건강행태, 스마트폰중독 및 자살생각지수가 주관적 행복지수에 미치는 영향 (Factors Influencing Subjective Happiness Index of Health behavior, Smart phone addiction, Suicidal Ideation among College students)
-
- 디지털융복합연구
- /
- 제11권10호
- /
- pp.557-569
- /
- 2013
본 연구의 목적은 대학생을 대상으로 건강행태, 스마트폰 중독 및 자살생각지수에 대한 실태를 조사하고 주관적 행복지수에 영향을 미치는 요인을 파악하여 대응방안을 마련하고자 하였다. 자료 수집은 2012년 11월19일부터 12월14일 까지 K시 소재 일개대학의 학생들을 대상으로 횡단적 자가보고 설문지를 수집하였다. 자료분석은 일반적 특성과 건강행태가 스마트폰 중독 및 자살생각지수가, 주관적 행복지수에 차이가 있는지 t-test 및 ANOVA를 시행하고, 변수간의 상관관계는 Pearson Correlation Coefficient, 영향을 미치는 요인을 알아보기 위하여 주관적 행복지수를 종속변수로 하여 단계적 다중 회귀분석을 실시하였다. 결과적으로 주관적 행복지수는 4.58점으로 중간 보다 높았고, 성별, 부모생존 및 동거, 월수입에 따라 차이가 있었고, 요인분석결과 17.7%의 설명력을 보였으며, 가정수입이 201-400만원미만에서 주관적 행복지수가 높았고(
Purpose - Despite the importance of price, many companies do not implement pricing policies smoothly, because typical price management strategies insufficiently consider logistics efficiency and an increase in logistics costs due to logistics waste. This study attempts to examine the effect of product line pricing, which corresponds to product mix pricing, on logistics efficiency in the case of manufacturer A, and analyzes how logistics performance changes in response to these variables. Research design, data, and methodology - This study, based on the case of manufacturer A, involved research through understanding the current status, analyses, and then proposing improvement measures. Among all the products of manufacturer A, product group B was selected as the research object, and its distribution channel and line pricing were examined. As a result of simulation, for products with low loading efficiency, improvement measures such as changing the number of bags in the box were suggested, and a quantitative analysis was conducted on how these measures influence logistics costs. The TOPS program was used for the Pallet loading efficiency simulation tool in this study. To prevent products from protruding out of the pallet, the maximum measurement was set as 0.0mm, and loading efficiency was based on the pallet area, and not volume. In other words, its size (length x width) was focused upon, following the purpose of this study and, then, the results were obtained. Results - As a result of the loading efficiency simulation, when the number of bags in the box was changed for 36 products with low average loading efficiency of 73.7%, as shown in