CHAPTER IV

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

A. Data Presentation

There are two research instruments that the researcher used in this

study; they are questionnaire and test. The questionnaire was used to measure

the students’ listening anxiety (x variable), and the test was used to measure

the students’ listening comprehension (y variable).

1. Data Presentation of Listening Anxiety

In collecting the data of students’ listening anxiety, the researcher

took from the result of the students’ questionnaire. It can be seen in

following table.

Table IV.1
Students’ Listening Anxiety Score

No. Student No. Score No Student No. Score

1 Student 1 91 18 Student 18 85
2 Student 2 85 19 Student 19 83
3 Student 3 78 20 Student 20 77
4 Student 4 94 21 Student 21 72
5 Student 5 95 22 Student 22 70
6 Student 6 73 23 Student 23 80
7 Student 7 70 24 Student 24 83
8 Student 8 83 25 Student 25 82
9 Student 9 90 26 Student 26 76
10 Student 10 77 27 Student 27 73
11 Student 11 70 28 Student 28 70
12 Student 12 94 29 Student 29 81
13 Student 13 81 30 Student 30 95
14 Student 14 100 31 Student 31 60
15 Student 15 86 32 Student 32 92
16 Student 16 87 33 Student 33 77
17 Student 17 73 34 Student 34 77
Total 2760
Mean 81

To make it clear, the researcher calculated the interval score

distribution of the listening anxiety score. To find the interval, the

35
 36

researcher computed the range of score. Then, the range was divided by

class interval. The following chart is the data of interval score distribution

of listening anxiety.

Chart IV.1
The Frequency Score of Students Listening Anxiety

10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
60-66 67-73 74-80 81-87 88-94 95-101

It can be seen, at the interval score of 60-66, there is 1 student. At

the interval score of 67-73, there are 8 students. At the interval score of

74-80, there are 7 students. At the interval score of 81-87, there are 10

students. At the interval score of 88-94, there are 5 students. Then, at the

interval score of 95-101, there are 3 students. Below, the researcher

presents the percentage of the students’ interval score distribution.

 37

Chart IV.2
The Percentage of Interval Score Distribution of Students’ Listening
Anxiety

3%

9%
60-66
23%
15% 67-73
74-80
81-87
88-94
29% 21% 95-101

It can be seen, at the interval score of 60-66, there are 3%. At the

interval score of 67-73, there are 23%. At the interval score of 74-80, there

are 21%. At the interval score of 81-87, there are 29 %, at the interval of

88-94, there are 15%. And at the interval score of 95-101, there are 9%.

The researcher also described the category and the percentage of

listening anxiety as follows:

Table IV.2
The Percentage of students’ Listening Anxiety

No Category Frequency Percentage (%)

1 Very Good 19 56%
2 Good 14 41%
3 Enough 1 3%
4 Less 0 0%
5 Fail 0 0%
Total 34 100%

From the table above, it can be seen that there are 19 students

(56%) at very good score category, 14 students (3%) are at good score
 38

category, and 1 student (3%) is at enough score category. Hence, there is

no student found at less score category and there is no one at fail score

category.

2. Data Presentation of Students’ Listening Comprehension

In collecting the data of students’ listening comprehension, the

researcher took from the result of the students’ test. It can be seen in

following table.

Table IV.3
Students’ Listening Comprehension

No Student No. Score No Student No. Score

1 Student 1 78 18 Student 18 72
2 Student 2 67 19 Student 19 72
3 Student 3 61 20 Student 20 61
4 Student 4 83 21 Student 21 61
5 Student 5 89 22 Student 22 61
6 Student 6 78 23 Student 23 67
7 Student 7 67 24 Student 24 67
8 Student 8 78 25 Student 25 61
9 Student 9 72 26 Student 26 67
10 Student 10 61 27 Student 27 44
11 Student 11 67 28 Student 28 61
12 Student 12 56 29 Student 29 61
13 Student 13 78 30 Student 30 94
14 Student 14 83 31 Student 31 56
15 Student 15 72 32 Student 32 72
16 Student 16 67 33 Student 33 50
17 Student 17 56 34 Student 34 56
Total 2296
Mean 68

To make it clear, the researcher imputed the interval score

distribution of the students’ listening comprehension score. To find the

interval, the researcher computed the range of score. Then, the range was

divided by class interval. The following chart is the data of interval score

distribution of listening comprehension.

 39

Chart IV.3
The Frequency Score of Listening Comprehension

12

10

0
44-52 53-61 62-70 71-79 80-88 89-97

It can be seen, at the interval score of 44-52, there are 2 students.

At the interval score of 53-61, there are 12 students. At the interval score

of 62-70, there are 7 students. At the interval score of 71-79, there are 9

students. At the interval score of 80-88, there are 2 students. At the

interval score of 89-97, there are 2 students.

Chart IV.4
The Percentage of the Interval Score Distribution of the Listening
comprehension
44-52 53-61 62-70 71-79 80-88 89-97

6% 6%
6%

35%
26%

21%
 40

It can be seen, at the interval score of 44-52, there are 6%. At the

interval score of 53-61, there are 35%. At the interval score of 62-70, there

are 21%. At the interval score of 71-79, there are 26%, at the interval of

80-88, there are 6%. And at the interval score of 89-97, there are 6%.

Table IV.4
The Percentage of Listening Comprehension

No Category Frequency Percentage (%)

1 Very Good 4 12%
2 Good 9 26%
3 Enough 15 44%
4 Less 5 15%
5 Fail 1 3%
Total 34 100%

From the table above, it can be seen that there are 4 students are at

very good score category, with a persentage of 12%. 9 students are at good

score category, with a percentage of 26%. 15 students are at enough score

category, with a percentage of 44%. 5 students are at less score categories,

with a percentage of 15%, and 1 student is at fail score category, with a

percentage of 3%.
 41

3. Data analysis of Listening Anxiety and Listening Comprehension

Table IV.5
The scores of Students’ Listening Anxiety and Listening
Comprehension
Score Score
No. Students Listening Listening No. Students Listening Listening
No. Anxiety Comprehension No. Anxiety Comprehension
1 Student 1 91 78 18 Student 18 85 72
2 Student 2 85 67 19 Student 19 83 72
3 Student 3 78 61 20 Student 20 77 61
4 Student 4 94 83 21 Student 21 72 61
5 Student 5 95 89 22 Student 22 70 61
6 Student 6 73 78 23 Student 23 80 67
7 Student 7 70 67 24 Student 24 83 67
8 Student 8 83 78 25 Student 25 82 61
9 Student 9 90 72 26 Student 26 76 67
10 Student 10 77 61 27 Student 27 73 44
11 Student 11 70 67 28 Student 28 70 61
12 Student 12 94 56 29 Student 29 81 61
13 Student 13 81 78 30 Student 30 95 94
14 Student 14 100 83 31 Student 31 60 56
15 Student 15 86 72 32 Student 32 92 72
16 Student 16 87 67 33 Student 33 77 50
17 Student 17 73 56 34 Student 34 77 56
Total 2760 2296 Total 2760 2296
Mean 81 68 Mean 81 68

a. Normality Test

The normality test was used to know whether the distribution

of the data is normal or not. Then, the researcher used SPSS 20.0 for

normality test. The following table shows the normality test result for x

variable (students’ listening anxiety) and y variable (students’ listening

comprehension).

Table IV.6
Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic Df Sig. Statistic Df Sig.
Listening Anxiety 0.087 34 0.200* 0.976 34 0.639
Listening Comprehension 0.137 34 0.104 0.969 34 0.430
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
 42

For normality test, if the significance level (Asymp.sig) > 0.05,

the data distribution is normal. From the table above, it shows that the

asymp sig. value of listening anxiety is 0.200 and listening

comprehension is 0.104. It can be concluded that the data distribution

is normal. Therefore, the analysis of correlation for listening anxiety

and listening comprehension can be continued.

b. Descriptive Analysis

For analyzing data of listening anxiety, the researcher obtained

the further analysis description by using SPSS 20.0. It can be seen

from the following table

Table IV.7
Descriptive Statistics Listening Anxiety

Std.
N Range Minimum Maximum Mean Variance
Deviation
Listening Anxiety 34 40 60 100 81.18 9.203 84.695
Valid N 34

From the table, it can be seen that the mean score of listening

anxiety is 81.18, the variance is 84.695, the standard deviation is

9.203, minimum score is 60 and maximum score is 100.

For analyzing data of listening comprehension, the researcher

obtained the further analysis description by using SPSS 20.0. It can be

seen from the following table.

Table IV.8
Descriptive Statistics Listening Comprehension

N Range Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Variance

Listening C. 34 50 44 94 67.53 10.891 118.620
Valid N 34
 43

From the table, it can be seen that the mean score of listening

comprehension is 67.53, the variance is 118.620, the standard deviation

is 10.891, minimum score is 44, and maximum score is 94.

a. Inferential Analysis

Table IV.9
The Correlation between Listening Anxiety and Listening
Comprehension

Listening Anxiety Listening

Comprehension
Pearson Correlation 1 0.638**
Listening
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Anxiety
N 34 34
Pearson Correlation 0.638** 1
Listening
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Comprehension
N 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Based on the table above, there is the symbol **. It is clear that

the coefficient correlation is significant at both levels (1% and 5%).

Pearson correlation was conducted in this research in order to

determine any significant correlation between listening anxiety and

listening comprehension.

In order to know whether there is a significant correlation

between listening anxiety and listening comprehension at the eleventh

grade students’ of Senior High School 1 Bunut, Pearson correlation

analysis was used by noticing on rtable and robserved. The robserved is 0.638.

With degree of significance at the level of 1%, the score of rtable is

0.435. By comparing the two scores where robserved> rtable (0.638>0.435);

meaning that listening anxiety and listening comprehension are

significantly correlated. Then, when the robserved was tested at the

 44

degree of significance at the level of 5%,, the rtable is 0.286. It is also

found that there is a significant correlation between variables where

rtable is lower than the robserved; robserved>rtable (0.638 > 0.286).

In addition, the table above also showed that the coefficient

correlation in this research is 0.638. Furthermore, in order to know the

level or strength of correlation between the two variables, the

researcher used Ridhuwan’s (2010 p.136) interpretation below.

Table IV.10
The Interpretation of Correlation Coefficient

Coefficient Interval Interpretation

0.80-1.000 Very Strong
0.60-0.799 Strong
0.40-0.599 Average
0.20-0.399 Weak
0.00-0.199 Very weak

The correlation coefficient obtained is 0.638 which means the

level of listening anxiety and listening comprehension at the eleventh

grade students’ of Senior High School 1 Bunut is strong.

Not only stop at the aforementioned interpretation, the R

determinant is also important to found as it provides clear information

about the magnitude or size of the correlation gives. The following is

the process of getting the R determinant:

R = (r)2 x100%

R = (0.638)2 x 100%

= 41%

Eventually, the R determinant obtained is 41%. It means that

41% of listening anxiety at the eleventh grade students’ of Senior High

 45

School 1 Bunut was influenced by their listening comprehension and

vise verse. Then, the other 59% was influenced by other unknown

variables or factors.

Chart IV.1
The Contribution of Listening Anxiety toward Listening
Comprehension

41%

59%

Listening Anxiety Other Factor

In conclusion, there is correlation between listening anxiety and

listening comprehension at State Senior High School 1 Bunut. 41%

give influence to students anxiety in listening comprehension at State

Senior High School 1 Bunut. It is categorized into strong level.