Our variable is categorical variable i.e.

Customer Experience (Q8A, Q8B, Q8C, Q8N), so the

parameter of interest for categorical variable is the population proportion.
Our test statistics based on z statistic. Our claim is that 70% of the passengers at Helsinki
airport rate art work and exhibitions more highly or equal to average customer experience
rating of 4.04 i.e. more artwork and exhibitions at Helsinki airport lead to increased customer
experience. We arrived at an average customer experience rating of 4.04 by calculating the
mean of all independent variables for customer experience in the questionnaire Q8A, Q8B,
Q8C, Q8N.We then picked on one representative data point Artwork and Exhibitions (Q8A) to
evaluate or hypothesis or claim.

Hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: More artwork and exhibitions at Helsinki airport lead to increased customer
Experience.
H0 = 70% passengers rated artwork and exhibitions (Variable Q8A) at Helsinki airport >= average
customer experience rating of 4.04
HA = 70% passengers rated artwork and exhibitions (Variable Q8A) at Helsinki airport < average
customer experience rating of 4.04
(One tail)

Test Results:

Null hypothesis: population proportion = 0.7

Sample size: n = 121
Sample proportion = 0.74
Test statistic: z = (0.74 - 0.7)/0.0416598 = 0.960159
Two-tailed p-value = 0.337
(one-tailed = 0.1685)
Conclusion:

Since the P-value (0.168) is bigger than the significance level (0.05), we cannot reject the null
hypothesis.

Our variable in this case is again categorical variable i.e. Reliable Service (Q8D, Q8G, Q8H), so
the parameter of interest for a categorical variable is the population proportion.
Our test statistics based on z statistic. Our claim is that 50% of the passengers at Helsinki
airport rate signs and directions inside the airport more highly or equal to average customer
reliability rating of 4.305 i.e. more signs and directions (reliable services) inside the Helsinki
airport lead to increased reliability. We arrived at an average customer reliability rating of
4.305 by calculating the mean of all independent variables for reliability in the questionnaire
Q8D, Q8G, Q8H.We then picked on one representative data point Signs and Directions inside
the Airport (Q8D) to evaluate or hypothesis or claim.

Hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2: More signs and directions inside the airport at Helsinki lead to increased
reliability.

H0 = 70% of passengers rated signs and directions (Variable Q8D) at Helsinki airport >= average
customer reliability rating of 4.305
HA = 70% of passengers rated signs and directions (Variable Q8D) at Helsinki airport < average
customer reliability rating of 4.305
(One tail)

Test Hypothesis 2
Null hypothesis: population proportion = 0.7
Sample size: n = 121
Sample proportion = 0.339
Test statistic: z = (0.339 - 0.7)/0.0416598 = -8.66543
Two-tailed p-value = 4.498e-18
(one-tailed = 2.249e-18)

Conclusion:

Since the P-value (0.0) is less than the significance level (0.05), we can reject the null
hypothesis.

Our variable in this case is another categorical variable i.e. Efficient Service (Q8E, Q8I, Q8J, Q8K,
Q8L, Q8M), so the parameter of interest for a categorical variable is the population proportion.
Our test statistics based on z statistic. Our claim is that 50 % of the passengers at Helsinki
airport rate information on screens and monitors inside the airport more highly or equal to
average customer efficiency rating of 4.5289 i.e. More information on screens and monitors
at Helsinki airport lead to increased efficient services. We arrived at an average customer
efficiency rating of 4.5289 by calculating the mean of all independent variables for efficiency in
the questionnaire Q8E, Q8I, Q8J, Q8K, Q8L, Q8M.We then picked on one representative data
point Information on screens and monitors (Q8F) inside the Airport to evaluate or hypothesis or
claim.

Hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3: More information on screens and monitors at Helsinki airport lead to increased
efficient services.

H0 = 70% of passengers rated information on screens and monitors (Variable Q8F) at Helsinki
airport >= average customer efficiency rating of 4.5289.
HA = 70% of passengers rated information on screens and monitors (Variable Q8F) at Helsinki
airport < average customer efficiency rating of 4.5289.
(One Tail)

Test Hypothesis 3

Null hypothesis: population proportion = 0.7

Sample size: n = 121
Sample proportion = 0.372
Test statistic: z = (0.372 - 0.7)/0.0416598 = -7.8733
Two-tailed p-value = 3.454e-15
(one-tailed = 1.727e-15)

Conclusion:

Since the P-value (0.0) is less than the significance level (0.05), we can reject the null
hypothesis.