×
Services Samples Blogs Make Payment About us Reviews 4.9/5 Order Now

Ethical Decision-Making among Business Students in Brazil & US: Statistical Study

November 09, 2023
Dr. Eamon Hale
Dr. Eamon
🇺🇸 United States
Statistics
Dr. Eamon Hale, a Statistics Homework Expert, earned his Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins University, one of the top universities in the USA. With over 12 years of experience, he excels in providing insightful statistical analysis and data-driven solutions for students.
Key Topics
  • Problem Description:
  • Solution
Tip of the day
When tackling a statistics problem, always start by visualizing the data! A simple graph or chart can help reveal trends, outliers, and patterns that aren’t immediately obvious from raw numbers. Understanding your data visually can make the analysis much clearer!
News
The rise of AI and big data is reshaping the field of statistics. Recent trends highlight the growing need for expertise in statistical modeling, machine learning, and data visualization, with applications in healthcare, finance, and technology.

Problem Description:

This Statistical Analysis homework aims to examine how cultural differences affect ethical decisions in business students from Brazil and the United States. The independent variables are Brazilian and American students. The dependent variables are ethical choices (subdivided with intervening variables of Relationship Incentives and Financial Incentives). The national culture has the following intervening variables: collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, future orientation, gender egalitarianism, assertiveness, performance orientation, humane orientation, gender, and educational level.

Solution

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's AlphaN of Items
.75753

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's AlphaN of Items
.95154

The acceptable value or bench mark for Cronbach’s alpha is at least 0.7, from the reliability statistics presented above, it can be concluded that there is a strong internal consistency or reliability between the responses of matched items.

Hypotheses based on the theoretical framework and the review of previous studies done on cross-cultural differences between Brazil and United States, this study raises the following hypotheses:

Correlations

RI_AmericaFI_AmericaRI_BrazilFI_Brazil
RI_AmericaPearson Correlation1.886**-.039-.144
Sig. (2-tailed).000.731.198
N1041048282
FI_AmericaPearson Correlation.886**1-.026-.129
Sig. (2-tailed).000.813.247
N1041048282
RI_BrazilPearson Correlation-.039-.0261.682**
Sig. (2-tailed).731.813.000
N8282101101
FI_BrazilPearson Correlation-.144-.129.682**1
Sig. (2-tailed).198.247.000
N8282101101

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

The correlation coefficients presented in the table above shows strength and direction of the relationship between financial incentives and relationship incentives for both Brazil and United States.

There is a significant, strong and positive relationship (r= 0.886, p= 0.000) between financial and relationship incentives for American participants, also, There is significant, strong and positive relationship (r= 0.682, p= 0.000) between financial and relationship incentives for Brazilian participants. However, a negative, insignificant and weak relationship exists among financial and relationship incentives of Brazil and America.

There are significant differences between the ethical choices that Brazilian and American students make on the hypothetical scenarios of business ethics.

American students will have higher scores of ethical choices than Brazilian students.

Between-Subjects Factors

Value LabelN
Country1.00America104
2.00Brazil101

Descriptive Statistics

CountryMeanStd. DeviationN
FIAmerica2.9124.79432104
Brazil2.8937.37721101
Total2.9032.62322205
RIAmerica3.1860.62348104
Brazil2.8640.33727101
Total3.0273.52733205

Descriptive statistics table above shows that the mean score of financial incentives is 2.92 with a standard deviation of 0.79 for America and 2.89 with a standard deviation of 0.37 for Brazil. Also, the mean score of relationship incentives is 3.17 with a standard deviation of 0.62 for America and 2.86 86with a standard deviation of 0.33 for Brazil.

Multivariate Tests

EffectValueFHypothesis dfError dfSig.
InterceptPillai's Trace.9743749.729b2.000202.000.000
Wilks' Lambda.0263749.729b2.000202.000.000
Hotelling's Trace37.1263749.729b2.000202.000.000
Roy's Largest Root37.1263749.729b2.000202.000.000
CountryPillai's Trace.25033.611b2.000202.000.000
Wilks' Lambda.75033.611b2.000202.000.000
Hotelling's Trace.33333.611b2.000202.000.000
Roy's Largest Root.33333.611b2.000202.000.000
  • Design: Intercept + Country
  • Exact statistic

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

SourceDependent VariableType III Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareFSig.
Corrected ModelFI.018a1.018.046.831
RI5.314b15.31420.982.000
InterceptFI1727.26811727.2684426.308.000
RI1875.44711875.4477404.946.000
CountryFI.0181.018.046.831
RI5.31415.31420.982.000
ErrorFI79.216203.390
RI51.414203.253
TotalFI1807.034205
RI1935.500205
Corrected TotalFI79.234204
RI56.728204
  • R Squared =.000 (Adjusted R Squared = -.005)
  • R Squared =.094 (Adjusted R Squared = .089)

Since the p-value for FI (0.831) is greater than significance level (0.05), we do not reject the null hypothesis and conclude that American students do not have higher scores of ethical choices (Financial incentives) than Brazilian students.

Similarly, since the p-value for RI (0.000) is less than significance level (0.05), we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that American students significantly have higher scores of ethical choices (Relationship incentives) than Brazilian students.

Female students will have higher scores of ethical choices than Male students.

Between-Subjects Factors

Value LabelN
I am a _____ student.1.00Male32
2.00Female50

Descriptive Statistics

I am a _____ student.MeanStd. DeviationN
RI_AmericaMale3.5556.7812732
Female3.0696.4827150
Total3.2593.6568482
FI_AmericaMale3.3764.8672932
Female2.8400.6585950
Total3.0493.7871282
RI_BrazilMale2.8669.2994032
Female2.9081.3202950
Total2.8921.3110982
FI_BrazilMale2.9307.3257132
Female2.9539.3092450
Total2.9449.3139882

Multivariate Tests

EffectValueFHypothesis dfError dfSig.
InterceptPillai's Trace.9932820.442b4.00077.000.000
Wilks' Lambda.0072820.442b4.00077.000.000
Hotelling's Trace146.5162820.442b4.00077.000.000
Roy's Largest Root146.5162820.442b4.00077.000.000
q0005Pillai's Trace.1393.096b4.00077.000.020
Wilks' Lambda.8613.096b4.00077.000.020
Hotelling's Trace.1613.096b4.00077.000.020
Roy's Largest Root.1613.096b4.00077.000.020
  • Design: Intercept + q0005
  • Exact statistic

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

SourceDependent VariableType III Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareFSig.
Corrected ModelRI_America4.607a14.60712.149.001
FI_America5.613b15.61310.075.002
RI_Brazil.033c1.033.340.561
FI_Brazil.011d1.011.105.746
InterceptRI_America856.4501856.4502258.333.000
FI_America754.0121754.0121353.366.000
RI_Brazil650.7541650.7546669.713.000
FI_Brazil675.6831675.6836778.390.000
q0005RI_America4.60714.60712.149.001
FI_America5.61315.61310.075.002
RI_Brazil.0331.033.340.561
FI_Brazil.0111.011.105.746
ErrorRI_America30.33980.379
FI_America44.57180.557
RI_Brazil7.80580.098
FI_Brazil7.97580.100
TotalRI_America906.01482
FI_America812.64582
RI_Brazil693.68382
FI_Brazil719.10482
Corrected TotalRI_America34.94781
FI_America50.18481
RI_Brazil7.83981
FI_Brazil7.98581
  • R Squared = .132 (Adjusted R Squared = .121)
  • R Squared =.112 (Adjusted R Squared = .101)
  • R Squared = .004 (Adjusted R Squared = -.008)
  • R Squared =.001 (Adjusted R Squared = -.011)

The p-values for RI (0.001) and FI (0.002) are less than significance level (0.05), we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that female students have higher scores of ethical choices (both financial and relationship incentives) than Male students in America. However, the p-values for RI (0.001) and FI (0.002) are less than significance level (0.05), we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that female students have higher scores of ethical choices (both financial and relationship incentives) than Male students in Brazil.

Graduate students will have higher scores of ethical choices than undergraduate students.

Between-Subjects Factors

Value LabelN
Are you an undergraduate or graduate business student enrolled in an accredited institution in the United States?1.00Yes67
2.00No14

Descriptive Statistics

Are you an undergraduate or graduate business student enrolled in an accredited institution in the United States?MeanStd. DeviationN
RI_AmericaYes3.3167.6635567
No2.8757.3161514
Total3.2405.6384881
FI_AmericaYes3.1382.7915667
No2.5186.4105114
Total3.0311.7745181
RI_BrazilYes2.9066.3275167
No2.8466.2154014
Total2.8962.3107381
FI_BrazilYes2.9500.3240667
No2.8975.2661714
Total2.9410.3139381

The means score of RI and FI for American undergraduate students are 3.32 and 3.14 with standard deviations 0.66 and 0.79 respectively. Also the mean score of RI and FI for American graduate students are 2.88 and 2.52 with standard deviations 0.32 and 0.41 respectively.

Similarly , The means score of RI and FI for Brazilian undergraduate students are 2.91 and 2.95 with standard deviations 0.33 and 0.32 respectively. Also the mean score of RI and FI for Brazilian graduate students are 2.85 and 2.90 with standard deviations 0.22 and 0.27 respectively.

Multivariate Tests

EffectValueFHypothesis dfError dfSig.
InterceptPillai's Trace.9891665.707b4.00076.000.000
Wilks' Lambda.0111665.707b4.00076.000.000
Hotelling's Trace87.6691665.707b4.00076.000.000
Roy's Largest Root87.6691665.707b4.00076.000.000
q0002Pillai's Trace.1052.239b4.00076.000.073
Wilks' Lambda.8952.239b4.00076.000.073
Hotelling's Trace.1182.239b4.00076.000.073
Roy's Largest Root.1182.239b4.00076.000.073
  • Design: Intercept + q0002
  • Exact statistic

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

SourceDependent VariableType III Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareFSig.
Corrected ModelRI_America2.253a12.2535.863.018
FI_America4.446b14.4468.065.006
RI_Brazil.042c1.042.429.514
FI_Brazil.032d1.032.321.572
InterceptRI_America444.0561444.0561155.515.000
FI_America370.5681370.568672.306.000
RI_Brazil383.2901383.2903941.493.000
FI_Brazil395.9731395.9733983.921.000
q0002RI_America2.25312.2535.863.018
FI_America4.44614.4468.065.006
RI_Brazil.0421.042.429.514
FI_Brazil.0321.032.321.572
ErrorRI_America30.35979.384
FI_America43.54479.551
RI_Brazil7.68279.097
FI_Brazil7.85279.099
TotalRI_America883.18781
FI_America792.19881
RI_Brazil687.15281
FI_Brazil708.47181
Corrected TotalRI_America32.61280
FI_America47.99080
RI_Brazil7.72480
FI_Brazil7.88480
  • R Squared = .069 (Adjusted R Squared = .057)
  • R Squared = .093 (Adjusted R Squared = .081)
  • R Squared = .005 (Adjusted R Squared = -.007)
  • R Squared = .004 (Adjusted R Squared = -.009)

Since the p-values for RI (0.018) and FI (0.006) are less than significance level (0.05), we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that undergraduate students have higher scores of ethical choices than graduate students in the United States. Also, Since the p-values RI (0.514) and FI (0.572) are less than significance level (0.05), we do not reject the null hypothesis and conclude that Graduate students do not have higher scores of ethical choices than undergraduate students in Brazil.

Similar Samples

Explore our sample work to see how we solve various Statistics problems. Each example showcases our approach to tackling complex statistical tasks, from data analysis to probability and regression. These samples demonstrate the thoroughness and precision applied by experts in delivering accurate solutions for different statistical challenges.