Table 2.1 below shows the correlation between farmers’ sex and harvesting technique.

Since it was revealed

that the computed x2 value of 0.8000 is lesser than the critical value of 3.841 at 0.05 level of significance and 1 degree of
freedom, the null hypothesis of the study is accepted which means that there is no significant relationship between
farmers’ sex and harvesting techniques. The result signifies that the harvesting techniques do not depend on the
farmers’ sex since the chi square value further implies that male and female farmers do not differ on their preference.

Table 2.1
Correlation between Farmers’ Sex and Harvesting Technique
Harvesting technique
Sex Manual Mechanical Total
2 2
O E X O E X
20 0 20
Male 20.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
16 0 16
Female 20.00 0.00
0.80 0.00
Total 36 0 36
X2 =
Chi-Square 0.80 0.00
0.8000
Critical Value @ 0.05 (1 df) = 3.841
Ho: Accepted
Remarks: Not Significant

Table 2.2 below shows the correlation between farmers’ sex and types of containers used in packing. Since it
was revealed that the computed x2 value of 0.8000 is lesser than the critical value of 3.841 at 0.05 level of significance
and 1 degree of freedom, the null hypothesis of the study is accepted which means that there is no significant
relationship between farmers’ sex and types of container used in packing. The result signifies that the types of container
used in packing do not depend on the farmers’ sex since the chi square value further implies that male and female
farmers do not differ on their preference.

Table 2.2
Correlation between Farmers’ Sex and Types of container used in packing
Types of Container used in Packing
Sex Sack Basket Total
2 2
O E X O E X
20 0 20
Male 20.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
16 0 16
Female 20.00 0.00
0.80 0.00
Total 36 0 36
X2 =
Chi-Square 0.80 0.00
0.8000
Critical Value @ 0.05 (1 df) = 3.841
Ho: Accepted
Remarks: Not Significant
 Table 2.3 below shows the correlation between farmers’ sex and drying techniques. Since it was revealed that
the computed x2 value of 0.9455 is lesser than the critical value of 3.841 at 0.05 level of significance and 1 degree of
freedom, the null hypothesis of the study is accepted which means that there is no significant relationship between
farmers’ sex and drying techniques. The result signifies that the drying techniques do not depend on the farmers’ sex
since the chi square value further implies that male and female farmers do not differ on their preference.

Table 2.3
Correlation between Farmers’ Sex and Drying techniques
Drying Techniques
Sex Solar Mechanical Total
2
O E X O E X2
18 2 20
Male 18.33 1.67
0.01 0.07
15 1 16
Female 18.33 1.67
0.61 0.27
Total 33 3 36
X2 =
Chi-Square 0.612 0.333
0.9455
Critical Value @ 0.05 (1 df) = 3.841
Ho: Accepted
Remarks: Not Significant

Table 2.4 below shows the correlation between farmers’ sex and storage preference. Since it was revealed that
the computed x2 value of 1.4286 is lesser than the critical value of 7.815 at 0.05 level of significance and 3 degrees of
freedom, the null hypothesis of the study is accepted which means that there is no significant relationship between
farmers’ sex and storage preference. The result signifies that storing rice that had been yielded do not depend on the
farmers’ sex since the chi square value further implies that male and female farmers do not differ on their preference.

Table 2.4
Correlation between Farmers’ Sex and Storage preference
Storage
Sex Stockroom Kitchen Living room Bed room Total
2 2
O E X O E X O E X2 O E X2
4 6 9 1 20
Male 4.44 6.67 7.78 1.11
0.04 0.07 0.19 0.01
4 6 5 1 16
Female 4.44 6.67 7.78 1.11
0.04 0.07 0.99 0.01
Total 8 12 14 2 36
X2 =
Chi-Square 0.089 0.13 1.18 0.022
1.4286
Critical Value @ 0.05 (3 df) = 7.815
Ho: Accepted
Remarks: Not Significant
 Table 2.5 below shows the correlation between farmers’ sex and reasons of marketing. Since it was revealed
that the computed x2 value of 4.5786 is beyond the critical value of 3.841 at 0.05 level of significance and 1 degree of
freedom, the null hypothesis of the study is rejected which means that there is a significant relationship between
farmers’ sex and reasons of marketing. The result signifies that marketing of rice depends on the farmers’ sex since the
chi square value further implies that male and female farmers differ on their reasons.

Table 2.5
Correlation between Farmers’ Sex and reasons of marketing
Reasons of Marketing
Personal
Sex Pay for loans Total
Consumption
O E X2 O E X2
13 7 20
Male 15.56 4.44
0.42 1.47
15 1 16
Female 15.56 4.44
0.02 2.67
Total 28 8 36
X2 =
Chi-Square 0.44 4.139
4.5786
Critical Value @ 0.05 (1 df) = 3.841
Ho: Rejected
Remarks: Significant

Table 2.6 below shows the correlation between farmers’ sex and means of transportation. Since it was revealed
that the computed x2 value of 1.1200 is lesser than the critical value of 3.841 at 0.05 level of significance and 1 degree of
freedom, the null hypothesis of the study is accepted which means that there is no significant relationship between
farmers’ sex and means of transportation. The result signifies that the means of transportation do not depend on the
farmers’ sex since the chi square value further implies that male and female farmers do not differ on their preference.

Table 2.6
Correlation between Farmers’ Sex and means of transportation
Means of Transportation
Sex Private Public Total
2 2
O E X O E X
16 4 20
Male 16.67 3.33
0.03 0.13
14 2 16
Female 16.67 3.33
0.43 0.53
Total 30 6 36
X2 =
Chi-Square 0.453 0.667
1.1200
Critical Value @ 0.05 (1 df) = 3.841
Ho: Accepted
Remarks: Not Significant