A STATISTICAL STUDY ON THE TRENDS OF FAST FOOD CONSUMPTION

A STATISTICAL STUDY ON
THE TRENDS OF
FAST FOOD
CONSUMPTION
BY: GARIMA TANEJA
M.STAT (2015-17)
DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS
INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
DR. BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR UNIVERSITY,
AGRA
(WITH SPECIAL
REFERENCE TO THE
STUDENTS OF
Dr. BHIM RAO
AMBEDKAR
UNIVERSITY, AGRA)

PREFACE
The present survey is carried out to study the “Trends of Fast Food Consumption” among the
students of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar University, Agra.
After noticing the increasing trends of consumption of Fast Food, we the students of M.Stat,
Institute of Social Sciences, Dr. B.R Ambedkar University, Agra decided to take a survey to
analyze the eating habits of the students of our University.
This project report is organized into Six Chapters.
The First Chapter is the Introduction which deals with the importance of study and also
contains the brief description about Fast Food and its impact on Health.
The Second Chapter is concerned with the Methodology used in this Survey Report.
The Third Chapter deals with the description of different Statistical Methods used in this
Survey Report.
Fourth Chapter highlights Data Summarization, Tabulation and Graphical Representation of
the data.
The Aim of the Fifth Chapter is to statistically analyze the data and to draw conclusions on the
basis of Analysis.
The Conclusions are discussed in the Sixth Chapter.

FIGURE 1.1: Famous eating points in AGRA

INTRODUCTION
ast Food is the term given to the food that can be prepared and served very quickly.
Any meal with low preparation time can be considered to be Fast Food.
The concept of Fast Food pops-up during 1920s.The 1950s first witnessed their rapid
spread.
The idea of ready-cooked food for sale is connected with Urban development. In Ancient
Rome cities, there were street stands that sold bread and wine. A fixture of East Asian cities is
the noodle shop. In the French Speaking Nations of West Africa, a range of ready to eat grilled
meat sticks were widely sold. Popular Indian Fast Food dishes include Vada Pav, Panipuri and
Dahi Vada.
THE START OF FAST FOOD CULTURE IN INDIA
For a Nation that is particular about its food and significantly fond of home cooked and fresh
food, the trend is radically changing the way people eat and is definitely showing the
globalization and increase of new market not witnessed in India before. Due to rising
disposable income, changing consumer behavior and favorable demographics, India is
observing a tremendous growth in the Fast Food and restaurant industries.
Additional reasons include exposure to western cuisine, the rising of number of nuclear
families and growth in the number of employed women, which are also having a significant
impact on the eating out trends and growth of the Fast Food industry in the country.
As a result, to this trend all the international food players like Pizza Hut, Dominos, McDonalds
and KFC are investing huge amount of money to grab a share of this highly lucrative market.
So after noticing this increasing trend of consumption of Fast Food, we the students of M.Stat,
Institute of Social Sciences, Dr. B.R Ambedkar University, Agra decided to take a survey to
analyze the eating habits of the students of our University.
F

FIGURE 1.2: STATISTICS ABOUT INDIAN MARKET
FIGURE 1.3: REALITY OF FAST FOOD

STUDIES ON FAST FOOD IN INDIA
 A report by “RESEARCH ON INDIA” has found that traditionally, the Indian consumers
have been eating at roadside eating points, dhabas and stalls which still occupy a major
share of the unorganized sector, where Fast Food has been eaten traditionally.
However, with the changes in the economy of the country and injection of modern from
the West, the non-home food market has now changed.
 A report by PRNewswire on “Fast Food Market in India 2015-2020” has provided the
detailed analysis of the factors that have led to the growth of Fast Food market in India.
The depth study of the food variety offered in terms of cuisines, the restaurant type and
the food category has been covered in this report.
HIGHLIGHTS
 Indian Fast Food market is expected to grow at a CAGR (Compound Annual
Growth Rate) of 18% by 2020 due to consumer changing behavior and
demography.
 Fast Food market in India is expected to be worth US$27.57 billion by 2020.
 About 10% of the Fast Food market in India is Organized.
NOVONOUS (offers Business Research Reports) estimates that that the
Organized Fast Food market in India is expected to grow at a CAGR of 18% by
2020.
 Vegetarian Fast Food constitutes of around 45% of the whole Fast Food
market in India and is expected to grow at a CAGR of 18% by 2020.
 Fast Food Casual Dining Restaurants (CDRs) market in organized sector in India
is projected to grow at a CAGR of 27% by 2019-20.
 Millions of people eat ethnic Fast Food every day from pani puri to vada pav to
dosa. Ethnic Fast Food market in India is projected to grow at a CAGR of
31.95% by 2019-20.

FIGURE 1.4: HARMFUL EFFECTS OF FAST FOOD
FIGURE 1.5: GROWING OF FAST FOOD INDUSTRY

FOOD HABITS OF INDIAN YOUTH
 31% of Indian are Vegetarians for religious and cultural reasons while the rest
of the population eat fish and meat.
 Dining Out is popular among Indian Consumers, particularly in Urban Areas,
facilitated by busier lifestyles and higher levels of disposable income.
Indeed, Value Sales at Full Service Restaurants have increased in recent years.
 Since 2009, demand for home delivery takeaway meals has been increasing
steadily.
HARMFUL EFFECTS OF FAST FOOD ON
HEALTH
 Regular Consumption of Fast Food is one of the leading factors responsible
for Obesity.
 Consumption of soft drinks has been associated with excess weight gain
and an elevated risk for the development of type 2 diabetes.
 High cholesterol resulting from Fast Food puts undue strain on the liver,
causing long term damage to this essential organ.
 Fast Food diet is a major cause of heart diseases.
 Research has suggested that diets high in fat may also impair essential brain
functions, like concentration and memory.
 Fast Food is grossly filled with refined foods, sugars and salts. If you have
high blood pressure or cholesterol, it is probably one of the worst things
you can have.
 Fast Food don’t provide you with any essential nutrient even though they
can be very much sufficing, you feel weakened.
 Lack of vital oxygen, nutrients and proteins particularly can stale your brain
cells temporarily.

PROMOTING HEALTHY FOOD INTAKE IN
CHILDREN
 Child should be offered with a plate filled with plenty of brightly colored
vegetables, fruits and sprouts.
 Ice-cream, chocolates and other heavy desserts can be replaced by low fat
fresh yogurt.
 Fresh lime juice, coconut water and fresh fruit juices should be preferred
to sodas and soft drinks as beverages.
 Prefer grilled fresh sandwiches to fried ones. Similarly, when choosing the
meat or poultry select baked, boiled, grilled items rather than fried ones.
 Avoid giving chocolate bars as gifts or reward to the children for their good
habits or academic achievements.
 Limit the portion size of the food ordered. Regular size meal may be opted
against ‘mega meal offers’ or ‘combo meal offers’.
 While eating away from home, avoid opting for dishes with rich creamy
layers and lots of spices.
 Replace naan with tandoori roti as low fat option breads in Indian menu.
 Dishes can be stir fried rather than deep fry to decrease the fat content.

OBJECTIVES OF THE SURVEY
1. To compare the trends of Fast Food consumption according to age, gender, financial
status and different courses.
2. To find out the reasons for the consumption of Fast Food among different categories of
the students.
3. To find out which is the most preferred Fast Food amongst students.
4. To find out which is the most preferred place and time for the consumption of Fast Food
amongst students.
5. To find out an average amount of money that students spend on Fast Food.
6. To check the awareness about health-risks caused by the consumption of Fast Food
amongst students.

POPULATION
The population for this project are the students of 7 Faculties of the University.
SAMPLING FRAME
The Sampling Frame is prepared from the Voter’s List arranged as per the Faculty of different
departments of the University. The Graduate and the Post Graduate students of all the 7
faculties of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar University, Agra were selected with the help of the Random
Number Table.
SAMPLING UNIT
The sampling unit is the students of 7 faculties of different departments of the University who
got selected randomly with the help of Random Number Tables. Firstly, a random number
from the Random Number Table is selected and then that number is matched with the Voter’s
list available for each Faculty.
SAMPLING DESIGN
For this Survey, we used Stratified Random Sampling with Proportional Allocation. Stratified
Random Sampling is the simplest form of Stratified Sampling, we independently took a Simple
Random Sample from each stratum, so that observations are randomly selected from the
population units in stratum h.
The total sample size is .
ENGINEERING SCIENCE LIFE
SCIENCE
HOME
SCIENCE
MANAGEMENT FINE
ARTS
ARTS

Here, we divided the population of sampling units into strata
, with sampling units in stratum h. For stratified sampling, we must know the
values of , and must have .
SCHEDULE
A comprehensive and detailed schedule is prepared with an extensive discussion among our
Professors and Classmates. The schedule is intended to cover various aspects of the survey.
The schedule is framed to study the Trends of Consumption of Fast Food among the students
and the awareness about the health risks associated with it.
Schedule consisted of four sections. The first section consists of Personal Information of the
Respondent, second section consists of the Family Structure, third section consists of
questions regarding their eating habits of Fast Food and the fourth and the final section
consist of the questions regarding the impact of Fast Food on Health.
The Final Schedule is in Appendix.
PILOT SURVEY
The main Objectives of the Pilot Survey are as follows:
Firstly, to check that the questions we have asked are providing us the relevant information
regarding the Main Objectives of our Survey or not.
Secondly, to check the various factors like Approximate Time needed to fill up a Schedule, for
getting the feedback of the Respondents if they find any question irrelevant or illogical, to
check what type of response we are getting while doing the survey i.e. the respondent should
not find the questions uninteresting. Also, the Pilot Survey helped us in finding out the most
effective way to ask questions so as to get the best possible response from the Respondent.
Moreover,
The Pilot Survey helped in pre-testing the schedule and to get an idea about the procedure of
the Survey. Five Schedules were given to each of us (Investigators) to carry out the Survey.

Since, I belong to the ISS Campus, so I found it better to conduct the survey there only. Five
Respondents were selected randomly to carry out the Pilot Survey.
FINALIZATION OF THE SURVEY
 Only a day was spent for filling up the five schedules of Pilot Survey and it took about
8-12 minutes in filling up of a schedule.
 The respondents were unwilling to provide us the information but somehow we
managed to convince them to fill up the schedule.
 There were some questions which were not providing us any useful information
regarding the survey so we decided to remove them.
Changes in the Personal Information
While conducting the survey, we observed some improper responses regarding following
points, so we decided to change them as:
1. Class & Stream: Course
2. Monthly Income: Monthly Income (if any)
3. Residential Status: Residential Status (with Family/Paying Guest)
4. Marital status: Married/Unmarried
Family Structure
Status(emp/unemp): Business/Job/Student/Unemployed
Questions which were improvised
1. Q11. was open ended and the responses were improper so we decided to introduce
options:
a) Self b) Parents
2. In Q22. options were improper so we changed them to new one which were:
a) Decrement b) Increment c) No Effect

CHAPTER - 3
STATISTICAL
METHODS

STATISTICAL METHODS
In this chapter we have given all the methods which are used in Statistical Analysis. The
Statistical Method is a technique used to obtain analysis and prepare the numerical data.
Statistical methods simplify unwisely masses of complex data by processes of classification,
tabulation, summarization, possibilities from the nature of the data available. It deals with
all aspects of data including data collection in terms of the design of surveys and
experiments.
On the basis of collected data to draw different conclusions and inferences, the following
Statistical Procedures are adopted:
1. Tabulation of data by using Frequency Tables and Cross Tabulation.
2. Graphical Representation.
3. Testing of Hypotheses by applying the following suitable test:
i) Chi-square Test
ii) Friedman Test
TABULATION OF DATA BY USING FREQUENCY
TABLES
Tabulation is a systematic and logical presentation of data such that it is easily understandable
and comparable. It attempts to furnish the maximum information in the minimum possible
space without sacrificing the quality and usefulness of data. The basic objectives of tabulation
are to summarize the information in such a fashion that it can be easily analyzed compared
and interpreted.
When we have Nominal scaled variable in a Survey, we cannot use statistical analysis
parameter like Mean, Standard Deviation and some of the advanced techniques of analysis.
But analysis of such data can always be done through Frequency Tables and Cross Tabulation.

Frequency distribution is a statistical table which shows the set of all distinct values of the
variables arranged in the order of their magnitude either individually or in groups with their
corresponding frequencies side by side. Thus, a frequency distribution consists of two parts
one part shows magnitude of values whereas other part shows number of times a value or
group of values has repeated.
GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION
Graphical Representation can be thought of as a way to obtain a “first look” at a group of data.
It does not provide a definitive interpretation of the data, but can lead to an intuitive “feel” for
the data.
However, this “first look” can be deceiving because the human mind wants to classify
everything it views based on something it already knows. This can lead to an erroneous first
impression that can be hard for a researcher to dismiss, even as evidence mounts that it may
be wrong.
Keep in mind that the purpose of graphical methods is simply to get a first look at the data
without drawing conclusions. It can, however, lead to hypotheses that guide further
investigation.
TESTING OF HYPOTHESIS
CHI-SQUARE TEST OF INDEPENDENCE
Tests of Statistical Hypotheses called Chi-Square Tests. A test of this sort was originally
proposed by Karl Pearson in 1900, and it provided one of the earlier methods of Statistical
Inference.
It is used to test the independence of two attributes through contingency table. The data was
tabulated in the form of tables.

According to Prof. R.A Fisher the following conditions must be satisfied for the validity of the
chi-square test.
a. The sample observation should be independent and normally distributed.
b. Constraints imposed upon the observations, if any should be linear.
c. Expected or Observed Frequency should not be less than 5.
d. The Total Frequency should be reasonably large, say more than 50, it means that sample
size is large enough.
HYPOTHESIS
: Two Variables are not Independent.
: Two Variables are Independent.
TEST STATISTICS: The chi-square test statistic is given by:
( )
;
which follows chi- square distribution under the null hypothesis with the degree of freedom

After calculating the value of chi-square statistics, we compare it with the tabulated value of
chi-square statistics at level of significance with degree of freedom.
If the is less than then we reject our Null Hypothesis with level of
significance.
If the calculated value is less than tabulated value at level of significance with
Degree of Freedom, we may accept our null hypothesis and conclude that
there is no association between two attributes otherwise we reject our null hypothesis and
accept the alternative hypothesis, and conclude that there is an association between the two
attributes.
NON-PARAMETRIC TESTS
Non Parametric Statistics refer to a statistical method wherein the data is not required to fit a
Normal Distribution. Non Parametric Statistics uses data that is often Ordinal, i.e. it does not
rely on numbers, but rather a ranking or order of sorts.
Non Parametric Tests have gained appreciation due to ease of their use, as the need for
parameters is relieved; the data becomes more applicable to a larger variety of tests. This type
of statistics can be used without the mean, sample size, standard deviation, or the estimation
of any other related parameters when none of that information is available.
There are various Non-Parametric Tests like Run Test, Wilcoxon Signed Test, Wilcoxon Signed
Ranked Test, Friedman Test.
We are going to discuss Friedman Test here.
FRIEDMAN TEST
The Friedman Test is a Non-Parametric Test developed by Milton Friedman, it is an alternative
to the ANOVA with repeated measures. It is used to test if k paired samples (k>2) of size n,
come from the population or from populations having identical properties as regards the
position parameter. The procedure involves ranking each row (or block) together then
considering the values of ranks by columns.

Use the Friedman Test when you have k paired samples corresponding to treatments
concerning the same blocks, in order to illustrate a difference between the treatments.
In order to run this test, the data should meet the following requirements:
 Data should be ordinal or continuous.
 The sample should be created with a random sampling method.
 Blocks are mutually independent (i.e. all of the pairs are independent-one does not
affect the other).
 Observations are ranked within blocks with no ties.
The Null Hypothesis for the test is that all treatments have identical effects, or that the
samples differ in some way. The alternative Hypothesis is that the treatments do have
different effects.
HYPOTHESIS
: All of the b treatment (population) means are equal,
i.e., each ranking of the random variables within a block is equally likely.
: At least one of the b treatment (population) means is not equal to at least one of the other
treatment (population) means.
TEST STATISTIC FOR FRIEDMAN TWO-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
BY RANKS TEST
First rank the treatments (populations) within each block separately. The smallest value within
a block is assigned rank 1 continuing through the largest value, which is assigned rank k. Use
average ranks in case of ties. Calculate the sum of the ranks , for each treatment
(population).
∑ for j=1,2…. k.

Then calculate Friedman’s statistic:
When there are ties, needs to be adjusted by A and C.
After adjusting the test statistic for ties, it becomes:
Now the final test statistic is calculated by modifying . So it can be approximated by the
chi-square distribution as:
INTREPRETATION OF OUTPUT (DECISION RULE) OF FRIEDMAN TWO-
WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BY RANKS TEST
When the null hypothesis is true, the exact distribution of is difficult to determine so its
quantiles are approximated by the F distribution with numerator degrees of freedom
and denominator degrees of freedom
Reject the null hypothesis at level if is greater than its quantile. This
quantile is approximated by the F distribution Table with and

Otherwise, accept if is less than or equal to the quantile indicating the means of
all the samples are equal in value.
This test is not usually run by hand, as the calculations are time consuming and labor intensive.
Nearly all popular Statistical software packages can run this test.
For this Report, Chi-Square and Friedman Test are performed through SPSS (Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences).

CHAPTER - 4
DATA
SUMMERIAZATION,
TABULATION
AND
GRAPHICAL
REPRESENTATION

DATA SUMMERIAZATION, TABULATION AND
GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION
 IN THE FOLLOWING FREQUENCY TABLES AND BAR GRAPHS THE STUDENTS ARE
CATEGORIZED ACCORDING TO GENDER, AGE, FACULTY, RESIDENTIAL STATUS AND
TOTAL FAMILY INCOME. THE OBSERVATIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN SUMMARIZED BELOW.
EAT FAST FOOD TOTAL
NO YES
GENDER
FEMALE 2 30 32
MALE 2 51 53
TOTAL 4 81 85
FIGURE 4.1: BAR GRAPH OF
STUDENTS EATING FAST FOOD
(ACCORDING TO GENDER)
TABLE 4.1: FREQUENCY OF
STUDENTS EATING FAST FOOD.
(ACCORDING TO GENDER)
OBSERVATION: Table 4.1 shows
that there are 81 students who
are eating fast food out of
which 30 are females and 51
are males.
Whereas, there are 4 students
who are not eating fast food
due to various reasons like do
not like fast food, due to bad
effects on health and high cost.

TABLE 4.2: FREQUENCY OF
STUDENTS EATING FAST FOOD.
(ACCORDING TO AGE)
FIGURE 4.2: GRAPH OF STUDENTS
EATING FAST FOOD.
(ACCORDING TO AGE)
AGE TOTAL
BELOW
20
20-21 22-23 ABOVE
23
AGE
NO 1 1 1 1 4
YES 18 26 32 5 81
TOTAL 19 27 33 6 85
OBSERVATION: Table 4.2
shows that there are 81
students who are eating fast
food out of which 18 are
below the age of 20, 26
belong to the age group 20-
21, 32 belong to the age
group 22-23 and 5 students
are above 23.
Whereas, there is 1 student in
each group who is not eating
Fast Food.

EAT FAST
FOOD
TOTAL
NO YES
FACULTY
ARTS 1 14 15
ENGINEERING 0 15 15
FINE ARTS 1 6 7
HOME SCIENCE 0 7 7
LIFE SCIENCE 0 11 11
MANAGEMENT 2 8 10
SCIENCE 0 20 20
TOTAL 4 81 85
Table 4.3: FREQUENCY OF STUDENTS
EATING FAST FOOD.
(ACCORDING TO FACULTY)
are eating fast food out of which
14 belong to the arts faculty, 15
from engineering, 6 from fine
arts, 7 from home science, 11
from life science, 8 from
management and 20 from the
science faculty.
Whereas, there is 1,1,2 students
from Arts, Fine Arts And
Management Faculty
respectively who did not eat Fast
Food.
EATING FAST FOOD.
(ACCORDING TO FACULTY)

EATING FAST FOOD.
(ACCORDING TO RESIDENTIAL STATUS)
EATING FAST FOOD.
(ACCORDING TO RESIDENTIAL STATUS)
RESIDENTIAL
STATUS
TOTAL
PAYING
GUEST
WITH
FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
STATUS
NO 1 3 4
YES 27 54 81
TOTAL 28 57 85
food out of which 27 live as
Paying Guests and 54 are
living with the family.
Whereas, there is 1 paying
guest and 3 students who are
living with family who did not
eat Fast Food.

NO YES TOTAL
TOT FAMILY INCOME
<= 10000 1 10 11
10001 - 20000 0 12 12
20001 - 25000 0 8 8
25001 - 29000 1 2 3
29001 - 30000 2 7 9
30001 - 38000 0 9 9
38001 - 48000 0 8 8
48001 - 52500 0 8 8
52501 - 75000 0 10 10
ABOVE 75001 0 7 7
TOTAL 4 81 85
EATING FAST FOOD.
(ACCORDING TO FAMILY INCOME)
EATING FAST FOOD.
(ACCORDING TO FAMILY INCOME)
food which belong to
different income groups.
Where, <=10000 is the
lowest income group and
above 75001 being the
highest.
Moreover, there are 4
students who did not eat
any Fast Food.

 FREQUENCY TABLES AND THEIR CORRESPONDING PIE CHARTS FOR DIFFERENT REASONS
THAT STUDENTS OPT TO EAT FAST FOOD
FREQUENCY PERCENT
STRONGLY AGREE 33 38.8
AGREE 45 52.9
DISAGREE 3 3.5
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
FIGURE 4.6: REASONS OF
EATING FAST FOOD
(TASTE)
TABLE 4.6: REASONS OF
EATING FAST FOOD
(TASTE)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
AGREE 52 61.2
DSAGREE 22 25.9
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
EATING FAST FOOD
(TIME SAVING)
EATING FAST FOOD
(TIME SAVING)

FREQUENCY PERCENT
AGREE 35 41.2
DISAGREE 41 48.2
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
EATING FAST FOOD
(ADVERTISEMENT)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
AGREE 49 57.6
DISAGREE 11 12.9
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
EATING FAST FOOD
(ADVERTISEMENT)
EATING FAST FOOD
(VARIETY)
TABLE 4.9: REASONS OF EATING
FAST FOOD
(VARIETY)

FREQUENCY PERCENT
AGREE 38 44.7
DISAGREE 39 45.9
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
EATING FAST FOOD
(INEXPENSIVE)
EATING FAST FOOD
(INEXPENSIVE)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
AGREE 46 54.1
DISAGREE 25 29.4
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
EATING FAST FOOD
(CONVENIENT)
EATING FA ST FOOD
(CONVENIENT)

FREQUENCY PERCENT
AGREE 31 36.5
DISAGREE 39 45.9
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
EATING FAST FOOD
(LAZINESS)
TABLE 4.12: REASONS OF EATING
FAST FOOD
(LAZINESS)

 FREQUENCY TABLES AND THEIR CORRESPONDING PIE CHARTS FOR THE PLACES THAT
STUDENTS OPT TO EAT FAST FOOD
FREQUENCY PERCENT
ALWAYS 14 16.5
SOMETIMES 57 67.1
NEVER 10 11.8
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
TABLE 4.13: PREFERRED PLACE
FOR EATING FAST FOOD
(MCDONALDS)
FIGURE 4.13: PREFERRED PLACE
FOR EATING FAST FOOD
(MCDONALDS)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
ALWAYS 7 8.2
SOMETIMES 53 62.4
NEVER 21 24.7
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
TABLE 4.14: PREFERRED
PLACE FOR EATING FAST
FOOD
(DOMINO’s)
FIGURE 4.14: PREFERRED
FOOD
(DOMINO’s)

FREQUENCY PERCENT
ALWAYS 4 4.7
SOMETIMES 38 44.7
NEVER 39 45.9
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
FOOD
(PIZZA HUT)
FOOD
(PIZZA HUT)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
ALWAYS 1 1.2
SOMETIMES 15 17.6
NEVER 65 76.5
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
FOOD
(SUBWAY)
FOOD
(SUBWAY)

FREQUENCY PERCENT
ALWAYS 5 5.9
SOMETIMES 16 18.8
NEVER 60 70.6
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
FOOD
(KFC)
FOOD
(KFC)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
ALWAYS 4 4.7
SOMETIMES 56 65.9
NEVER 21 24.7
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
FOOD
(FOOD COURTS)
FOOD
(FOOD COURTS)

 FREQUENCY TABLES AND THEIR CORRESPONDING PIE CHARTS FOR THE FAST FOOD THAT
STUDENTS PREFER TO EAT
FREQUENCY PERCENT
ALWAYS 39 45.9
SOMETIMES 37 43.5
NEVER 5 5.9
TOTAL 81 95.3
NONE 4 4.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
PLACE FOR EATING FAST FOOD
(LOCAL EATING POINTS)
PLACE FOR EATING FAST FOOD
(LOCAL EATING POINTS)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
BOTH 4 4.7
NON-VEG 4 4.7
VEG 65 76.5
TOTAL 73 85.9
NONE 12 14.1
TOTAL 85 100.0
FAST FOOD
(BURGER)
FAST FOOD
(BURGER)

FREQUENCY PERCENT
BOTH 3 3.5
NON-VEG 1 1.2
VEG 54 63.5
TOTAL 58 68.2
NONE 27 31.8
TOTAL 85 100.0
FAST FOOD
(SANDWICH)
FAST FOOD
(SANDWICH)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
NON-VEG 2 2.4
VEG 10 11.8
TOTAL 12 14.1
NONE 73 85.9
TOTAL 85 100.0
FAST FOOD
(KAATHI ROLLS)
FAST FOOD
(KAATHI ROLLS)

FAST FOOD
(MAGGIE)
FAST FOOD
(MAGGIE)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
BOTH 4 4.7
NON-VEG 2 2.4
VEG 43 50.6
TOTAL 49 57.6
NONE 36 42.4
TOTAL 85 100.0
FREQUENCY PERCENT
BOTH 1 1.2
VEG 65 76.5
TOTAL 66 77.6
NONE 19 22.4
TOTAL 85 100.0
FAST FOOD
(CHINESE)
FAST FOOD
(CHINESE)

FAST FOOD
(ITALIAN)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
NON-VEG 2 2.4
VEG 33 38.8
TOTAL 35 41.2
NONE 50 58.8
TOTAL 85 100.0
FAST FOOD
(ITALIAN)
FREQUENCY PERCENT
NON-VEG 2 2.4
VEG 19 22.4
TOTAL 21 24.7
NONE 64 75.3
TOTAL 85 100.0
FAST FOOD
(OTHERS)
FAST FOOD
(OTHERS)

 FREQUENCY TABLES AND THEIR CORRESPONDING BAR GRAPHS TO SHOW THAT WHERE STUDENTS
PREFER TO EAT FAST FOOD WHETHE AT EATING POINTS OR AT HOME AND ALSO THE PREFERRED
EATING TIME
FREQUENCY PERCENT
NONE 4 4.7
EATING POINTS 40 47.1
HOME 2 2.4
BOTH 39 45.9
TOTAL 85 100.0
TABLE 4.27: WHERE PREFER TO
EAT FAST FOOD
FIGURE 4.27: WHERE PREFER TO
EAT FAST FOOD
food out of which 40 are eating
at Eating Points, 2 students
prefer Home Delivery of Fast
Food while 39 students at both
i.e. Eating points and Home
Delivery.

PREFERRED EATING TIME FREQUENCY
TIME
NONE 4
BEFORE 12 NOON 4
12PM-3PM 25
3PM-6PM 25
6PM-9PM 26
AFTER 9PM 1
TOTAL 85
EATING TIME
are eating fast food which out of
which 4 are eating Fast Food
Before 12 Noon, 25 are eating
between 12PM-3PM, 25 are
eating between 3PM-6PM, 26 are
eating between 6PM-9PM and
only 1 student is eating Fast Food
after 9PM.
Whereas, there are 4 students
who did not eat any Fast Food.
EATING TIME

 FREQUENCY TABLES AND THEIR CORRESPONDING BAR GRAPHS TO SHOW THAT WHAT
PERCENTAGE OF THEIR MONTHLY ALLOWANCE THE STUDENTS ARE SPENDING ON FAST
FOOD ACCORDING TO AGE GROUPS, FACULTY AND RESIDENTIAL STATUS.
PERCENTAGE TOTAL
<= 25% 25.01% –
50%
50.01% -
75%
75.01% -
100%
ABOVE
100%
AGE
GROUPS
BELOW 20 6 5 5 1 1 18
20-21 11 10 1 2 0 24
22-23 11 15 4 1 0 31
ABOVE 23 2 2 1 0 0 5
TOTAL 30 32 11 4 1 78
TABLE 4.29: PERCENTAGE OF
MONTHLY ALLOWANCE SPENT
ON FAST FOOD (AGE GROUPS)
shows that what percentage of
the monthly allowance
students is spending on Fast
Food.
The students are divided into 4
Age Groups from Below 20 to
Above 23.
FIGURE 4.29: PERCENTAGE OF
ON FAST FOOD (AGE GROUPS)

PERCENTAGE TOTAL
<= 25% 25.01% -
50%
50.01% -
75%
75.01% -
100%
ABOVE
100%
FACULTY
ARTS 3 7 1 2 0 13
ENGINEERING 11 4 0 0 0 15
FINE ARTS 1 3 2 0 0 6
HOME SCIENCE 3 2 2 0 0 7
LIFE SCIENCE 6 4 1 0 0 11
MANAGEMENT 1 3 1 2 0 7
SCIENCE 5 9 4 0 1 19
TOTAL 30 32 11 4 1 78
ON FAST FOOD (FACULTY)
shows that what percentage
of the monthly allowance
students are spending on
Fast Food.
The students are divided into
7 Faculties.
Also, the percentage groups
of monthly allowance are
divided into 5 groups.
ON FAST FOOD (FACULTY)

PERCENTAGE TOTAL
<= 25% 25.01% -
50%
50.01% -
75%
75.01% -
100%
ABOVE
100%
RESIDENTIAL
STATUS
PAYING GUEST 17 7 3 0 0 27
WITH FAMILY 13 25 8 4 1 51
TOTAL 30 32 11 4 1 78
ON FAST FOOD (RESIDENTIAL
STATUS)
that what percentage of the
monthly income students are
spending on Fast Food.
The students are divided
according to their Residential
Status I.e. Paying Guest and with
Family.
Also, the percentage groups of
monthly allowance are divided
into 5 groups.
ON FAST FOOD (RESIDENTIAL
STATUS)

 FREQUENCY TABLES AND THEIR CORRESPONDING BAR GRAPHS ABOUT THE HEALTH
ISSUES THAT STUDENTS FACE AFTER EATING FAST FOOD.
FREQUENCY PERCENT
NONE 4 4.7
NO 14 16.5
YES 67 78.8
TOTAL 85 100.0
TABLE 4.32: IS FAST FOOD
UNHEALTHY OR NOT?
OBSERVATION: Table 4.32 shows that
there are 67 students who thinks that
eating Fast Food is Unhealthy while 14
students thinks that Fast Food does
not effects the Health.
Whereas, 4 students did not eat any
Fast Food.
FIGURE 4.32: IS FAST FOOD
UNHEALTHY OR NOT?

FREQUENCY PERCENT
NONE 4 4.7
KNOW HEALTH RISKS 63 74.1
HEARD BUT DON'T
UNDERSTAND
9 10.6
DON'T KNOW HEALTH
RISKS
9 10.6
TOTAL 85 100.0
TABLE 4.33: AWARENESS ABOUT
HEALTH RISKS
FIGURE 4.33: AWARENESS ABOUT
HEALTH RISKS
“knows about the health risks”, 9
students have “heard about the
health risks but don’t understand
them” and other 9 students “don’t
even know about the health risks”.
Fast Food.

FREQUENCY PERCENT
4 4.7
NO 43 50.6
YES 38 44.7
TOTAL 85 100.0
TABLE 4.34: HEALTH ISSUES
FACED AFTER EATING FAST
FOOD
FIGURE 4.34: HEALTH ISSUES
FACED AFTER EATING FAST
FOOD
students who faced some
Health Problems like: “Food
Poisoning, Stomach Ache,
Laziness and Obesity” after
eating Fast Food, while 43
students did not face any
Health Problem after eating
Fast Food.
Whereas, 4 students did not
eat any Fast Food due to some
reason or other.

FREQUENCY PERCENT
4 4.7
DECREMENT 15 17.6
INCREMENT 2 2.4
NO EFFECT 64 75.3
TOTAL 85 100.0
TABLE 4.35: DEMONETIZATION
EFFECT
that there are 15 students who said
that Demonetization led to the
Decrement in the Consumption of
Fast Food, only 2 students said that
their consumption of Fast Food
increased during Demonetization
while 64 students found No Effect of
Demonetization.
Fast Food due to some reason or
other.
FIGURE 4.35: DEMONETIZATION
EFFECT

CHAPTER - 5
STATISTICAL
ANALYSIS

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Statistical Analysis is the science of collecting, exploring and presenting large amounts of data
to discover underlying patterns and trends. It deals with all aspects of data including the
planning of data collection in terms of the design of surveys and experiments.
As this Project is a Statistical Study on the Trends of Fast Food Consumption (With Special
Reference to the Students of Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra) .
So the Analysis Report will start with the testing of Independence of Consumption of Fast Food
with respect to the various categories like Gender, Age, Faculty, Residential Status and Total
Family Income.
TESTING OF INDEPENDENCE
TEST-1
: The Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of Gender.
: The Consumption of Fast Food is not Independent of Gender.
CHI-SQUARE TESTS
VALUE DF ASYMP. SIG.
(2-SIDED)
EXACT SIG.
(2-SIDED)
EXACT SIG. (1-
SIDED)
PEARSON CHI-
SQUARE
.273A
1 .601
CONTINUITY
CORRECTIONb .000 1 1.000
LIKELIHOOD RATIO .265 1 .607
FISHER'S EXACT
TEST
.630 .485
N OF VALID CASES 85
CONCLUSION: - Since, the p-value is 0.601 which is greater than 0.05. So we accept our
Null Hypothesis and conclude that “Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of the Gender”.

TEST-2
: The Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of Age.
: The Consumption of Fast Food is not Independent of Age.
CHI-SQUARE TESTS
(2-SIDED)
PEARSON CHI-
SQUARE
2.194A
3 .533
LIKELIHOOD
RATIO
1.501 3 .682
N OF VALID CASES 85
Null Hypothesis and conclude that “Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of the Age”.
TEST-3
: The Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of Faculty.
: The Consumption of Fast Food is not Independent of Faculty.
CHI-SQUARE TESTS
(2-SIDED)
PEARSON CHI-
SQUARE
9.394A
6 .153
LIKELIHOOD
RATIO
9.162 6 .165
N OF VALID CASES 85
Null Hypothesis and conclude that “Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of the Faculty”.

TEST-4
: The Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of Residential Status.
: The Consumption of Fast Food is not Independent of Residential Status.
CHI-SQUARE TESTS
(2-SIDED)
EXACT SIG.
(2-SIDED)
EXACT SIG.
(1-SIDED)
PEARSON CHI-
SQUARE
.120A
1 .729
CONTINUITY
CORRECTIONB .000 1 1.000
LIKELIHOOD RATIO .125 1 .723
FISHER'S EXACT
TEST
1.000 .600
N OF VALID CASES 85
Null Hypothesis and conclude that “Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of the
Residential Status”.
TEST-5
: The Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of Total Family Income.
: The Consumption of Fast Food is not Independent of Total Family Income.
CHI-SQUARE TESTS
(2-SIDED)
PEARSON CHI-
SQUARE
15.174A
9 .086
LIKELIHOOD
RATIO
12.204 9 .202
N OF VALID CASES 85
Null Hypothesis and conclude that “Consumption of Fast Food is Independent of the Total
Family Income”.

TESTING OF MEAN RANKS
TEST-1
All of the mean ranks are Equal i.e. each ranking of the random variable within a block is
equally likely.
At least one of the mean rank is not equal to at least one of the other mean rank.
RANKS TABLE
MEAN
RANK
TASTE 2.59
ADVERTISEMENT 4.81
VARIETY 3.26
INEXPENSIVE 4.70
TIME SAVING 4.01
CONVENIENT 4.04
LAZINESS 4.59
CONCLUSION: - For the Mean Rank testing, we labelled Strongly Agree as 1, Agree as 2
and Disagree as 3. So, from the above Rank Table we see that Mean Rank of the Block Taste is
lowest i.e. 2.59, this shows that “Taste” is the most preferred reason among the students to
eat Fast Food.
Also, the Test Statistics Table shows that the p-value is 0.000 which is less than 0.05. So we
reject our Null Hypothesis and conclude that “Each ranking of the random variable within a
block is not equally likely”.
TEST STATISTICS
N 81
CHI-SQUARE 98.848
DF 6
ASYMP. SIG. .000

TEST-2
equally likely.
RANKS TABLE
MEAN
RANK
MCDONALDS 3.12
DOMINOS 3.67
PIZZA HUT 4.46
SUBWAY 5.49
KFC 5.20
FOOD COURTS 3.78
LOCAL EATING
POINTS
2.29
CONCLUSION: - For the Mean Rank testing, we labelled Always as 1, Sometimes as 2
and Never as 3. So, from the above Rank Table we see that Mean Rank of the Block Local
Eating Points is lowest i.e. 2.29, this shows that “Local Eating points” is the most preferred
place among the students to eat Fast Food.
TEST STATISTICSA
N 81
CHI-SQUARE 182.340
DF 6
ASYMP. SIG. .000

TEST-3
equally likely.
RANKS TABLE
MEAN
RANK
NICE
ATMOSPHERE
2.19
OUTING 2.30
DIFFERENT FOOD 1.96
WITH FRIENDS 3.55
CONCLUSION: - For the Mean Rank testing, we gave Ratings from 1 to 5 where, 5 is
Highest and 1 is Lowest. So, from the above Rank Table we see that Mean Rank of the Block
with Friends is highest i.e. 3.55, this shows that “Like to eat with Friends” is the most
preferred reason among the students to eat Fast Food.
TEST STATISTICSA
N 79
CHI-SQUARE 86.964
DF 3
ASYMP. SIG. .000

TEST-4
equally likely.
RANKS TABLE
MEAN
RANK
HUNGER 2.65
EATING POINTS 3.44
QUALITY 2.75
COST 3.70
MOOD/EMOTION 2.46
CONCLUSION: - For the Mean Rank testing, we labelled Mostly as 1, Sometimes as 2,
Rarely as 3 and Can’t say as 4. So, from the above Rank Table we see that Mean Rank of the
Block Mood/Emotion is lowest i.e. 2.46, this shows that “Mood/Emotion” is the most popular
factor among the students to eat Fast Food.
TEST STATISTICSA
N 81
CHI-SQUARE 47.814
DF 4
ASYMP. SIG. .000

TEST-5
equally likely.
RANKS TABLE
MEAN
RANK
BURGER IN 1 MONTH 4.06
SANDWICH IN 1 MONTH 3.84
KAATHI ROLLS IN 1 MONTH 2.24
MAGGIE IN 1 MONTH 5.38
CHINESE IN 1 MONTH 4.38
ITALIAN IN 1 MONTH 3.22
OTHERS IN 1 MONTH 4.89
CONCLUSION: - For the Mean Rank testing, we labelled Did not eat Fast Food as 1, 1-3
times as 2, 4-6 times as 3 and More than 6 times as 4. So, from the above Rank Table we see
that Mean Rank of the Block Maggie in 1 Month is highest i.e. 5.38, this shows that “Maggie in
1 Month” is the most preferred Fast Food among the students.
TEST STATISTICSA
N 69
CHI-SQUARE 118.443
DF 6
ASYMP. SIG. .000

CONCLUSIONS
The survey was conducted on a sample of 100 Students out of which 85 were the clear
respondents and 15 of them were not available even after the continuous visits so we
excluded them.
After applying the suitable tests on the data and analyzing it we observed the following
results:
1. Consumption of Fast Food is independent of student’s Gender, Age, Faculty, Residential
Status and Family Income.
2. Out of the various reasons for the Consumption of Fast Food like Taste, Advertisement,
Variety, Inexpensive, Time Saving, Convenient and Laziness, “Taste” is the most
preferred reason among the students to eat Fast Food.
3. From the various Fast Food listed in our schedule like Burger, Sandwich, Kaathi Rolls,
Maggie, Chinese and Italian, “Maggie” is the most preferred Fast Food among the
students.
Also, one more thing we observed is that Street Foods like Samosa, Kachori, Pattiez, Gol
Gappe etc. are often eaten by the students.
4. Out of 85 students, 40 prefer to eat Fast Food at Eating Points because they like to go
out and eat with friends whereas, 39 students like to eat at Eating Points as well as
Home.
5. Out of the various Eating Points like McDonalds, Dominos, Pizza Hut, Subway, KFC, Food
Courts and Local Eating Points, “Local Eating Points” are the most popular among the
students to eat fast food and when it comes to the preferred time for eating Fast Food,
between and after college hours are the popular ones i.e. 12NOON to 6PM and 6PM to
9PM respectively.

6. The average amount of money that students spend on Fast Food in one month is
Nearly 50% of their monthly allowance. Also, the minimum amount spent on Fast Food
is Rs. 150 whereas the maximum amount is Rs. 10,000.
7. Out of 85 students 67 said that eating Fast Food is unhealthy also 63 students (74.1%)
are aware about the health risks and 38 students (44.7%) have faced health problems
like Food Poisoning, Stomach Ache, Obesity, Laziness etc. and in spite of these facts
students are still eating Fast Food and this bar is keep on increasing.
8. As far as Demonetization is concerned, 75.3% of students said that it did not affect their
Consumption of Fast Food.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Sukhatme, P.V., Sampling Theory of Surveys with Applications, Banglore, India, The
Banglore Press, 1954.
2. Lohr, S.L., Sampling: Design and Analysis, U.S.A, Advanced Series, 2nd
Edition.
3. Rohatgi, V.K. & Ehsanes Saleh, A.K. MD, An Introduction to Probability and Statistics,
John Wiley & Sons, 2nd
Edition.
4. Conover, W.J., Practical Nonparametric Statistics, New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1999.
5. Landau Sabine & Everitt, B.S., A Handbook of Statistical Analyses using SPSS, New York,
Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2004.
6. Chinnu Divakar, “Fast Food History in India”, Scribd.
Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/fast-food-industry-in-india-a-study
7. Chandni Sahgal, “Food Habits of Indian Youth”, Slideshare.
Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/opportunities-in-the-indian-food-service-
market
8. Anita Goyal, “Consumer Perception about Fast Food in India”, Researchgate.
Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.com/consumer-perception-about-fast-food-
in-india
9. Amit Malhotra, “Fast Food Growth in India”, Desiblitz.
Retrieved from https://www.desiblitz.com/content/fast-food-grows-in-india

APPENDIX
A STATISTICAL STUDY ON THE TRENDS OF FAST FOOD CONSUMPTION
(WITH SPECIAL REFRENCE TO THE STUDENTS OF
DR. BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR UNIVERSITY, AGRA)
PERSONAL INFORMATION:
Name: Gender: Age:
Height: Weight:
Institute:
Course:
Your Monthly Income (if any):
Marital Status (Married/Unmarried):
Residential Status (Paying Guest/With Family):
Address:
FAMILY STRUCTURE:
NAME GENDER AGE EDUCATION MARITAL
STATUS
BUSINESS/JOB
/STUDENT/
UNEMPLOYED
MONTHLY
INCOME
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

1. Do you eat Fast Food?
a) Yes b) No
 If No, what are the reasons?
a) Do not like it c) It affects health
b) It is expensive d) Others, specify ……………
If Yes, what are the reasons? Tick all the options.
REASONS STRONGLY AGREE AGREE DISAGREE
Taste
Advertisement
Variety
Inexpensive
Time Saving
Convenient
Laziness
If Others Specify …………
2. Which place do you prefer to eat Fast Food? Tick all the options.
PLACES ALWAYS SOMETIMES NEVER
McDonalds
Dominos
Pizza Hut
Subway
KFC
Food Courts
Local Eating Points
3. Which fast food do you prefer? Can mark more than one option.
FAST FOOD VEG NON VEG BOTH
Burger
Sandwich
Kaathi Rolls
Maggie
Chinese
Italian
Others…………...
4. Which type of beverage you prefer with the food?
a) Diet b) Normal

5. Where do you prefer to eat fast food more?
a) Eating points c) Both
b) Home
 If answer is a)
Rate each option.
Reasons Rating (5:Highest ; 1:Lowest)
Due to nice atmosphere
For outing
Can easily order different types of
food at a same time
Like to eat with friends
Others specify…………
 If answer is b)
Do you prefer Home Delivery of food?
Yes No
 If Yes
i. Can eat comfortably at home iii. Laziness
ii. It saves time iv. Others specify…………
6. During the past 1 month how many times did you eat fast food?
Tick all the options.
Fast food a) b) c) d)
Burger
Sandwich
Kathi Rolls
Maggie
Chinese
Italian
Others............
Where a) Did not eat any fast food c) 4-6 times
b) 1-3 times d) More than 6 times
7. At what time do you usually eat fast food?
a) Before 12 noon d) 6pm-9pm
b) 12pm-3pm e) After 9pm
c) 3pm-6pm

8. On average how much you individually spend for a fast food meal per month?
Rs. ……………….
9. What is the source of money you spend on fast food per month?
a) Self b) Parents
10.How much allowance do you get monthly?
Rs. .…………….
11.Which factor influence the selection of fast food?
Tick all the options.
Factors Mostly Sometimes Rarely Can’t say
Hunger
Eating Points
Quality
Cost
Mood/Emotion
12.Do you think fast food is unhealthy?
a) Yes b) No
13.Do you know about the major health risks like diabetes, obesity, heart diseases caused
due to fast food?
a) I understand these health risks and what they are.
b) I’ve heard about these risks but don’t understand them.
c) I know poor eating habits, but not familiar with health risks.
d) I don’t know there were any health risks.
14.Do you eat more when you are in stress?
a) Mostly c) Never
b) Sometimes d) Cannot say
15.Have you ever faced any health problems after eating fast food?
a) Yes b) No
 If Yes
a) Food Poisoning c) Laziness
b) Stomach Ache d) Others specify...

16.Do you eat fast food in spite of the fact that it lacks nutritive values?
a) Yes b) No
 If Yes, whether the information regarding nutritive values affects your choice of the
food.
a) Not at all c) Mostly
b) Sometimes d) Always
17.Whether demonetization has affected your food habits?
a) Decrement in consumption of Fast food.
b) Increment in consumption of Fast food.
c) No effect.

A STATISTICAL STUDY ON THE TRENDS OF FAST FOOD CONSUMPTION

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie A STATISTICAL STUDY ON THE TRENDS OF FAST FOOD CONSUMPTION

Ähnlich wie A STATISTICAL STUDY ON THE TRENDS OF FAST FOOD CONSUMPTION (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

A STATISTICAL STUDY ON THE TRENDS OF FAST FOOD CONSUMPTION