Plastics Reuse - Lab Report Example

Topic: Plastics Reuse Registration No: Institution: Date: 3. Major Findings/ Results 3.1. Findings from Statistical Analyses During the data collection process, the main data collected included the gender of participants where 45.16% (n=14) were male while 54.84% (n=17) were female. Thus, it is observed that there were more female respondents compared with male respondents. The selection of both genders ensures responses could be compared in terms of gender (Great Britain, Walley and Stationery Office 2014). In addition, the age range of participants was collected. It was fund that those who were aged 18-21 were 38.71% (n=12), those aged 22-25 years old were 54.84% (n=17), those between 26-28 years old were 3.23% (n=1) and those aged more than 28 years were 3.23% (n=1). Thus, it can be observed that the age groups whose responses were dominant in this study was those aged 18-21 years and those aged 22-25 years. Thus, the researcher ensured more focus was put when collecting data from these age groups (Kurtz and Boone 2011). This is illustrated as shown in the figure below. Figure 1. Age range of participants during the study In addition, the research process involved establishing whether respondents used plastics. The responses were classified based on frequency of use of the plastics and included choices such as; every time, sometimes and not at all. Respondents who selected every time were 38.71% (n=12), those who selected sometimes were 61.29% (n=19) while those who selected not at all were 0.0% (n=0). This showed that most of the respondents had used plastics at some point during their activities. However, there was a general agreement that respondents in this study appreciated the significance of plastic bags for the purposes for which they were used. The fourth question required respondents to explain the number of plastic bags they had used. Responses were classified ranging from 0-5, 5-10, 10-15 and more than 15. Respondents who selected 0-5 were 80.65% (n=25), those who selected 5-10 were 12.90% (n=4), those who selected 10-15 were 3.23% (n=1) and those who selected more than 15 bags were 3.23% (n=1). This shows that the highest number of respondents who had used plastic bags among the respondents had used 0-5 paper bags. From these results, it can be observed that respondents limited the use of plastic bags at their residential locations to just a small amount per week. This is illustrated as shown in the figure below. Figure 2. The number of plastic bags that had been used by respondents The fifth question required respondents to explain whether they would spend money on plastic bags when they go to the shops. The responses were categorised into; I will reuse my own plastic bags, I may buy plastics bags if it is urgent and I won’t even buy and reuse the plastics bags. Those who selected ‘I will reuse my plastics bags were 35.48% (n=11), those who selected I may buy the plastics bags if it is urgent were 64.52% (n=20) while those who selected I won’t even buy and reuse the plastics bags were 0.00% (n=0). Thus, it is observed that most respondents would buy plastics bags compared with those who would reuse their personal plastics bags. Consequently, this can act as a ground for understanding the impact of increase in the quantity of waste plastic bags as the population increases (Minden 2010). Figure 3. Options of spending characteristics of respondents on plastics bags The sixth question involved asking respondents to explain the purpose for which they used plastics bags. The responses were categorised into; use for rubbish bin, use for gardening, use for shopping and use for carrying dirty clothes. Respondents who selected ‘Use for rubbish bin’ were 58.06% (n=18), those who selected Use for gardening were 3.23% (n=1), those who selected Use for shopping were 38.71% (n=12) and none selected Use for carrying dirty clothes 0.00% (n=0). These responses show that plastic bags were not effectively used when people had done shopping and hence, a large majority used them to store waste materials (Walker 2007). Thus, it is observed that most respondents used plastics bags for rubbish bins. These results are summarised as shown in the table below. Figure 4. various uses of plastics bags by respondents The seventh question was composed of a five point Liker-Scale that ranged from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree with intermediate choices of Agree, Neutral and Disagree. The first part of the question required respondents to explain whether plastics bags have negative impacts on the environment. Those who strongly Agreed were 38.71% (n=12), those who Agreed were 35.48% (n=11), those who were Neutral were 12.90% (n=4), those who selected Disagree were 6.45% (n=2) and those who strongly Disagreed were 6.45% (n=2). Thus, it is observed that most respondents Strongly Agreed that plastics bags have negative impacts on the environment. The second part of the seventh question required respondents to explain whether they agreed that the young generation preferred to use new plastics bags. Those who strongly Agreed were 20.69% (n=6), those who Agreed were 24.14% (n=7), those who were Neutral were 44.83% (n=13), those who selected disagree were 3.45% (n=1) and those who strongly Disagreed were 6.90% (n=2). Thus, most respondents were not aware whether young generation preferred to use plastics bags. The third part of the question involved asking the respondents to explain whether schools need to teach children to reuse plastics bags. Those who strongly Agreed were 33.33% (n=10), those who Agreed were 33.33% (n=10), those who were Neutral were 16.67% (n=5), those who selected disagree were 13.33% (n=4) and those who strongly Disagreed were 3.33% (n=1). Thus, it is observed that most respondents were of the view that schools should teach children how to reuse plastics bags. The fourth part of this question involved investigation of whether government affects the decision to purchase and saving on plastics bags. Those who strongly Agreed were 17.24% (n=5), those who Agreed were 44.83% (n=13), those who were Neutral were 34.48% (n=10), those who selected disagree were 3.45% (n=1) and those who strongly Disagreed were 0.0% (n=0). It is observed that there were more respondents who agreed that government involvement affected the purchase and saving of environment from plastics bags use. The fifth part of the question involved investigation of education of people on reuse of plastics bags can result into reduction of risk for the environment. Those who strongly Agreed were 24.14% (n=7), those who Agreed were 41.38% (n=12), those who were Neutral were 31.03% (n=9), those who selected disagree were 3.45% (n=1) and those who strongly Disagreed were 6.90% (n=2). Hence, it can be observed that agreed that educating people to reuse the plastics bags is effective in reducing the risk for the environment. These results are summarized in the figure below. Figure 5. Liker –Scale results of responses The eighth question required respondents to explain the number of plastics bags they had purchased during their last shopping. Responses were categorised into; none, one, two, three and more than three. Those who selected none were 32.26% (n=10), those who selected one were 35.48% (n=11), those who selected two were 19.35% (n=6) and those who selected three were 9.68% (n=3). Only a single respondent 3.23% (n=1) selected more than three. This shows that during the past shopping event, most respondents had purchased 10 plastics bags. The ninth question involved asking respondents to explain the number of plastic bags they kept at home. Responses were categorised into 0-10, 11-20, 21-30 and more than 30. Those who selected 0-10 were 51.61% (n=16), those who selected 11-20 were 16.13% (n=5), those who selected 21-30 were 12.90% (n=4) and those who selected more than 30 were 19.35% (n=6). Thus it is observed that most respondents kept between 0 and 10 plastic bags at home. These results are summarised as shown in the figure below. Figure 6. Responses on the number of plastic bags kept at home The tenth question investigated the number of times that respondents reused plastics bags at home. Responses were categorised into; none, once, twice, three times and more than three times. Respondents who selected none were 12.90% (n=4), those who selected once were 29.03% (n=9), those who selected twice were 19.35% (n=6), those who selected three times were 22.58% (n=7) and those who selected more than three times were 16.13% (n=5). Thus, it is observed that the highest number of respondents selected using plastic bags once while they were at home. These results are summarized as shown in the figure below. Figure 7. Number of times of use of plastics bags by respondents The last question involved an investigation of whether paper bags will result into a change in people’s habits. Responses were categorised into; absolutely, yes but also a small impact on environment and I don’t think so. Those who selected absolutely were 32.26% (n=10), those who selected Yes but small impacts on the environment were 45.16% (n=14), those who selected No, I don’t think so were 22.58% (n=7). This implies that most respondents believed that paper bags will change the habits of people who use plastic bags but it will have an impact on the environment. Significance levels When the impacts of various demographic characteristics on the research responses were estimated it was found that that male gender had a significance value of p Read More