TypeofReview *Involvement 1 0.135 0.714 Error 144 R Squared =0.019 (Adjusted R Squared = -0,002) According to table 13, the main effect of type of review on attitude towards the product in non-significant, (1,144) = 2.117, = 0.148. Also, the main effect of F p involvement on attitude towards the product is non-significant, (1,144) = 0.324, = F p 0.570. Finally the interaction effect between type of review and involvement is significant, (1,144) = 0.135, =0.714. Consequently, hypothesis 3c and 3d are F p rejected. 5.1.4 Perceived risk Table 14: Descriptive statistics for perceived risk Attribute vs Benefit High vs Low Involvement Mean N High Involvement 3,4807 40 Attribute-centric Low Involvement 2,6869 33 Total 3,1218 73 High Involvement 4,0294 34 Benefit-centric Low Involvement 1,7805 41 Total 2,8000 75 High Involvement 3,7328 74 Total Low Involvement 2,1847 74 Total 2,9587 148 Table 14 demonstrates the descriptive statistics of perceived risk under the effects of involvement and type of review. It should be mentioned that the means of involvement differ significantly for each level of type of review. Besides, the total scores of type of review and the total scores of involvement seem to have great differences. In an effort to certify that these differences are significant the following table summarizes all the ANOVA results. Table 15: Results of two-way ANOVA on perceived risk df F Sig. TypeofReview 1 0.406 0.525
TypeofReview *Involvement 1 0.135 0.714 Error 144 R Squared =0.019 (Adjusted R Squared = -0,002) According to table 13, the main effect of type of review on attitude towards the product in non-significant, F (1,144) = 2.117, p = 0.148. Also, the main effect of involvement on attitude towards the product is non-significant, F (1,144) = 0.324, p = 0.570. Finally the interaction effect between type of review and involvement is F (1,144) = 0.135, p =0.714. Consequently, hypothesis 3c and 3d are rejected. 5.1.4 Perceived risk Table 14: Descriptive statistics for perceived risk Attribute vs Benefit High vs Low Involvement Mean N Attribute-centric High Involvement 3,4807 40 Low Involvement 2,6869 33 Total 3,1218 73 Benefit-centric High Involvement 4,0294 34 Low Involvement 1,7805 41 Total 2,8000 75 Total High Involvement 3,7328 74 Low Involvement 2,1847 74 Total 2,9587 148 Table 14 demonstrates the descriptive statistics of perceived risk under the effects of involvement and type of review. It should be mentioned that the means of involvement differ significantly for each level of type of review. Besides, the total scores of type of review and the total scores of involvement seem to have great differences. In an effort to certify that these differences are significant the following table summarizes all the ANOVA results. Table 15: Results of two-way ANOVA on perceived risk df F Sig. TypeofReview 1 0.406 0.525 significant,