Differences in the Factors that Influence Students’ Decision to Shift to the BSIA Program
Across Gender and Age
Kruskal-Wallis H Test was used to test the significant differences in the seven (7) factors
that influence students’ decision to shift to the BSIA program when grouped according to their
gender and age at the 0.05 alpha level of significance. Post-hoc analyses using multiple
comparisons with Bonferroni corrections were also conducted across groups with significant
Kruskal-Wallis results.
Table 10. Means and Significant Differences of the Factors that Influence Students’ Decision to
Shift to BSIA Across Gender
Variable
Personal Preference
Male
Female
Prefer not to say
Financial Problems
Male
Female
Prefer not to say
External Influence
Male
Female
Prefer not to say
Difficulty in Accountancy
Male
Female
Prefer not to say
Interest in Internal Auditing
Male
Female
Prefer not to say
QPA Retention/Qualifying Exam
Male
Female
Prefer not to say
Lack of Interest in Accountancy
Male
Female
Prefer not to say
Mean
Kruskal-Wallis H
1.482
p-value
.477
8.987
.011*
1.499
.473
2.216
.330
5.443
.066
11.446
.003*
4.608
.100
3.60
3.59
3.00
2.83
2.07
2.00
3.13
2.90
3.00
3.50
3.33
4.00
3.47
3.07
3.00
3.37
2.48
3.00
3.43
3.04
3.00
*Distributions are significantly different at the 0.05 alpha level of significance
Scale of Verbal Interpretation of Means: (3.26-4.00) Strongly Agree, (2.51-3.25) Agree, (1.76-2.50) Disagree, (1.00-1.75) Disagree
As presented in Table 10, results revealed that financial problems as a factor in shifting to
BSIA is significantly different across the distributions of the students’ gender (H=8.987, p=.011)
where males agree (M=2.83) that financial problems strongly impact their decision to shift to BSIA
while females disagree (M=2.07) that financial problems influenced their decision to shift to BSIA
(p=.008; see Supplemental Table 1).
Likewise, the QPA retention as a factor in shifting to BSIA is significantly different across
the distributions of the students’ gender (H=11.446, p=.003) where males strongly agree (M=3.37)
that the qualifying exam was an impact in their decision to shift while females disagree (M=2.48)
that the QPA retention was a factor in their decision to shift to BSIA (p=.002; see Supplemental
Table 2).
On the other hand, no significant differences were found among the distributions of gender
for the factors personal preference (H=1.482, p=.477), external influence (H=1.499, p=.473),
difficulty in mastering accountancy subjects (H=2.216, p=.330), interest in internal auditing
(H=5.443, p=.066), and lack of interest in accountancy (H=4.608, p=.100).
Insert discussion and implications of your results here.
Table 11. Means and Significant Differences of the Factors that Influence Students’ Decision to
Shift to BSIA Across Age Groups
Variable
Personal Preference
19-21 years old
22-23 years old
24 years old and above
Financial Problems
19-21 years old
22-23 years old
24 years old and above
External Influence
19-21 years old
22-23 years old
24 years old and above
Difficulty in Accountancy
19-21 years old
22-23 years old
24 years old and above
Interest in Internal Auditing
19-21 years old
22-23 years old
24 years old and above
QPA Retention/Qualifying Exam
19-21 years old
22-23 years old
24 years old and above
Lack of Interest in Accountancy
19-21 years old
22-23 years old
24 years old and above
Mean
Kruskal-Wallis H
5.002
p-value
.082
3.295
.193
.478
.787
2.263
.323
2.656
.265
9.554
.008*
2.520
.284
3.42
3.62
4.00
2.04
2.34
3.00
2.88
2.99
3.20
3.54
3.37
3.00
2.92
3.27
3.40
3.33
2.52
3.20
2.96
3.20
3.60
*Distributions are significantly different at the 0.05 alpha level of significance
Scale of Verbal Interpretation of Means: (3.26-4.00) Strongly Agree, (2.51-3.25) Agree, (1.76-2.50)
Disagree, (1.00-1.75) Disagree
Table 11 shows that QPA retention as a factor that influence students’ decision to shift to
the BSIA program significantly differ across the distributions of the students’ age groups (H=9.554,
p=.008) where those aged 19 to 21 years strongly agree (M=3.33) that QPA retention influenced
their decision to shift while those aged 22 to 23 years old only agree (M=2.52) that the qualifying
exam was an influence in their decision to shift to the BSIA program (p=.010; see Supplemental
Table 3).
Furthermore, there are no significant differences in the personal preference (H=5.002,
p=.082), financial problems (H=3.295, p=.193), external influence (H=.478, p=.787), difficulty in
mastering accountancy subjects (H=2.263, p=.323), interest in internal auditing (H=2.656,
p=.265), and lack of interest in accountancy (H=2.520, p=.284) as factors that influence students’
decision to shift to the BSIA program when grouped according to the students’ age groups.
Insert discussion and implications of your results here.
Supplemental Tables
Supplemental Table 1. Pairwise Comparisons of Gender for Factor Financial Problems
Sample 1 - Sample 2
Female-Prefer not to say
Test
Statistic
Std. Error
Std. Test
Statistic
Sig.
Adj. Sig.a
-.493
28.154
-.018
.986
1.000
Female-Male
18.293
6.113
2.992
.003
.008
Prefer not to say-Male
17.800
28.414
.626
.531
1.000
Each row tests the null hypothesis that the Sample 1 and Sample 2 distributions are the same
a Significance values have been adjusted by the Bonferroni correction for multiple tests
Supplemental Table 2. Pairwise Comparisons of Gender for Factor QPA Retention
Sample 1 - Sample 2
Test
Statistic
Std. Error
Std. Test
Statistic
Sig.
Adj. Sig.a
Female-Prefer not to say
-7.246
28.018
-.259
.796
1.000
Female-Male
20.580
6.083
3.383
.001
.002
Prefer not to say-Male
13.333
28.277
.472
.637
1.000
Each row tests the null hypothesis that the Sample 1 and Sample 2 distributions are the same
a Significance values have been adjusted by the Bonferroni correction for multiple tests
Supplemental Table 3. Pairwise Comparisons of Age Groups for Factor QPA Retention
Sample 1 - Sample 2
22 to 23 years old-24 and above
22 to 23 years old-19 to 21
24 years old and above-19 to 21
Test
Statistic
Std. Error
Std. Test
Statistic
Sig.
Adj. Sig.a
-16.886
12.871
-1.312
.190
.569
19.340
6.568
2.945
.003
.010
2.454
13.675
.179
.858
1.000
Each row tests the null hypothesis that the Sample 1 and Sample 2 distributions are the same
a Significance values have been adjusted by the Bonferroni correction for multiple tests