BAB V. PENUTUP
D. Rekomendasi
Beberapa rekomendasi untuk peneliti-peneliti selanjutnya adalah:
1. Sebaiknya variabel independen corporate governance ditambah cakupannya, seperti struktur kepemilikan ataupun keberadaan
komite-komite lainnya.
2. Variabel kontrol karakteristik perusahaan ukuran perusahaan dengan proksi total aset dapat diganti dengan menggunakan proksi lain, seperti
penjualan atau jumlah karyawan perusahaan.
3. Untuk penelitian selanjutnya bisa juga membandingkan keluasan
environmental disclosure antara industri di Indonesia dengan negara lain (studi komparatif).
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Adams, C.A., dan Harte, G. 1998. The changing portrayal of the employment of women in British banks and retail companies corporate annual reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society. Vol. 23 (80): 781–812
Ahmed, K dan Nichols, D. 1994. The Impact of non-financial company characteristic on Mandatory disclosure Compliance in Developing Countries: The Case of Bangladesh. International Journal of Accounting, Vol. 29 (1): 62-77
Alhabshi, S.O. 1994.Corporate Ethics in the Management of Corporations. The Malaysian Accountant.April: 22-24
Anggraini, R.R. 2006. Pengungkapan Informasi Sosial dan Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Pengungkapan Informasi Sosial dalam Laporan Keuangan Tahunan (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan-Perusahaan yang terdaftar Bursa Efek Jakarta). Simposium Nasional Akuntansi IX (Padang)
Astuti, T.W. 1999. Analisis Disclosure Level Serta Variabel-Variabel Penjelas Sebagai Faktor Penentu Cost of Equity Capital. Skripsi FE UGM
Atkinson, G. 1999. Measuring Corporate Sustainability. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. Vol. 42 (2): 235-252
Bates, G.M. 2002. Environmental Law in Australia. Sydney: Butterworths
Belal, A.R. 2000. Environmental Reporting in Developing Countries: Empirical evidence from Bangladesh. Eco-Management and Auditing. Vol. 7 (3): 114
Barry J.R. 1999.Independent Directors. Ivey Business Journal
Berry A Michael dan Dennis A Rondinelli. 1998. Proactive Corporate Environmental Management: A New Industrial Revolution. Academy of Management Executive. Vol. 12 (2): 38-50
Brick E, Ivan, dan Chidambaran N.K. 2007. Board Meetings, Committee Structure, and Firm Performance. http://papers.ssrn.com. 23 Agustus 2008
Chen, C.J.P., dan Jaggi, B. 2000. Association between independent non-executive directors, family control and financial disclosures in Hong Kong. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. Vol. 19: 285–310
Chinn, R. 2000. Corporate Governance Handbook. Gee Publising Ltd. London
Chuah, B.H. 1995. The unique breed of Malaysian managers. Management Times. New Straits Times Press: Malaysia. March 7-6
Cohen, A. 1974. Two-Dimensional Man. Routledge and Kegan Paul: London
Collier, P. 1993. Factors affecting the formation of audit committees in major UK listed companies. Accounting and Business Research. Vol. 23 (91): 421– 430
Cunnigham, S., dan D. Gaddene. 2003. Do corporation perceive mandatory publication of pollution information for key stakeholders as a legitimacy treath?. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. Vol. 5 (4): 523-549
Davis, K., dan William C.F. 1984. Business and Society: Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics. 5th ed. New York : Mc.Graw Hill
Deegan, C., dan Rankin, M. 1997. The materiality of environmental information to users of annual reports. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal. Vol. 10 (4): 562–583
De Villers, C.J. 1998. The Willingess of South Africans to Support More Green Reporting. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences. Vol. 1 (1): 145-167
Donaldson, T., dan Preston, L. 1995. The stakeholder theory of the corporation— concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review. Vol. 20 (1): 65–92
Dye, R.A., dan Sridhar, S.S. 1995. Industry-wide disclosure dynamics. Journal of Accounting Research. Vol. 33 (1): 157–174
Eipstein, M.J., dan Freedman, M. 1994. Sosial Disclosure and the Individual Investor. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal. Vol. 7 (4): 94-108
Eng, L.L., dan Mak, Y.T. 2001. Corporate Governance and Voluntary Disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. ELSEVIER: 325-345
Fama, E.F., dan Jensen, M.C. 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics. Vol. 26 (2): 301–325
Freedman, M., dan Jaggi, B. 1992. “An Investigation of The Long-Run Relationship Between Pollution Performance and Economic Performance: the Case of Pulp-and-Paper Firms”. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 3 (4): 315-336
Freedman, M., dan Wasley, C. 1990. “The Association Between Environmental Performance and Environmental Disclosure in Annual Reports and 10-Ks”.
Advances in Public Interest Accounting. Vol. 3: 183-193
Finch, N. 2005. The Motivations for Adopting Sustainability Disclosure. Macquaarie Graduate School of Management. Social Science Research Network
Foo, S.L., dan Tan, M.S. 1988. A comparative study of social responsibility reporting in Malaysia and Singapore. Singapore Accountant. August 12–15
Forker, J.J. 1992. Corporate Governance and Disclosure Quality. Accounting and Business Research. Vol. 22 (86): 111-124
Gamble, G.O. 1995. Environmental disclosure in annual report and 10Ks: an examination. Accounting Horizons. Vol. 9 (3): 34-54
Global Reporting Initiatives. 2002. Sustainability Reporting Guidelines. www.globalreporting.org
Gray, R., R Kouhy, dan S. Lavers. 1995. Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting: A Review of Literature and a Longitudinal Study of UK Disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal. Vol. 8 (2): 47-77
Ghozali, I. 2005. Analisis MultivariateDengan Program SPSS. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro
Gujarati, D.N. 2003. Basic Econometrics. Forth Edition. New York: Mc.Graw-Hill
Guthrie, J., dan Parker. L.D. 1990. Corporate Social Reporting: A rebuttal of Legitimacy Theory. Accounting and Business Research. Vol. 19 (76): 343-351
Hadi, A.S. 2006. Regression Analysis by Example. Forth Edition. A John Willey and Sons, Inc
Haniffa dan Cooke. 2005. The Impact of Culture and Governance on Corporate Social Reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. Elsevier. 391-430
Hayuningtyas, P. 2007. Karakteristik Perusahaan, dan Pengungkapan Tanggung Jawab Sosial Perusahaan. Skripsi FE UNS
Hendriksen, Eldon, dan M. Van Brenda. 2001. Accounting Theory. USA: Mc.Graw-Hill
Herwidayatmo. 2000. Implementasi Good Corporate Governance Untuk Perusahaan Publik Indonesia. Usahawan. Edisi 10/Tahun XXIX: 25-32
IAI. 2004. Standar Akuntansi Keuangan. Jakarta: Salemba Empat
Ja`far, M. 2006. Pengaruh Dorongan Manajemen Lingkungan, Manajemen Lingkungan Proaktif dan Kinerja Lingkungan terhadap Public Environmental Reporting. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi IX (Padang)
John, K., dan L.W. Senbet. 1998. Corporate Governance and Board Effectiveness.
Journal of Banking and Finance. Vol. 22: 371-403
Kaihatu, T.S. 2006. Good Corporate Governance dan Penerapannya di Indonesia. Jurnal Ekonomi Manajemen Universitas Kristen Petra Surabaya.
www.petra.ac.id. 06-09-2008
Komar, S. 2004. Akuntansi Pertanggungjawaban Sosial (Social Responsibility Accounting) dan Korelasinya dengan Akuntansi Islam. Media Akuntansi.
Edisi 42/Tahun XI: 54-58
Kusumastuti, Supatmi, dan Sastra. 2007. Pengaruh Board Diversity terhadap Nilai Perusahaan dalam Perspektif Corporate Governance. Jurnal Ekonomi Manajemen Universitas Kristen Petra Surabaya. www.petra.ac.id. 06-09-2008
Mathews, M.R. 1985. Social and Environmental Accounting : A practical demonstration of ethical concern. Journal of Business Ethics. Vol. 14: 663-671
McMullen, D.A. 1996. Audit committee performance: an investigation of the consequences associated with audit committee. Auditing: A Journal of Theory and Practice. Vol. 15 (1): 87–103
Menon dan Williams. 1994. The Use of Audit Committees for Monitoring. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. Vol. 13: 121-139
Monks, R.A.G., dan Minow, N. 2003. Corporate Governance 3rd edition. Blackwell Publishing
Morgan, A. 1987. Solving polynomial systems using continuation for engineering and scientific problems. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J
Naim, Ainun, dan F. Rakhman. 2000. Analisis Hubungan Antara Kelengkapan Pengungkapan Laporan Keuangan dengan Struktur Modal dan Tipe Kepemilikan Perusahaan. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Indonesia. Vol. 15 (1): 70-82
Neimark, M.D. 1992. The Hidden Dimensions of Annual Reports. Paul Chapman:
London
Niskanen, J., dan T. Nieminen. 2001. The Objectivity of Corporate environmental reporting: a study of finish listed firms' environemental disclosure. Business Strategy and The Environment. Vol. 10 (1): 29
Nurudin. 2004. Menggugat Pendidikan Hard Skill.
http://www.suaramerdeka.com/harian/0410/04/opi04.htm. 28 Agustus 2008
Nyquist, S. 2003. The Legislation of environmental disclosure in three Nordic Countries – a comparisons. Bussiness Strategy and The Environment. Vol. 12 (1): 12
Parson, E.A. 1996. Reflections on air capture: the political economy of active intervention in the global environment. Climatic Change: 1-11
Pincus, K., Rusbarsky, M. dan Wong, J.W. 1989. Voluntary formation of corporate audit committees among NASDAQ firms. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. Vol. 8 (4): 239-265
Pflieger, J., M. Fischer, T. Kupfer; P. Eyerer. 2005. The contribution of life cycle assessment to global sustainability reporting of Organization. Management of Environmental. Vol. 16 (2)
Pound, J. 1995. The promise of the governed corporation. Harvard Business Review. Vol. 73 (2): 89–98
Reliant Energy Inc. 2007. Corporate Governance Guidelines. www.ssrn.com. 06-09-2008
Roberts, C. 1992. Environmental disclosures: A note on reporting practices in mainland Europe. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability. Vol. 4 (3): 62– 71
Rosenstein, S., dan Wyatt, J.G. 1990. Outside directors, board independence and shareholder wealth. Journal of Financial Economics. Vol. 26: 175–192
Santrock, J.W. 1995.Life Span Development:Perkembangan Masa Hidup. Edisi 5 jilid II. Penerbit Erlangga: Jakarta
Setyawan, S. 2005.“Konteks Budaya Etnis Tionghoa dalam Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia“.Jurnal Manajemen dan Bisnis BENEFIT. Vol. 9 (2): 164 – 170. BPPE FE UMS
Sekaran, U. 2003. Research Method for Business. USA: John Wiley & Sons
Sendut, H. 1991. Managing in a Multicultural Society: The Malaysian Experience. Malaysian Management Review. Vol. 26 (1): 61-69
Shaw, J.C. 2003. Corporate Governance and Risk : A system approach. John Wiley and Sons. Inc.New Jersey
Simon, S.M. Ho, dan Wong. 2001. Astudy of Relationship Between Corporate Governance structures and The Extent of Voluntary Disclosure. Journal of International Accounting Auditing and Taxation. ELSEVIER: 139-156
Solomon, Aris, dan Linda Lewis. 2002. Incentives and disincentives corporate environmental disclosure. Busines Strategy and The Environment. Vol. 11 (3): 154
Specter, C.N dan Solomon, J.S. 1990. The human resource factor in Chinese management and reform: Comparing the attitudes and motivations of future
managers in Shanghai, China; Baltimore, Maryland; and Miami, Florida. International Studies of Management and Organisations. Vol. 20: 69–83
Suhardjanto, D. 2008. Environmental Reporting Practies: An Evidence From Indonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Bisnis. Vol. 8 (1): 33-46
Suhardjanto, Tower, dan Brown. 2007. Generating a Uniquely Indonesian Environmental Reporting Disclosure Index Using Press Coverage as an Important Proxy of Stakeholder Demand. Asian Academic Accounting Association annual conference Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Sugiyono. 2007. Menjawab Stigma, Mewariskan Tradisi.
http://www.kabarejogja.com/new/canthing2.html. 14 Juni 2008
Sularso, R.A. 2003. Pengaruh Pengumuman Dividen Terhadap Perubahan Harga Saham (Return) Sebelum dan Sesudah Ex-Dividend Date di Bursa Efek Jakarta (BEJ). Jurnal Akuntansi & Keuangan. Vol. 5
Suratno, I.B., Darsono, dan Mutmainah. 2006. Pengaruh Environmental Performance terhadap Environmental Disclosure dan Economic Performance (Studi Empiris Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Jakarta Periode 2001-2004). Simposium Nasional Akuntansi IX (Padang)
Suwardjono. 2005. Perekayasaan Pelaporan Keuangan. Teori Akuntansi. Yogyakarta. BPFE
Triyuwono, I. 1997. Akuntansi Syariah dan Koperasi Mencari Bentuk dalam Amanah. Jurnal Akuntansi dan auditing Indonesia. Vol. 1 (1): 3-46
WALHI. 2005. Laporan Indorayon Tidak Sesuai Fakta. http://www.walhi.or.id/
Walk, H.I., dan J.R. Francis, dan M.G. Tearney. 1989. Accounting Theory: A conceptual and institusional approach. 2nd ed. Boston: PWS-Kent Publising
Weir, C., dan Laing, D. 2003. Ownership structure, board composition and the market for corporate control in the UK: An empirical analysis. Applied Economics. Vol.35: 1747–1759
Welford, R. 1998. Corporate Environmental Managemen. London: Eartscan Publication
Woodward, D.G. 1998. Specification of a content-based approach for use in
corporate social reporting analysis. Southampton Institute working paper
Yunita, H.M. 2008. Pengaruh Implentasi Governance Terhadap Pengungkapan Informasi. Skripsi FE UII
Zhegal, D., dan Ahmed. SA. 1990. Comparison of social responsibility information disclosure media used by Canadian .rms. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal. Vol. 3 (1): 38–53
LAMPIRAN 3
Descriptives
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
ED 44 .59 11.20 5.3989 2.62110
Valid N (listwise) 44
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
pro_dki 90 .50 100.00 42.3787 15.06395 pro_kai 90 25.00 100.00 55.6136 22.92498 rapat_dk 90 2 77 9.23 12.059 rapat_ka 90 1 104 10.26 13.274 Aset 90 314993000 312533200000000 17257907027079.53 46089452435045.730 Valid N (listwise) 90
75
LAMPIRAN 4
HASIL UJI Asumsi Klasik
Normalitas
NPar Tests
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Unstandardized Residual N 44 Mean .0000000 Normal Parametersa Std. Deviation 2.02335219 Absolute .104 Positive .104
Most Extreme Differences
Negative -.067
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .692
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .725
a. Test distribution is Normal.
Dari tabel di atas menunjukkan nilai probabilitas jauh di atas 0.05, yaitu sebesar 0.752, hal ini dapat disimpulkan bahwa data berdistribusi
76
Multikolineritas
Coefficientsa
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients Collinearity Statistics Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIF
(Constant) -8.397 4.618 -1.819 .078 Prop_DKI .060 .029 .328 2.093 .044 .695 1.438 LBC_PK 1.088 .584 .255 1.862 .071 .910 1.099 LBP_PK .026 .790 .005 .033 .974 .735 1.361 Rapat_DK -.003 .034 -.014 -.090 .929 .676 1.479 Prop_KA -.024 .018 -.208 -1.322 .195 .691 1.448 Rapat_KA -.011 .020 -.073 -.540 .592 .935 1.070 TI .546 .545 .158 1.001 .324 .687 1.456 1 LogAset .787 .464 .309 1.695 .099 .511 1.955 a. Dependent Variable: ED
Dari tabel di atas menunjukkan bahwa tidak ada variabel bebas yang
mempunyai nilai tolerance kurang dari 0.10, hal ini berarti tidak ada korelasi antar variabel bebas. Hasil perhitungan nilai VIF (Variance Inflation Factor) juga menunjukkan hal yang sama, dimana tidak satupun variabel bebas yang memiliki nilai VIF lebih besar dari 10, sehingga dapat disimpulkan bahwa
tidak terdapat multikolinearitas antar variabel bebas maka model regresi layak
77 Autokorelasi Model Summaryb Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson 1 .636a .404 .268 2.24270 2.031
a. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Rapat_KA, Prop_KA, LBP_PK, Rapat_DK, Prop_DKI, TI
b. Dependent Variable: ED
Berdasarkan hasil uji autokorelasi pada tabel di atas, nilai dhitung (Durbin Watson) sebesar 2.031 berada di antara du dan 4-du atau du<dhitung<4-du. Nilai du sebesar 1.768 diperoleh dari tabel Durbin Watson dengan nilai signifikan 0,01 dan k =8. Setelah nilai du diperoleh, maka dapat ditentukan nilai 4-du sebesar 2.232 (4 − 1.768). Dari hasil tersebut dapat disimpulkan bahwa tidak terjadi
autokorelasi dalam penelitian ini, sehingga model regresi yang dilakukan layak untuk digunakan.
Heteroskedastisitas
Dari grafik tersebut terlihat titik-titik yang tersebar baik di atas maupun di bawah angka 0 pada sumbu Y, sehingga model regresi layak dipakai.
78 LAMPIRAN 1
DAFTAR PERUSAHAAN SAMPEL
No Nama Perusahaan
1 Arpeni Pratama Ocean Line (APOL) 2 Astra Graphia (ASGR)
3 Berlian Laju Tanker (BLTA) 4 Fortune Indonesia (FORU)
5 Millenium Pharmacon International (SDPC) 6 PT Matahari Putra Prima Tbk
7 PT. Pusako Tarinka 8 PT. Panorama setrawisata 9 PT. Pudjiadi and Sons
10 PT. Pelayaran tempuran emas 11 PT. Tira austenite
12 PT Pelita Sejahtera Abadi Tbk 13 Centrin Online (CENT)
14 PT Hero Supermarket Tbk (HERO) 15 PT Indosiar Karya Media Tbk (IDKM) 16 Bank Artha Graha Internasional (INPC) 17 Bank Pan Indonesia (PNBN)
18 Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BBRI) 19 Bank Bukopin (BBKP)
20 Bank Century (BCIC)
21 Asia Kapitalindo Securities (AKSI) 22 Bank Lippo (LPBN)
23 Bank Niaga (BNGA) 24 Bank Permata (BNLI)
25 Adira Dinamika Multi Finance (ADMF) 26 PT. Pan Pacific International
27 Bank Central Asia Tbk 28 Bank Mandiri
29 Bank Bumiputera Indonesia (BABP) 30 Asuransi Dayin Mitra (ASDM) 31 BFI Finance Indonesia (BFIN) 32 PT. Trust finance Indonesia
33 Bintang Mitra Semetaraya (BMSR) 34 Bhuwanatala Indah Permai(BIPP)
79 35 Citra Marga Nusaphala Persada (CMNP)
36 Darma Henwa (DEWA)
37 PT Mobile-8 Telecom Tbk (FREN) 38 PT Hexindo Adiperkasa Tbk (HEXA) 39 PT Indonesia Paradise Property Tbk (INPP) 40 PT Myoh Technology Tbk 41 PT Lippo Cikarang Tbk (LPCK) 42 PT Metrodata Electronics Tbk (MTDL) 43 PT. Rukun Raharja 44 PT. Sentul city 45 PT. Suryainti permata 46 PT. Telkom Indonesia 47 PT. Tunas ridean 48 PT. United tractors 49 PT. Wijaya karya 50 PT Jasa Marga Tbk
51 PT Jaya Real Property Tbk
52 PT Jakarta Setiabudi Internasional Tbk (JSPT) 53 PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol Tbk (PJAA) 54 Ciputra Development
55 Indofood sukses makmur
56 PT. Indocement Tunggal Perkasa 57 Indofarma
58 Fajar Surya wisesa 59 Holcim Indonesia 60 PT Energi Mega Persada 61 Gudang Garam
62 Adhi Karya Tbk 63 Aneka Tambang Tbk 64 Apexindo Pratama Duta 65 Bakrie&Brother Tbk 66 Bumi Resources (BUMI) 67 Central Proteina Prima (CPRO) 68 PT Semen Gresik
69 PT Bukit Asam
70 PT Sumalindo Lestari Jaya 71 International Nickel (Inco) 72 AKR Corporindo (AKRA) 73 Astra International (ASII)
80 74 Bakrie Telecom (BTEL)
75 Bakrieland Development (ELTY) 76 Intiland Development (DILD) 77 Lippo Karawaci (LPKR) 78 Elnusa (ELSA)
79 PT Indonesia Prima Property Tbk 80 PT. Modernland Reality
81 PT. Modern Intrnasional
82 PT. Royal oak development asia 83 PT. Radiant utama interinsco 84 PT. Suryamas dutamakmur 85 PT Total Bangun Persada 86 Indosat (ISAT)
87 PT. Nusantara Infrastruktur 88 PT. Pakuwon Jati
89 PT. Panca wiratama sakti
81 LAMPIRAN 2
DAFTAR PERUSAHAAN DENGAN BOBOT ENVIRONMENTAL DISCLOSURE
No Nama Perusahaan Bobot ED
1 Arpeni Pratama Ocean Line (APOL) 4.54
2 Astra Graphia (ASGR) 8.69
3 Fortune Indonesia (FORU) 2.27
4 PT. Panorama setrawisata 0.67
5 PT. Pudjiadi and Sons 7.55
6 PT. Tira austenite 0.59
7 PT Pelita Sejahtera Abadi Tbk 0.95
8 Bank Pan Indonesia (PNBN) 4.11
9 Bank Permata (BNLI) 7.03
10 Adira Dinamika Multi Finance (ADMF) 0.59
11 Bank Mandiri 7.36
12 Citra Marga Nusaphala Persada (CMNP) 4.98
13 Darma Henwa (DEWA) 6.62
14 PT Hexindo Adiperkasa Tbk (HEXA) 2.27
15 PT Indonesia Paradise Property Tbk (INPP) 4.59
16 PT Lippo Cikarang Tbk (LPCK) 5.24
17 PT. Sentul city 5.22
18 PT. Telkom Indonesia 4.49
19 PT. Wijaya karya 6.1
20 PT Jaya Real Property Tbk 9.48
21 PT Jakarta Setiabudi Internasional Tbk (JSPT) 4.79
22 PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol Tbk (PJAA) 4.44
23 Ciputra Development 5.92
24 Indofood sukses makmur 5.25
25 PT. Indocement Tunggal Perkasa 8.11
26 Fajar Surya wisesa 4.23
27 Holcim Indonesia 7.49
28 PT Energi Mega Persada 4.65
29 Adhi Karya Tbk 5.92
30 Aneka Tambang Tbk 9.43
31 Apexindo Pratama Duta 4.49
32 Bakrie&Brother Tbk 6.86
33 Bumi Resources (BUMI) 6.28
34 Central Proteina Prima (CPRO) 2.86
82
36 PT Bukit Asam 7.34
37 PT Sumalindo Lestari Jaya 7.8
38 International Nickel (Inco) 11.21
39 Astra International (ASII) 7.77
40 Bakrie Telecom (BTEL) 4.59
41 Bakrieland Development (ELTY) 1.63
42 Intiland Development (DILD) 5.32
43 Lippo Karawaci (LPKR) 4.18
83
LAMPIRAN 5
Regression
Variables Entered/Removedb Model Variables Entered Variables Removed Method 1 LogAset, LBC_PK, Rapat_KA, Prop_KA, LBP_PK, Rapat_DK, Prop_DKI, TIa . Enter2 . LBP_PK Backward (criterion: Probability of F-to-remove >= ,100). 3 . Rapat_DK Backward (criterion: Probability of F-to-remove >= ,100). 4 . Rapat_KA Backward (criterion: Probability of F-to-remove >= ,100). 5 . TI Backward (criterion: Probability of F-to-remove >= ,100). 6 . Prop_KA Backward (criterion: Probability of F-to-remove >= ,100). a. All requested variables entered.
84 Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 .636a .404 .268 2.24270 2 .636b .404 .288 2.21137 3 .636c .404 .307 2.18156 4 .631d .399 .320 2.16212 5 .618e .382 .318 2.16408 6 .590f .349 .300 2.19346
a. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Rapat_KA, Prop_KA, LBP_PK, Rapat_DK, Prop_DKI, TI
b. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Rapat_KA, Prop_KA, Rapat_DK, Prop_DKI, TI
c. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Rapat_KA, Prop_KA, Prop_DKI, TI
d. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Prop_KA, Prop_DKI, TI e. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Prop_KA, Prop_DKI f. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Prop_DKI
85 ANOVAg
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 119.377 8 14.922 2.967 .012a Residual 176.040 35 5.030 1 Total 295.417 43 Regression 119.371 7 17.053 3.487 .006b Residual 176.046 36 4.890 2 Total 295.417 43 Regression 119.325 6 19.888 4.179 .003c Residual 176.091 37 4.759 3 Total 295.417 43 Regression 117.775 5 23.555 5.039 .001d Residual 177.642 38 4.675 4 Total 295.417 43 Regression 112.770 4 28.193 6.020 .001e Residual 182.646 39 4.683 5 Total 295.417 43 Regression 102.965 3 34.322 7.134 .001f Residual 192.451 40 4.811 6 Total 295.417 43
a. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Rapat_KA, Prop_KA, LBP_PK, Rapat_DK, Prop_DKI, TI b. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Rapat_KA, Prop_KA, Rapat_DK, Prop_DKI, TI
c. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Rapat_KA, Prop_KA, Prop_DKI, TI d. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Prop_KA, Prop_DKI, TI
e. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Prop_KA, Prop_DKI f. Predictors: (Constant), LogAset, LBC_PK, Prop_DKI
86
Coefficientsa
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
(Constant) -8.397 4.618 -1.819 .078 Prop_DKI .060 .029 .328 2.093 .044 LBC_PK 1.088 .584 .255 1.862 .071 LBP_PK .026 .790 .005 .033 .974 Rapat_DK -.003 .034 -.014 -.090 .929 Prop_KA -.024 .018 -.208 -1.322 .195 Rapat_KA -.011 .020 -.073 -.540 .592 TI .546 .545 .158 1.001 .324 1 LogAset .787 .464 .309 1.695 .099 (Constant) -8.427 4.466 -1.887 .067 Prop_DKI .060 .028 .326 2.174 .036 LBC_PK 1.091 .569 .255 1.918 .063 Rapat_DK -.003 .033 -.015 -.097 .924 Prop_KA -.024 .017 -.209 -1.429 .162 Rapat_KA -.011 .019 -.073 -.554 .583 TI .543 .534 .157 1.018 .316 2 LogAset .792 .430 .311 1.844 .073 (Constant) -8.316 4.259 -1.953 .058 Prop_DKI .059 .026 .322 2.273 .029 LBC_PK 1.104 .545 .258 2.024 .050 Prop_KA -.023 .015 -.204 -1.506 .141 Rapat_KA -.011 .019 -.074 -.571 .572 TI .556 .510 .161 1.090 .283 3 LogAset .777 .396 .305 1.965 .057 (Constant) -8.414 4.217 -1.995 .053 Prop_DKI .057 .026 .313 2.241 .031 LBC_PK 1.107 .541 .259 2.048 .048 Prop_KA -.022 .015 -.192 -1.445 .157 TI .519 .502 .150 1.035 .307 4 LogAset .781 .392 .307 1.992 .054 (Constant) -9.451 4.100 -2.305 .027 Prop_DKI .055 .026 .300 2.154 .037 LBC_PK 1.120 .541 .262 2.071 .045 Prop_KA -.022 .015 -.192 -1.447 .156 5 LogAset .979 .343 .385 2.857 .007 (Constant) -9.851 4.146 -2.376 .022 Prop_DKI .045 .025 .248 1.818 .077 LBC_PK 1.186 .546 .278 2.171 .036 6 LogAset .934 .346 .367 2.701 .010 a. Dependent Variable: ED
87
LAMPIRAN 6
Logistic Regression
Case Processing Summary
Unweighted Casesa N Percent
Included in Analysis 44 48.9 Missing Cases 46 51.1 Selected Cases Total 90 100.0 Unselected Cases 0 .0 Total 90 100.0
a. If weight is in effect, see classification table for the total number of cases.
Dependent Variable Encoding
Original
Value Internal Value
0 0
1 1
Model Summary
Step -2 Log likelihood
Cox & Snell R Square Nagelkerke R Square 1 51.681a .148 .200 2 51.748a .146 .199 3 51.870a .144 .195 4 52.125a .139 .189 5 52.480a .132 .179 6 53.076a .120 .163 7 53.694a .108 .146 8 54.813a .085 .115
a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 5 because parameter estimates changed by less than ,001. a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 5 because parameter estimates changed by less than ,001.
88 Hosmer and Lemeshow Test
Step Chi-square df Sig.
1 6.397 8 .603 2 3.860 8 .870 3 4.978 8 .760 4 8.961 8 .346 5 13.335 8 .101 6 3.934 8 .863 7 4.523 8 .807 8 4.605 8 .799
89
Variables in the Equation
B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B)
pro_dki -.009 .029 .097 1 .755 .991 lb_lbc_pk -.384 .696 .304 1 .581 .681 lb_lbp_pk -.690 .755 .837 1 .360 .501 rapat_dk -.013 .026 .240 1 .624 .988 pro_ka -.007 .017 .174 1 .676 .993 rapat_ka .021 .028 .556 1 .456 1.021 ti .119 .463 .066 1 .797 1.127 Aset .000 .000 1.481 1 .224 1.000 Step 1a Constant .646 1.836 .124 1 .725 1.907 pro_dki -.010 .029 .117 1 .732 .990 lb_lbc_pk -.366 .692 .279 1 .597 .694 lb_lbp_pk -.635 .722 .774 1 .379 .530 rapat_dk -.012 .026 .232 1 .630 .988 pro_ka -.007 .017 .166 1 .684 .993 rapat_ka .022 .027 .635 1 .425 1.022 Aset .000 .000 1.503 1 .220 1.000 Step 2a Constant .830 1.682 .244 1 .622 2.294 lb_lbc_pk -.347 .695 .249 1 .618 .707 lb_lbp_pk -.697 .702 .987 1 .320 .498 rapat_dk -.015 .024 .413 1 .521 .985 pro_ka -.009 .016 .322 1 .571 .991 rapat_ka .021 .028 .603 1 .438 1.022 Aset .000 .000 1.588 1 .208 1.000 Step 3a Constant .560 1.492 .141 1 .707 1.751 lb_lbp_pk -.734 .700 1.099 1 .294 .480 rapat_dk -.017 .023 .511 1 .475 .983 pro_ka -.009 .016 .349 1 .555 .991 rapat_ka .020 .028 .495 1 .482 1.020 Aset .000 .000 1.637 1 .201 1.000 Step 4a Constant .162 1.250 .017 1 .897 1.176 lb_lbp_pk -.640 .676 .897 1 .344 .527 rapat_dk -.017 .023 .536 1 .464 .983 rapat_ka .022 .029 .599 1 .439 1.023 Aset .000 .000 1.995 1 .158 1.000 Step 5a Constant -.483 .622 .603 1 .437 .617 lb_lbp_pk -.624 .670 .865 1 .352 .536 rapat_ka .017 .024 .509 1 .475 1.017 Aset .000 .000 1.682 1 .195 1.000 Step 6a Constant -.606 .603 1.010 1 .315 .545 lb_lbp_pk -.697 .661 1.111 1 .292 .498 Aset .000 .000 1.777 1 .183 1.000 Step 7a Constant -.396 .532 .553 1 .457 .673 Aset .000 .000 1.793 1 .181 1.000 Step 8a Constant -.803 .381 4.442 1 .035 .448
90
LAMPIRAN 7
Univariate Analysis of Variance
Between-Subjects Factors N 1 31 2 10 LBC_PK 3 3
Levene's Test of Equality of Error Variancesa
Dependent Variable:ED
F df1 df2 Sig. .412 2 41 .665 Tests the null hypothesis that the error variance of the dependent variable is equal across groups. a. Design: Intercept + LBC_PK
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable:ED
Source
Type III Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Corrected Model 40.841a 2 20.421 3.289 .047 Intercept 805.073 1 805.073 129.659 .000 LBC_PK 40.841 2 20.421 3.289 .047 Error 254.576 41 6.209 Total 1577.917 44 Corrected Total 295.417 43 a. R Squared = .138 (Adjusted R Squared = .096)
91
Post Hoc Tests
Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable:ED 95% Confidence Interval (I) LBC_P K (J) LBC_P K Mean Difference
(I-J) Std. Error Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound 2 -.2867 .90621 .946 -2.4903 1.9169 1 3 -3.8630* 1.50666 .037 -7.5267 -.1993 1 .2867 .90621 .946 -1.9169 2.4903 2 3 -3.5763 1.64032 .087 -7.5650 .4123 1 3.8630* 1.50666 .037 .1993 7.5267 Tukey HSD 3 2 3.5763 1.64032 .087 -.4123 7.5650 2 -.2867 .90621 1.000 -2.5487 1.9754 1 3 -3.8630* 1.50666 .042 -7.6239 -.1021 1 .2867 .90621 1.000 -1.9754 2.5487 2 3 -3.5763 1.64032 .105 -7.6709 .5182 1 3.8630* 1.50666 .042 .1021 7.6239 Bonferroni 3 2 3.5763 1.64032 .105 -.5182 7.6709 Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 6.209. *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.
92
LAMPIRAN 8
T-Test
Group Statistics
Aset N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 1 27 5.9211 2.45746 .47294 ED
0 17 4.5712 2.73544 .66344
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for Equality
of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error
Difference Lower Upper Equal variances
assumed .214 .646 1.699 42 .097 1.34993 .79475 -.25394 2.95381 ED
Equal variances not