2015
DOI: 10.22610/jebs.v7i6(j).620
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

To Vote or Not To Vote: Marketing Factors Influencing the Voting Intention of University Students in Johannesburg

Abstract: Voting intention has become an issue of concern worldwide with regard to successful political elections. With only 6% of South Africa’s youth having registered to vote in the 2014 elections, it is of vital importance to get a better understanding of the main reasons behind these statistics and factors that have influenced voting intentions. Although several studies have explored this area of research, it remains a topic of interest. This research paper aims to examine the factors behind voting intention of t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to Table 3, the highest correlation value was 0.668 and the lowest correlation value was 0.030. These correlation values are below 0.85 and, therefore, it can be concluded that there is discriminant validity between all the constructs (Morar et al 2015).…”
Section: Discriminant Validitymentioning
confidence: 87%
“…According to Table 3, the highest correlation value was 0.668 and the lowest correlation value was 0.030. These correlation values are below 0.85 and, therefore, it can be concluded that there is discriminant validity between all the constructs (Morar et al 2015).…”
Section: Discriminant Validitymentioning
confidence: 87%
“…The values ranged from 0.764 to 0.936 and thus the measurement instruments are deemed reliable (Morar, Venter & Chuchu 2015). According to the accuracy table presented above (Table 2), the mean value for all the constructs ranges between 3 and 4, indicating that the majority of the respondents had either a neutral standpoint (3 on the Likert scale) or they agreed (4 on the Likert scale) with the statements provided.…”
Section: Reliability Analysismentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Again, based on the values presented in Table 2, it can be concluded that all the measurement instruments are reliable on the basis that the Cronbach alpha values are required to be above or equal to 0.6 and, in this case, all the values substantially exceeded this threshold. The values ranged from 0.764 to 0.936 and thus the measurement instruments are deemed reliable (Morar, Venter & Chuchu, 2015). According to the accuracy table presented above (Table 2), the mean value for all the constructs ranges between 3 and 4, indicating that most of the respondents had either a neutral standpoint (3 on the Likert scale) or they agreed (4 on the Likert scale) with the statements provided.…”
Section: Reliability Analysismentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Preferably, this value should be less than 1 but is recommended to at least encompass a value of less than 2 to ensure that there is no issue of outliers (Drost, 2011); however, as seen in the accuracy in Table 2, all the remaining constructs had standard deviation values that were substantially below 2. The item to total statistics for each item analysed through SPSS are required to be above 0.5 to assess convergent validity (Morar et al 2015). According to the accuracy table (Table 2), the majority of the instruments met the threshold of 0.5.…”
Section: Reliability Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%