HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND EDUCATION
FACULTY OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION
-—&amp–-

GRADUATION THESIS

DETERMINANTS OF BRAND LOYALTY TOWARDS SAMSUNG
MOBILE PHONE PRODUCTS: A CASE STUDY OF CONSUMERS IN
HO CHI MINH CITY

NGUYEN TRUONG PHU HUU
Student ID

20124188

Major

INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT

Advisor

HA NGUYEN MINH QUAN, MA

Ho Chi Minh City, May 2024

i

COMMENTS OF REVIEWER
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Ho Chi Minh City, May 2024
Reviewer

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my advisor, Mr. Ha Nguyen Minh
Quan, MA, for his invaluable guidance, support, and encouragement throughout the
course of this research. His expertise, patience, and constructive feedback have been
instrumental in shaping the direction and quality of this study.
I am also profoundly thankful to the participants of this research, the consumers in
Ho Chi Minh City, whose willingness to share their experiences and insights has been
indispensable to the completion of this project. Their cooperation and involvement have
enriched the depth and validity of our findings.
Furthermore, I extend my appreciation to the faculty and staff of Samsung68,
whose commitment to academic excellence has provided me with a nurturing environment
for intellectual growth and development.
I would like to acknowledge the support of my family and friends, whose
unwavering encouragement and understanding have sustained me throughout this
journey. Their belief in me
...

...
s
Correlations
LOY
LOY

SAT

TRUST

PQ

PRO

.650**

.594**

.670**

.465**

.000

.000

.000

.000

260

260

260

260

260

Pearson Correlation

.650**

1

.551**

.556**

.425**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

Pearson Correlation

1

Sig. (2-tailed)
N
SAT

114

N

260

260

260

260

260

.594**

.551**

1

.555**

.366**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

N

260

260

260

260

260

Pearson Correlation

.670**

.556**

.555**

1

.477**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

N

260

260

260

260

260

Pearson Correlation

.465**

.425**

.366**

.477**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

N

260

260

260

260

TRUST Pearson Correlation

PQ

PRO

.000

260

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
4.4.4 Multivariate regression analysis
Model Summaryb
Model
1

R
.770a

R

Adjusted R Std. Error of

Square

Square

.593

the Estimate

.587

DurbinWatson

.45085

1.734

a. Predictors: (Constant), PRO, TRUST, SAT, PQ
b. Dependent Variable: LOY
ANOVAa
Model
1

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

Regression

75.590

4

Residual

51.834

255

Total

127.424

259

a. Dependent Variable: LOY
b. Predictors: (Constant), PRO, TRUST, SAT, PQ
115

F

18.898 92.969
.203

Sig.
.000b

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized

Standardized

Coefficients

Coefficients

Collinearity Statistics

Std.
Model

B

Error

1 (Constant)

.294

.179

SAT

.260

.044

TRUST

.198

PQ
PRO

Beta

t

Sig.

1.647

.101

.310

5.930

.000

.585

1.708

.051

.199

3.874

.000

.604

1.655

.349

.055

.340

6.343

.000

.555

1.802

.110

.052

.099

2.111

.036

.732

1.367

a. Dependent Variable: LOY

116

Tolerance

VIF

117

Correlations
ABSZRE
ABSZRE

Correlation

.012

-.029

.

.819

.448

.847

.638

260

260

260

260

260

.014

1.000

.536**

.577**

.414**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.819

.

.000

.000

.000

N

260

260

260

260

260

.047

.536**

1.000

.563**

.339**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.448

.000

.

.000

.000

N

260

260

260

260

260

.012

.577**

.563**

1.000

.487**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.847

.000

.000

.

.000

N

260

260

260

260

260

-.029

.414**

.339**

.487**

1.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

.638

.000

.000

.000

.

N

260

260

260

260

260

Correlation

Spearmans rho

Coefficient

Correlation
Coefficient

Correlation
Coefficient

PRO

PRO

.047

N

PQ

PQ

.014

Sig. (2-tailed)

TRUST

TRUST

1.000

Coefficient

SAT

SAT

Correlation
Coefficient

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

118