a study on the customer satisfaction for e …journalstd.com/gallery/4-july2020.pdf4) literature...
TRANSCRIPT
A STUDY ON THE CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION FOR E-BANKING
TRANSACTION DURING COVID-19 Rakesh Kumar Verma
Research Scholar
M M H College, Ghaziabad, UP, India
Dr. M K Jain Professor & Officiating Principal
M M H College, Ghaziabad, UP, India
ABSTRACT
The pandemic of coronavirus not only threatens the life of each & every person, but also changes the outlook of people in
regard to social behavior and dealings of money transactions. The time of COVID-19 switched the activities and dealings
which we were doing since ages as the part of our lifestyle to indifferent activities of social distancing, assuming everyone
as Corona patient and behaving differently even in money transaction dealing.
Because of technology, smart phones and internet availability; some of the educated and technically advanced people have
started to use e-transactions. Nowadays due to the fear of the Coronavirus, exchange of cash currency i.e. rupees and coins,
between the customer and seller may be risky. So people are supposed to prefer cashless transaction activities. For this they
want to prefer plastic cards which can be sanitized after the use; or want to prefer online e-transactions through internet
i.e. PayTm, BhimUpi, PhonePe and Online payment through credit card & debit card. As these online e-transaction can be
done from a distance, contact is not needed, so risk of Corona may be minimized.
In this study I will identify whether people are using E-Transaction and are really satisfied on the basis of dimensions of
‘Easy Use’, ‘Reliable’, ‘Secured’, ‘Speedy’, ‘Safe’ and ‘Trust’. I will consider Socio-Economic factors as ‘Age Group’,
‘Educational Qualification’, ‘Occupation’ and ‘Income Group’.
Key Words: E-Banking, PayTm, BhimUpi, PhonePe, Plastic Cards, Cashless Transactions, Sanitization, Covid-
19, Corona
1) INTRODUCTION
Because of change in lifestyle, widespread science & technology and out-bursting of contagious disease Corona
(Covid-19), people are changing their mode of shopping and mode of transaction. They want to adopt safety,
security & trust along with reliability, speed & convenience. Every hand is comfortable with smart phones and
every smart phone is equipped with technology, a variety of apps and power of the internet. The Government is
also giving access to e-banking services like debit cards, credit cards, PayTm, PhonePe, Bhimupi etc. Amazon,
Flipcart & many other shopping apps facilitate us in doing cashless transactions while sitting at home / office by
24X7. Nowadays, in this period of COVID-19, the advisable social distancing which might be the prevention of
Corona, leads to payment and money transactions without the involvement of cash currency. Thus cashless
transactions i.e. e-banking services are increasing.
2) OBJECTIVES
a) To identify that people want to use e-banking transactions.
b) To understand that with e-banking transactions customers are satisfied or not satisfied.
c) To study the effect of different socio-economic factors on the e-banking transactions.
d) To analyze the satisfaction level of e-banking transactions in different socio-economic groups.
e) To conclude that people are satisfied with different dimensions of e-banking services.
3) SCOPE OF THE STUDY
a) Awareness of e-banking in the population
b) People want to use more and more e-banking transactions
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 21
c) E-banking transaction are easy and safe
d) E-banking transaction may facilitate to the prevention from contagious diseases
4) LITERATURE REVIEW
(1) Devi Punitha (2019), she selected variables like age, gender, education qualification, occupation, income and
banking experience. She said that to achieve customer satisfaction and to overcome the competition, customer
requirements has to be fulfilled. (W.1)
(2) Manwani Satish, Singh Neeraj and Sood Vishal (2019), they considered the factors of customer satisfaction,
responsiveness, creditability, reliability, access, communication and trustworthiness. They conclude that
banks can grow if they provide accessibility and trustworthiness towards the development of customer
relationships. (W.2)
(3) Eswaran R. (2019), he considers various factors like employee’s behavior, banking services, banking
performance, infrastructure facilities and value added services for customer’s satisfaction. He concluded a
significant relationship between factors and satisfaction. (W.3)
(4) Ayswarya R, et.al. (2019), they said that the majority of respondents are satisfied. They considered the factors
convenience, responsiveness, security, accessibility, assurance, knowing the customer for their study. They
said that mobile banking services are convenient, time saving and quick. (W.4)
(5) Gomathinayagam S., et.al. (2019), they stated that mobile banking services customers are highly satisfied as
services are easy in using mobile applications. They stated that more of the male, youth and UG/PG qualified
people are using mobile services with satisfaction. (W.5)
(6) Pathak Ankita and Mishra Sunil (2019), they stated that young consumers are comfortable using mobile
banking services, but the aged ones especially above 65 are not using them frequently. They concerned the
factors ease of use, usefulness, awareness and interest to use of mobile banking. They said that consumers
are interested in using mobile banking services. (W.6)
(7) Prasanth A. et.al. (2019), they said that card banking is the most important form of e-banking. Important
cards are debit cards, credit cards, petro cards, travel cards etc. They evaluated that cards were used for paying
utility bills, luxury and durable goods shopping, household consumables etc. with satisfaction. (W.7)
(8) Bai H. Manjula (2019), she stated that consumers are more interested in mobile banking services and they
are demanding more for their better satisfaction. She considered many factors like gender, age, educational
qualification, occupation, monthly income for calculating consumer’s satisfaction. (W.8)
(9) Duraipandi A. (2019), he states that the competition among banks have proved a boon to the customers with
a wide range of options to the customers. He considered the variables gender, age, education, occupation and
income level between the banks ICICI and SBI. (W.9)
(10) Krishnasamy S., et.at. (2018), they said that mobile banking has benefits and problems also. They stated
that even with the problems, consumers are satisfied with mobile banking services. (W.10)
5) RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The study is based on primary data. During Covid-19, primary data is collected with the help of Google Form. A
questionnaire is prepared on Google Form and sent to a number of people through Facebook, WhatsApp, and E-
mail. The responses were recorded in the excel sheet from responded Google forms and then analyzed.
Research Design: Descriptive research design is applied to the study to describe the characteristics of satisfaction
of a group of individuals regarding age, education, occupation and income. The study concerned that certain
dimensions are related to socio-economic groups for different variables.
Data Sources: Sources of data is primary which is collected by framing a structured questionnaire of 11 questions.
First four questions are of socio-economic factors; fifth questions is for using e-banking services or not; and last
six questions comprising the dimensions of satisfaction level as ‘easy use’, ‘reliable’, ‘secured’, ‘speedy’, ’safe’
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 22
and ‘trust’. Secondary data is studied for framing the problem of the study and is recorded as the literature review.
The secondary data is collected from websites, newspapers etc.
For sampling, random sampling is used. The questionnaire is prepared with Google form and circulated online to
several people. The responses from sample-questionnaire are recorded in the excel sheet for further computation.
Sample Design: Categorical sample for socio-economic groups is collected to judge satisfaction level for
different dimensions from the undefined population.
Sample Size: Sample size was not predefined because the questionnaire was circulated to a huge number of
people through the internet. Ultimately 121 responses were received. Many people responded phonically that the
moment they read the word “E-Banking”, either they deleted it or not responded, with a fear of banking
information may be leaked.
Sample Area: Sample area was mainly Ghaziabad but as the data circulated online so responses came from many
parts of Uttar Pradesh as well from many States of India. Even one response came from the U.K. (Peterborough
Cambridgeshire); for this I am thankful to her.
Tools of Analysis: Structured questionnaire with closed ended answers are analyzed through various tools:
1. M S Excel
2. Percentage tool
3. Pivot Table
4. Probability (p) value for Chi Square
5. Chi Square Inv RT value
6. Pie Chart
7. Bar Graph
8. Schedule
Hypothesis: the null hypothesis is:
Ho = with different Socio-Economic groups, customers are satisfied with e-banking transactions for different
dimensions
If null hypothesis is rejected then alternate hypothesis (HA) will be applied that customer are not satisfied with e-
banking transaction for different dimensions
6) DATA ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION
After tabulation and computation of primary data, the presentation and analysis is here under:
Figure – 1 Users of E-Banking Services
97% respondents say ‘Yes’, that they are using E-Banking Services.
117, 97%
4, 3%
Users of E-Banking Services
Use of E-Banking Services
Yrs
No
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 23
Figure – 2 Respondents in the Study - Age Group wise
There are 31% respondents in the age group less than 30, 39% in 31-40 and 22% in 41-50. So youths are 92%
who have responded for the questionnaire.
Figure – 3 Respondents in the Study - Educational wise
There are 21% respondents who are graduate, 37% are postgraduate and 25% are doctorate. So, as per modern
age, highly literates are 83% who have responded for the questionnaire.
Figure – 4 Respondents in the Study - Occupation wise
There are 44% respondents in the private jobs, 19% are professionals and 17% are self-employed. The government
job people are only 3%.
38, 31%
47, 39%
26, 22%
9, 7%1, 1%
Respondents in the Study - Age Group wise
lessthan30
31-40
41-50
51-60
morethan60
13, 11%
26, 21%
45, 37%
30, 25%
7, 6%
Respondents in the Study - Educational wise
12th
Graduate
Postgraduate
Doctorate
Professional
20, 17%
53, 44%4, 3%
23, 19%
21, 17%
Respondents in the Study - Occupation wise
Student
PvtJob
GovtJob
Professional
Selfemployed
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 24
Figure – 5 Respondents in the Study - Income wise
There are 28% respondents in the 1-2.5L income group, 17% in 2.51-4.0L group, 26% in 4.01-6.0L and 25% in
6.0-10.0L group. So 96% people are under 10Lakh income group.
Figure – 6 Satisfaction Levels for Easy Use
For dimensions Easy Use, 42% responded for highly satisfied and 40% for satisfied and 8% are less satisfied;
therefore satisfied people are 90%.
Figure – 7 Satisfaction Levels for Reliability
For dimensions Reliability, 28% responded for highly satisfied and 53% for satisfied and 7% are less satisfied;
therefore satisfied people are 88%.
34, 28%
21, 17%31, 26%
30, 25%
5, 4%
Respondents in the Study - Income wise
1.0-2.50L
2.51-4.0L
4.01-6.0L
6.01-10.0L
morethan10L
51, 42%
48, 40%
9, 8%
5, 4%4, 3%4, 3%
Satisfaction Levels for EasyUse
1 Highly Satisfied
2 Satisfied
3 Less Satisfied
4 Not Satisfied
5 Highly Unsatisfied
6 Do Not Know
34, 28%
64, 53%
8, 7%
6, 5%3, 2%6, 5%
Satisfaction Levels for Reliability
1 Highly Satisfied
2 Satisfied
3 Less Satisfied
4 Not Satisfied
5 Highly Unsatisfied
6 Do Not Know
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 25
Figure – 8 Satisfaction Levels for Security
For dimensions Security, 27% responded for highly satisfied and 46% for satisfied and 13% are less satisfied;
therefore satisfied people are 86%.
Figure – 9 Satisfaction Levels for Speedy
For dimensions Speedy, 42% responded for highly satisfied and 41% for satisfied and 7% are less satisfied;
therefore satisfied people are 90%.
Figure – 10 Satisfaction Levels for Safety
For dimensions Safety, 52% responded for highly satisfied and 30% for satisfied and 7% are less satisfied;
therefore satisfied people are 89%.
33, 27%
56, 46%
15, 13%
10, 8%2, 2%5, 4%
Satisfaction Levels for Security
1 Highly Satisfied
2 Satisfied
3 Less Satisfied
4 Not Satisfied
5 Highly Unsatisfied
6 Do Not Know
51, 42%
49, 41%
8, 7%3, 2%4, 3%6, 5%
Satisfaction Levels for Speedy
1 Highly Satisfied
2 Satisfied
3 Less Satisfied
4 Not Satisfied
5 Highly Unsatisfied
6 Do Not Know
63, 52%
36, 30%
8, 7%
5, 4%4, 3%5, 4%
Satisfaction Levels for Safety
1 Highly Satisfied
2 Satisfied
3 Less Satisfied
4 Not Satisfied
5 Highly Unsatisfied
6 Do Not Know
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 26
Figure – 11 Satisfaction Levels for Trust
For dimensions Trust, 29% responded for highly satisfied and 47% for satisfied and 13% are less satisfied;
therefore satisfied people are 89%.
Figure – 12 Distribution of Places under the Study
Respondent response is received from 27 places; 26 from India and 1 from UK. 68 responses are received from
Ghaziabad and rest responses are received from Bengaluru, Dehradun, Delhi, Hardwar, Mumbai, Varanasi other
places.
PIVOT TABLE AND CHI SQUARE TEST: calculated through M S Excel:
35, 29%
57, 47%
15, 13%
4, 3%6, 5%4, 3%
Satisfaction Levels for Trust
1 Highly Satisfied
2 Satisfied
3 Less Satisfied
4 Not Satisfied
5 Highly Unsatisfied
6 Do Not Know
1 1 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 3
68
1 1 1 4 6 2 3 1 4 6 1 1 1 2 1 1
AL
IGA
RH
BA
LL
IA
BE
NG
AL
UR
U
BH
US
AW
AL
BIJ
NO
R
BU
DA
UN
BU
LA
ND
SH
AH
AR
DA
DR
I
DE
HR
AD
UN
G N
OID
A
GH
AZ
IAB
AD
GO
RA
KH
PU
R
HA
RD
WA
R
KA
RH
ER
A …
ME
ER
UT
MO
DIN
AG
AR
MU
MB
AI
MU
RA
DN
AG
AR
MU
ZZ
AF
AR
NA
…
NE
WD
EL
HI
NO
IDA
PE
TE
RB
OR
OU
G…
RA
EB
AR
EL
I
RA
IGA
RH
SA
HIB
AB
AD
TA
MN
AR
VA
RA
NA
SI
Distribution of Places under the Study
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 27
1. Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use:
Figure – 13 Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.242686 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi
Square calculated value is 23.99328 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected.
Therefore Ho is accepted.
2. Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability:
Figure – 14 Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.135626 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi
Square calculated value is 26.98714 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected.
Therefore Ho is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
Count of EasyUseColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
31-40 0.00% 12.40% 1.65% 1.65% 2.48% 20.66% 38.84%
41-50 1.65% 10.74% 1.65% 1.65% 0.00% 5.79% 21.49%
51-60 0.83% 4.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.48% 7.44%
lessthan30 0.83% 14.88% 0.00% 3.31% 1.65% 10.74% 31.40%
morethan60 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83%
Grand Total 3.31% 42.15% 3.31% 7.44% 4.13% 39.67% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly
Unsatisfied
less satisfied Not satisfied satisfied
Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
31-40
41-50
51-60
lessthan30
morethan60
Pivot Table % value Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability
Count of ReliableColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
31-40 0.00% 5.79% 1.65% 3.31% 3.31% 24.79% 38.84%
41-50 2.48% 7.44% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 10.74% 21.49%
51-60 0.83% 4.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.48% 7.44%
lessthan30 1.65% 10.74% 0.83% 2.48% 0.83% 14.88% 31.40%
morethan60 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83%
Grand Total 4.96% 28.10% 2.48% 6.61% 4.96% 52.89% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
40
DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly
Unsatisfied
less satisfied Not satisfied satisfied
Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability
31-40
41-50
51-60
lessthan30
morethan60
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 28
3. Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
Figure – 15 Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.734534 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi
Square calculated value is 15.70854 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected.
Therefore Ho is accepted.
4. Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy:
Figure – 16 Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.962917 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi
Square calculated value is 10.27448 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected.
Therefore Ho is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
Count of SecuredColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
31-40 0.00% 7.44% 0.83% 5.79% 4.96% 19.83% 38.84%
41-50 1.65% 6.61% 0.83% 2.48% 0.83% 9.09% 21.49%
51-60 0.83% 4.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.48% 7.44%
lessthan30 1.65% 9.09% 0.00% 3.31% 2.48% 14.88% 31.40%
morethan60 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83%
Grand Total 4.13% 27.27% 1.65% 12.40% 8.26% 46.28% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly
Unsatisfied
less satisfied Not satisfied satisfied
Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
31-40
41-50
51-60
lessthan30
morethan60
Pivot Table % value Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
Count of SpeedyColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
31-40 0.83% 17.36% 2.48% 4.13% 0.00% 14.05% 38.84%
41-50 1.65% 9.09% 0.00% 0.83% 0.83% 9.09% 21.49%
51-60 0.83% 4.13% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 1.65% 7.44%
lessthan30 1.65% 11.57% 0.83% 0.83% 1.65% 14.88% 31.40%
morethan60 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 0.83%
Grand Total 4.96% 42.15% 3.31% 6.61% 2.48% 40.50% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
31-40 41-50 51-60 lessthan30 morethan60
Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 29
5. Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety:
Figure – 17 Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.786066 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi
Square calculated value is 14.82973 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected.
Therefore Ho is accepted.
6. Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust:
Figure – 18 Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.55714 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 18.46 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho is
accepted.
Pivot Table % value Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
Count of Safe Column Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
31-40 0.00% 20.66% 2.48% 2.48% 1.65% 11.57% 38.84%
41-50 2.48% 14.05% 0.00% 1.65% 0.00% 3.31% 21.49%
51-60 0.83% 4.96% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.65% 7.44%
lessthan30 0.83% 12.40% 0.83% 2.48% 2.48% 12.40% 31.40%
morethan60 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 0.83%
Grand Total 4.13% 52.07% 3.31% 6.61% 4.13% 29.75% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly
Unsatisfied
less satisfied Not satisfied satisfied
Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
31-40
41-50
51-60
lessthan30
morethan60
Pivot Table % value Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
Count of Trust Column Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
31-40 0.00% 9.09% 3.31% 4.96% 1.65% 19.83% 38.84%
41-50 1.65% 8.26% 0.00% 4.13% 0.83% 6.61% 21.49%
51-60 0.83% 3.31% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 2.48% 7.44%
lessthan30 0.83% 8.26% 1.65% 1.65% 0.83% 18.18% 31.40%
morethan60 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83%
Grand Total 3.31% 28.93% 4.96% 12.40% 3.31% 47.11% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
DoNotKnow Highly
Satisfied
Highly
Unsatisfied
less satisfied Not satisfied satisfied
Age Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
31-40
41-50
51-60
lessthan30
morethan60
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 30
7. Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use:
Figure – 19 Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.31403 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 22.4996 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
8. Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability:
Figure – 20 Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.90878 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 12.2066 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
Count of EasyUseColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
12TH 1.65% 4.13% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 4.13% 10.74%
Doctorate 0.00% 14.88% 0.00% 2.48% 0.00% 7.44% 24.79%
Graduate 0.83% 5.79% 0.00% 3.31% 0.83% 10.74% 21.49%
Postgraduate 0.83% 14.05% 3.31% 0.83% 3.31% 14.88% 37.19%
Professional 0.00% 3.31% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.48% 5.79%
Grand Total 3.31% 42.15% 3.31% 7.44% 4.13% 39.67% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
12TH Doctorate Graduate Postgraduate Professional
Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
Pivot Table % value Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliabilitty
Count of ReliableColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
12TH 1.65% 2.48% 0.00% 1.65% 0.00% 4.96% 10.74%
Doctorate 0.83% 9.09% 0.00% 0.83% 1.65% 12.40% 24.79%
Graduate 1.65% 4.13% 0.83% 0.83% 0.00% 14.05% 21.49%
Postgraduate 0.83% 10.74% 1.65% 2.48% 3.31% 18.18% 37.19%
Professional 0.00% 1.65% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 3.31% 5.79%
Grand Total 4.96% 28.10% 2.48% 6.61% 4.96% 52.89% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
25
12TH Doctorate Graduate Postgraduate Professional
Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 31
9. Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Security:
Figure – 21 Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.48788 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 19.5264 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
10. Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy:
Figure – 22 Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.95502 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 10.6404 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
Count of SecuredColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
12TH 2.48% 1.65% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 5.79% 10.74%
Doctorate 0.00% 8.26% 0.83% 2.48% 1.65% 11.57% 24.79%
Graduate 0.83% 4.96% 0.00% 2.48% 1.65% 11.57% 21.49%
Postgraduate 0.83% 10.74% 0.83% 6.61% 3.31% 14.88% 37.19%
Professional 0.00% 1.65% 0.00% 0.00% 1.65% 2.48% 5.79%
Grand Total 4.13% 27.27% 1.65% 12.40% 8.26% 46.28% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
12TH Doctorate Graduate Postgraduate Professional
Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
Pivot Table % value Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
Count of SpeedyColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
12TH 1.65% 3.31% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.79% 10.74%
Doctorate 0.00% 14.05% 0.00% 1.65% 0.00% 9.09% 24.79%
Graduate 1.65% 7.44% 0.83% 2.48% 0.83% 8.26% 21.49%
Postgraduate 1.65% 14.88% 2.48% 1.65% 1.65% 14.88% 37.19%
Professional 0.00% 2.48% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 2.48% 5.79%
Grand Total 4.96% 42.15% 3.31% 6.61% 2.48% 40.50% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
12TH Doctorate Graduate Postgraduate Professional
Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 32
11. Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety:
Figure – 23 Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.10786 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 28.0653 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
12. Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust:
Figure – 24 Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.69196 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 16.393 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
Count of Safe Column Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
12TH 1.65% 5.79% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 2.48% 10.74%
Doctorate 0.00% 18.18% 0.00% 1.65% 0.00% 4.96% 24.79%
Graduate 0.83% 5.79% 0.83% 1.65% 1.65% 10.74% 21.49%
Postgraduate 1.65% 19.01% 2.48% 2.48% 0.83% 10.74% 37.19%
Professional 0.00% 3.31% 0.00% 0.00% 1.65% 0.83% 5.79%
Grand Total 4.13% 52.07% 3.31% 6.61% 4.13% 29.75% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
25
12TH Doctorate Graduate Postgraduate Professional
Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
satisfied
Pivot Table % value Education Qualification Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
Count of Trust Column Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
12TH 1.65% 2.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.61% 10.74%
Doctorate 0.00% 9.92% 0.00% 4.96% 0.00% 9.92% 24.79%
Graduate 0.83% 6.61% 0.83% 3.31% 0.83% 9.09% 21.49%
Postgraduate 0.83% 8.26% 4.13% 3.31% 2.48% 18.18% 37.19%
Professional 0.00% 1.65% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 3.31% 5.79%
Grand Total 3.31% 28.93% 4.96% 12.40% 3.31% 47.11% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
25
12TH Doctorate Graduate Postgraduate Professional
Education Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 33
13. Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use:
Figure – 25 Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.83785 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 13.8534 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
14. Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability:
Figure – 26 Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliable
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.89447 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 12.5851 which at df=20 is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
Count of EasyUseColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
GovtJob 0.83% 1.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 3.31%
Professional 0.00% 8.26% 0.83% 1.65% 1.65% 6.61% 19.01%
PvtJob 0.83% 20.66% 1.65% 1.65% 1.65% 17.36% 43.80%
Selfemployed 0.83% 4.13% 0.83% 1.65% 0.83% 9.09% 17.36%
Student 0.83% 7.44% 0.00% 2.48% 0.00% 5.79% 16.53%
Grand Total 3.31% 42.15% 3.31% 7.44% 4.13% 39.67% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
GovtJob Professional PvtJob Selfemployed Student
Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
satisfied
Pivot Table % value Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability
Count of ReliableColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
GovtJob 0.83% 0.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.65% 3.31%
Professional 1.65% 5.79% 0.83% 0.00% 1.65% 9.09% 19.01%
PvtJob 0.83% 13.22% 0.83% 2.48% 3.31% 23.14% 43.80%
Selfemployed 0.83% 2.48% 0.83% 1.65% 0.00% 11.57% 17.36%
Student 0.83% 5.79% 0.00% 2.48% 0.00% 7.44% 16.53%
Grand Total 4.96% 28.10% 2.48% 6.61% 4.96% 52.89% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
GovtJob Professional PvtJob Selfemployed Student
Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliable
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly
Unsatisfiedless satisfied
Not satisfied
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 34
15. Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Security:
Figure – 27 Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Secured
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.90637 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 12.2727 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
16. Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy:
Figure – 28 Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.74427 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 15.5476 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
Count of SecuredColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
GovtJob 0.83% 0.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.65% 3.31%
Professional 0.00% 4.96% 0.83% 2.48% 3.31% 7.44% 19.01%
PvtJob 0.83% 14.05% 0.83% 5.79% 2.48% 19.83% 43.80%
Selfemployed 1.65% 3.31% 0.00% 1.65% 1.65% 9.09% 17.36%
Student 0.83% 4.13% 0.00% 2.48% 0.83% 8.26% 16.53%
Grand Total 4.13% 27.27% 1.65% 12.40% 8.26% 46.28% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
GovtJob Professional PvtJob Selfemployed Student
Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Secured
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
satisfied
Pivot Table % value Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
Count of SpeedyColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
GovtJob 0.83% 1.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 3.31%
Professional 0.83% 7.44% 0.83% 0.83% 1.65% 7.44% 19.01%
PvtJob 0.83% 21.49% 1.65% 4.96% 0.83% 14.05% 43.80%
Selfemployed 0.83% 5.79% 0.83% 0.83% 0.00% 9.09% 17.36%
Student 1.65% 5.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 9.09% 16.53%
Grand Total 4.96% 42.15% 3.31% 6.61% 2.48% 40.50% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
GovtJob Professional PvtJob Selfemployed Student
Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for SpeedyDoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly
Unsatisfiedless satisfied
Not satisfied
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 35
17. Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety:
Figure – 29 Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.88256 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 12.878 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
18. Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust:
Figure – 30 Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.67723 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 16.6242 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
Count of Safe Column Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
GovtJob 0.83% 1.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 3.31%
Professional 0.83% 10.74% 0.83% 0.83% 1.65% 4.13% 19.01%
PvtJob 0.83% 25.62% 1.65% 3.31% 0.83% 11.57% 43.80%
Selfemployed 0.83% 7.44% 0.83% 0.83% 0.00% 7.44% 17.36%
Student 0.83% 6.61% 0.00% 1.65% 1.65% 5.79% 16.53%
Grand Total 4.13% 52.07% 3.31% 6.61% 4.13% 29.75% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
40
GovtJob Professional PvtJob Selfemployed Student
Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for SafetyDoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly
Unsatisfiedless satisfied
Not satisfied
Pivot Table % value Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
Count of Trust Column Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
GovtJob 0.83% 0.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.65% 3.31%
Professional 0.00% 6.61% 1.65% 4.96% 0.83% 4.96% 19.01%
PvtJob 0.83% 14.05% 2.48% 3.31% 0.83% 22.31% 43.80%
Selfemployed 0.83% 4.13% 0.83% 2.48% 0.83% 8.26% 17.36%
Student 0.83% 3.31% 0.00% 1.65% 0.83% 9.92% 16.53%
Grand Total 3.31% 28.93% 4.96% 12.40% 3.31% 47.11% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
GovtJob Professional PvtJob Selfemployed Student
Occupation Wise Satisfaction Level for TrustDoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly
Unsatisfiedless satisfied
Not satisfied
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 36
19. Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use:
Figure – 31 Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.93783 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 11.3083 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
20. Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability:
Figure – 32 Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.90852 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 12.2137 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
Count of EasyUseColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
1.0-2.50L 0.83% 9.92% 1.65% 3.31% 0.83% 11.57% 28.10%
2.51-4.0L 1.65% 4.96% 0.00% 0.83% 1.65% 8.26% 17.36%
4.01-6.0L 0.83% 12.40% 1.65% 0.00% 0.83% 9.92% 25.62%
6.01-10.0L 0.00% 12.40% 0.00% 3.31% 0.83% 8.26% 24.79%
morethan10L 0.00% 2.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.65% 4.13%
Grand Total 3.31% 42.15% 3.31% 7.44% 4.13% 39.67% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
DoNotKnow Highly
Satisfied
Highly
Unsatisfied
less satisfied Not satisfied satisfied
Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Easy Use
1.0-2.50L
2.51-4.0L
4.01-6.0L
6.01-10.0L
morethan10L
Pivot Table % value Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability
Count of ReliableColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
1.0-2.50L 1.65% 9.09% 1.65% 2.48% 0.00% 13.22% 28.10%
2.51-4.0L 1.65% 1.65% 0.00% 0.83% 1.65% 11.57% 17.36%
4.01-6.0L 1.65% 7.44% 0.00% 0.83% 2.48% 13.22% 25.62%
6.01-10.0L 0.00% 9.09% 0.83% 2.48% 0.83% 11.57% 24.79%
morethan10L 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.31% 4.13%
Grand Total 4.96% 28.10% 2.48% 6.61% 4.96% 52.89% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
DoNotKnow Highly
Satisfied
Highly
Unsatisfied
less satisfied Not satisfied satisfied
Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Reliability
1.0-2.50L
2.51-4.0L
4.01-6.0L
6.01-10.0L
morethan10L
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 37
21. Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Security:
Figure – 33 Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.91163 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 12.1272 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
22. Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy:
Figure – 34 Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.74944 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 15.4612 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
Pivot Table % value Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
Count of SecuredColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
1.0-2.50L 0.83% 6.61% 0.83% 3.31% 3.31% 13.22% 28.10%
2.51-4.0L 1.65% 2.48% 0.00% 3.31% 0.83% 9.09% 17.36%
4.01-6.0L 0.83% 9.09% 0.00% 1.65% 1.65% 12.40% 25.62%
6.01-10.0L 0.00% 7.44% 0.83% 3.31% 2.48% 10.74% 24.79%
morethan10L 0.83% 1.65% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 0.83% 4.13%
Grand Total 4.13% 27.27% 1.65% 12.40% 8.26% 46.28% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
1.0-2.50L 2.51-4.0L 4.01-6.0L 6.01-10.0L morethan10L
Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Security
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
satisfied
Pivot Table % value Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
Count of SpeedyColumn Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
1.0-2.50L 1.65% 8.26% 1.65% 0.83% 1.65% 14.05% 28.10%
2.51-4.0L 1.65% 5.79% 1.65% 2.48% 0.00% 5.79% 17.36%
4.01-6.0L 0.83% 14.05% 0.00% 2.48% 0.83% 7.44% 25.62%
6.01-10.0L 0.83% 12.40% 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 10.74% 24.79%
morethan10L 0.00% 1.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.48% 4.13%
Grand Total 4.96% 42.15% 3.31% 6.61% 2.48% 40.50% 100.00%
0
5
10
15
20
1.0-2.50L 2.51-4.0L 4.01-6.0L 6.01-10.0L morethan10L
Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Speedy
DoNotKnow
Highly Satisfied
Highly Unsatisfied
less satisfied
Not satisfied
satisfied
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 38
23. Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety:
Figure – 35 Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.7075 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 16.1464 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
24. Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust:
Figure – 36 Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
The p-value of Chi Square test is 0.79777 which is more than α value (0.05), so Ho cannot be rejected. The Chi Square
calculated value is 14.6191 at df=20 which is less than critical value 31.4104, so Ho cannot be rejected. Therefore Ho
is accepted.
7) CONCLUSION
All calculated Chi Square values at df=20 and α=0.05, for different socio-economic factors (age-groups,
educational qualification, occupation and income levels) on different dimensions (easy use, reliability, security,
speedy, safety and trust) are lower than critical value of Chi Square. Thus Ho cannot be rejected, so people from
Pivot Table % value Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
Count of Safe Column Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
1.0-2.50L 1.65% 12.40% 1.65% 1.65% 2.48% 8.26% 28.10%
2.51-4.0L 1.65% 4.13% 0.00% 1.65% 1.65% 8.26% 17.36%
4.01-6.0L 0.83% 16.53% 0.83% 0.83% 0.00% 6.61% 25.62%
6.01-10.0L 0.00% 15.70% 0.83% 2.48% 0.00% 5.79% 24.79%
morethan10L 0.00% 3.31% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 4.13%
Grand Total 4.13% 52.07% 3.31% 6.61% 4.13% 29.75% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
DoNotKnow Highly
Satisfied
Highly
Unsatisfied
less satisfied Not satisfied satisfied
Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Safety
1.0-2.50L
2.51-4.0L
4.01-6.0L
6.01-10.0L
morethan10L
Pivot Table % value Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
Count of Trust Column Labels
Row Labels DoNotKnow Highly Satisfied Highly Unsatisfiedless satisfiedNot satisfied satisfiedGrand Total
1.0-2.50L 0.83% 4.13% 1.65% 3.31% 1.65% 16.53% 28.10%
2.51-4.0L 1.65% 4.96% 1.65% 0.83% 0.00% 8.26% 17.36%
4.01-6.0L 0.83% 9.09% 0.83% 3.31% 0.83% 10.74% 25.62%
6.01-10.0L 0.00% 9.92% 0.83% 4.96% 0.83% 8.26% 24.79%
morethan10L 0.00% 0.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.31% 4.13%
Grand Total 3.31% 28.93% 4.96% 12.40% 3.31% 47.11% 100.00%
0
10
20
30
DoNotKnow Highly
Satisfied
Highly
Unsatisfied
less satisfied Not satisfied satisfied
Income Wise Satisfaction Level for Trust
1.0-2.50L
2.51-4.0L
4.01-6.0L
6.01-10.0L
morethan10L
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 39
different socio-economic backgrounds have satisfaction with e-banking transactions. P-value also supports the
Chi Square values as all the p-values are higher than significant level i.e. α=0.05.
90% people are satisfied with easy use of e-transaction. 88% people are satisfied with reliability of e-transaction.
86% people are satisfied with security of e-banking transaction. 90% people are satisfied with speedy e-
transaction services. 89% people are satisfied with safety of e-banking transaction. 89% people are satisfied with
trust of e-banking transaction. 97% people are using e-banking services.
High level of satisfaction, high percentage of use of e-banking services, Chi Square values and p-values concludes
that customer are satisfied with e-banking transaction.
8) PROBLEM AREAS
1) As the number of respondents inform phonically that just by looking at, that this is a form of e-banking, either
they deleted or not opened.
2) The fear of banking fraud and banking data leakage is so much that hundreds of people to whom the form
was circulated electronically, have not responded.
3) People are taking cautions & having a mindset that if in any way banking data is leaked that may lead to
financial loss to them.
4) Survey form on e-banking was a fear factor in the mind of the public in general.
9) SUGGESTIONS
1) The Government should promote e-banking to the public in general.
2) The Government should take care of cyber security so that frauds and cheatings could be minimized.
3) Training, education and awareness should be spread for the Users so that they can feel themselves in a
comfort zone for e-banking services.
4) Articles on e-banking should be promoted through newspapers, TV, internet ads and other media regularly.
5) E-banking awareness camps should be organized by expert banking officials in the colleges, societies and
organizations.
10) QUESTIONNAIRE
QUESTIONNAIRE:
I am studying customer satisfaction during COVID-19 that customers are satisfied with E-Banking Transaction or are
not satisfied with E-Banking Services. There are many E-Banking Services like ‘Mobile Banking’, ‘SMS Banking’,
‘Paytm’, BhimUPI’, PhonePe’, ‘Online Credit Card’, ‘Online Credit Card’ etc.
Looking forward to your time and support.
Best Regards
Rakesh Kumar Verma
Scholar CCS University, Meerut
Q1 Which Age Group You belong to
less than 30 31-40 41-50 51-60 more than 61
Q2 What is Your Educational Qualification?
12th Graduate Post Graduate Doctorate Professional
Q3 What is Your Occupation?
Students Private Job Government
Job
Professional Self
Employed
Q4 What is Your Income Group?
1.0-2.50Lakh
2.51-4.01Lakh
4.01-6.0Lakh
6.01-10Lakh
more than
10Lakh
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 40
Q5 You want to use E-Banking Services for Shopping & Bill Payment.
Yes No
Q6 You want to use E-Banking Services because of “EASY USE”. (1=Highly Satisfied; 2=Satisfied; 3=Less
Satisfied; 4=Not Satisfied; 5=Highly Unsatisfied and 6=Do No Know)
Yes No
Q7 You want to use E-Banking Services because of “RELIABILITY”. (1=Highly Satisfied; 2=Satisfied; 3=Less
Satisfied; 4=Not Satisfied; 5=Highly Unsatisfied and 6=Do No Know)
Yes No
Q8 You want to use E-Banking Services because these are “SECURED”. (1=Highly Satisfied; 2=Satisfied;
3=Less Satisfied; 4=Not Satisfied; 5=Highly Unsatisfied and 6=Do No Know)
Yes No
Q9 You want to use E-Banking Services because these are “SPEEDY”. (1=Highly Satisfied; 2=Satisfied;
3=Less Satisfied; 4=Not Satisfied; 5=Highly Unsatisfied and 6=Do No Know)
Yes No
Q10 You want to use E-Banking Services because we remain “SAFE” in the time of Covid-19. (1=Highly
Satisfied; 2=Satisfied; 3=Less Satisfied; 4=Not Satisfied; 5=Highly Unsatisfied and 6=Do No Know)
Yes No
Q11 You want to use E-Banking Services because we can “TRUST”. (1=Highly Satisfied; 2=Satisfied; 3=Less
Satisfied; 4=Not Satisfied; 5=Highly Unsatisfied and 6=Do No Know)
Yes No
11) REFERENCES:
Websites:
W.1 https://ijsser.org/files_2019/ijsser_04__292.pdf
W.2 https://www.ijires.org/administrator/components/com_jresearch/files/publications/IJIRES_1578_FINAL.
W.3 http://www.dynamicpublisher.org/gallery/64-s94.pdf
W.4 https://www.scirp.org/html/7-9202239_94422.htm
W.5 http://www.pragatipublication.com/assets/uploads/doc/1d4bf-1006-1015.16980.pdf
W.6 https://www.ijitee.org/wp-content/uploads/papers/v8i6s/F61020486S19.pdf
W.7 http://ijariie.com/AdminUploadPdf/CUSTOMER_PERCEPTION_TOWARDS_PLASTIC_MONEY_ija
riie9471.pdf
W.8 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332525412_Mobile_Banking_Services_and_Customer_satisfac
tion_with_reference_to_ICICI_Bank_-_A_Study/link/5cd53494299bf14d9586ef6d/download
W.9 https://web.a.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=09
75153X&AN=139065910&h=9yppgJh2TJBwuBFXkxs6hD%2biz6dtDIrjNeQF2jn2O%2bMjyHhggIDT
TOoeFLLK81okAhb1kNHHQ108dznYQV%2bZDA%3d%3d&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&result
Local=ErrCrlNotAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26profile%3dehost%26scope%3dsite
%26authtype%3dcrawler%26jrnl%3d0975153X%26AN%3d139065910
W.10 http://ijamtes.org/gallery/118-dec.pdf
Books:
1. Kothari C. R., Research Methodology – Methods and Techniques, New Delhi, New Age International
Publishers, Second Revised Edition, 2004
2. Chawla Dr. Deepak, Sondhi Dr. Neena, Research Methodology – Concepts and Cases, New Delhi, Vikas
Publishing House Pvt Limited, Second Edition, 2015
3. Cooper Donald R., Schindler Pamela S., Business Research Methods, New York, McGraw-Hill / Irwin,
Twelfth Edition, 2014
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 41
4. Sachdeva J. K., Business Research Methodology, Mumbai, Himalaya Publishing House, Second Revised
Edition, 2011
5. Kumar Ranjit, Research Methodology, New Delhi, Sage Publication India Pvt Ltd, Third Edition, 2011
6. Gupta S. L., Gupta Hitesh. Research Methodology. New Delhi, International Book House Pvt. Ltd., Second
Edition
Science, Technology and Development
Volume IX Issue VII JULY 2020
ISSN : 0950-0707
Page No : 42