All the data obtained from the SKYTRAK for each passenger or respondents will not be used for

any other research purposes. In this case, the research was conducted with no other purpose of
establishing definite cause effect relationship between the independent and dependent variables.
The correlation between cause and effect were investigated rather than forming a cause because
this study attempted to analyze the relationship between the dependent variable and independent
variable. In other simple explanation, this study was analytically based upon nature or clear
purposes. The rating quality system conducted by SKYTRAK is based upon passenger review
and feedback. This soft service quality measuring key involved the analysis on the existing data
thru the mention website. Even though this study may be considered as the field study but the
extent of research interference was high. Population of this research included the various
passengers or travelers past experience using AirAsia with the total number of 50 respondents
comes from various country and different type of cabin flown.

A. Variance and Standard Deviation Analysis

Table 1 below shows the value of Average, Mode, Median, Skew, Variance and Standard
Deviation Value for each item rated by passenger focused on the various cabin flown including
hot seat, economy, premium economy and business.

No. Item

Average

Mode

Median

Skew

Variance

Standard
Deviation

Rating

Value for Money

6.86
3.98

10
5

8
5

-0.797
-1.188

10.167
2.020

3.189
1.421

Seat Comfort

3.55

-0.709

2.044

1.430

Staff Services

3.67

-0.711

2.558

1.599

Catering

2.94

-0.236

1.892

1.3755

Entertainment

1.82

1.233

1.403

1.184

Table 1: Average, Mode, Median, Skew, Variance and Standard Deviation Value

From this feedback on Figure 1 below, total number of feedback given by 50 respondents that
has their past-flight experienced on various type of cabin flown shows that 37 of respondents
agree and recommend other passengers to use this airlines for their next flight while only 13 of
them were not agree. Therefore the percentage of respondent say YES is 74% while another
26% say NO.

30

Number of Respondents

25

20

15

10

Hot Seat

Economy

Premium Economy

Business

Yes

26

No

11

2.8

Figure 1: Total number of respondent depend on type of cabin flown.

B. Analysis using Pearson Correlation Methods.

Key Values;
X: X Values
Y: Y Values
Mx: Mean of X Values
My: Mean of Y Values
X - Mx & Y - My: Deviation scores
(X - Mx)2 & (Y - My)2: Deviation Squared
(X - Mx)(Y - My): Product of Deviation Scores
i.

Value for Money vs Seat Comfort

Graph 1 : Pearson Correlation Value for Money vs Seat Comfort

Result Details and Calculation
X Values
= 195
Mean = 3.98
(X - Mx)2 = SSx = 96.98
Y Values
= 174
Mean = 3.551
(Y - My)2 = SSy = 98.122

X and Y Combined
N = 49
(X - Mx)(Y - My) = 84.551
R Calculation
r = ((X - My)(Y - Mx)) / ((SSx)(SSy))
r = 84.551 / ((96.98)(98.122)) = 0.8668
From the calculation and graph 1 above, it it shows that the value of R is 0.8668. This is a strong
positive correlation, which means that high X variable scores of value for money score go with
high Y variable scores of seat comfort (and vice versa).The value of R2, the coefficient of
determination, is 0.7513. Therefore there was a positive correlation between the value for money
and seat comfort.
ii.

Seat Comfort vs Time Service

Graph 2 : Pearson Correlation Seat Comfort vs Time Service

Result Details and Calculation

X Values
= 174
Mean = 3.551
(X - Mx)2 = SSx = 98.122

Y Values
= 180
Mean = 3.673
(Y - My)2 = SSy = 122.776
X and Y Combined
N = 49
(X - Mx)(Y - My) = 93.816
R Calculation
r = ((X - My)(Y - Mx)) / ((SSx)(SSy))
r = 93.816 / ((98.122)(122.776)) = 0.8547

From the calculation and graph 2, the value of R is 0.8547. This is a strong positive correlation,
which means that high X variable scores of seat comfort go with high Y variable scores of time
services (and vice versa).The value of R2, the coefficient of determination, is 0.7305. Therefore
there was a positive correlation between the value for seat comfort and time service.
iii.

Staff Service vs Catering

Graph 3 : Staff Service vs Catering Pearson Correlation

Result details and calculations

X Values
= 180
Mean = 3.673
(X - Mx)2 = SSx = 122.776
Y Values
= 144
Mean = 2.939
(Y - My)2 = SSy = 90.816
X and Y Combined
N = 49
(X - Mx)(Y - My) = 67.02
R Calculation
r = ((X - My)(Y - Mx)) / ((SSx)(SSy))
r = 67.02 / ((122.776)(90.816)) = 0.6347

The value of R is 0.6347. This is a moderate positive correlation, which means there is a
tendency for high X variable scores of staff services go with high Y variable scores of catering
(and vice versa).The value of R2, the coefficient of determination, is 0.4028. Therefore there was
a positive correlation between the staff services and catering.

iv.

Catering vs Entertainment

Graph 4 : Pearson Correlation Catering vs Entertainment

Result details and calculation

X Values
= 144
Mean = 2.939
(X - Mx)2 = SSx = 90.816
Y Values
= 89
Mean = 1.816
(Y - My)2 = SSy = 67.347
X and Y Combined
N = 49
(X - Mx)(Y - My) = 42.449

R Calculation
r = ((X - My)(Y - Mx)) / ((SSx)(SSy))
r = 42.449 / ((90.816)(67.347)) = 0.5428

The value of R is 0.5428. This is a moderate positive correlation, which means there is a
tendency for high X variable scores of catering go with high Y variable scores of entertainment
(and vice versa).The value of R2, the coefficient of determination, is 0.2946. Therefore there was
a positive correlation between the catering and entertainment.

APPENDIX

A. VARIANCE AND STANDARD DEVIATION

1. Variance and Standard Deviation Calculation for Rating System
N: 49
M: 6.86
SS: 488.00
s2 = SS(N - 1) = 488.00(49-1) = 10.17
s = s2 = 10.17 = 3.19
Therefore,
Variance = 10.16667.
Standard Deviation = 3.18852
2. Variance & Standard Deviation Calculations Value for Money
N: 49
M: 3.98
SS: 96.98
s2 = SS(N - 1) = 96.98(49-1) = 2.02
s = s2 = 2.02 = 1.42
Therefore,

Variance = 2.02041.
Standard Deviation = 1.42141.

3. Variance & Standard Deviation Calculations Seat Comfort

N: 49
M: 3.55
SS: 98.12
s2 = SS(N - 1) = 98.12(49-1) = 2.04
s = s2 = 2.04 = 1.43
Therefore,
Variance = 2.04422.
Standard Deviation = 1.42976.
4. Variance & Standard Deviation Calculations Staff Services
N: 49
M: 3.67
SS: 122.78
s2 = SS(N - 1) = 122.78(49-1) = 2.56
s = s2 = 2.56 = 1.60
Therefore,
Variance = 2.55782.
Standard Deviation = 1.59932.

5. Variance & Standard Deviation Calculations Catering

N: 49
M: 2.94
SS: 90.82
s2 = SS(N - 1) = 90.82(49-1) = 1.89
s = s2 = 1.89 = 1.38
Therefore,
Variance = 1.89201.
Standard Deviation = 1.37550.
6. Variance & Standard Deviation Calculations

N: 49
M: 1.82
SS: 67.35
s2 = SS(N - 1) = 67.35(49-1) = 1.40
s = s2 = 1.40 = 1.18
Therefore,
Variance = 1.40306.
Standard Deviation = 1.18451.