Search

The paper presents the application possibility of "Effect size" and Cohen's-d index in the case of introduction of new milk products on the market. The field and online survey were used to establish the potential interest of finalconsumers for new functional food product of dairy company in Slovenia - milk with phytosterols additives. Two techniques possibilities of Cohen-d index were calculated manual and using the Cohen's-d calculator. Further, the application is focused on two main questions in survey regarding observed problem: 1) Would you buy milk with phytosterols additives, which scientifically proven lowers concentration of cholesterol in blood? 2) Would you pay for it at a higher price? The sample includes 419 surveys, 150 surveyswere conducted on field (control group) and 269 surveys were provided online (experimental group). The Cohenćs-d index (d) results show by using manual and Cohen's-d calculator for both groups "small" effect (d=0.35, i.e. d=0.34 ), and "zero or near zero" effect (d=0.15, i.e.= 0.15) when deciding to buy new milk product. U ovom radu prikazan je primjer mogućosti primjene “Utjecaja veličine” i Cohen-d indeksa u slučaju plasiranja novog mliječnog proizvoda na tržište. Terenska i online anketa korištene su za ocjenjivanje potencijalnog interesa potrošača za kupnju novog, funkcionalnog mliječnog proizvoda u Sloveniji - mlijeko s aditivom fitosterolom. Korišten je izračun za dvije vrste Cohen-d indeksa, ručno i pomoću Cohen’s-d kalkulatora na primjeru dvaju glavnih pitanja: 1) Zainteresirani ste za kupnju mlijeka s aditivom fitosterola, koji znanstveno dokazuje sniženje koncentracije kolesterola u krvi i 2) Spremni ste platiti za taj proizvod veću cijenu? Uzorak obuhvaća 419 anketa, od toga provedeno je 150 anketa na terenu (kontrolna skupina), dok je 269 anketa provedeno online (eksperimentalna skupina). Cohen-d indeks (d) rezultati prikazani su za dva prije spomenuta načina izračuna, “mali” učinak (d=0,35, odnosno d=0,34) i “nula ili blizu nule” učinak (d=0,15, odnosno = 0,15).

Travniški nasadi predstavljajo neprecenljivo, a žal skrito in zanemarjeno bogastvo, ki se je skozi desetletja ohranjalo skoraj samo od sebe. V tem diplomskem delu je bilo po različnih kriterijih ocenjenih 85 travniških nasadov na področju Prekmurja. Pridobljeni podatki so prikazali trenutno stanje nasadov v naravi, ki je slabo. Za boljše razumevanje in bolj realno in uravnoteženo razlago ocenitve smo izdelali s sistemom DEXi večparametrski model, ki nam je služil za dodatno oceno sadovnjakov. Na podlagi atributov in izdelanih funkcij smo potrdili, da je stanje res slabo. Oba sistema obdelave podatkov, ki se med seboj dopolnjujeta, sta se izkazala kot uporabna za širše območje in bi lahko bila uporabljena za ocenjevanje pri določanju zneska subvencij za ekstenzivne oziroma travniške nasade. Posredno bi sprožili, da bi ta nebrušen diamant, katerega delček najdemo skoraj na vsakem dvorišču v Sloveniji, bolje upravljali in ga ohranili tudi za prihodnost. Orchard fruit stands represent invaluable but, saddly, hidden and forgotten riches, which have been preserved through decades practically by themselves. In this graduation thesis 85 orchard fruit stands were graded according to different criteria in the Prekmurje area. The obtained results show that the current situation of orchard fruit stands is bad. For better understanding and clearer and balanced explanation of the grading we have devised multiparameter model based on a DEXi system which served for the purpose of additional assessment of orchards. Based on the atributes of the defined functions we confirmed that the situation is in fact bad. Both systems of data processing, which complement each other, were proved as useful for a wider area and could be applied for the calculation of subsidies granted to farmers for the preservation of orchard fruit stands. By doing this we could indirectly achieve that this hidden treasure, a part of which can be found in almost every garden in Slovenia, would be better managed and preserved also in the future.

Človek iz dneva v dan preoblikuje svoj življenjski prostor, tako je tudi tekom svoje evolucije poskrbel za nastanek travniških nasadov. Da bi dobili realno sliko travniških nasadov v današnjem času, smo se odločili za razvoj večparametrskih modelov ocenjevanja, pri čemer smo si pomagali z metodama DEX ter AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process). Obe metodi temeljita na večparametrskih modelih, kjer s pomočjo funkcij določimo, kateri parametri imajo večji pomen pri končni oceni posameznega nasada. Pri metodi DEX je bil uporabljen program DEXi, pri metodi AHP pa program Expert Choice, tako eden kot drugi sta pokazala svoje prednosti in slabosti. Bistvena razlika je v prikazu rezultatov in sicer program DEXi nam poda končne ocene v opisni obliki, zaradi česar je več travniških nasadov dobilo enako končno oceno in ni mogoče na enostaven način določiti razlike med njimi. Expert Choice je bolj natančen in hitro prilagodljiv na spremembe odločitvenega modela, končne ocene nam poda numerično. Rangiranje travniških nasadov je tako bolj natančno oziroma ne prihaja do enakih končnih ocen za več različnih travniških nasadov. Pri obeh metodah se pojavlja problem subjektivnosti odločevalca pri samih osnovnih ocenah in njegova naravnanost na kritičnost. V praksi bi lahko uporabili obe preučevani metodi, predvsem pa metodo AHP oziroma program Expert Choice, ki nam poda natančne numerične ocene dejanskega stanja v naravi. From day to day the man transforms his living space and so he also took care of the emergence of meadow orchards during his evolution. To get a realistic picture of meadow orchards nowadays, we decided to develop a multiparameter assessment models, where we used methods DEX and AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process). Both methods are based on multiparameter models, where with the help of function, we can determine which parameters have higher importance in the final evaluation of individual orchard. Program DEXi was used in method DEX and program Expert Choice in method AHP. Both of programs showed their advantages and disadvantages. The main difference between them is in the presentation of results, where the program DEXi gives us a final evaluation in narrative form and therefore more meadow orchards obtained the same final assesment. This makes it difficult to determine the difference between them in a simple way. Expert Choice is more accurate and able to adapt to changes in the decision model. It gives the final assesment in numerical form. This makes ranking of meadow orchards more accurate and therefore does not come to the same final evaluation for various meadow orchards. In both methods, there is a problem of subjectivity of decison maker at basic evaluation and his stance on the criticism. In practise, we could use both of studied methods, escpecially the method AHP, respectivelly program Expert Choice, which gives us precise numerical assesments of the actual situation in nature.