repository.ipb.ac.id · kesimpulan dan saran . kesimpulan . sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat...

39
KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN Kesimpulan Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan nyata dengan efektivitas komunikasi terutama pada aspek afektif dan konatif. Pelatihan atau kursus yang diikuti oleh responden menjadi faktor penentu dalam membangun komunikasi yang efektif pada program PIDRA di kabupaten Sumbawa, Nusa Tenggara Barat. Jenis kelamin, kepemilikan lahan dan pendapatan keluarga juga memiliki hubungan nyata dengan efektivitas komunikasi. 2. Peran fasillitator atau pendamping berhubungan nyata dengan efektivitas komunikasi terutama pada aspek konatif. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa fasilitator atau pendamping berperan sebagai agen perubahan. 3. Partisipasi anggota dalam kelompok mandiri berhubungan nyata dengan efektivitas komunikasi pada aspek kognitif, afektif dan konatif. Partisipasi anggota dalam kelompok mandiri juga merupakan faktor penentu efektivitas komunikasi. Hal ini menunjukkan ada perubahan perilaku yang sejalan dengan program PIDRA antara lain kesetaraan gender, kemandirian kelompok, kegiatan menabung, keterampilan bertani dan beternak, mengelola usaha dan dana kelompok. Dengan kata lain, kelompok dan anggotanya dapat memperoleh manfaat dari program PIDRA. Saran Saran yang diajukan adalah: agar program PIDRA dapat kontinu perlu memperhatikan keberadaan Petugas Penyuluh Lapangan dan Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat serta sekaligus memperhatikan karakteristik individu dan partisipasi dalam kelompok. Selain itu keterlibatan Pemerintah Daerah dalam pengalokasian anggaran (APBD) perlu didorong untuk direalisasikan pada program mendatang.

Upload: phamnhan

Post on 15-Mar-2019

231 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN

Kesimpulan Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai

berikut:

1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan nyata dengan efektivitas komunikasi

terutama pada aspek afektif dan konatif. Pelatihan atau kursus yang diikuti

oleh responden menjadi faktor penentu dalam membangun komunikasi

yang efektif pada program PIDRA di kabupaten Sumbawa, Nusa Tenggara

Barat. Jenis kelamin, kepemilikan lahan dan pendapatan keluarga juga

memiliki hubungan nyata dengan efektivitas komunikasi.

2. Peran fasillitator atau pendamping berhubungan nyata dengan efektivitas

komunikasi terutama pada aspek konatif. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa

fasilitator atau pendamping berperan sebagai agen perubahan.

3. Partisipasi anggota dalam kelompok mandiri berhubungan nyata dengan

efektivitas komunikasi pada aspek kognitif, afektif dan konatif. Partisipasi

anggota dalam kelompok mandiri juga merupakan faktor penentu

efektivitas komunikasi. Hal ini menunjukkan ada perubahan perilaku yang

sejalan dengan program PIDRA antara lain kesetaraan gender, kemandirian

kelompok, kegiatan menabung, keterampilan bertani dan beternak,

mengelola usaha dan dana kelompok. Dengan kata lain, kelompok dan

anggotanya dapat memperoleh manfaat dari program PIDRA.

Saran

Saran yang diajukan adalah: agar program PIDRA dapat kontinu perlu

memperhatikan keberadaan Petugas Penyuluh Lapangan dan Lembaga Swadaya

Masyarakat serta sekaligus memperhatikan karakteristik individu dan partisipasi

dalam kelompok. Selain itu keterlibatan Pemerintah Daerah dalam pengalokasian

anggaran (APBD) perlu didorong untuk direalisasikan pada program mendatang.

Page 2: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

DAFTAR PUSTAKA

Agung, S.R. 2001. Efektivitas Komunikasi Organisasi Pelaksana Program KUT [Tesis]. Bogor: Program Pascasarjana, Institut Pertanian Bogor.

BPS, BAPPEDA Kabupaten Sumbawa. 2004. Sumbawa dalam Angka.

Sumbawa: Badan Pusat Statistik dengan Bappeda Kabupaten Sumbawa. Cernea, MM. 1988. Mengutamakan Manusia di dalam Pembangunan Variabel-

variabel Sosiologi di dalam Pembangunan Pedesaan. Jakarta: UI Press. De Vito, J.A. 1997. Komunikasi Antar Manusia Kuliah Dasar. Edisi Kelima.

Jakarta: Professional Books. DFID. 2001. Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Dalam Praktek. Jakarta: Departemen

Pertanian. Dinas Pertanian Kabupaten Blitar. 2004. Rencana Operasional Program PIDRA.

Blitar: PIDRA. Eaton, JW. 1986. Pembangunan Lembaga dan Pembangunan Nasional dari

Konsep ke Aplikasi. Jakarta: UI Press. Effendy, OU. 1984. Ilmu Komunikasi Teori dan Praktek. Bandung: PT Remaja

Rosdakarya. Jahi, A. 1988. Komunikasi Massa Dan Pembangunan Pedesaan di Negara–

negara Dunia Ketiga. Jakarta: PT Gramedia. Kerlinger, F. N. 2000. Azas-Azas Penelitian Behavioral. Ed. Ketiga. L. R.

Simatupang dan Koesmanto. HJ, Penerjemah. Yogyakarta: Gajah Mada University Press. Terjemahan dari: Fondation of Behavioral Research.

Koentjaraningrat. 1994. Kebudayaan Mentalitas dan Pembangunan. Jakarta: PT.

Gramedia. Lionberger, HF dan Gwin. 1982. Communication Strategies: A Guide for

Agricultural Change Agents. Columbia: University of Missouri. Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat Republik Indonesia. 1988. Ketetapan-ketetapan

MPR RI. Jakarta: Badan Penerbit ALDA. Manjar, A. 2002. Efektivitas Komunikasi Perencanaan Partisipatif P3MD Pada

Lembaga Keamanan Masyarakat Desa (LKMD) di Kabupaten Bogor [Tesis]. Bogor: Program Pascasarjana, Institut Pertanian Bogor.

Page 3: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

53

Mulyana, D. 2000. Pengantar Ilmu Komunikasi. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.

Nazir, M. 1988. Metode Penelitian. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia.

Rakhmat, J. 2001. Psikologi Komunikasi. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya. Rejeki, S.N. 1998. Perencanaan Program Penyuluhan (Teori dan Praktek).

Yogyakarta: Universitas Atma Jaya. Ruseffendi, E.T. 1994. Dasar-dasar Penelitian Pendidikan dan Bidang Non

Eksakta Lainnya. Semarang: IKIP Semarang Press. Rogers, E.M. 1995. Diffusion of Inovation. New York: The Free Press. Singarimbun, M dan Effendi, S. 1989. Metode Penelitian Survai. Jakarta:

LP3ES. Slamet, M. 2003. Membentuk Pola Perilaku Manusia Pembangunan. Bogor: IPB

Press. Suharto, E. 2005. Membangun Masyarakat Memberdayakan Masyarakat, Kajian

Strategis Pembangunan kesejahteraan Sosial dan Pekerjaan Sosial. Jakarta: Refika Aditama.

Tubbs, S.L dan Moss, S. 1996. Human Communication Prinsip-prinsip Dasar

Buku Pertama. Bandung : PT Remaja Rosdakarya. Vardiansyah, D. 2004. Pengantar Ilmu Komunikasi. Jakarta: UI Press.

Page 4: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

L A M P I R A N

Page 5: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

Lampiran 1. Peta Propinsi Nusa Tenggara Barat

55

WEST NUSA TENGGARA Post-Crisis programme for Participatory Integrated Development in Rainfed Areas (PIDRA)

Page 6: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

58

5756

Lampiran 2. Peta Wilayah Kabupaten Sumbawa

Page 7: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

57

Lampiran 3. Distribusi Responden Pada Desa dan Kecamatan Lokasi Penelitian No Desa/Kecamatan Nama Kelompok Mandiri Tahun Jumlah

(Orang)1 Kukin/Moyo Utara KMP Maras Rembang 2004 18 KMW Lonto Engal 16 2 Pungkit Tede/Lape- KMW Anggrek Putih 2003 12 Lopok KMP Buin Tereng 19 KMP Teming Tinggi 1 KMW Mawar Merah 11 3 Tatebal/Ropang KMW Bina Bersama 2003 2 KMP Lete Batu 5 KMP Temang Damai 4 4 Lenangguar/Ropang KMP Tali Jangi 2003 2 KMW Saling Pendi 7 KMW Dea Tuan 5 KMP Riam Remo 7 J u m l a h 109 Keterangan: KMP = Kelompok Mandiri Pria KMW = Kelompok Mandiri Wanita

Page 8: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

58

Lampiran 4. Hasil Analisis Validitas dan Reliabilitas Case Processing Summary N %

Valid 20 100.0Excluded(a) 0 .0

Cases

Total 20 100.0a Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.809 53 Item-Total Statistics

Pertanyaan Scale Mean if Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-Total Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha if Item

Deleted Nomor6 106.3500 72.029 .441 .799 Nomor7 106.2500 78.618 -.057 .812 Nomor9 107.4500 78.682 -.065 .812 Nomor10 106.5000 79.842 -.382 .813 Nomor11 106.5500 78.366 .000 .809 Nomor12 107.1500 76.766 .153 .808 Nomor13a 106.5000 74.895 .363 .803 Nomor13b 106.6000 76.779 .207 .807 Nomor13c 106.6000 76.674 .223 .806 Nomor13d 106.8000 76.484 .217 .806 Nomor13e 106.6500 75.082 .311 .804 Nomor13f 106.6500 75.503 .343 .804 Nomor13g 106.5500 75.418 .270 .805 Nomor15 106.3000 76.642 .196 .807 Nomor17 106.7500 78.618 -.058 .814 Nomor18 106.6000 75.832 .206 .807 Nomor21 106.5500 76.261 .182 .807 Nomor23 105.9000 79.989 -.213 .816 Nomor24 106.2500 74.513 .447 .801

Page 9: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

59

Item-Total Statistics

Pertanyaan Scale Mean if Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-Total Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha if Item

Deleted Nomor25a 106.1500 77.292 .093 .809 Nomor25b 106.1000 75.253 .262 .805 Nomor25c 106.0500 76.050 .184 .807 Nomor25d 106.2000 75.221 .275 .805 Nomor25e 106.1500 79.818 -.190 .816 Nomor25f 106.1500 77.818 .018 .812 Nomor25g 106.2000 80.589 -.244 .819 Nomor25h 106.0500 76.997 .094 .810 Nomor25i 106.0500 74.471 .410 .801 Nomor26 105.6000 76.989 .338 .806 Nomor27 106.9000 71.042 .705 .792 Nomor28 106.7000 72.958 .505 .798 Nomor29 106.8500 75.713 .297 .804 Nomor30 106.9500 74.682 .395 .802 Nomor31 107.2000 75.642 .292 .805 Nomor32 106.5500 76.576 .197 .807 Nomor33 106.2000 78.589 -.055 .814 Nomor34 106.3000 77.274 .061 .811 Nomor35 106.6000 80.147 -.223 .817 Nomor36 106.9500 71.418 .788 .792 Nomor37 106.8000 71.958 .654 .794 Nomor38 106.8500 75.713 .297 .804 Nomor39 107.1000 73.253 .555 .798 Nomor40 107.0500 76.471 .182 .807 Nomor41 106.2500 74.197 .390 .802 Nomor41a 106.2000 75.116 .285 .804 Nomor42 106.3000 74.642 .360 .802 Nomor43 106.2000 74.379 .360 .802 Nomor44 106.2500 74.197 .390 .802 Nomor45 106.4500 68.576 .593 .791 Nomor46 106.5500 72.155 .413 .800 Nomor47 106.5500 76.155 .133 .810 Nomor48 106.6000 71.621 .480 .797 Nomor49 106.6000 72.884 .428 .800

r tabel df 51 = 0.1806.

Page 10: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

60

Lampiran 5. Hasil Analisis Khi kuadrat untuk jenis kelamin

Kelamin * GenKog Crosstabulation

GenKog Total

.00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Kelamin 1 Count 3 11 32 7 53 Expected Count 1.9 13.1 33.6 4.4 53.0 % within Kelamin 5.7% 20.8% 60.4% 13.2% 100.0% % within GenKog 75.0% 40.7% 46.4% 77.8% 48.6% % of Total 2.8% 10.1% 29.4% 6.4% 48.6% 2 Count 1 16 37 2 56 Expected Count 2.1 13.9 35.4 4.6 56.0 % within Kelamin 1.8% 28.6% 66.1% 3.6% 100.0% % within GenKog 25.0% 59.3% 53.6% 22.2% 51.4% % of Total .9% 14.7% 33.9% 1.8% 51.4%Total Count 4 27 69 9 109 Expected Count 4.0 27.0 69.0 9.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 3.7% 24.8% 63.3% 8.3% 100.0% % within GenKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 24.8% 63.3% 8.3% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .209 .173 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 11: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

61

Kelamin * MOKog Crosstabulation MOKog .00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 4 9 38 2 53 Expected Count 1.9 6.3 41.3 3.4 53.0 % within Kelamin 7.5% 17.0% 71.7% 3.8% 100.0% % within MOKog 100.0% 69.2% 44.7% 28.6% 48.6% % of Total 3.7% 8.3% 34.9% 1.8% 48.6% 2 Count 0 4 47 5 56 Expected Count 2.1 6.7 43.7 3.6 56.0 % within Kelamin .0% 7.1% 83.9% 8.9% 100.0% % within MOKog .0% 30.8% 55.3% 71.4% 51.4% % of Total .0% 3.7% 43.1% 4.6% 51.4%Total Count 4 13 85 7 109 Expected Count 4.0 13.0 85.0 7.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 3.7% 11.9% 78.0% 6.4% 100.0% % within MOKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 11.9% 78.0% 6.4% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .263 .044 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 12: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

62

Kelamin * BukuKog Crosstabulation BukuKog .00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 3 4 37 9 53 Expected Count 1.5 3.4 38.9 9.2 53.0 % within Kelamin 5.7% 7.5% 69.8% 17.0% 100.0% % within BukuKog 100.0% 57.1% 46.3% 47.4% 48.6% % of Total 2.8% 3.7% 33.9% 8.3% 48.6% 2 Count 0 3 43 10 56 Expected Count 1.5 3.6 41.1 9.8 56.0 % within Kelamin .0% 5.4% 76.8% 17.9% 100.0% % within BukuKog .0% 42.9% 53.8% 52.6% 51.4% % of Total .0% 2.8% 39.4% 9.2% 51.4%Total Count 3 7 80 19 109 Expected Count 3.0 7.0 80.0 19.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 2.8% 6.4% 73.4% 17.4% 100.0% % within BukuKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 2.8% 6.4% 73.4% 17.4% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .178 .312 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 13: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

63

Kelamin * KPPTKog Crosstabulation KPPTKog .00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 9 17 25 2 53 Expected Count 7.8 19.4 24.8 1.0 53.0 % within Kelamin 17.0% 32.1% 47.2% 3.8% 100.0% % within KPPTKog 56.3% 42.5% 49.0% 100.0% 48.6% % of Total 8.3% 15.6% 22.9% 1.8% 48.6% 2 Count 7 23 26 0 56 Expected Count 8.2 20.6 26.2 1.0 56.0 % within Kelamin 12.5% 41.1% 46.4% .0% 100.0% % within KPPTKog 43.8% 57.5% 51.0% .0% 51.4% % of Total 6.4% 21.1% 23.9% .0% 51.4%Total Count 16 40 51 2 109 Expected Count 16.0 40.0 51.0 2.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 14.7% 36.7% 46.8% 1.8% 100.0% % within KPPTKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 14.7% 36.7% 46.8% 1.8% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .166 .378 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 14: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

64

Kelamin * UEKog Crosstabulation UEKog .00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 8 20 24 1 53 Expected Count 7.3 26.7 18.5 .5 53.0 % within Kelamin 15.1% 37.7% 45.3% 1.9% 100.0% % within UEKog 53.3% 36.4% 63.2% 100.0% 48.6% % of Total 7.3% 18.3% 22.0% .9% 48.6% 2 Count 7 35 14 0 56 Expected Count 7.7 28.3 19.5 .5 56.0 % within Kelamin 12.5% 62.5% 25.0% .0% 100.0% % within UEKog 46.7% 63.6% 36.8% .0% 51.4% % of Total 6.4% 32.1% 12.8% .0% 51.4%Total Count 15 55 38 1 109 Expected Count 15.0 55.0 38.0 1.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 13.8% 50.5% 34.9% .9% 100.0% % within UEKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 13.8% 50.5% 34.9% .9% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .257 .052 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 15: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

65

Kelamin * GenAfe Crosstabulation GenAfe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 8 27 18 53 Expected Count 10.2 30.1 12.6 53.0 % within Kelamin 15.1% 50.9% 34.0% 100.0% % within GenAfe 38.1% 43.5% 69.2% 48.6% % of Total 7.3% 24.8% 16.5% 48.6% 2 Count 13 35 8 56 Expected Count 10.8 31.9 13.4 56.0 % within Kelamin 23.2% 62.5% 14.3% 100.0% % within GenAfe 61.9% 56.5% 30.8% 51.4% % of Total 11.9% 32.1% 7.3% 51.4% Total Count 21 62 26 109 Expected Count 21.0 62.0 26.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 19.3% 56.9% 23.9% 100.0% % within GenAfe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 19.3% 56.9% 23.9% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .228 .050 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 16: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

66

Kelamin * MOafe Crosstabulation MOafe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 3 33 17 53 Expected Count 2.4 33.1 17.5 53.0 % within Kelamin 5.7% 62.3% 32.1% 100.0% % within MOafe 60.0% 48.5% 47.2% 48.6% % of Total 2.8% 30.3% 15.6% 48.6% 2 Count 2 35 19 56 Expected Count 2.6 34.9 18.5 56.0 % within Kelamin 3.6% 62.5% 33.9% 100.0% % within MOafe 40.0% 51.5% 52.8% 51.4% % of Total 1.8% 32.1% 17.4% 51.4% Total Count 5 68 36 109 Expected Count 5.0 68.0 36.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 4.6% 62.4% 33.0% 100.0% % within MOafe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 4.6% 62.4% 33.0% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .051 .866 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 17: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

67

Kelamin * BukuAfe Crosstabulation BukuAfe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 3 26 24 53 Expected Count 1.9 29.7 21.4 53.0 % within Kelamin 5.7% 49.1% 45.3% 100.0% % within BukuAfe 75.0% 42.6% 54.5% 48.6% % of Total 2.8% 23.9% 22.0% 48.6% 2 Count 1 35 20 56 Expected Count 2.1 31.3 22.6 56.0 % within Kelamin 1.8% 62.5% 35.7% 100.0% % within BukuAfe 25.0% 57.4% 45.5% 51.4% % of Total .9% 32.1% 18.3% 51.4% Total Count 4 61 44 109 Expected Count 4.0 61.0 44.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 3.7% 56.0% 40.4% 100.0% % within BukuAfe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 56.0% 40.4% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .153 .271 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 18: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

68

Kelamin * KPPTAfe Crosstabulation KPPTAfe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 3 25 25 53 Expected Count 1.9 30.6 20.4 53.0 % within Kelamin 5.7% 47.2% 47.2% 100.0% % within KPPTAfe 75.0% 39.7% 59.5% 48.6% % of Total 2.8% 22.9% 22.9% 48.6% 2 Count 1 38 17 56 Expected Count 2.1 32.4 21.6 56.0 % within Kelamin 1.8% 67.9% 30.4% 100.0% % within KPPTAfe 25.0% 60.3% 40.5% 51.4% % of Total .9% 34.9% 15.6% 51.4%Total Count 4 63 42 109 Expected Count 4.0 63.0 42.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 3.7% 57.8% 38.5% 100.0% % within KPPTAfe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 57.8% 38.5% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .212 .077 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 19: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

69

Kelamin * UEAfe Crosstabulation UEAfe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 3 30 20 53 Expected Count 1.9 34.0 17.0 53.0 % within Kelamin 5.7% 56.6% 37.7% 100.0% % within UEAfe 75.0% 42.9% 57.1% 48.6% % of Total 2.8% 27.5% 18.3% 48.6% 2 Count 1 40 15 56 Expected Count 2.1 36.0 18.0 56.0 % within Kelamin 1.8% 71.4% 26.8% 100.0% % within UEAfe 25.0% 57.1% 42.9% 51.4% % of Total .9% 36.7% 13.8% 51.4% Total Count 4 70 35 109 Expected Count 4.0 70.0 35.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 3.7% 64.2% 32.1% 100.0% % within UEAfe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 64.2% 32.1% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .165 .216 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 20: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

70

Kelamin * GenKona Crosstabulation GenKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 18 23 12 53 Expected Count 12.2 31.6 9.2 53.0 % within Kelamin 34.0% 43.4% 22.6% 100.0% % within GenKona 72.0% 35.4% 63.2% 48.6% % of Total 16.5% 21.1% 11.0% 48.6% 2 Count 42 7 56 7 Expected Count 12.8 33.4 9.8 56.0 % within Kelamin 12.5% 75.0% 12.5% 100.0% % within GenKona 28.0% 64.6% 36.8% 51.4% % of Total 6.4% 38.5% 6.4% 51.4% Total Count 25 65 19 109 Expected Count 25.0 65.0 19.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 22.9% 59.6% 17.4% 100.0% % within GenKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 22.9% 59.6% 17.4% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .311 .003 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 21: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

71

Kelamin * MOKona Crosstabulation MOKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 14 23 16 53 Expected Count 13.1 17.0 22.9 53.0 % within Kelamin 26.4% 43.4% 30.2% 100.0% % within MOKona 51.9% 65.7% 34.0% 48.6% % of Total 12.8% 21.1% 14.7% 48.6% 2 Count 13 12 31 56 Expected Count 13.9 18.0 24.1 56.0 % within Kelamin 23.2% 21.4% 55.4% 100.0% % within MOKona 48.1% 34.3% 66.0% 51.4% % of Total 11.9% 11.0% 28.4% 51.4% Total Count 27 35 47 109 Expected Count 27.0 35.0 47.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 24.8% 32.1% 43.1% 100.0% % within MOKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 24.8% 32.1% 43.1% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .265 .017 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 22: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

72

Kelamin * BukuKona Crosstabulation BukuKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 9 27 17 53 Expected Count 11.2 25.8 16.0 53.0 % within Kelamin 17.0% 50.9% 32.1% 100.0% % within BukuKona 39.1% 50.9% 51.5% 48.6% % of Total 8.3% 24.8% 15.6% 48.6% 2 Count 14 26 16 56 Expected Count 11.8 27.2 17.0 56.0 % within Kelamin 25.0% 46.4% 28.6% 100.0% % within BukuKona 60.9% 49.1% 48.5% 51.4% % of Total 12.8% 23.9% 14.7% 51.4% Total Count 23 53 33 109 Expected Count 23.0 53.0 33.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 21.1% 48.6% 30.3% 100.0% % within BukuKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 21.1% 48.6% 30.3% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .098 .590 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 23: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

73

Kelamin * KPPTKona Crosstabulation KPPTKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 19 26 8 53 Expected Count 17.0 27.2 8.8 53.0 % within Kelamin 35.8% 49.1% 15.1% 100.0% % within KPPTKona 54.3% 46.4% 44.4% 48.6% % of Total 17.4% 23.9% 7.3% 48.6% 2 Count 16 30 10 56 Expected Count 18.0 28.8 9.2 56.0 % within Kelamin 28.6% 53.6% 17.9% 100.0% % within KPPTKona 45.7% 53.6% 55.6% 51.4% % of Total 14.7% 27.5% 9.2% 51.4%Total Count 35 56 18 109 Expected Count 35.0 56.0 18.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 32.1% 51.4% 16.5% 100.0% % within KPPTKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 32.1% 51.4% 16.5% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .079 .711 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 24: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

74

Kelamin * UEKona Crosstabulation UEKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Kelamin 1 Count 17 28 8 53 Expected Count 21.4 27.7 3.9 53.0 % within Kelamin 32.1% 52.8% 15.1% 100.0% % within UEKona 38.6% 49.1% 100.0% 48.6% % of Total 15.6% 25.7% 7.3% 48.6% 2 Count 27 29 0 56 Expected Count 22.6 29.3 4.1 56.0 % within Kelamin 48.2% 51.8% .0% 100.0% % within UEKona 61.4% 50.9% .0% 51.4% % of Total 24.8% 26.6% .0% 51.4% Total Count 44 57 8 109 Expected Count 44.0 57.0 8.0 109.0 % within Kelamin 40.4% 52.3% 7.3% 100.0% % within UEKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 40.4% 52.3% 7.3% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .293 .006 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 25: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

75

Lampiran 6. Hasil Analisis Khi kuadrat untuk kepemilikan lahan Adalahan * GenKog Crosstabulation GenKog .00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 1 4 5 0 10 Expected Count .4 2.5 6.3 .8 10.0 % within Adalahan 10.0% 40.0% 50.0% .0% 100.0% % within GenKog 25.0% 14.8% 7.2% .0% 9.2% % of Total .9% 3.7% 4.6% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 3 23 64 9 99 Expected Count 3.6 24.5 62.7 8.2 99.0 % within Adalahan 3.0% 23.2% 64.6% 9.1% 100.0% % within GenKog 75.0% 85.2% 92.8% 100.0% 90.8% % of Total 2.8% 21.1% 58.7% 8.3% 90.8%Total Count 4 27 69 9 109 Expected Count 4.0 27.0 69.0 9.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 3.7% 24.8% 63.3% 8.3% 100.0% % within GenKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 24.8% 63.3% 8.3% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .175 .327 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 26: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

76

Adalahan * MOKog Crosstabulation MOKog .00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 2 2 6 0 10 Expected Count .4 1.2 7.8 .6 10.0 % within Adalahan 20.0% 20.0% 60.0% .0% 100.0% % within MOKog 50.0% 15.4% 7.1% .0% 9.2% % of Total 1.8% 1.8% 5.5% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 2 11 79 7 99 Expected Count 3.6 11.8 77.2 6.4 99.0 % within Adalahan 2.0% 11.1% 79.8% 7.1% 100.0% % within MOKog 50.0% 84.6% 92.9% 100.0% 90.8% % of Total 1.8% 10.1% 72.5% 6.4% 90.8%Total Count 4 13 85 7 109 Expected Count 4.0 13.0 85.0 7.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 3.7% 11.9% 78.0% 6.4% 100.0% % within MOKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 11.9% 78.0% 6.4% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .287 .021 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 27: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

77

Adalahan * BukuKog Crosstabulation BukuKog .00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 2 2 5 1 10 Expected Count .3 .6 7.3 1.7 10.0 % within Adalahan 20.0% 20.0% 50.0% 10.0% 100.0% % within BukuKog 66.7% 28.6% 6.3% 5.3% 9.2% % of Total 1.8% 1.8% 4.6% .9% 9.2% Ya Count 1 5 75 18 99 Expected Count 2.7 6.4 72.7 17.3 99.0 % within Adalahan 1.0% 5.1% 75.8% 18.2% 100.0% % within BukuKog 33.3% 71.4% 93.8% 94.7% 90.8% % of Total .9% 4.6% 68.8% 16.5% 90.8%Total Count 3 7 80 19 109 Expected Count 3.0 7.0 80.0 19.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 2.8% 6.4% 73.4% 17.4% 100.0% % within BukuKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 2.8% 6.4% 73.4% 17.4% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .360 .001 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 28: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

78

Adalahan * KPPTKog Crosstabulation KPPTKog .00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 2 4 4 0 10 Expected Count 1.5 3.7 4.7 .2 10.0 % within Adalahan 20.0% 40.0% 40.0% .0% 100.0% % within KPPTKog 12.5% 10.0% 7.8% .0% 9.2% % of Total 1.8% 3.7% 3.7% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 14 36 47 2 99 Expected Count 14.5 36.3 46.3 1.8 99.0 % within Adalahan 14.1% 36.4% 47.5% 2.0% 100.0% % within KPPTKog 87.5% 90.0% 92.2% 100.0% 90.8% % of Total 12.8% 33.0% 43.1% 1.8% 90.8%Total Count 16 40 51 2 109 Expected Count 16.0 40.0 51.0 2.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 14.7% 36.7% 46.8% 1.8% 100.0% % within KPPTKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 14.7% 36.7% 46.8% 1.8% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .071 .907 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 29: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

79

Adalahan * UEKog Crosstabulation UEKog .00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 1 4 5 0 10 Expected Count 1.4 5.0 3.5 .1 10.0 % within Adalahan 10.0% 40.0% 50.0% .0% 100.0% % within UEKog 6.7% 7.3% 13.2% .0% 9.2% % of Total .9% 3.7% 4.6% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 14 51 33 1 99 Expected Count 13.6 50.0 34.5 .9 99.0 % within Adalahan 14.1% 51.5% 33.3% 1.0% 100.0% % within UEKog 93.3% 92.7% 86.8% 100.0% 90.8% % of Total 12.8% 46.8% 30.3% .9% 90.8%Total Count 15 55 38 1 109 Expected Count 15.0 55.0 38.0 1.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 13.8% 50.5% 34.9% .9% 100.0% % within UEKog 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 13.8% 50.5% 34.9% .9% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .103 .759 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 30: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

80

Adalahan * GenAfe Crosstabulation GenAfe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 3 7 0 10 Expected Count 1.9 5.7 2.4 10.0 % within Adalahan 30.0% 70.0% .0% 100.0% % within GenAfe 14.3% 11.3% .0% 9.2% % of Total 2.8% 6.4% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 18 55 26 99 Expected Count 19.1 56.3 23.6 99.0 % within Adalahan 18.2% 55.6% 26.3% 100.0% % within GenAfe 85.7% 88.7% 100.0% 90.8% % of Total 16.5% 50.5% 23.9% 90.8% Total Count 21 62 26 109 Expected Count 21.0 62.0 26.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 19.3% 56.9% 23.9% 100.0% % within GenAfe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 19.3% 56.9% 23.9% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .179 .164 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 31: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

81

Adalahan * MOafe Crosstabulation MOafe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 1 9 0 10 Expected Count .5 6.2 3.3 10.0 % within Adalahan 10.0% 90.0% .0% 100.0% % within MOafe 20.0% 13.2% .0% 9.2% % of Total .9% 8.3% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 4 59 36 99 Expected Count 4.5 61.8 32.7 99.0 % within Adalahan 4.0% 59.6% 36.4% 100.0% % within MOafe 80.0% 86.8% 100.0% 90.8% % of Total 3.7% 54.1% 33.0% 90.8% Total Count 5 68 36 109 Expected Count 5.0 68.0 36.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 4.6% 62.4% 33.0% 100.0% % within MOafe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 4.6% 62.4% 33.0% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .223 .058 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 32: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

82

Adalahan * BukuAfe Crosstabulation BukuAfe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 1 8 1 10 Expected Count .4 5.6 4.0 10.0 % within Adalahan 10.0% 80.0% 10.0% 100.0% % within BukuAfe 25.0% 13.1% 2.3% 9.2% % of Total .9% 7.3% .9% 9.2% Ya Count 3 53 43 99 Expected Count 3.6 55.4 40.0 99.0 % within Adalahan 3.0% 53.5% 43.4% 100.0% % within BukuAfe 75.0% 86.9% 97.7% 90.8% % of Total 2.8% 48.6% 39.4% 90.8% Total Count 4 61 44 109 Expected Count 4.0 61.0 44.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 3.7% 56.0% 40.4% 100.0% % within BukuAfe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 56.0% 40.4% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .206 .088 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 33: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

83

Adalahan * KPPTAfe Crosstabulation KPPTAfe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 1 9 0 10 Expected Count .4 5.8 3.9 10.0 % within Adalahan 10.0% 90.0% .0% 100.0% % within KPPTAfe 25.0% 14.3% .0% 9.2% % of Total .9% 8.3% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 3 54 42 99 Expected Count 3.6 57.2 38.1 99.0 % within Adalahan 3.0% 54.5% 42.4% 100.0% % within KPPTAfe 75.0% 85.7% 100.0% 90.8% % of Total 2.8% 49.5% 38.5% 90.8% Total Count 4 63 42 109 Expected Count 4.0 63.0 42.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 3.7% 57.8% 38.5% 100.0% % within KPPTAfe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 57.8% 38.5% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .252 .024 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 34: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

84

Adalahan * UEAfe Crosstabulation UEAfe 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 1 8 1 10 Expected Count .4 6.4 3.2 10.0 % within Adalahan 10.0% 80.0% 10.0% 100.0% % within UEAfe 25.0% 11.4% 2.9% 9.2% % of Total .9% 7.3% .9% 9.2% Ya Count 3 62 34 99 Expected Count 3.6 63.6 31.8 99.0 % within Adalahan 3.0% 62.6% 34.3% 100.0% % within UEAfe 75.0% 88.6% 97.1% 90.8% % of Total 2.8% 56.9% 31.2% 90.8% Total Count 4 70 35 109 Expected Count 4.0 70.0 35.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 3.7% 64.2% 32.1% 100.0% % within UEAfe 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.7% 64.2% 32.1% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .172 .192 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 35: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

85

Adalahan * GenKona Crosstabulation GenKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 4 6 0 10 Expected Count 2.3 6.0 1.7 10.0 % within Adalahan 40.0% 60.0% .0% 100.0% % within GenKona 16.0% 9.2% .0% 9.2% % of Total 3.7% 5.5% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 21 59 19 99 Expected Count 22.7 59.0 17.3 99.0 % within Adalahan 21.2% 59.6% 19.2% 100.0% % within GenKona 84.0% 90.8% 100.0% 90.8% % of Total 19.3% 54.1% 17.4% 90.8% Total Count 25 65 19 109 Expected Count 25.0 65.0 19.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 22.9% 59.6% 17.4% 100.0% % within GenKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 22.9% 59.6% 17.4% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .172 .190 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 36: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

86

Adalahan * MOKona Crosstabulation MOKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 2 6 2 10 Expected Count 2.5 3.2 4.3 10.0 % within Adalahan 20.0% 60.0% 20.0% 100.0% % within MOKona 7.4% 17.1% 4.3% 9.2% % of Total 1.8% 5.5% 1.8% 9.2% Ya Count 25 29 45 99 Expected Count 24.5 31.8 42.7 99.0 % within Adalahan 25.3% 29.3% 45.5% 100.0% % within MOKona 92.6% 82.9% 95.7% 90.8% % of Total 22.9% 26.6% 41.3% 90.8% Total Count 27 35 47 109 Expected Count 27.0 35.0 47.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 24.8% 32.1% 43.1% 100.0% % within MOKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 24.8% 32.1% 43.1% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .191 .127 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 37: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

87

Adalahan * BukuKona Crosstabulation BukuKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 2 6 2 10 Expected Count 2.1 4.9 3.0 10.0 % within Adalahan 20.0% 60.0% 20.0% 100.0% % within

BukuKona 8.7% 11.3% 6.1% 9.2%

% of Total 1.8% 5.5% 1.8% 9.2% Ya Count 21 47 31 99 Expected Count 20.9 48.1 30.0 99.0 % within Adalahan 21.2% 47.5% 31.3% 100.0% % within

BukuKona 91.3% 88.7% 93.9% 90.8%

% of Total 19.3% 43.1% 28.4% 90.8% Total Count 23 53 33 109 Expected Count 23.0 53.0 33.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 21.1% 48.6% 30.3% 100.0% % within

BukuKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

% of Total 21.1% 48.6% 30.3% 100.0% Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .079 .711 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 38: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

88

Adalahan * KPPTKona Crosstabulation KPPTKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 3 7 0 10 Expected Count 3.2 5.1 1.7 10.0 % within Adalahan 30.0% 70.0% .0% 100.0% % within

KPPTKona 8.6% 12.5% .0% 9.2%

% of Total 2.8% 6.4% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 32 49 18 99 Expected Count 31.8 50.9 16.3 99.0 % within Adalahan 32.3% 49.5% 18.2% 100.0% % within

KPPTKona 91.4% 87.5% 100.0% 90.8%

% of Total 29.4% 45.0% 16.5% 90.8% Total Count 35 56 18 109 Expected Count 35.0 56.0 18.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 32.1% 51.4% 16.5% 100.0% % within

KPPTKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

% of Total 32.1% 51.4% 16.5% 100.0% Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .152 .276 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Page 39: repository.ipb.ac.id · KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN . Kesimpulan . Sesuai dengan hasil penelitian, dapat diambil beberapa kesimpulan sebagai berikut: 1. Karakteristik individu berhubungan

89

Adalahan * UEKona Crosstabulation

UEKona 1.00 2.00 3.00

Total

Adalahan Tidak Count 3 7 0 10 Expected Count 4.0 5.2 .7 10.0 % within Adalahan 30.0% 70.0% .0% 100.0% % within UEKona 6.8% 12.3% .0% 9.2% % of Total 2.8% 6.4% .0% 9.2% Ya Count 41 50 8 99 Expected Count 40.0 51.8 7.3 99.0 % within Adalahan 41.4% 50.5% 8.1% 100.0% % within UEKona 93.2% 87.7% 100.0% 90.8% % of Total 37.6% 45.9% 7.3% 90.8%Total Count 44 57 8 109 Expected Count 44.0 57.0 8.0 109.0 % within Adalahan 40.4% 52.3% 7.3% 100.0% % within UEKona 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 40.4% 52.3% 7.3% 100.0%

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.

Nominal by Nominal Contingency Coefficient .126 .415 N of Valid Cases 109

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.