Social status: The Volvo was signifi

Social status: The Volvo was significantly higher than VW and Audi. VW was significantly lower than all the others.
Affection: The Volvo was significantly lower than the others. VW was significantly higher than the others.
Originality: The VW was significantly lower on originality than the others. The Volvo was significantly more original than the VW and the Audi.

4. 2. Comparison between customers, Volvo employee experts and randomly chosen Volvo employees
Significant differences were found between the three groups of participants on a number of factors (table 3). When comparing the results of the groups per vehicle and factor significant differences were found for the Volvo on potency (F(2,66) = 8.1, p 5 .01) and social status (F(2,66) = 7.1, p 5 0.01 ), for the VW on pleasantness (F(2,66) = 8.3, p 5 0.001) and unity (F(2,66) = 6.2, p 5 0.01), and for the Audi on enclosedness (F(2,66) = 10.9 p 5 0.001) and social status (F(2,66) = 5.6, p 5 0.01) using ANOVA. When compensating for the age difference between the groups using ANCOVA, significant differences were found on VW for pleasantness (F(2,65) = 7,4, p 5 0.01) and unity (F(2,65) = 6.0, p 5 0.01 ), and for Audi on the enclosedness (F(2,65) = 9.2, p 5 0.001) and social status (F(2,65) = 5.7, p 5 0.01). When summarizing over all cars and thus comparing the general use of the scales between the groups there was a significant difference on social status (F(2,65) = 5.9, p 5 0.01). However, when compensating for the age differences between the groups by using ANCOVA this difference was no longer significant.

結果 (中文) 1:

社会地位: 沃尔沃是有力地高于大众和奥迪。大众是有力地比别人低。Affection: 沃尔沃是有力地比别人低。大众是有力地比别人高。创意: 大众是有力地创意比别人低。沃尔沃是有力地比大众和奥迪更原始。4.2。客户、 沃尔沃员工专家和随机选择的沃尔沃员工之间的比较车流量 differences 被发现三个处理组的参与者在大量的因素 (表 3)。当车辆和因子车流量 differences 每组结果比较发现沃尔沃的权威 (F(2,66) = 8.1，p 5.01) 和社会地位 (F(2,66) = 7.1，p 5 0.01) 上愉悦, 大众 (F(2,66) = 8.3，p 5 0.001) 和统一 (F(2,66) = 6.2，p 5 0.01)，和在 enclosedness 上奥迪 (F(2,66) = 10.9 p 5 0.001) 和社会地位 (F(2,66) = 5.65 p 0.01) 使用方差分析。当补偿使用协方差，组间年龄 difference，车流量 differences 找上大众的愉悦性 (F(2,65) = 7，4，5 p 0.01) 和统一 (F(2,65) = 6.0，p 5 0.01)，和在 enclosedness 上奥迪 (F(2,65) = 9.2，p 5 0.001) 和社会地位 (F(2,65) = 5.7，p 5 0.01)。当总结过去所有的汽车和因而比较之间的群体有鳞片的一般用法是在社会地位上的车流量 difference (F(2,65) = 5.9，5 p 0.01)。然而，当使用协方差组间年龄 differences 补偿这 difference 不再是车流量。

結果 (中文) 3:

社会地位：沃尔沃fi显著高于大众和奥迪。大众fi显著低于所有其他。一个ff检验：沃尔沃显著低于其他fi。大众显著高于其他fi。独创性：大众的显著fi明显降低创意比别人。沃尔沃的显著fi明显比大众和奥迪更多的原。4。2。客户，沃尔沃员工专家和随机选择的沃尔沃员工之间的比较有fi不能二ff差异发现三组参与者之间的一系列因素（表3）。当比较每辆车的因素有fi不能二fferences组结果发现效力沃尔沃（F（2,66）= 8.1，P 5。01）和社会地位（F（2,66）= 7.1，P 5 0.01），在愉悦大众（F（2,66）= 8.3、P 5 0.001）和统一（F（2,66）= 6.2，P 5 0.01），并对enclosedness奥迪（F（2,66）= 10.9 P 5 0.001）和社会地位（F（2,66）= 5.6，P 5 0.01）采用单因素方差分析。当补偿二ff年龄组之间的差异用协方差分析，意义fi不能二ff差异为愉悦大众发现（F（2,65）= 7，P 5 0.01）和统一（F（2,65）= 6，P 5 0.01），和奥迪的enclosedness（F（2,65）= 9.2，P 5 0.001）和社会地位（F（2,65）= 5.7，P 5 0.01）。在总结过去所有的汽车，比较有组间的尺度一般使用具有fi不能二ff分社会地位（F（2,65）= 5.9，P 5 0.01）。然而，当补偿年龄地ff组间的差异采用协方差这二ff差异不再显著fi不能。