In: Economics
Q = 10 – .5P + 1.5Y + .25PR
(.10) (.03) (.045) (.50)
where P is the price of the soft drink manufactured by Liza's firm, Y refers to household per capita income (in thousands of dollars), and PR is the price of a rival soft drink manufacturing firm. The p-values are given in the parentheses. The R2 = 0.71 (p-value = .034).
Q = 10 – .5P + 1.5Y + .25PR
(.10) (.03) (.045) (.50)
evaluating the significance at 5% significance level
P value for P = 0.03
since the p value is less than 0.05 , we can say that price is a significant explanatory variable.
P value for Y = 0.045 and is less than 0.05 , we can say that income is a significant explanatory variable.
P value for PR = 0.50 and is more than 0.05 , we can say that income is a insignificant explanatory variable.
coefficient estimate for P = -0.5.
yes this makes economic sense as the sign of coefficient is negative which is consistent with demand theory of inverse relation between price and demand . According to this , $1 increase in price will cause the demand to fall by 0.5
coefficient estimate for Y = 1.5
yes this makes economic sense as the sign of coefficient is positive which is consistent with direct relation between income and demand. According to this , $1 increase in income will cause the demand to increase by 1.5
the value of R2 = 0.71 .this means that 71% of variation in demand for soft drink are explained by these 3 variables and the model is statistically significant as P value < 0.05 . Given the industry standards the above model provides a good estimate of demand for soft drink through these variables. Also according to economic theory the signs of variable are correct and consistent with economic theory .