Predicting Tire Repurchases At Tire Rack

Project Objectives

To investigate the relationship between a tire's wet traction performance and noise level on whether consumers would repurchase the tire again at Tire Rack

Question 1 & 2 : Develop the Model & Asses Predictor Significance

Step 1: Install and load required libraries

#install.packages("readexcel")
#install.packages("Hmisc")
#install.packages("pscl")
  
## step 1: load the libraries 
library(readxl) #allows us to import excel files
library(Hmisc) #allows us to call the correlation function
## 
## Attaching package: 'Hmisc'
## The following objects are masked from 'package:base':
## 
##     format.pval, units
library(pscl) #allows us to call the pseudo R-square package to evaluate our model
## Classes and Methods for R originally developed in the
## Political Science Computational Laboratory
## Department of Political Science
## Stanford University (2002-2015),
## by and under the direction of Simon Jackman.
## hurdle and zeroinfl functions by Achim Zeileis.
library(pROC) #allows us to run the area under the curve (AUC) package to get the plot and AUC score
## Type 'citation("pROC")' for a citation.
## 
## Attaching package: 'pROC'
## The following objects are masked from 'package:stats':
## 
##     cov, smooth, var

Step 2: Import & clean the data

tire_ratings_df <- read_excel("Class Exercise 15_TireRatings.xlsx")
ratings_df <- subset(tire_ratings_df,select = -c(Tire))

Step 3: Summarize the data

head(ratings_df)
## # A tibble: 6 × 4
##     Wet Noise Buy_Again Purchase
##   <dbl> <dbl>     <dbl>    <dbl>
## 1   8     7.2       6.1        0
## 2   8     7.2       6.6        1
## 3   7.6   7.5       6.9        1
## 4   6.6   5.4       6.6        0
## 5   5.8   6.3       4          0
## 6   6.3   5.7       4.5        0
A Description of the features are presented in the table below:

Variable     | Definition
-------------|------------
1. Wet       | The average of the ratings for each tire’s wet traction performance (1-10).
2. Noise     | The average of the ratings for the noise level generated by each tire (1-10).
3. Buy_Again | The average of the buy-again responses (1-10).
4. Purchase  | If the respondent would purchase again (1: Probably or Definetly and 0: No)
summary(ratings_df)
##       Wet            Noise         Buy_Again        Purchase     
##  Min.   :4.300   Min.   :3.600   Min.   :1.400   Min.   :0.0000  
##  1st Qu.:6.450   1st Qu.:6.000   1st Qu.:3.850   1st Qu.:0.0000  
##  Median :7.750   Median :7.100   Median :6.150   Median :0.0000  
##  Mean   :7.315   Mean   :6.903   Mean   :5.657   Mean   :0.4412  
##  3rd Qu.:8.225   3rd Qu.:7.925   3rd Qu.:7.400   3rd Qu.:1.0000  
##  Max.   :9.200   Max.   :8.900   Max.   :8.900   Max.   :1.0000
Interpretation: The median wet traction performance score is 7.75 (Excellent). The median nose level score rating is 7.1 (Excellent).The median Buy_Again score is 6.15 (Possibly buy again)

Step 4: Feature selection (i.e., correlation analysis)

corr <- rcorr(as.matrix(ratings_df))
corr
##            Wet Noise Buy_Again Purchase
## Wet       1.00  0.76      0.91     0.74
## Noise     0.76  1.00      0.83     0.72
## Buy_Again 0.91  0.83      1.00     0.83
## Purchase  0.74  0.72      0.83     1.00
## 
## n= 68 
## 
## 
## P
##           Wet Noise Buy_Again Purchase
## Wet            0     0         0      
## Noise      0         0         0      
## Buy_Again  0   0               0      
## Purchase   0   0     0
# Interpretation: All the variables are significant with the target variable.

Step 5: Build the logistic regression model

model <- glm(Purchase ~ Wet + Noise, data = ratings_df, family = binomial)
summary(model)
## 
## Call:
## glm(formula = Purchase ~ Wet + Noise, family = binomial, data = ratings_df)
## 
## Coefficients:
##             Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)   
## (Intercept) -39.4982    12.4779  -3.165  0.00155 **
## Wet           3.3745     1.2641   2.670  0.00760 **
## Noise         1.8163     0.8312   2.185  0.02887 * 
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## (Dispersion parameter for binomial family taken to be 1)
## 
##     Null deviance: 93.325  on 67  degrees of freedom
## Residual deviance: 27.530  on 65  degrees of freedom
## AIC: 33.53
## 
## Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 8
Interpretation: All of the independent variables are significant (p-value < 0.05).

Question 3: Overall Model Significance

likelihood test

## Fit a null model
null_model <- glm(Purchase ~ 1, data = ratings_df, family = binomial)

#Perform likelihood ratio test 
anova(null_model, model, model, test = "Chisq")
## Analysis of Deviance Table
## 
## Model 1: Purchase ~ 1
## Model 2: Purchase ~ Wet + Noise
## Model 3: Purchase ~ Wet + Noise
##   Resid. Df Resid. Dev Df Deviance  Pr(>Chi)    
## 1        67     93.325                          
## 2        65     27.530  2   65.795 5.162e-15 ***
## 3        65     27.530  0    0.000              
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
Interpretation: The inclusion of Wet and Noise score rating as predictors in our LR model does indeed significantly predict the likelihood of customers who would buy the tire again, relative to a model that predicts returns based solely on the mean of observed outcomes (i.e., null model) 

Pseudo R-squared

pR2(model)
## fitting null model for pseudo-r2
##         llh     llhNull          G2    McFadden        r2ML        r2CU 
## -13.7649516 -46.6623284  65.7947536   0.7050093   0.6199946   0.8305269
Interpretation: A McFadden R-squared of 0.705 means that our LR model explains about 70.5% of the variability in the outcome relative to a model with no predictors. This is considered a good fit where values above 0.2 to 0.4 are often seen as indicative of a useful model.

Area Under the Curve (AUC)

The Area Under the Curve Score (AUC) score represents the ability of the model to correctly classify whether the respondent would repurchase a tire again at Tire Rack
# Compute the ROC Curve and the AUC score
roc_curve <- roc(ratings_df$Purchase, fitted(model))
## Setting levels: control = 0, case = 1
## Setting direction: controls < cases
plot(roc_curve)

auc(roc_curve)
## Area under the curve: 0.9741
Interpretation: An AUC score of 0.97 indicated that the LR model has a high level of accuracy in predicting 
student retention. 

Question 4 & 5 Predicting with New Information

# Given the following new student information 
new_data1 <- data.frame(Wet = 7.0, Noise = 7.0) 
new_data2 <- data.frame(Wet = 8.0, Noise = 8.0) 


# Predict the probability 
# (1) Probability that the student did not attend orientation
prob1 <- predict(model, newdata = new_data1, type = "response")
round((prob1 * 100),2) 
##    1 
## 4.06
# (2) Probability that the student attended orientation
prob2 <- predict(model, newdata = new_data2, type = "response") 
round((prob2 * 100),2)
##     1 
## 88.37
Interpretation:
(1) There is a 4.06% chance that a customer will repurchase the tire when the wet traction peformancr score and noise level score is 7.
program
(2) There is a 88.37% chance that a customer will repurchase the tire when the wet traction peformancr score and noise level score is 8.

Question 6: Odds Ratio

# Extract the coefficients
coefficients <- summary(model)$coefficients

# (1) Caluclat the odd ratio for "Wet"
odds_ratio_noise <- exp(coefficients["Wet", "Estimate"])
odds_ratio_noise 
## [1] 29.20949
# (2) Caluclat the odd ratio for "Noise"
odds_ratio_wet <- exp(coefficients["Wet", "Estimate"])
odds_ratio_wet
## [1] 29.20949
Interpretation (1): the odd ratio = 29.21 > 1. This indicates that wet traction performance is associated with the higher odds of repurchasing a tire 
Interpretation (2) : the odd ratio = 29.21 > 1. This indicate that noise level is associated with the higher odds of repurchasing a tire