Hypotheses:

First Hypothesis: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of obstacles that weaken women's
participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan due to the
educational qualification variable (postgraduate studies / bachelor / intermediate
diploma).

Second Hypothesis: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between

the average responses of the study sample in the degree of obstacles that weaken
women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan due to
marital status variable (married/not married).

Third Hypothesis: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of obstacles that weaken women's
participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan due to number of
daily working hours (48 hours or more / (40-47) hours / 39 hours or less).

Fourth Hypothesis: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between

the average responses of the study sample in the degree of obstacles that weaken
women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan due to the
variable of having health insurance that covers all family members (yes/no).

Social and cultural obstacles

1. Low societal awareness of women's participation in the construction sector
2. The culture of the conservative society does not encourage the idea of women
working in construction projects
3. The prevailing masculine culture in society
4. Difficulty balancing family, work and social life
5. The physiological structure of women's nature and femininity, which weakens
their participation in the construction sector

1
 6. The concept of intolerance against women limits the activation of their role in
the construction sector
7. Aggressive behaviors of males against women working in construction projects
8. Customs and societal habits

Managerial obstacles
1. The general perception that women lack the skills and competencies that qualify
them to work in the construction sector
2. Fear of women's inability to take responsibility for working in construction
projects
3. Employers in construction projects are convinced of man's capabilities
4. Unfair discrimination of training needs between men and women
5. Long working hours negatively affect women's participation in the construction
sector
6. The nature of the construction sector work weakens women's participation in
the construction sector
7. Women's work is not underestimated in construction projects
8. The isolation of the work sites of some construction works negatively affects
participation in work in the construction sector
9. The hardship of work conditions.

Economic obstacles
1. There are no development plans to enhance the role of women working in
construction projects
2. The high cost of living contributed to pushing women to work in construction
projects
3. The Jordanian Labor Law is unfair with regard to women's participation in the
construction sector
4. The Jordanian Social Security Law does not guarantee the effective participation
of women in the construction sector
5. The effect of Covid-19 pandemic on the economic life.
2
 Analysis
The population of the study comprised 250 women working in Construction sector in
Karak Governorate-Jordan. According to (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016), the sample size
should consists of 152 individuals or more. A set of 160 copies the study tool
(questionnaire) were distributed randomly to individuals of the study population, all
them were restored. three of the restored copies were invalid for statistical analysis and
neglected, so the number of the valid copies equals 157 consisting the study sample.

Validity of the Study:

The researcher has examined the face validity of the questionnaire and its answers'
consistency by presenting it to experienced Arbitrators from Mutah University and other
Jordanian universities. The items of the instrument of the study were modified
according to their opinions and propositions.
Reliability of the Study:
Reliability is described as consistency by Huck (2007). The internal consistency reliability
of the instrument was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha due to its versatility with the use
of continuous variables (Huck, 2012). The coefficient alpha of .70 cutoff (Nunnally &
Bernstein , 1994) was met and exceeded with each of the three scales employed within
this study.
Table 1 Test for Reliability

Items Variable No. of Items Cronbach's Alpha

Q1 – Q8 Social and Cultural Obstacles (OBS_1) 8 .701

Q9- Q17 Administrative Obstacles (OBS_2) 9 .707
Q18- Q22 Economic and Political Obstacles (OBS_3) 5 .838

Descriptive Statistics
In order to determine the degree of convenience, the researcher has identified 3 levels
that are: high, Moderate and low according to the following equation

3
 upper limit of the alternative−lower limit of the alternative
Interval Length=
No. of Levels

Table (2) illustrates the adopted scale for determining the agreement level of the
arithmetic average.

Table 2 Agreement Level of Arithmetic Average

Arithmetic average Convenience level

1 - 2.33 Low
2.34 - 3.67 Moderate
3.68 - 5 High

The descriptive statistics shown in table (3) illustrate that Social and Cultural Obstacles
variable has got a mean of 3.2174 with a standard deviation of .40161 and according to
table (2) this variable has got a moderate degree of agreement, Administrative
Obstacles variable has got a mean of 3.0205 with a standard deviation of .57126 and
according to table (3) this variable has got a moderate degree of agreement, Training
variable has got a mean of 2.7516 with a standard deviation of .70771 and according to
table (3) this variable has got a moderate degree of agreement.
To check that a distribution of scores is normal, we need to look at the values of
kurtosis and skewness. The values for skewness and kurtosis between -2 and +2 are
considered acceptable in order to prove normal univariate distribution (George &
Mallery, 2010). It is obvious from table (2) that the values of the three variables
considered in the study lie in this range so the distribution of these variables are
considered normal.

4
 Table 3 Descriptive Statistics of Main Variables of the Study

N Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error

Social Obstacles 157 3.1900 .65052 .145 .194 -.111 .385

Managerial Obstacles 157 3.1632 .63528 -.117 .194 -.346 .385

Economic Obstacles 157 2.8016 .77162 .173 .194 -.616 .385

Valid N (listwise) 157

The results shown in table (4) indicate the arithmetic averages, standard deviations, RII
and the degree of agreement of all items related to the Social and Cultural Obstacles
variable.

Table (4) illustrates the arithmetic averages and standard deviations and the degree of
importance of all items related to the dependent variable obstacles that weaken
women's participation in construction projects. Q3 comes in the first rank with a high
degree of agreement and an arithmetic average of 3.943 and a standard deviation of
1.134 (RII=0.493) while Q6 comes in the last rank with a moderate degree of agreement
and an arithmetic average of 2.599 and standard deviation of 0.980 (RII=0.325).

No. Question Mean SD RII Rank Agreement

1 Low societal awareness of women's participation in 3.586 1.044 0.448 2 Moderate
the construction sector
2 The culture of the conservative society does not 3.338 1.238 0.417 5 Moderate
encourage the idea of women working in
construction projects
3 Customs and societal habits 3.943 1.134 0.493 1 High
4 The prevailing masculine culture in society 3.439 0.908 0.43 3 Moderate
5 Difficulty balancing family, work and social life 3.344 0.875 0.418 4 Moderate
6 The physiological structure of women's nature and 2.599 0.98 0.325 8 Moderate
femininity, which weakens their participation in the
construction sector
7 The concept of intolerance against women limits 2.847 0.893 0.356 7 Moderate
the activation of their role in the construction
sector

5
 8 Aggressive behaviors of males against women 3.312 0.946 0.414 6 Moderate
working in construction projects
9 The general perception that women lack the skills 2.662 1.107 0.296 9 Moderate
and competencies that qualify them to work in the
construction sector
10 Fear of women's inability to take responsibility for 3.166 0.953 0.352 2 Moderate
working in construction projects
11 Employers in construction projects are convinced of 2.688 1.109 0.299 8 Moderate
man's capabilities
12 The hardship of work conditions 3.962 1.3 0.44 1 High
13 Unfair discrimination of training needs between 3.032 1.04 0.337 4 Moderate
men and women
14 Long working hours negatively affect women's 2.79 0.913 0.31 6 Moderate
participation in the construction sector
15 The nature of the construction sector work weakens 3.013 1.044 0.335 5 Moderate
women's participation in the construction sector
16 Women's work is not underestimated in 3.166 1.055 0.352 2 Moderate
construction projects
17 The isolation of the work sites of some construction 2.707 0.803 0.301 7 Moderate
works negatively affects participation in work in the
construction sector
18 There are no development plans to enhance the 3 1.038 0.6 2 Moderate
role of women working in construction projects
19 The high cost of living contributed to pushing 3.159 1.053 0.632 1 Moderate
women to work in construction projects
20 The Jordanian Labor Law is unfair with regard to 2.535 1.101 0.507 4 Moderate
women's participation in the construction sector
21 The Jordanian Social Security Law does not 2.287 1.098 0.457 5 Low
guarantee the effective participation of women in
the construction sector
22 The effect of Covid-19 pandemic on the economic 2.777 0.978 0.555 3 Moderate
life

Table 4 Descriptive Statistics related to Sociocultural Obstacles variable

Measure Questions
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8
Mean 3.586 3.338 3.943 3.439 3.344 2.599 2.847 3.312

6
SD 1.044 1.238 1.134 0.908 0.875 0.980 0.893 0.946

RII 0.448 0.417 0.493 0.430 0.418 0.325 0.356 0.414

Rank 2 5 1 3 4 8 7 6
Agreement Moderate Moderate High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate

Table (5) illustrates the arithmetic averages and standard deviations and the degree of
importance of all items related to Administrative Obstacles Variable. Q12 comes in the
first rank with a high degree of agreement and an arithmetic average of 3.962 and a
standard deviation of 1.300 (RII=0.440) while Q9 comes in the last rank with a moderate
degree of agreement and an arithmetic average of 2.662 and standard deviation of
1.107 (RII=0.0296).

2.66242 3.16560 2.68789 3.96178 3.03184 2.78980 3.01273 3.16560 2.70700

5 8 3 7 9 9 5 6

1.10682 0.95304 1.10855 1.30032 1.04034 0.91309 1.04383 1.05518 0.80272

1 6 4 2 3 5 9 9

0.53248 0.63312 0.53758 0.79235 0.60636 0.55796 0.60254 0.63312 0.54140

4 1 7 9 2 8 1 1

Table 5 Table 4 Descriptive Statistics related to Managerial Obstacles variable

MEASURE
Questions
Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17
Mean 3.96
2.662 3.166 2.688 2 3.032 2.790 3.013 3.166 2.707
SD 1.30
1.107 0.953 1.109 0 1.040 0.913 1.044 1.055 0.803
RII 0.44
0.296 0.352 0.299 0 0.337 0.310 0.335 0.352 0.301
Rank 9 2 8 1 4 6 5 2 7
Agreemen
t Moderate Moderate Moderate High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate

7
Table (6) illustrates the arithmetic averages and standard deviations and the degree of
importance of all items related to Economic & Political Obstacles Variable. Q19 comes in
the first rank with a moderate degree of agreement and an arithmetic average of
3.159236 and a standard deviation of 1.053137 (RII=0.631847) while Q20 comes in the
last rank with a moderate degree of agreement and an arithmetic average of 2.535032
and standard deviation of 0.457325 (RII=0.507006).

Table 6 Descriptive Statistics related to Economic & Political Obstacles Variable

MEASURE QUESTIONS

MEAN 3.000 3.159 2.535 2.287 2.777

SD 1.038 1.053 1.101 1.098 0.978
RII 0.600 0.632 0.507 0.457 0.555
RANK 2 1 4 5 3
AGREEMENT Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Moderate

Hypothesis Testing
According to (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2012) performing ANOVA Test requires certain
assumptions should be met :

1. The populations follow the normal distribution.

2. There should be no significant outliers
3. There needs to be homogeneity of variances.

In order to check for normal distribution of the data, Shapiro-Wilk test was used. The
results shown in table (7) indicate that sig. for all variables is greater than 0.05, so
one could conclude the normality of the sample of the study is confirmed. Shapiro-
Wilk test is used since the sample size equals 133 (<50 & > 2000) (Field, 2013).

8
 Table 7 Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Social Obstacles .090 157 .003 .986 157 .115

Managerial Obstacles .082 157 .012 .989 157 .267

Economic Obstacles .061 157 .200* .985 157 .092

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

Figures (1) demonstrate the boxplots for “Sociocultural Obstacles”, “Managerial

Obstacles” and “Economic Obstacles variables” respectively. It is evident from these
figure that there is no significant Outliers problem in the data collected from the
individuals of the sample.

The last assumption related to homogeneity of variances will be performed while testing
the hypotheses.

Hypotheses Testing
First Hypothesis states “There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05)
between the average responses of the study sample in the degree of obstacles that
weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan
due to the educational qualification variable (postgraduate studies / bachelor /

9
intermediate diploma).” It will be divided into 3 sub-hypotheses stated in null form as
the following:
Ho1_1: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “social and cultural obstacles”
that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/
Jordan due to the educational qualification variable (postgraduate studies / bachelor /
intermediate diploma).
Ho1_2: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Managerial obstacles” that
weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan
due to the educational qualification variable (postgraduate studies / bachelor /
intermediate diploma).
Ho1_3: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Economic and Political
Obstacles” that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak
Governorate/ Jordan due to the educational qualification variable (postgraduate
studies / bachelor / intermediate diploma).
In order to test these sub-hypotheses one-way ANOVA was performed. The
results of this test are illustrated in the following tables.
Table 7 illustrates Levene test, the Sig. value for “Social and cultural Obstacles”
equals 0.418 and for “Economic and Political Obstacles” equals 0.839 both values are
greater than 0.05 so one could assume homogeneity of variances among these
variables. While Sig. value for “Managerial Obstacles” is less than 0.05 so, according
Levene test, homogeneity of variances could not be assumed for this variable. Based on
this, another test should be performed that is Brown-Forsythe test to be assured of this
conclusion.

10
 Table 8 Test of Homogeneity of Variances for the First Hypothesis

Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

Social Obstacles .877 2 154 .418
Managerial Obstacles 8.621 2 154 .000
Economic Obstacles .176 2 154 .839
It is evident from table 8 that Sig. value for “Managerial Obstacles” is greater
than 0.05 so, one could neglect the results of Levene test for this variable and
homogeneity of variances could be assumed for this variable.

Table 9 Robust Tests of Equality of Means for the First Hypothesis

Statistica df1 df2 Sig.

Social Obstacles Brown-Forsythe 2.889 2 112.364 .060
Managerial Obstacles Brown-Forsythe 2.260 2 83.501 .111
Economic Obstacles Brown-Forsythe 2.751 2 100.192 .069
a. Asymptotically F distributed.
Table 9 illustrates the ANOVA Test for the first hypothesis, it is noticed that Sig.
value is greater than 0.05 for both “Social and Cultural Obstacles” variable and
“Economic and Political Obstacles” variable which means that the researchers failed
reject HO1_1 AND HO1_2. Accordingly, the first null sub-hypothesis is accepted stating
“There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the average
responses of the study sample in the degree of “social and cultural obstacles” that
weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan
due to the educational qualification variable (postgraduate studies / bachelor /
intermediate diploma).” As well as, the second null hypothesis is accepted stating
“There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the average
responses of the study sample in the degree of “Managerial obstacles” that weaken
women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan due to the
educational qualification variable (postgraduate studies / bachelor / intermediate
diploma).”
The Sig. value for the variable of “Economic and Political Obstacles” is less than
0.05. Henceforth, the null sub-hypothesis is rejected and the alternative sub-hypothesis

11
is accepted stating “there are statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Economic and Political
Obstacles” that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak
Governorate/ Jordan due to the educational qualification variable (postgraduate
studies / bachelor / intermediate diploma).”
Table 10 ANOVA Test for the First Hypothesis

Sum of df Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Social Between Groups 2.311 2 1.155 2.793 .064
Obstacles
Within Groups 63.704 154 .414
Total 66.015 156
Managerial Between Groups 2.173 2 1.086 2.771 .066
Obstacles Within Groups 60.363 154 .392
Total 62.535 156
Economic Between Groups 5.902 2 2.951 5.225 .006
Obstacles Within Groups 86.980 154 .565
Total 92.882 156

To find which group is different from the other post hoc Tukey (HSD) test was
performed shown in Table 10 which revealed that those with Diploma significantly
different from those with either Bachelor degree or higher studies degree. Based on
this, it is concluded that this group of women who has diploma degrees consider the
economic and political more than the other two groups.

Table 11 Tukey HSD Test for Economic and Political Obstacles

Subset for alpha = 0.05

Scientific Qualification N 1 2
Tukey Ba Bachelor 83 2.6605
Higher Studies 34 2.7647
Diploma 40 3.1257
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 45.140.

12
 Second Hypothesis: There are no statistically significant differences (α =
0.05) between the average responses of the study sample in the degree of obstacles
that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/
Jordan due to marital status variable (married/not married). It will be divided into 3 sub-
hypotheses stated in null form as the following:
Ho2_1: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Social And Cultural Obstacles”
that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/
Jordan due to marital status variable (married/not married).
Ho2_2: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Managerial Obstacles” that
weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan
due to marital status variable (married/not married).
Ho2_3: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Economic And Political
Obstacles” that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak
Governorate/ Jordan due to marital status variable (married/not married).
In order to test these sub-hypotheses, Levene Test should be performed to check
the homogeneity of variance. The results of this test are illustrated in table 11 which
demonstrated the Sig. value of all the three variable are greater than 0.05 so Equal
variances among the variables could be assumed
Table 12 Test of Homogeneity of Variance for the Second Hypothesis

Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

Social Obstacles .610 1 155 .436
Managerial Obstacles 1.851 1 155 .176
Economic Obstacles .985 1 155 .322

13
Based on this result, t-test for independent sample was performed as shown in table 12
which illustrates the Sig. value for all the three variables are greater than 0.05 which
means that the researchers failed to reject null sub-hypotheses. Then the second
hypothesis is accepted in its null form.

14
Table 13 t-test for Equality of Means for the Second Hypothesis

95% Confidence
Interval of the
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Difference
t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper
Social Equal
Obstacles variances -.089 155 .929 -.00972 .10873 -.22449 .20506
assumed
Equal
variances
-.090 115.601 .929 -.00972 .10811 -.22384 .20441
not
assumed
Managerial Equal
Obstacles variances .481 155 .631 .05091 .10575 -.15798 .25980
assumed
Equal
variances
.469 104.928 .640 .05091 .10866 -.16454 .26636
not
assumed
Economic Equal
Obstacles variances 1.845 155 .067 .23537 .12758 -.01665 .48738
assumed
Equal
variances
1.809 107.312 .073 .23537 .13010 -.02252 .49326
not
assumed

Third Hypothesis: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between

the average responses of the study sample in the degree of obstacles that weaken
women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan due to
number of daily working hours (48 hours or more / (40-47) hours / 39 hours or less). It
will be divided into 3 sub-hypotheses stated in null form as the following:

15
Ho3_1: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the average
responses of the study sample in the degree of “Social And Cultural Obstacles” that
weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan
due to number of daily working hours (48 hours or more / (40-47) hours / 39 hours or
less).

Ho3_2: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the average
responses of the study sample in the degree of “Managerial Obstacles” that weaken
women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan due to
number of daily working hours (48 hours or more / (40-47) hours / 39 hours or less).

Ho3_3: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the average
responses of the study sample in the degree of “Economic and Political Obstacles” that
weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan
due to number of daily working hours (48 hours or more / (40-47) hours / 39 hours or
less). In order to test these sub-hypotheses, Levene Test should be performed to check
the homogeneity of variance.

Table 13 illustrates Levene test, the Sig. value for “Social and cultural Obstacles” equals
0.422 and for “Economic and Political Obstacles” equals 0.454 both values are greater
than 0.05 so one could assume homogeneity of variances among these variables. While
Sig. value for “Managerial Obstacles” equals 0.005 so, according Levene test,
homogeneity of variances could not be assumed for this variable. Based on this, another
test should be performed that is Brown-Forsythe test to be assured of this conclusion.

Table 14 Test of Homogeneity of Variances for the Third Hypothesis

Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

Social Obstacles .869 2 154 .422

Managerial Obstacles 5.560 2 154 .005

Economic Obstacles .794 2 154 .454

16
It is evident from table 8 that Sig. value for “Managerial Obstacles” equals .271 that is
greater than 0.05 so, one could neglect the results of Levene test for this variable and
homogeneity of variances could be assumed for this variable.

17
Table 15 Robust Tests of Equality of Means for the Third Hypothesis

Statistica df1 df2 Sig.

Social Obstacles Brown-Forsythe .075 2 28.945 .928
Managerial Obstacles Brown-Forsythe 1.322 2 109.969 .271
Economic Obstacles Brown-Forsythe .173 2 35.331 .842
a. Asymptotically F distributed.

Table 15 illustrates the ANOVA Test for the first hypothesis, it is noticed that Sig.
value is greater than 0.05 for all “variable which means that the researchers failed reject
HO1_1, H03_2 and HO3_3. Accordingly, the null form for the 3 sub-hypotheses will be
accepted.

Table 16 ANOVA Test for the Third Hypothesis

Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Social Obstacles Between Groups .082 2 .041 .095 .909

Within Groups 65.933 154 .428

Total 66.015 156

Managerial Obstacles Between Groups .792 2 .396 .987 .375

Within Groups 61.744 154 .401

Total 62.535 156

Economic Obstacles Between Groups .233 2 .116 .193 .824

Within Groups 92.649 154 .602

Total 92.882 156

Fourth Hypothesis: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05)

between the average responses of the study sample in the degree of obstacles that
weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan
due to the variable of having health insurance that covers all family members (yes/no).
It will be divided into 3 sub-hypotheses stated in null form as the following:

18
 Ho4_1: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Social and Cultural Obstacles”
that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/
Jordan due to the variable of having health insurance that covers all family members
(yes/no).
Ho4_2: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Managerial Obstacles” that
weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan
due to the variable of having health insurance that covers all family members (yes/no).
Ho4_3: There are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Economic and Political
Obstacles” that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak
Governorate/ Jordan due to the variable of having health insurance that covers all
family members (yes/no).
In order to test these sub-hypotheses, Levene Test should be performed to
check the homogeneity of variance. The results of this test illustrates the Sig. value for
“Social and cultural Obstacles” variables and “Economic and Political Variables” are
greater than 0.05 so Equal variances among these two variables could be assumed. On
the other hand, Sig. value for “Managerial Obstacles” equals .010 that is less 0.05 which
means that equal variances could be assumed for this variable and the Sig. value when
equal variances nor assumed should be considered in this case.

Table 17 Test of Homogeneity of Variance for the Fourth Hypothesis

Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

Social Obstacles 3.440 1 155 .066
Managerial Obstacles 6.896 1 155 .010
Economic Obstacles .017 1 155 .895

19
Table 18 Descriptive Statistics for the Fourth Hypothesis

Insurance N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Social Obstacles Yes 67 3.0559 .71706 .08760

No 90 3.2898 .58036 .06118

Managerial Yes 67 3.1160 .73475 .08976

Obstacles No 90 3.1986 .54713 .05767

Economic Yes 67 2.6751 .77115 .09421

Obstacles
No 90 2.8958 .76263 .08039

Based on this result, t-test for independent sample was performed as shown in
table 18. It appears from table 17 that the sig. vale for “social and cultural obstacles”
variable when equal variances assumed equals .025 and less than 0.05 which means
that the null sub-hypothesis (H04_1) is rejected and the alternative sub-hypothesis is
accepted stating “There are statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) between the
average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Social And Cultural Obstacles”
that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak Governorate/
Jordan due to the variable of having health insurance that covers all family members
(yes/no).” it is obvious from table 17 that those who claimed that the insurance did
cover all family members responded to social and cultural obstacles more those who
have an inclusive insurance. The Sig. value for managerial obstacles when equal
variances not assumed equals .420 which means that the one could not reject the null
sub-hypothesis stating “there are no statistically significant differences (α = 0.05)
between the average responses of the study sample in the degree of “Managerial
Obstacles” that weaken women's participation in construction projects in Karak
Governorate/ Jordan due to the variable of having health insurance that covers all
family members (yes/no).” As well as, the Sig. value of “Economic and Political
Obstacles” variable equals .076 that is greater than 0.05. Henceforth, once could reject
the null sub-hypothesis H04_3 stating “There are no statistically significant differences
(α = 0.05) between the average responses of the study sample in the degree of

20
“Economic and Political Obstacles” that weaken women's participation in construction
projects in Karak Governorate/ Jordan due to the variable of having health insurance
that covers all family members (yes/no).”

Table 19 t-test for Equality of Means for the Fourth Hypothesis

95% Confidence Interval

of the Difference
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error
t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper

Social Equal
Obstacles variances -2.258 155 .025 -.23394 .10361 -.43862 -.02926
assumed

Equal
variances not -2.189 124.169 .030 -.23394 .10685 -.44542 -.02246
assumed

Managerial Equal
Obstacles variances -.808 155 .420 -.08263 .10228 -.28466 .11941
assumed

Equal
variances not -.774 116.955 .440 -.08263 .10669 -.29393 .12868
assumed

Economic Equal
Obstacles variances -1.785 155 .076 -.22070 .12364 -.46495 .02354
assumed

Equal
variances not -1.782 141.477 .077 -.22070 .12385 -.46553 .02413
assumed

21
Table 20 Summary of Sub-hypotheses and its status

Sub- Statistical Test Null Hypothesis In Favor

hypothesi (Rejected/
s No. Accepted)
H01_1 One-way ANOVA Accepted
H01_2 One-way ANOVA Accepted
H01_3 One-way ANOVA Rejected Diploma
H02_1 T-Test for Independent Samples Accepted
H02_ T-Test for Independent Samples Accepted
H02_3 T-Test for Independent Samples Accepted
H03_1 One-way ANOVA Accepted
H03_2 One-way ANOVA Accepted
H03_3 One-way ANOVA Accepted Insurance did
not include all
family members
H04_1 T-Test for Independent Samples Rejected
H04_2 T-Test for Independent Samples Accepted
H04_3 T-Test for Independent Samples Accepted

Demographic Characteristics of the Sample

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative

Percent Percent
34 21.7 21.7 21.7
Higher Studies

83 52.9 52.9 74.5

Qualification

Bachelor
Scientific

40 25.5 25.5 100.0

Diploma

22
 Office 49 31.2 31.2 31.2

Work Type Field 45 28.7 28.7 59.9

Both 63 40.1 40.1 100.0

Less than 10 years 77 49.0 49.0 49.0

10-15 years 54 34.4 34.4 83.4

15-20 years 14 8.9 8.9 92.4

Experience

20 years or more 12 7.6 7.6 100.0

Less than 500 JDs 32 20.4 20.4 20.4

501-1000 JDs 93 59.2 59.2 79.6

Monthly Income

1001-1500 JDs 24 15.3 15.3 94.9

More than 1500 JDs 8 5.1 5.1 100.0

Married now 101 64.3 64.3 64.3

Marital

Not married mow 56 35.7 35.7 100.0

Status

Yes 90 57.3 57.3 57.3

Children
Having

No 67 42.7 42.7 100.0

Yes 90 57.3 57.3 57.3

Children
Having

No 67 42.7 42.7 100.0

3 Children or more 54 34.4 34.4 34.4

Number of Children

2 Children 28 17.8 17.8 52.2

1 Child 9 5.7 5.7 58.0

23
 No children 66 42.0 42.0 100.0

Nursery Yes 25 15.9 15.9 15.9

No 132 84.1 84.1 100.0

Infrastructure 50 31.8 31.8 31.8

Work Specialization

Construction 59 37.6 37.6 69.4

Other 48 30.6 30.6 100.0

48 Hours or more 62 39.5 39.5 39.5

Weekly Working

40 to 47 Hours 83 52.9 52.9 92.4

less than 39 12 7.6 7.6 100.0

Hours

Yes 67 42.7 42.7 42.7

Insurance

No 90 57.3 57.3 100.0

The sample consisted of 3 categories according to scientific qualifications. The

individuals who have Bachelor degree was the largest category forming 53% of the
sample while those with diploma degree ranked second with a percentage of 25% of the
sample. Finally, those who completed their higher studies formed 22% of the sample.
The sample consisted of 3 categories according to types of the work: In Office, Field and
Hybrid (office and field). The largest percentage of 40% of the individuals of the sample
is formed of persons who work both in office and the field. In the second rank people
who work in office formed 31% of the sample, followed by those who work in the field
with a percentage of 29%.
The individuals of the sample fell into 4 categories according to Years of Experience
Dimension; the first one is comprised from those with Less than 10 years of experience
counted 77 persons forming a percentage of 49% of the sample of the study (largest
category), the second category are those whose experience lies from 10 years to less
than 15 years counted 54 forming a percentage of 34% of the sample of the study while

24
the third category included those with experience between 15 years to less than 20
years counted 14 persons forming a percentage of 17% of the sample of the study (the
smallest category). The last category comprised those whose experience equal 20 years
or greater counted 12 persons forming a percentage of 8% of the sample of the study.
The sample has 4 categories according to Monthly Income dimension; the first category
consisted of those persons with (501-1000) JDs of forms 59% of the sample, while those
whose income is less than 500 JDs forms 21% of the sample followed by those whose
monthly income ranges between (1001-1500) JDs with a percentage of 15%. In the last
rank, comes those whose income is greater than 1500 JDs forming 5% of the sample.
The sample is divided into 2 categories according to being married at time of delivering
the questionnaire (marital status). 64% of the sample are married now while 36% of the
individuals of the sample are not married now.
The sample is divided into 2 categories according to being married at time of delivering
the questionnaire (marital status). 57% of the sample have children while 43% of the
individuals of the sample have no children.
The sample is divided into 2 categories according whether the individuals of the sample
worked before marriage. The results have shown that 61% of the individuals of the
sample have worked before marriage while 39% of the sample did not work before
marriage.
The sample has 4 categories according to having Children dimension; the first category
consisted of those persons with no child forms 42% of the sample, while those who's
with 3 children or more forms 34% of the sample followed by those who's with 2
children with a percentage of 18%. In the last rank, comes those with only one child
forming 5% of the sample.
The sample is divided into 2 categories according whether there is a nursery nearby the
work site. The results have shown that 84% of the individuals of the sample mentioned
that there is nothing like this, while 16% of the sample said there is a nursery nearby.
The sample is divided into 3 categories according to work specialization. The first
category includes those working in construction with a percentage of 38% followed by
those working in infrastructure with a percentage of 32%. In the last place, 30% of the
sample work in other specializations.
The sample is divided into 3 categories according to weekly working hours. The first
category includes those working 40-47 hours in a week with a percentage of 53%
followed by those working 48 hours or more in a week with a percentage of 32%. In the
last place, 8% of the sample work in less than 39 hours in a week.
The sample is divided into 2 categories according whether the insurance provided be
the work owner includes all family members or not. It was found that 57% of the
individuals of the sample mentioned that work owner does not provide insurance to all
family members compared to 43% of the sample who mentioned that indicated that the
work owner provide insurance to all family members.

25
26