Total Quality Management Practices in Indian ...

ISBN - 978-93-81583-46-3

Total Quality Management Practices in Indian Hospitality Industry: Some Key Findings from Survey Faisal Talib1, Zillur Rahman2, M.N. Qureshi3 1 Assistant Professor, 2Associate Professor, 3Associate Professor 1 Mechanical Engineering Section, University Polytechnic, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 2 Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee 3 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Technology and Engineering, M.S. University of Baroda, Vadodara, Gujarat 1 [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

National Conference on Emerging Challenges for Sustainable Business 2012 1866

Total Quality Management Practices in Indian Hospitality Industry: Some…

Total Quality Management Practices in Indian Hospitality Industry: Some Key Findings from Survey

Abstract Hospitality industry is the key to the resurgence of India. It has achieved many distinctions and is being accepted as one of the fastest growing industries in terms of gross revenue and foreign exchange earnings. It also contributes a major share of Indian economy and plays an important role in the development of the country. Quality is considered to be one of the important factors in the growth of hospitality industry especially total quality management (TQM). With the emergence and popularity of TQM, hospitality industry continues to be heavily involved in the implementation of TQM related practices. Following the extensive literature review in the field of TQM, it was found lot of attention has been given to the hospitality industry. Looking at the above facts, the objective of this study was designed. The purpose of this paper was to identify, analyze and rank the key TQM practices in Indian hospitality industry based on e-mail survey of 34 hospitality companies. Statistical measures like mean, standard deviation, reliability test and Pearson Correlation analysis were performed. The results presented are focused on 17 TQM practices identified from literature review. It was found that top-management commitment, customer focus, product and service design, continuous improvement and innovation, quality culture and training and education are the most successful driven practices for TQM program in Indian hospitality industry. Moreover, supplier management and human resource management are the least important practices. At the end, some implications to quality managers and scope for further research are presented. Keywords: TQM; Hospitality Industry; Top-management commitment; Quality Culture; India.

1. Introduction The complexity and globalization of today’s tough competitive business environment and technological challenges have made total quality management (TQM) as one of the most National Conference on Emerging Challenges for Sustainable Business 2012 1867


important managerial technique to achieve competitive advantage for the hospitality industry (Eraqi, 2006; Kumar et al., 2011; Saunders and Graham, 1992). Due to the popularity of TQM in manufacturing and service sectors from past two decades, the hospitality industry continues to adopt TQM related principles and practices and are heavily involved in them (Sila and Ebrahimpour, 2003). Several important managerial practices

such

as

top-management

commitment,

customer

focus,

continuous

improvement and innovation, training, information, process management etc which have showed positive association with quality services in service industries can be related to TQM in the hospitality industry. A voluminous literature is available which identifies these common TQM practices leading to successful TQM implementation with significant results (Claver-Cortés et al., 2008; Prajogo and Sohal, 2006; Brotherton, 2004). Among these practices training and education, information and analysis, customer focus and continuous improvement and innovation are particularly important to the hospitality industry (Brotherton, 2004; Claver-Cortés et al., 2008). Further, an extensive investigation over the TQM practices have been done in relation to manufacturing and service sectors, but the number of studies devoted to hospitality industry (including hotels and tourism) is relatively less especially in Indian context. Moreover, although several TQM researchers have examined the practices of TQM commuted to hotels and tourism industries covering different objectives (ClaverCortés et al., 2008; Eraqi, 2006; Camison, 1996; Partlow, 1996; Keating and Harrington, 2003), the identification, analysis of implementation and ranking of TQM practices have not been examined in the Indian hospitality industry as in the TQM literature. Accordingly, more research on such issues is need of the hour to bridge the gap in the empirical literature on the Indian hospitality industry. Furthermore, from last one decade, Indian hospitality statistical data shows that this industry contributes a major share to India’s service sector gross domestic product (GDP) and asserts itself as the engine of India’s economic development (CSO, 2010). The World Economic Forum Report (2009) has indicated that India is ranked eleventh place in the Asia Pacific region in terms of travel and tourism competitiveness and 24th in terms of cultural resources. Indian hospitality standards with respect to gross revenue and foreign exchange earnings have made them to compete by following quality standards and sustainable hospitality management model. National Conference on Emerging Challenges for Sustainable Business 2012 1868


Owing to the customer-oriented service endeavor, hospitality companies need to improve service offerings by determining the needs of their target groups. Within this context, this study aims to identify, analyze and rank the TQM practices in select Indian hospitality industry. The study involves a survey-based empirical approach in order to accomplish the objective of present study. Statistical measures like mean, standard deviation, reliability test and Pearson Correlation analysis were used to empirically examine and rank the TQM practices in Indian hospitality industry. Understanding the identified TQM practices, Indian hospitality managers and practitioners would be able to incorporate these practices in their companies to achieve enhanced company performance and increased competitiveness in the marketplace. This paper therefore, presents the results of the study of key TQM practices in Indian hospitality industry. The paper is organized as follows. The next section begins with a review of the existing literature on TQM practices in service industries and studies on TQM in hospitality industry. This is followed by discussion on research methodology adopted. Results and discussion derived from the empirical data are then presented. Finally, it ends with the conclusions, some managerial implications, and scope for future research. 2. Literature Review Current literature on TQM suggests that it has been widely accepted as a means of improving business competitiveness and customer satisfaction. An industry aspiring to become customer-oriented with emphasis on quality of services will have to implement the TQM concepts throughout the industry (Tsang and Antony, 2001). Since the effective implementation of TQM hinges on the identification of key TQM practices, it is interesting to know a set of TQM practices which will make the implementation of TQM successful. The current literature review is focused on the identification of TQM practices that need to be considered and implemented in any service industry like hospitality as well as literature on TQM in hospitality industry which can guide TQM managers and practitioners to improve their company performance.

2.1 TQM Practices TQM practices are those critical factors that must do well, to ensure success in achieving special and continual attention, to bring about increased performance in the service National Conference on Emerging Challenges for Sustainable Business 2012 1869


industries (Talib et al., 2011a,b,c). Several studies have been undertaken focused on the identification of TQM practices in service industries. They have come out with number of TQM dimensions. For example in a study conducted by Samat et al. (2006) extracted out seven TQM practices. They are: management support and commitment, employee involvement, employee empowerment, information and communication, training and education, customer focus and continuous improvement. Kumar et al. (2011) comes out with management commitment; customer satisfaction; continuous improvement; teamwork; employee’s empowerment; training; feedback; and effective communication as few successful dimensions for both manufacturing and service industries. Talib and Rahman (2010) reported nine TQM practices for service industries. They are: topmanagement commitment, customers focus, training and education, continuous improvement and innovation, supplier management, employee involvement, employee encouragement, benchmarking and quality information and performance. Khamalah and Lingaraj (2007) reports on a study of managerial perceptions of the implementation of TQM in small and large service organizations and came out with seven key factors: Topmanagement commitment, benchmarking, quality improvement programs, teambuilding techniques, supplier involvement, training, reward and recognition. Similarly, Hazilah (2009) suggested eight factors for quality improvement in Malaysian public hospitals. They are: leadership and management commitment, supplier partnership, continuous improvement, employee involvement and training, management by fact, strategic planning, teamwork, and quality assurance. Though a voluminous literature on TQM practices is available that has evolved different sets of TQM practices but as such no study has identified a common set of practices for successful implementation of TQM. This study utilizes 17 TQM practices identified by Talib et al. (2011a,b) for service industries as presented in Table 1 and through the extant literature review which are frequently occurring in the TQM literature. The detailed description of each TQM practice can be found in Talib et al. (2011b). Table 1: Major TQM Practices TQM Practices 1. 2. 3.

TQM Practice Top-management commitment Customer focus Training and education

Symbol TMC CF TE



4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

Continuous improvement and innovation Supplier management Employee involvement Information and analysis Process management Quality systems Benchmarking Quality culture Human resource management Strategic planning Employee encouragement Teamwork Product and service design Communication

CII SM EI IA PM QS BM QC HRM SP EE TW PSD COM

(Source: Talib et al., 2011a,b)

2.2 TQM in Hospitality Industry As per the report of Ministry of Tourism (2010), Indian hospitality industry has been accepted as one of the fastest growing industries in terms of GDP, revenue generation and foreign exchange earnings. The report also revealed that it is a major contributor to the national integration process of the country as well as preserver of natural and cultural environment (Talib et al., 2012). It is also expected that hospitality sector is expected to generate tremendous employment and foreign exchange by 2019. The current body of literature on TQM in hospitality industry showed that it has been applied to all segments of the hospitality (example hotels, restaurant, food services etc.) (Talib et al., 2012). Further, it was also revealed that few studies have been conducted in this area and most of them are conceptual or literature review type. For example Alvarez et al. (2012) in their study reported how quality management is carried out in hotels in the Basque Country, a region in the north of Spain with a long tradition in the tourist sector. They found a large percentage of hotels implement a quality management system that has been designed in-house. The study also indicated that a significant number of hotels implement a policy of continuous improvement. Sila and Ebrahimpour (2003) in their exploratory research analyzed and compared the TQM practices of three luxury hotels located in the Northeastern part of the US and found leadership, guest and market focus, and information and analysis as the three most significant TQM factors. Study by Holjevac (2008) using literature review and theoretical approach aimed to emphasize business ethics as a dimension of TQM in tourism in National Conference on Emerging Challenges for Sustainable Business 2012 1871


helping Croatia approximate European Union standards. Keating and Harrington (2003) reviewed the literature on the implementation of quality program in the Irish hotel industry. Top-management sponsorship and the provision of training and value promotion throughout the organization were found to be important factors in this industry. Similarly, Pyo (2000) in his literature review discussed the perspectives and research agenda of quality research in tourism and hospitality. Further review of previous literature on TQM in hospitality industry by Wang et al. (2012); Chen et al. (2012); Daghfous and Barkhi (2009); Politis et al. (2009); Chartrungruang et al. (2006); ClaverCortés et al. (2008) and others are of interest too.

3. Research Methodology This section discusses the sample and data collection procedures used in this study as well as instrument administration approach to target the principle respondents. In order to accomplish the objective of this study, a self-administered structured questionnaire survey methodology was adopted based on the works of Antony et al. (2002); Brah et al. (2000); Sureshchandar et al. (2001); Bayraktar et al.(2008). The study uses an electronic mail (e-mail) survey means to collect relevant data as done by earlier studies in this area (Kureshi et al., 2010; Zu, 2009). The instrument was initially validated through a pilot study before it was actually used for primary data collection. The instrument developed was divided into three sections. The first section collects the demographic information of the respondents like profession, gender, years of experience as well as the general background of the company. The second section presents the information regarding identification and ranking of TQM practices in the company by listing 17 major TQM practices. Third section analyzes 17 TQM practices with regard to their implementation in the Indian hospitality companies which consisted of 110 items. The instrument was operationalzed on a 5-point Likert scale, with 1= very low, 2=low, 3= moderate, 4=high, and 5= very high. Each TQM practice contains three to eight items. The sampling frame of this survey was composed of select Indian hospitality companies including hotels and tourism companies published by the i3 (i-cube, Information Infrastructure for Institutions), Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy Private Limited, India (i3, CMIE, 2010). The list contains a total of 350 companies at the time of research period. A minimum sample size based on GDP contribution of National Conference on Emerging Challenges for Sustainable Business 2012 1872


hospitality industry (10.24 percent) from the total contribution of GDP in the Indian service sector (56 percent) was used in this study. The minimum sample size needed for this study comes out to be 112. The sample was drawn using a simple random sample approach. The

target

respondents

for

this

study

were

top

and

middle

level

administrators/managers who have sufficient level of experience and qualification and therefore, they will be aware of the TQM practices followed in their respective company. A total of 112 questionnaires were e-mailed to different hospitality companies. After several follow-ups and personal contacts, a total of 39 companies responded which were selected for this study, however, only 34 useable survey instruments were included for the data analysis as 5 instruments were unusable, yielding a response rate of 30.3 percent. The key characteristics of respondents are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Characteristics of Respondents Characteristics Type of company Tourism Star Hotel Total Ownership Government Private Total Total number of employees (staff) Less than 50 More than 50 Total Is your company ISO 9000 or any other quality certified? Yes No Total Position/Role of the Respondent Director/Managing Director/Executive Director/CEO/General Manager Project Manager/Senior Engineer Manager/Senior Manager

Number of Respondents

Percentage of Respondents

16 18 n=34

47.1 52.9 100

7 27 n=34

20.6 79.4 100

6 28 n=34

17.6 82.4 100

33 1 n=34

97.1 2.9 100

4

11.8

6

17.6



Manager/Technical Manager/Operations Manager Quality Manager/Human Resource Manager/Quality Engineer/Market Manager/Executive Manager Others (Like Project Architect, Consultant; Customer Relation Officer; Service Manager; Assistant Manager) Total Years of experience Less than 5 years More than 5 years Total Gender Male Female Total Department/Section Quality Product and Services Customer Relation Marketing Information Management Services Others Total

8 10

23.5 29.4

6

17.6

n=34

100

5 29 n=34

14.7 85.3 100

30 4 n=34

88.2 11.8 100

4 6 5 11 5 3 n=34

11.8 17.6 14.7 32.4 14.7 8.8 100



4. Results and Discussion 4.1 Profile of Respondents The first section of the instrument developed for this study seeks the demographic data of the respondents. As shown in Table 2, the profile of the survey respondents comprised 16 tourism (47.1 percent) and 18 hotels (52.9 percent) companies out of which 20.6 percent were government and 79.4 percent were private owned companies. The breakdown of gender of the respondents was 30 (88.2 percent) male and 4 (11.8 percent) female. It suggests that majority of the Indian hospitality companies are male dominated companies in their quality department. Regarding year of experience, there were only 5 respondents (14.7 percent) who have less than five years of experience and remaining 29 respondents (85.3 percent) were having more than five years of experience. Reflecting that majority of respondents’ job tenure at their current organization was more than five years at the time of survey and hence, low job turnover problem was not observed. It was also found that almost all the responding companies were quality certified meaning that the group of companies is either implementing or is in the process of getting TQM implemented in some way. Finally, the responses received from different departments/sections are as follows: 4 from quality (11.8 percent), 6 from product and services (17.6 percent), 5 from customer relation (14.7 percent), 11 from marketing (32.4 percent), 5 from information management services (14.7 percent), and 3 from others (8.8 percent).

4.2 Identification and Ranking of TQM Practices In the second part of the instrument, respondents were asked to rank the 17 TQM practices in Indian hospitality companies identified from the literature review (Section 2.1) using a 5-point Likert scale. Here rank 1 means the most important practice for TQM implementation and rank 17 means the least important. For this purpose, descriptive analysis was performed by finding response counts, means and standard deviation scores using SPSS 16.0 software (Coakes et al., 2006). The results are shown in Figure 1 and Table 3. From the figure, a consolidate picture of importance of 17 TQM practices with respect to mean scores is presented. While frequency counts of scales, various means and standard deviation scores computed for identifying and ranking the TQM practices in Indian hospitality companies are presented in Table 3.



5 4.5 4 Mean Score

3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5

CO M

PS D

TW

EE

SP

HR M

QC

BM

QS

PM

IA

EI

SM

CI I

TE

CF

TM

C

0

TQM Practices

Figure 1: Mean scores of 17 TQM Practices in the Indian Hospitality Industry From Table 3, an overall mean score of 3.72 indicated that respondents feel that the identified TQM practices are important in Indian hospitality companies. This score is at the upper middle end of 5-point Likert scale where 5 represents the maximum positive value and 1 the maximum negative value with 3 being the average value. The mean score of TQM practices ranged from 2.76 to 4.50 with two scores corresponding to a low level, nine scores at a moderate level, and remaining six scores at a good level of practice. To further elaborate, mean scores for six TQM practices are all above 4.0. Responding companies have relatively higher mean scores (≥4.0) for the TQM practices: top-management commitment; customer focus; product and service design; continuous improvement and innovation; quality culture; and training and education, while mean scores for the practices: quality systems; process management; communication; teamwork; information and analysis; benchmarking; employee encouragement; employee involvement; and strategic planning are between 3.25 and 4.0. Human resource management (2.76) and supplier management (3.18) scored lowest mean scores. This suggested that in general, most of the TQM practices had been given equal importance, only two practices HRM and SM perceived to be least important for Indian hospitality companies. Hence, it may be concluded from Table 3 that top six TQM practices (i.e. TMC; CF; PSD; CII; QC; and TE) are viewed as most important practices and emphasis must be given to them. While nine practices (i.e. QS; PM; COM; TW; IA; BM; EE; EI; and SP) are identified as moderate TQM practices. National Conference on Emerging Challenges for Sustainable Business 2012 1876


They are the second highest emphasized TQM practices. This suggest that the Indian hospitality companies emphasized management commitment to various levels, continuous improvement processes, customer orientation and satisfaction, customer product and service requirements, clarity of specification, company’s quality culture and change, and providing enough on-the-job training and education in QM tools and techniques as well as training on TQM concepts and practices for employees. This was also claimed by Arumugam et al. (2009); Karuppusami and Gandhinathan (2007); Talib and Rahman (2010); Talib et al. (2011a,d); Bayraktar et al. (2008); Motwani (2001). On the other hand, the two lowest mean scores come from HRM (2.76) and SM (3.18). Both received a low score, implying that they are little in use and less emphasized TQM practices in Indian hospitality companies. This was also supported by Talib and Rahman (2012); Tsang and Antony (2001); Arumugam et al. (2009); Sila and Ebrahimpour (2003). The possible reasons of unimportance for these practices are the nature of industry and job turnover problem. Unlike in non-service industries, a service may not involve the materials from suppliers for production. For example, the quality of service in a 5-star hotel is to provide highly disciplined and perfect products and service delivery system to its customers. This kind of service does not need any suppliers within their operation of the company. Similarly, as reported in the earlier section, the job turnover problem was not observed in hospitality industry which suggests that there is no scarcity of workforce in these companies. Therefore, internal recruitment, employment security and work force development was not a problem for hospitality companies. Table 3: Descriptive Statistics of 17 TQM Practices in Indian Hospitality Industry TQM Practice Top-management commitment Customer focus Training and education Continuous improvement and innovation Supplier management Employee involvement Information and

1 0

Response Counts 2 3 4 0 5 7

Standard Deviation 0.74

Rank

5 22

Mean Score 4.50

1

0

0

4

13

17

4.38

0.697

2

0

1

10

10

13

4.03

0.904

6

0

4

6

6

18

4.12

1.094

4

3

10

8

4

9

3.18

1.359

16

0

9

10

7

8

3.41

1.131

14

0

1

20

4

9

3.62

0.922

11



analysis Process management

0

2

13

13

6

3.68

0.84

8

Quality systems

0

3

10

12

9

3.79

0.94

7

Benchmarking

0

7

9

11

7

3.53

1.051

12

Quality culture

1

2

6

10

15

4.06

1.07

5

Human resource management Strategic planning

6

11

6

7

4

2.76

1.30

17

0

5

18

5

6

3.35

0.95

15

Employee encouragement Teamwork

0

9

8

9

8

3.47

1.13

13

0

3

15

8

8

3.62

0.95

10

Product and service design Communication

0

0

8

13

13

4.15

0.78

3

0

2

14

12

6

3.65

0.84

9

Overall

3.72

4.3 Analysis of Key TQM Practices 4.3.1

Reliability Test

According to Black (1999), “reliability is an indication of consistency between two measures of the same thing”. It is most commonly followed technique to measures internal consistency among a group of items combined to form a single scale and reflects the homogeneity of the scale. An internal consistency analysis was performed separately for the items of 17 TQM practices. The alpha values of each TQM practice are summarized in Table 4. The reliability coefficients (alpha values) of 17 TQM practices exceeded the minimum acceptable level of 0.60 (Black and Porter, 1996). Further, after performing reliability test, 19 items were deleted to increase the reliability of the scale. Therefore, the total items covering 17 TQM practices were reduced from 110 to 91. As can be seen from Table 4, the reliability coefficients range from 0.664 to 0.930, thus, provides strong evidence that the scales developed are judged to be reliable.



Table 4: Results of Data Reliability with the Value of Alpha for 17 TQM Practices Final Alpha (Reliability)

3

Final Number of Items 6

0.890

1

8

0.898

6

0.824

3

3

0.842

7

0.737

1

6

0.840

8

0.919

None

8

0.919

6

0.871

None

6

0.871

5

0.859

None

5

0.859

6

0.621

2

4

0.664

5

0.658

1

4

0.664

Benchmarking (BM)

5

0.849

2

3

0.903

Quality culture (QC)

8

0.772

3

5

0.841

Human resource management (HRM)

7

0.808

None

7

0.808

Strategic planning(SP)

6

0.856

1

5

0.893

Employee encouragement (EE) Teamwork (TW)

6

0.872

None

6

0.872

4

0.915

None

4

0.915

Product and service design (PSD) Communication (COM)

8

0.858

1

7

0.873

5

0.907

1

4

0.930

19

91

Measure Top-management commitment (TMC) Customer focus (CF) Training and education (TE) Continuous improvement and innovation (CII) Supplier management (SM) Employee involvement (EI) Information and analysis (IA) Process management (PM) Quality systems(QS)

Total Note: n=34 4.3.2

Original Number of Items 9

Original Alpha (Reliability) 0.833

Items Deleted

9

110

0.910

Pearson’s Correlation Analysis

Bivariate correlation technique which computes Pearson’s correlation coefficient was carried out using SPSS program with the two-tailed test. The value of correlation coefficient varies from -1 to +1. A value of zero or nearly zero indicates no relationship between the variables. National Conference on Emerging Challenges for Sustainable Business 2012 1879


Furthermore, a value greater than 0.60 is regarded as highly correlated, a value between 0.30 to 0.60 shows medium correlation, and a value lower than 0.30 is considered as poorly correlated (Kline, 1994). Table 5 shows Pearson’s correlation matrix. To analyze the 17 TQM practices with regard their implementation in the Indian hospitality companies, correlation among the practices in the instrument was determined. In this study, Pearson’s correlation analysis was applied to show the relationship between each TQM practice. The results of correlation matrices with the 17 TQM practices of hospitality companies are shown in Table 5. It was observed from the table that the highest correlation coefficient is 0.861 which represents the relationship between PSD and CF. Therefore, it can be concluded that the relationship between PSD and CF is strongly correlated. This relationship is quite obvious to understand and hence supports the literature. Moreover the results of correlation matrix have shown that practices EI and TMC, SM and TMC, SM and TE, SM and CII, IA and CII, HRM and TMC, HRM and CF, EE and TMC, EE and CII, PM and TMC, PM and EI are not correlated to other practices or are weakly correlated. Within these 17 TQM practices, the relationship between EE and TMC has the lowest correlation coefficient (0.167). The correlation matrix shows that the practices for the implementation of TQM in hospitality industry are intercorrelated. In addition, it can be seen that TQM practices like CF, TW, TMC, TE, PSD, CII, QC, and IA are medium to highly correlated to all the other factors.



Table 5: Pearson’s Correlation Matrix of 17 TQM Practices 1

TQM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Practice TMC

1

CF

0.585**

1

TE

0.535**

0.710**

1

CII

0.815**

0.681**

0.715**

SM

0.200*

0.407*

0.193*

.049

EI

0.190*

0.342*

0.219*

0.177*

.854**

1

IA

0.235*

0.349*

0.183*

0.246*

0.679**

0.727**

1

PM

0.191*

0.591**

0.623**

0.315*

0.310*

0.261*

0.230*

1

QS

0.627**

0.700**

0.691**

0.740**

0.240*

0.217*

0.275*

0.577**

1

BM

0.373*

0.734**

0.599**

0.424*

0.250*

0.350*

0.223*

0.604**

0.673**

1

QC

0.823**

0.690**

0.560**

0.768**

0.600**

0.660**

0.214*

0.394*

0.659**

0.620**

1

HRM

0.240*

0.251*

0.238*

0.217*

0.555**

0.548**

0.560**

0.278*

0.241*

0.238*

0.255*

1

SP

0.261*

0.791**

0.674**

0.400*

0.493**

0.332*

0.324*

0.664**

0.607**

0.839**

0.432*

0.332*

1

EE

0.167*

0.500**

0.372*

0.213*

0.778**

0.683**

0.507**

0.385*

0.375*

0.289*

0.236*

0.210*

0.602**

1

TW

0.311*

0.682**

0.716**

0.618**

0.338*

0.264*

0.235*

0.577**

0.675**

0.425*

0.385*

0.230*

0.626**

0.628**

1

PSD

0.506**

0.861**

0.737**

0.621**

0.356*

0.360*

0.269*

0.636**

0.695**

0.804**

0.675**

0.253*

0.839**

0.556**

0.641**

1

0.396* 0.754** 0.718** 0.637** 0.311* 0.231* 0.233* 0.611** Notes: n=34; Correlation is significant at *p