Table 4 Questionnaire result statistics.
From: Research on product design priority allocation based on user characteristics classification
Variable Name | Number | Description Of Variables | Option Assignment | Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient | p-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Y1 | Y2 | Y1 | Y2 | |||||
Intensity Of Demand | Y1 | Intensity To Change To More Suitable Protective Equipment | Very Much Hope = 1 Hope = 2 Don’t Care = 3 No Need = 4 | 1.000 | — | — | — | |
Product Selection Behavior | Y2 | What Kind Of Protective Clothing To Choose | Purchase Of Female-Specific Protective Clothing = 1; Purchase Of General-Purpose Protective Clothing = 2; Issued Protective Gear = 3; Not Required = 4 | — | 1.000 | — | — | |
Personal Factor | ||||||||
Economic Characteristics | X1 | Monthly Wage Level | X1 < 3000 = 1;3000 ≦ X1 < 6000 = 2;X1 > 6000 = 3 | −0.765 | −0.650 | 1.23 × 10−38 | 8.33 × 10−30 | |
Intellectual Characteristics | X2 | Educational Attainment | Junior High School And Below = 1; High School Or Junior College = 2; College Or Bachelor’s Degree = 3; Master’s Degree And Above = 4 | −0.758 | −0.815 | 2.22 × 10−47 | 8.33 × 10−30 | |
Value Characteristics | X3 | Spirit Of Dedication | Strong = 1;Fair = 2;Poor = 3 | 0.621 | 0.525 | 1.74 × 10−25 | 1.21 × 10−16 | |
Psychological Characteristic | X4 | Ability To Work Under Pressure | Strong = 1;Fair = 2;Poor = 3 | 0.592 | 0.600 | 2.48 × 10−22 | 3.71 × 10−24 | |
Unit Factors | ||||||||
Working Environment | X5 | Degree Of Damage To Health From The Working Environment | Serious Damage = 1; Minor Damage = 2; No Damage = 3 | −0.720 | −0.343 | 2.17 × 10−39 | 3.23 × 10−5 | |
Employment Stability | X6 | Measuring Stability Of Employment | Very Stable = 1; Mostly Stable = 2; Less Stable = 3; Frequently Changing = 4 | 0.518 | 0.533 | 1.18 × 10⁻¹⁶ | 7.57 × 10−17 | |
Family Factors | ||||||||
Marital Status | X7 | — | Married (Including Divorced, Widowed) = 1; Unmarried = 2 | −0.221 | −0.125 | 7.57 × 10−4 | 0.053 | |
Family Size | X8 | — | X8 ≤ 3 = 1;X8 > 3 = 2 | 0.469 | 0.113 | 9.86 × 10⁻¹⁴ | 0.082 | |
Social Factors | ||||||||
City Level | X9 | City Level Subdivision | Tier 1 Cities = 1; Tier 2 Cities = 2; Tier 3 Cities = 3; Tier 4 And Below Cities = 4 | −0.489 | −0.632 | 1.59 × 10⁻¹⁵ | 1.28 × 10−27 | |
Market Supply | X10 | Types Of Protective Equipment | More = 1; Enough = 2; Less = 3 | 0.070 | −0.709 | 0.281 | 1.39 × 10−36 | |
Policy Orientation | X11 | Gender-Specific Product Distribution | Yes = 1; 3 Cannot Say = 2; No = 3 | −0.307 | −0.231 | 1.86 × 10⁻⁶ | 0.00014 | |
Work Factors | ||||||||
Working Hours | X12 | Measurement Of Single Working Hours | X12 < 8 h = 1;8 ≦ X12 < 10 h = 2; 10 ≦ X12 < 12 h = 3;X12 > 12 h = 4 | −0.574 | −0.217 | 1.49 × 10⁻²¹ | 0.00027 | |
Willingness To Work | X13 | Willingness To Work In The Event Of A Major Accident | Go To Front Line = 1; Rear Support = 2; Home Standby = 3 | 0.667 | 0.722 | 2.33 × 10⁻³⁴ | 6.31 × 10−38 | |
Cognitive Factors | ||||||||
Protective Concept | X14 | Perceived Level Of Protection | Very Clear = 1; General Understanding = 2; Basic Understanding = 3 | 0.725 | 0.853 | 3.24 × 10⁻⁴⁹ | 5.13 × 10−73 | |
Policy Cognition | X15 | Level Of Knowledge Of Protection Policies | Level Of Knowledge Of Protection Policies | 0.518 | 0.693 | 1.18 × 10⁻¹⁶ | 5.43 × 10−35 | |
Degree Of Protection | X16 | Perceived Level Of Health Protection | Very Clear = 1; General Understanding = 2; Basic Understanding = 3 | 0.070 | 0.158 | 0.281 | 0.015 | |
Sense Of Entitlement | X17 | Should Enjoy Equal User Subject Rights | Agree = 1; Cannot Say = 2; Disagree = 3 | 0.768 | 0.791 | 1.23 × 10⁻⁶⁷ | 1.73 × 10−52 | |
