Figure 4.23 Average MGT scores by occupation – SI
4.5 Matched guise test results 4.5.1 Introduction
Thus far we have examined the MGT results according to response percentages as well as according to the different variables age, education level, sex, and location. This section will be devoted to overall findings
within the matched guise test, especially in answering whether there is a significant difference or not in total scores between Indonesian and Jambi Malay. Although it is not possible to statistically test for
differences between the matched guise test and the questionnaire, some broad observations on their varying results will be made as well.
4.5.2 Difference between Jambi Malay and Indonesian
First of all, table 4.61 shows the results of a t-test performed on the MGT between Indonesian and Jambi Malay. With a criteria set at p .01, there was not a statistically significant difference between the total
Indonesian average and the total Jambi Malay average t statistic -1.93, p .0548.
Table 4.61 Difference in MGT scores by language test: paired samples t-test
Even though it was not significantly higher, the average score for Indonesian was slightly higher than the average score for Jambi Malay, which is what was expected at the outset.
4.5.3 Matched guise test scores according to speaker
Looking further at the matched guise test, in figure 4.24 the total scores according to each of the four speakers are given. In this graph it can be seen that the scores for the male speakers Sayuti and B. were
somewhat higher than for the females. Also, for two of the speakers Sayuti and Indah, the scores were slightly higher for their Jambi Malay recordings than for their Indonesian recordings, while for B. and
Nyimas the scores for Jambi Malay were lower than for Indonesian.
Figure 4.24 Average MGT scores by recorded speaker
A t-test was performed on each of the individual speakers’ average scores to see where there were differences between their Indonesian and Jambi Malay recordings. Table 4.62, table 4.63, and table 4.64 all
demonstrate that there was no significant difference between Jambi Malay and Indonesian for three of the speakers: Sayuti, Indah, and B.
Table 4.62 MGT scores for Sayuti by language test: paired samples t-test
Table 4.63 MGT scores for Indah by language test: paired samples t-test
Table 4.64 MGT scores for B. by language test: paired samples t-test
In table 4.65, however, the difference in scores for Nyimas’ Indonesian and Jambi Malay was statistically significant t statistic -3.65, p .0003. In this case, there was a large gap between the higher
Indonesian average and the lower Jambi Malay average. Noteworthy is the fact that Nyimas has had the most contact with foreigners on a daily basis in her workplace in Jambi City despite living in Jambi
Seberang, and that numerous times her voice in Indonesian was mistaken for a well-known high-level government official.
Table 4.65 MGT scores for Nyimas by language test: paired samples t-test
4.5.4 Differences between the matched guise test and the questionnaire
