Regression 737.152 3 245.717 93.131 .000b 1 Residual 253.288 96 2.638 Total 990.440 99 a. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision b. Predictors: (Constant), PerceivedQuality, BrandImage, Price

Constructed in SPSS

Hypothesis:

Ho4: There is no positive simultaneous significant influence between Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality toward Purchasing Decision.

Ha4: There is positive simultaneous significant influence between Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality toward Purchasing Decision.

From Table 4.36, testing the effect of independent variables together on dependent variables is done by using the F-Test. The result of this F-test shows the F value = 93.131 with a significance level of 0.000. The F table value is found on the F table with df1 = 3 and df2 = 96, thus the F table value is 2.700. F value > F table (93.131> 2.700) and significance level is 0.000 (< 0.05) means that Ha4 is accepted, simultaneously Brand Image, Price and Perceived Quality has significant influence toward Purchase Decision of Magnum Ice Cream.

4.8.3 Coefficient Determination (R²) The coefficient of determination (R²) was essentially measures how much the ability of the model to explain the variations dependent variable. The coefficient ofdetermination is between zero and one. The coefficient ofdetermination represented in Table 4.34.

Results calculated using SPSS can be seenthat the R square value of 0.736 is obtained. The 73.6% means that purchase decision can be explained by the variable Brand Image, Price, Perceived Quality, while the rest is 26.4% of purchase decision is influenced by other variables which are not examined in this research.

4.9. Interpretation of Results a. The Reliability Test shows the value of CronbachAlphafrom every variable. Each variable‟s cronbach alpha values that greater than 0.60 means that the questionnaire which is the indicators of these variables is reliable. This can be seen from the results of the testing that has been done as follows: Brand Image (X1) Cronbach Alpha value of 0.810, Price (X2)

Cronbach Alpha value of 0.793, Perceived Quality (X3) Cronbach Alpha value of 0.814, and Purchase Decision (Y) value of 0.804. b. The Validity Test shows the r values from each variable are greater than r table = 0.220 which indicate moderate and high positive relationship with significance level less than 0.05. From the result, it can be concluded that each variables is valid. The result of validity test can be seen as follows: 1) Brand Image (X1) Brand Image r values determined with the indicators of: BI1 with value of 0.816;BI2 with value of 0.775;BI3 with value of 0.768;BI4 with value of 0.849. All indicators show a very strong relationship. 2) Price (X2) Price r values determined with the indicators of: P1 with value of 0.715; P2 with value of 0.918; P3 with value of 0.725; P4 with value of 0.774. All indicators show a strong relationship. 3) Perceived Quality (X3) Perceived Quality r values determined with the indicators of: PQ1 with value of 0.613; PQ2 with value of 0.840; PQ3 with value of 0.862; PQ4 with value of 0.867. All indicators show a very strong relationship. 4) Purchase Decision (Y) Purchase Decision r values determined with the indicators of: PD1 with value of 0.819; PD2 with value of 0.877; PD3 with value of 0.642; PD4 with value of 0.849. All indicators show a strong relationship.

87 c. Analysis of the hypothesis can be seen as follows: 1) The Analysis of Brand Image on Purchase Decision Hypothesis 1 testing results shows that variable brand image has a positive and significant affection purchase decision through the result of the regression analysis 0,296 and t value of 3.953 >t table (1,66) with significance level of 0.000 below 0.05.This result shows that the higher influence of Brand Image, the higher Purchase Decision on Magnum ice cream.

Brand Image has a positive significant influence in creating a commitment to purchase a product or brand that will ultimately create consumer to the brand or product. The popularity and credibility on Magnum ice cream products has been tested, it was proved by the inclusion of Magnum‟s brand in a row Top Brand Index 2012 for ice‟s cream category. This will create a confidence in Wall‟s ice cream Magnum brand that Wall‟s Magnum ice cream is a good brand in the eyes of consumers.

2) The Analysis of Price on Purchase Decision Hypothesis 2 testing results shows that variable price has a positive significant influence towards purchase decision through the result of the regression analysis 0.172 and t value of 1.993 > t table (1,66) with significance level of 0.000 below 0.05.It means that the more reasonable price would increase the level of purchases and customer loyalty. This result explains that the price may be an additional reference for prospective customers and become a consideration of the desired product. A reasonable price would be a decision for consumers to remain loyal to the product. The results of this study also showed that in many cases, the characteristics of magnum‟s price is in conformity with the criteria which expected by the consumers

with the existing of product features, affordable prices, and the prices are in accordance with the benefits of the products.

3) The Analysis of Perceived Quality on Purchase Decision Hypothesis 3 testing results shows that variable perceived quality has a positive significant influence towards purchase decision through the result of the regression analysis 0.427 and t value of 5.053 > t table (1,66) with significance level of 0.000 below 0.05. It means that consumer judge Magnum ice cream products have good quality product and in accordance with customer needs. Hypothesis 3 shows the positive effects of product quality and significant impact on purchasing decisions are supported by the results of research. These results indicate that the quality of the products specified in the purchase process will determine the level of customer loyalty on the product. Consumers will compare the quality of the product with other products so that consumers can determine which products are selected for long periods of time.These results indicate that in many cases, the quality characteristics of Magnum ice cream are accordance with the criteria which expected by consumers, which in this case your customers will expect good quality products according to customers tastes.

4) The Analysis of Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality together on Purchase Decision Hypothesis 4 testing results shows that variablesbrand image, price,andperceived quality simultaneously have positiveand significantinfluence towards purchase decision. This is evidentfromthe test resultsobtainedt value=2,029>t table(1.66) with asignificancelevel of0.045<0.05. From theregression

analysisequation ofthe regression lineY = 1.584 + 0.296 X1 +

0.172 X2+ 0.427 X3. The result of this F-test shows the F value

= 93.131 with a significance level of 0.000. The F table value is found on the F table with df1 = 3 and df2 = 96, thus the F table value is 2.700. F value > F table (93.131> 2.700) and significance level is 0.000 (< 0.05) means that together the brand image, price and perceived quality has significant impact on purchase decision of Magnum Ice Cream. And collectively demonstrate that the variable brand image, price, and perceived quality can determine the increase on purchase decisions by 73.6%.

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this final chapter of the research, the researcher draws the conclusion and recommendation developed from the wholly integrated quantitative analysis. The result of this research has found through the statistical testing such as; Classical Data Assumptions and specifically the multiple regression analysis, about the impact of brand image, price and perceived quality on purchase decision for Magnum Ice Cream. The tool used for this research was spreading questionnaires to ice cream consumers in Jakarta. The analysis is conducted to discover the specifically impact of brand image, price and perceived quality on consumer purchase decision.

5.1 Conclusions Based on classical data assumptions, the data gathered from the questionnaire is normally distributed, proved no multicolinearity, no heteroscedasticity. According to multiple linear regressions, the result is presented as follows:

1. Hypothesis 1 testing results shows that variable brand image has a positive and significant affection purchase decision through the result of the regression analysis 0,296 and t value of 3.953 >t table (1,66) with significance level of 0.000 below 0.05. 2. Hypothesis 2 testing results shows that variable price has a positive significant influence towards purchase decision through the result of the regression analysis 0.172 and t value

of 1.993 > t table (1,66) with significance level of 0.000 below 0.05. 3. Hypothesis 3 testing results shows that variable perceived quality has a positive significant influence towards purchase decision through the result of the regression analysis 0.427 and t value of 5.053 > t table (1,66) with significance level of 0.000 below 0.05. 4. Hypothesis 4 testing results shows that variables brand image, price, and perceived quality simultaneously have positive and significant influence towards purchase decision. This is evident from the test results obtained t value=2,029>t table(1.66) with a significance level of 0.045<0.05. From the regression analysis

equation of the regression line Y = 1.584 + 0.296 X1 + 0.172

X2+ 0.427 X3. The result of this F-test shows the F value = 93.131 with a significance level of 0.000. The F table value is found on the F table with df1 = 3 and df2 = 96, thus the F table value is 2.700. F value > F table (93.131> 2.700) and significance level is 0.000 (< 0.05) means that together the brand image, price and perceived quality has significant impact on purchase decision of Magnum Ice Cream. And collectively demonstrate that the variable brand image, price, and perceived quality can determine the increase on purchase decisions by 73.6%. 5. Correlation coefficient (R) of 0.863 shows that there is a very strong relationship between dependent and independent variable and has coefficient of determination of 0.736 to the test value of F = 93,131, which means that 73.6% means that purchase decision can be explained by the variable Brand Image, Price, Perceived Quality, while the rest is 26.4% of purchase decision is influenced by other variables which are not examined in this research.

5.2 Recommendations

Based on the conclusions obtained in this study, the recommendations proposed as a complement to the results of the study as follows:

5.2.1. For Unilever

1. The unique design and attractive can form an image or image of a company. When the company has a bad image, the customer will give a negative assessment so that customers will switch to other products. It should be considered by Unilever to always provide new innovations in creating a unique and attractive design as well as maintaining a good image in the eyes of customers, especially in Magnum ice cream. 2. Magnum ice cream‟s market segment; that most young people should be the primary consideration in determining the price of the company. It is because the majority of young people do not have the income. Companies should consider affordable prices to customers. 3. Companies need to improve the quality of magnum ice cream products.

5.2.2 For Future Research 1. For future research, it is needed doing a further research in other factors besides Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality toward the Purchase Decision of Magnum Ice Cream. It is because the three independent variables in this study were able toexplain 73.6% of the Magnum Ice Cream customer purchase decision while the remaining 26.4% is explained by other variables not included in this study.

2. Future studies are advised to examine the other brandswith take another example of the influence of Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality in the Purchase Decision also different, so the variables that influence purchase decision also different. It can be used as a comparison and complements in this research.

3. For future studies it is advisable to look for another different populations and the wider population this study. The sample used should also be much more than the sample in this study, thus further research can further provide a more specific on the effect of Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality on purchase decision.

REFERENCES

Books/E-books Aaker, D. A. (2001).Managing brand equity: CapitalizingOn The Value Of A Brand Name, The Free Press. New York, NY.

Aaker, D. A. (2010).Building Strong Brands. London, Great Britain: Simon &Schuster UK Ltd.

Commons, R. John. (2000). The definition of price in (ed.) American Economics (Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, Volume 18 Part 2, 309-334. Bradford, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Davies, G., Chun, R., daSilva, R., & Roper, S. (2003).Corporate Reputation and Competitiveness. London: Routledge.

Davino, C., &Fabbris, C. (2012).Survey Data Collection and Integration (Google eBook). New York: Springer.

Dolak, Dave. (2003). Building a strong brand: Brands and Branding Basics.

Farag, H. (2009). Collaborative Value Creation: An Empirical Analysis of the European Biotechnology Industry. New York: Springer.

Ferdinand, Augusty. (2006). Metode Penelitian Manajemen: Pedoman Penelitian untuk Penulisan Skripsi, Tesis, dan Disertasi Ilmu Manajemen. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

Ghozali, Imam. (2005). Structural Equation Modelling :Teori, Konsep, dan Aplikasi dengan Program LISREL 8.54. Semarang : Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

Jackson, S. L. (2011). Research Methods and Statistics: A Critical Thinking Approach: A Critical Thinking Approach. Independence: Cengage Learning.

Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (2000).Choices, Values, and Frames, New York: Russell Sage Foundation and Cambridge University Press.

Kapferer, J.N. (2004). The New Strategic Brand Management: Creating and Sustaining Brand Equity LongTerm. London: Kogan Page.

Keller, K. L. (2003). Strategic Brand Management: Building Measuring, and Imagine Brand Equity. New Jersey: Upper Saddle River.

Keller, K. L. (2009). Strategic Brand Management:Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity.(3rd edition ed). New Delhi: Pearson Education India.

Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Ang, S. H., Leong, S. M., Tan, C. T., & Hon-Ming, O. Y. (2008).Principle of Marketing, (12th Edition ed.). Jurong: Pearson Education South Asia.

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. (2011).Marketing Management (14th edition ed.). London: Pearson Education.

Kotler, P. (2001). A framework for marketing management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kotler, Philip dan Keller, Kevin Lane.(2007). Manajemen Pemasaran. Edisi 12 Jilid 1 dan 2. Terjemahan: Benyamin Molan. Jakarta: PT. Indeks.

Krehbiel, K. (2006) “Pivots” In Donald Wittman and Barry Weingast (eds.). Oxford Handbook of Political Economy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kumar, P. (2010). Marketing of Hospitality & Tourism Services(1st edition ed). India: Tata McGraw-Hill Education.

Lake, L. (2009). Consumer Behaviour for Dummies. New Jersey: Wiley.

Lamb, C. W., Hair, J. F., & McDaniel, Jr. C. D. (2010).Essentials of Marketing (7th edition ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning.

Miller, J. & Muir, D. (2004).The Business of Brands. West Sussex: Chichester.

Pradhan, B. (2009). Retailing Management (3rd edition). India: Tata McGraw-Hill Education.

Ramesh, K. (2008) Conceptual Issues in Consumer Behaviour: The Indian Context. India: Tata McGraw-Hill Education.

Reid, R.D., &Bojanic, D.C. (2009) Hospitality Marketing Management (5th edition ed). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Santoso (2009).PL Menguasai Statistik dengan SPSS 17 + CD . Jakarta: Elex Media Komputindo.

Sekaran,Uma. (2010). Research Method for Business: Uma Sekaran& Roger Bougie. (5th edition ed): Springer.

Tabachnick, B. G., &Fidell L. S. (2006).Using multivariate statistics (5th edition ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Tjiptono, Fandy. (2005). Brand Management dan Strategy. Yogyakarta: Andi.

Van den Heever, J. (2000). Brands and Branding in South Africa.Johannesburg: Affinity.

Wang, W. C. (2006). The Effect of Product Knowledge and Brand Image on Purchase Intention Moderated by Product Category. Unpublished master thesis, Tatung University: Taiwan.

Journals Alfred, Owusu (2013). Influences of Price and Quality on Consumer Purchase of Mobile Phone in the Kumasi Metropolis In Ghana A Comparative Study.European Journal of Business and Management.Vol.5, No.1.

Anholt, S. (2006).The Anholt - GMI City Brands Index: How the world sees the world‟s cities.Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Vol. 2, Issue 1, 18-31.

BARREIRO, J. M; RUZO, E. (2000).Análisis de valor de marca a travésdellogit multinomial: unstudioempírico.In: ACTAS DEL XII ENCUENTRO DE PROFESORES UNIVERSITARIOS DE MARKETING, 167-183. Santiago de Compostela (A Coruña).

Broadbent, K., & Cooper, P. (1987).Research is Good for You. Journal of Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 5, Issue 1 , 3-9.

Brodie, R. J. (2009). From Goods to Service Branding: An Integrative Perspective.Marketing Theory, Vol. 9 Issue 1, 103–107.

Choy, Ng, Ch‟ng. (2011). Consumers‟ Perceived Quality, Perceived Value and Perceived Risk Towards Purchase Decision on Automobile. American Journal of Economics and Business Administration Vol. 3 Issue 1, 47-57.

Erenkol, A. D., &Duygun, A. (2010).Customers Perceived Brand Equity and A Research on The Customers of Bellona Which is a Turkish Furniture Brand.The Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 16 Issue1.

FaelaSufa&BambangMunas.(2012). Analisis Pengaruh Daya Tarik Iklan, Kualitas Pesan Iklan, Frekuensi Penayangan Iklan terhadap Efektivitas Iklan Televisi Mie Sedap. Diponegoro Journal Of Management, Vol 1, No 1, 226 – 233.

Hajipour, Bavarsad, Zarei (2013). Effect of Marketing Factors on Brand Relationship Equity and Affects the Customers‟ Purchase Intention. Journal of Management Research. 2013, Vol. 5, No. 1.

Hsieh, M. H., Pan, S. L., &Setiono, R. (2004). Product-, corporate-, and country-image dimensions and purchase behavior: A multicountry analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 32 Issue 3, 251–270.

Jalilvand, Samiei, Mahdavinia. (2011). The Effect of Brand Equity Components on Purchase Intention: An Application of Aaker‟s Model in the Automobile Industry.International Journal of Business and Management.Vol.2, No. 2, 149-158.

Kamins, M.A., & Marks, L. J. (2001).The perception of kosher as a third party certification claim in advertising for familiar and unfamiliar brands.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Vol. 19 Issue 3, 177-185.

Khasanah, Imroatul. (2013). Analisis Pengaruh Ekuitas Merek Terhadap Keputusan Pembelian Mie Instan Sedaap Di Semarang. Jurnal Dinamika Manajemen. JDM Vol. 4, No. 1, 93-102.

Laroche, M., C. Kim, and L. Zhou. (2006). Brand familiarity and confidence as determinants of purchase intention : An empirical test in a multiple brand context.Journal of Business Research, Vol. 37 Issue 2, 115-120.

Lee, G. C &Leh, F. C. Y. (2011). Dimensions of Customer - Based Brand Equity: A Study on Malaysian Brands.Jounal of Marketing Research and Case Study.

Martinez, E. (2002).The Effect of Brand Extension Strategies upon Brand Image. Zaragoza: Faculted de Ciencias Economicas Empresariales The University of Zaragoza Press.

Moradi, H &Zarei, A. (2011) .The Impact of Brand Equity on Purchase Intention and Brand Preference- The Moderating Effect of Country of Origin Image. Australian Journal Image and AplliedSciences.Vol. 5, No. 3, 539-549.

Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J., &Maclnnis, D. J. (1986).Strategic brand concept-image management.Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 Issue4, 135–145.

RONDÁN CATALUÑA, F. J. (2004) Precio versus lealtadhacia la marca en la elección de compra.InvestigacionesEuropeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, Vol. 10, Issue 1, 165- 188.

ROSA DÍAZ, I. M. (2004).Price Knowledge: Effects of Consumers' Attitudes Towards Prices, Demographics, and Socio-Cultural Characteristics.Journal of Product Brand Management, Vol. 13, Issue 6, 406-428.

Roth, M. S. (1995). Effects of Global Market Conditions on Brand Image Customization and Brand Performance.Journal of Advertising, Vol. 24 Issue 4, 55–72.

Sondoh, S.L., Omar, M.W., Wahid, N.A., Ismail, I.,&Haru, A. (2007). The Effect of Brand Image on Overall Satisfaction and Loyalty Intention in the Context of Color Cosmetic. Journal Asian Academy of Management, Vol. 12 Issue 1, 83−107.

Vinhas, D. S. R. &Faridah, S. A. S. (2008).Online Corporate Brand Image, Satisfaction, and Loyalty.Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 16 Issue 3, 119−144.

Waal, Kourtit (2013). Performance measurement and management in practice,Advantages, disadvantages and reasons for use.International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management Vol. 62 No. 5, 2013 pp. 446-473.

Yaseen, Tahira, Gulzar, Anwar. (2011). Impact of Brand Awareness, Perceived Quality and Customer Loyalty on Brand Profitability and Purchase Intention: A Resellers‟View. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business.Vol 3, No 8.

Yasin, N, M, Noor M. N. (2007). Does Image of Country of Origin Matter to Brand Equity.Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 16 Issue 1, 38-48.

Zhou, Y &Ziang, J. (2011).The Impact of Customer-Based Brand Equity on Revisit Intentions: An Empirical Study on Business and Leisure Traveler at Five Shanghai Budget Hotels.Research Journal of International Studies.

Internet Businessdictionary.com (2013).Population. From:http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/population.ht ml#ixzz2ioUhBb

Civicpartnership.org (2013).Quantitative and Qualitative Method. From:http://www.civicpartnerships.org/docs/tools_resources/Q uan_Qual%20Mthods209.07.htm

Ehow.com (2013).Primary Data. From:http://www.ehow.com/about_4685513_primarydata_.ht ml

Janzengroup.net (2013).Reliability. From :http://www.janzengroup.net/stats/lessons/scalevar.html

Managementstudyguide.com(2013). Secondary Data. From:http://www.managementstudyguide.com/secondary_data.ht m

Research Methodology From: http://research-methodology.net/consumer-decision- making-process/

Statistic.laerd.com (2013).Pearson Coorelation Coefficient Statistical Guide. From :https://statistics.laerd.com/statistical-guides/pearson- correlationcoefficientstatistical-guide.php

Steppingstones.ca (2013).Secondary data. From:http://www.steppingstones.ca/artman/publish/article_60.sht ml

100

Top Brand Index Data 2012 From: http://www.topbrand-award.com/top-brand- survey/survey result/top_brand_index_2012_fase_2

Top Brand Index Data 2013 From: http://www.topbrand-award.com/top-brand- survey/survey-result/top_brand_index_2013_fase_2

Top Brand Index Data 2014 From:http://www.topbrand-award.com/top-brand- survey/survey-result/top_brand_index_2014_fase_2

101

APPENDIX A

QUESTIONNAIRE

102

“The Analysis Influence of Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality toward Purchasing Decision for Unilever Product” (A Case Study of Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta)

Introduction to Questionnaire

Dear Sir or Madam, It will be very beneficial for both of us if you are willing to spare some of your times to fill up this questionnaire. Here I point out the intent and purpose of these questionnaires along with general instructions filling. The questionnaire was developed in order to measures the Brand Image, Price, and Perceived Quality Influence toward Purchasing Decision of Magnum Ice Cream in Jakarta. The purpose of this research is to determine how brand image, price, and perceived quality influence the purchasing decision for Magnum ice cream in Jakarta. By knowing the result of the research, I hope that it will make a benefit for you and for me. The Questionnaire consists of 3 (Three) Parts: Part I : General Description about Respondent Profile Part II : Instruction of Questionnaire Filling Part III : Statement of the Brand Image,Price, and Perceived Quality and Purchase Decision Thank you very much for your attention and cooperation acknowledged.

Jakarta, November 2014

Best Regards,

Darren KristoferKosasih

103

------Part I ------In this section, you are asked to fill your profile, please cross (X) or circle the statement below. Respondent Profile Gender a. Male b. Female Age a. <20 years old b. 20 – 30 years old c. 31 - 40 years old d. 41 – 50 years old e. >50 years old

------Part II ------Instruction for filling In this section you are asked to give an opinion on how much the following statement in accordance to the brand equity and purchase decision. Please rate the following statement according to Strongly Disagree (SD), Disagree (D), Neither Agree or Disagree (N), Agree (A) and Strongly Agree (SA): Choose 1 if you are Strongly Disagree (SD) with the statement Choose 2 if you are Disagree (D) with the statement Choose 3 if you are Neither Agree or Disagree (N) with the statement Choose 4 if you are Agree (A) with the statement Choose 5 if you are Strongly Agree (SA) with the statement

Example: No. Statements 1 2 3 4 5 1 I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream X because of its quality.

104

------Part III ------Magnum Ice Cream

Brand Image(X1)

No. Statements 1 2 3 4 5 1 Magnum ice cream is a premium class of ice cream. 2 Magnum ice cream is one of the leading ice creams in Indonesia. 3 Magnum ice cream has an unique brand (logo, quality, packaging, etc) 4 I think Magnum brand image can create an intention to buy

Price(X2)

No. Statements 1 2 3 4 5 1 Magnum ice cream has a high price 2 Magnum ice cream‟s price is accordance with the quality and taste 3 Magnum ice cream‟s price is competing with competitor 4 Magnum ice cream‟s price is accordance with the brand

105

Perceived Quality(X3)

No. Statements 1 2 3 4 5 1 Magnum ice cream has many variation of taste. 2 Products from Magnum ice cream offer excellent features. (Packaging, seal, etc) 3 Magnum ice cream is made from pure Belgian chocolate. 4 Magnum ice cream is very reliable.

Purchase Decision

No. Statements 1 2 3 4 5 1 I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because of its quality. 2 I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because of its taste. 3 I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because of the price is affordable for me. 4 I decide to purchase Magnum ice cream because I feel satisfy with the product.

106

APPENDIX B

RAW DATA MATERIAL

107

Appendix B

RAW DATA MATERIAL

Brand Image

108

Price

109

Perceived Quality

110

Purchase Decision

111

APPENDIX C

Cronbach’s Alpha

112

APPENDIX C

CRONBACH’S ALPHA

Brand Image

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Based on Standardized Items

.810 .816 4

Price

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Based on Standardized Items

.793 .790 4

Perceived Quality

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Based on Standardized Items .814 .811 4

Purchase Decision

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Based on Standardized Items

.804 .809 4

113

APPENDIX D

Pearson Correlation

114

APPENDIX D

PEARSON CORRELATION

Brand Image

Correlations

BI1 BI2 BI3 BI4 TBI

Pearson Correlation 1 .470* .459* .698** .816**

BI1 Sig. (2-tailed) .036 .042 .001 .000

N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .470* 1 .468* .471* .775** BI2 Sig. (2-tailed) .036 .038 .036 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .459* .468* 1 .587** .768** BI3 Sig. (2-tailed) .042 .038 .006 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .698** .471* .587** 1 .849** BI4 Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .036 .006 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .816** .775** .768** .849** 1

TBI Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000

N 20 20 20 20 20

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

115

Price

Correlations

P1 P2 P3 P4 TP

Pearson Correlation 1 .586** .322 .331 .715**

P1 Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .167 .155 .000

N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .586** 1 .607** .669** .918** P2 Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .005 .001 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .322 .607** 1 .394 .725** P3 Sig. (2-tailed) .167 .005 .085 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .331 .669** .394 1 .774** P4 Sig. (2-tailed) .155 .001 .085 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .715** .918** .725** .774** 1

TP Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000

N 20 20 20 20 20

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

116

Perceived Quality

Correlations

PQ1 PQ2 PQ3 PQ4 TPQ

Pearson Correlation 1 .429 .311 .424 .613**

PQ1 Sig. (2-tailed) .059 .182 .062 .004

TPQ Sig. (2-tailed) .004 .000 .000 .000

N 20 20 20 20 20

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

117

Purchase Decision

Correlations

PD1 PD2 PD3 PD4 TPD

Pearson Correlation 1 .899** .284 .497* .819**

PD1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .224 .026 .000

N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .899** 1 .287 .645** .877** PD2 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .220 .002 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .284 .287 1 .477* .642** PD3 Sig. (2-tailed) .224 .220 .034 .002 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .497* .645** .477* 1 .849** PD4 Sig. (2-tailed) .026 .002 .034 .000 N 20 20 20 20 20 Pearson Correlation .819** .877** .642** .849** 1

TPD Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .002 .000

N 20 20 20 20 20

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

118

APPENDIX E

Classic Assumption

119

APPENDIX E

Classic Assumption

120

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig. Collinearity Coefficients Coefficients Statistics B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF 1 (Constant) 1.584 .781 2.029 .045 BrandImage .296 .075 .316 3.953 .000 .417 2.398 Price .172 .086 .185 1.993 .049 .308 3.244 PerceivedQuality .427 .085 .444 5.053 .000 .345 2.896 a. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision

Coefficient Correlationsa

a. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision

121

APPENDIX F

Multiple Regression Analysis

122

Appendix F

Multiple Regression Analysis

Regression

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized T Sig. Coefficients B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 1.584 .781 2.029 .045 BrandImage .296 .075 .316 3.953 .000 Price .172 .086 .185 1.993 .049 PerceivedQuality .427 .085 .444 5.053 .000 a. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 737.152 3 245.717 93.131 .000b Residual 253.288 96 2.638 Total 990.440 99 a. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision b. Predictors: (Constant), PerceivedQuality, BrandImage, Price

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the Square Estimate 1 .863a .744 .736 1.62432 a. Predictors: (Constant), PerceivedQuality, BrandImage, Price b. Dependent Variable: PurchaseDecision

123

APPENDIX G

Statistical Table

124

Appendix G

R-Table

125

F-Table

126

127

T-Table

128