CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter deals with the presentations, the findings, analyses and

interpretation of the data collected from the respondents. The interpretations

are based on the collected data which are presented in tabular form.

I. Demographic Profile of Respondents

Table 4.1. Distribution of Respondents by Strand

Strand Frequency Percentage
TVL – Food Trades (FT) 13 56.5%
TVL – Dressmaking (DM) 10 43.5%
Total 23 100%

Table 4.1 showed the frequency and distribution of the respondent's strand. It revealed

that majority (13 or 56.5%) among the respondents were coming from TVL food trades and

most (10 or 43.5) came from TVL - dressmaking.

Table 4.2. Distribution of Respondents by Age

Age Frequency Percentage
15–16 years old 6 26.1%
17–18 years old 16 69.6%
19–20 years old 2 8.7%
Total 23 100%
Table 4.2 showed the frequency and percentage distribution of the respondent’s age. It

revealed that a great majority (16 or 69.6%) among the respondents were 17-18 years old, most

(6 or 26.1%) of the respondents were 15-16 years old, and some (2 or 8.7%) of the respondents

were 19-20 years old. This means that most of the Senior High School in this study is 17-18

years old not just in this study but most of the studies which are studied by the Senior High

School students. This indicates that most participants belong to the mid-adolescent group who

are highly active in social media usage.

II. Level of Social Media Usage
A. Frequency of Use
Item Weighted Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
Check accounts multiple times/day 3.88 0.90 Agree
Cannot go a day without using 3.62 0.88 Agree
Use more than 5 times/day 3.50 1.06 Agree
Urge to open during school hours 2.58 0.97 Disagree
Frequently post/update 2.58 0.93 Disagree
Overall mean 3.23 0.95 Agree
Table 4.3 presents the mean, standard deviation, rank, and verbal interpretation of the

frequency of use of accounts. As shown, the overall mean is 3.23 (SD = 0.95), which verbally

interprets as Agree. This indicates that, in general, respondents moderately agree to frequently

using their accounts.

The highest in the rank is “Check accounts multiple times/day” with the mean of 3.88, which

indicates that most of the respondents consistently monitor their accounts throughout the day.

Next in the rank is “Cannot go a day without using” with the mean of 3.62, which implies that

respondents strongly rely on account usage on a daily basis. The third in the rank is “Use more

than 5 times/day” with the mean of 3.50, which further shows a pattern of repetitive and habitual

use.

Meanwhile, the lowest in the rank is “Urge to open during school hours” with the mean of 2.58,

which indicates that respondents generally disagree with the idea of feeling compelled to check

during academic hours. Equally, the indicator “Frequently post/update” also obtained a mean of

2.58, ranked last, suggesting that respondents are not as engaged in actively posting or updating

content compared to passive checking behaviors.

The data reveals that respondents are more inclined toward habitual checking and daily

dependence on account use rather than active posting or disruptive use during school hours. The

results show that while respondents have a relatively high frequency of checking, their behavior

does not strongly reflect distractions in academic settings.

B. Duration of Use
Item Weighted Mean SD Interpretation
Consumes significant free time 3.33 1.01 Agree
More than 3 hours/day 3.25 0.90 Agree
Lose track of time 3.29 0.81 Agree
>1 hour per session 2.79 0.88 Neutral
Daily routine involves long hours 3.00 0.93 Neutral
Overall mean 3.13 0.91 Agree
Table 4.4 shows the mean, standard deviation, rank, and qualitative description of the

duration of account use. As seen in this table, the overall mean is 3.13 (SD = 0.91), which

verbally interprets as Agree. This indicates that, in general, respondents moderately agree that

account use takes up a considerable portion of their time.

The highest in the rank is “Consumes significant free time” with the mean of 3.33, which

indicates that most of the respondents feel that account usage occupies much of their leisure

time. Next in the rank is “Lose track of time” with the mean of 3.29, suggesting that respondents

often become unaware of how long they spend when engaged in account activities. The third in

the rank is “More than 3 hours/day” with the mean of 3.25, which shows that respondents agree

to spending extended periods daily on account use.

In contrast, “Daily routine involves long hours” is placed fourth with the mean of 3.00, verbally

interpreted as Neutral. This suggests that respondents are divided on whether their daily

activities consistently involve prolonged use of accounts. The last in the rank is “>1 hour per
session” with the mean of 2.79, also interpreted as Neutral. This means that respondents do not

consistently agree that their sessions typically last for more than one hour at a time.

The results show that respondents are more likely to acknowledge the cumulative impact of

account use on their time (free time consumed, loss of time awareness, and long daily usage)

rather than on the duration of single sessions. The findings imply that their engagement is

marked by frequent, extended use throughout the day rather than by a single prolonged session.

C. Time of Use
Item Weighted Mean SD Interpretation
Before going to sleep 3.38 1.13 Agree
More at night than daytime 3.33 0.76 Agree
Early in the morning 3.29 1.16 Agree
Mostly late at night 3.25 0.99 Agree
Disrupts sleep 2.41 1.30 Disagree
Overall mean 3.13 1.07 Agree
Table 4.5 shows the mean, standard deviation, rank, and qualitative description of the

time of account use. As seen in this table, the overall mean is 3.13 (SD = 1.07), which verbally

interprets as Agree. This indicates that, in general, respondents moderately agree that they use

their accounts at specific times of the day, particularly around night hours.

The highest in the rank is “Before going to sleep” with the mean of 3.38, which indicates that

most respondents agree they frequently check or use their accounts before bedtime. Next in the

rank is “More at night than daytime” with the mean of 3.33, suggesting that account use is more

concentrated during the evening. The third in the rank is “Early in the morning” with the mean

of 3.29, which shows that many respondents also engage with their accounts shortly after waking

up. The fourth in the rank is “Mostly late at night” with the mean of 3.25, reinforcing the finding

that nighttime use is a common behavior among respondents.

The lowest in the rank is “Disrupts sleep” with the mean of 2.41, which is verbally interpreted

as Disagree. This suggests that while respondents actively use their accounts before bedtime or

late at night, they generally do not perceive it as significantly interfering with their sleep quality.

The results reveal that respondents are more inclined to use accounts during evening and night

hours, with habits extending from before sleep to early morning. However, despite this pattern,

they do not strongly associate account use with sleep disruption. This indicates that respondents’

account usage is heavily time-bound to non-academic hours, particularly evenings, but is not

necessarily viewed as harmful to rest.

D. Type of Platform Used

Item Weighted Mean SD Interpretation
Primarily FB, TikTok, YouTube 3.75 0.79 Agree
Rely on TikTok/Instagram 3.75 0.85 Agree
Multiple platforms regularly 3.54 0.66 Agree
Platforms serve different purposes 3.50 0.88 Agree
Prefer real-time interaction 2.92 0.65 Neutral
Overall Mean 3.49 0.77 Agree
Table 4.6 shows the mean, standard deviation, rank, and qualitative description of the

type of platform used. As seen in this table, the overall mean is 3.49 (SD = 0.77), which verbally

interprets as Agree. This indicates that, in general, respondents agree that they actively use and

rely on multiple social media platforms, with particular preference for entertainment and content-

sharing applications.

The highest in the rank is a tie between “Primarily FB, TikTok, YouTube” and “Rely on

TikTok/Instagram”, both with the mean of 3.75, which indicates that respondents highly prefer

popular and visually engaging platforms for their social media use. Next in the rank is “Multiple

platforms regularly” with the mean of 3.54, suggesting that respondents often access and engage

across different platforms rather than limiting themselves to a single one. The fourth in the rank
is “Platforms serve different purposes” with the mean of 3.50, reflecting that respondents

recognize and utilize the unique functions of various platforms depending on their needs (e.g.,

entertainment, communication, updates).

The lowest in the rank is “Prefer real-time interaction” with the mean of 2.92, verbally

interpreted as Neutral. This implies that while respondents are active across multiple platforms,

they are not strongly inclined toward real-time interactions (e.g., live chats or video calls),

focusing instead on content consumption and general engagement.

The findings reveal that respondents are more inclined toward visually oriented and

entertainment-focused platforms such as TikTok, YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram, with a

pattern of diversified use across different apps. However, they are less engaged in synchronous

or real-time communication, suggesting that their social media activity is shaped more by content

consumption than by direct interpersonal interaction.

E. Purpose of Use
Item Weighted Mean SD Interpretation
Entertainment/socializing 3.62 0.65 Agree
Rarely for academic use 3.62 0.97 Agree
Follow educational pages 3.62 0.82 Agree
School-related info 3.25 1.36 Neutral
Distracted by non-academic content 3.21 1.02 Neutral
Overall mean 3.46 0.96 Agree
Table 4.7 shows the mean, standard deviation, rank, and qualitative description of the

purpose of account use. As seen in this table, the overall mean is 3.46 (SD = 0.96), which

verbally interprets as Agree. This indicates that, in general, respondents agree that their social

media use is primarily driven by entertainment and social purposes, with some engagement in

academic-related activities.
The highest in the rank is a tie among “Entertainment/socializing”, “Rarely for academic use”,

and “Follow educational pages”, all with the mean of 3.62. This shows that respondents

predominantly use social media for leisure and social connections while also recognizing its role

in following educational content, though academic purposes are less frequent compared to

entertainment. The fourth in the rank is “School-related info” with the mean of 3.25, which is

verbally interpreted as Neutral. This suggests that respondents are divided on whether they rely

on social media for accessing information relevant to their studies. The last in the rank is

“Distracted by non-academic content” with the mean of 3.21, also interpreted as Neutral. This

indicates that while distractions exist, respondents are not in strong agreement that non-academic

content significantly hampers their academic focus.

The findings reveal that respondents are more inclined to use social media for entertainment,

social interaction, and light academic engagement (e.g., following educational pages) rather than

for direct academic purposes such as school-related information. While distractions are present,

these are not perceived as overwhelming. The results suggest that social media serves a dual

purpose of leisure and supplementary academic support, but its primary role remains

entertainment and socialization.

III. Effect of Social Media on Academic Performance

A. Academic Grades
Item Weighted Mean Std. Dev
1. SM negatively affects grades 2.83 0.76
2. Prioritize SM over studying 2.92 0.93
3. Performance declined due to SM 3.38 0.65
4. Perform better when SM limited 3.38 0.77
5. Grades would improve if less SM 3.42 0.83
Overall mean 3.19 0.79
Table 4.8 shows the mean, standard deviation, rank, and qualitative description of the

impact of social media use on academic grades. As seen in this table, the overall mean is 3.19

(SD = 0.79), which verbally interprets as Neutral to Agree. This indicates that, in general,

respondents moderately acknowledge that social media has some influence on their academic

performance.

The highest in the rank is “Grades would improve if less SM” with the mean of 3.42, which

suggests that respondents believe reducing social media usage could lead to better academic

outcomes. This is followed closely by “Performance declined due to SM” and “Perform better

when SM limited”, both with the mean of 3.38, indicating that respondents recognize a negative

effect of excessive social media use on their performance and admit that they function better

when their use is controlled.

Meanwhile, the fourth in the rank is “Prioritize SM over studying” with the mean of 2.92,

verbally interpreted as Neutral. This shows that respondents are somewhat divided on whether

they consciously give more importance to social media than to academic responsibilities. The

lowest in the rank is “SM negatively affects grades” with the mean of 2.83, also interpreted as

Neutral. This implies that while there are signs of academic impact, respondents are less likely to

fully admit that social media is directly and consistently harmful to their grades.
The findings reveal that respondents recognize the potential of social media to hinder their

academic performance, as shown in their agreement that grades could improve if usage were

reduced. However, the neutral responses in some areas suggest that not all respondents directly

connect their social media use with declining grades. This indicates a mixed perception—while

they acknowledge the risks of excessive use, they may not universally view social media as the

sole or primary cause of academic difficulties.

B. Study Habits
Item Weighted Mean Std. Dev
6. Procrastinate due to SM 3.62 0.77
7. Interferes with study schedule 3.17 0.87
8. Distracted by notifications 3.33 1.01
9. Rarely complete study goals 2.96 1.12
10. Poor habits due to SM interruptions 2.96 1.04
Overall mean 3.21 0.96
Table 4.9 shows the mean, standard deviation, rank, and qualitative description of the

impact of social media use on study habits. As seen in this table, the overall mean is 3.21 (SD =

0.96), which verbally interprets as Agree. This indicates that, in general, respondents agree that

social media has a noticeable effect on their study habits, particularly in terms of procrastination

and distraction.

The highest in the rank is “Procrastinate due to SM” with the mean of 3.62, which suggests that

respondents strongly recognize procrastination as a major consequence of social media use. Next

in the rank is “Distracted by notifications” with the mean of 3.33, showing that interruptions

from social media alerts frequently divert their attention from studying. The third in the rank is

“Interferes with study schedule” with the mean of 3.17, which indicates that respondents admit

social media usage sometimes disrupts their planned study routines.

The lowest in the rank are “Rarely complete study goals” and “Poor habits due to SM

interruptions”, both with the mean of 2.96, interpreted as Neutral. This implies that respondents

are divided on whether social media use consistently prevents them from finishing their study

tasks or significantly creates poor study habits.

The findings reveal that respondents are more likely to experience procrastination and distraction

as immediate effects of social media, while they are less likely to directly attribute the failure to

complete study goals or poor study habits entirely to its use. This suggests that while social

media clearly interferes with time management and focus, its perceived long-term effects on

study effectiveness are less uniformly acknowledged.

C. Class Participation
Item Weighted Mean Std. Dev
11. Participate less after late-night SM 3.04 1.08
12. Sleepy/tired in class from late-night SM 3.00 0.98
13. Shorter attention span in lessons 2.88 1.12
14. Miss class updates due to SM 3.25 0.85
15. Less responsive when preoccupied 3.17 1.31
Overall mean 3.07 1.07
Table 4.10 shows the mean, standard deviation, rank, and qualitative description of the

impact of social media use on class participation. As seen in this table, the overall mean is 3.07

(SD = 1.07), which verbally interprets as Neutral to Agree. This indicates that, in general,

respondents moderately acknowledge that social media affects their active participation in class,

though not to a very strong extent.

The highest in the rank is “Miss class updates due to SM” with the mean of 3.25, suggesting that

respondents agree that their use of social media sometimes causes them to overlook or miss

important class-related announcements. Next in the rank is “Less responsive when preoccupied”

with the mean of 3.17, which implies that being engaged with social media makes them less
interactive or attentive during lessons. The third in the rank is “Participate less after late-night

SM” with the mean of 3.04, indicating that some respondents admit to reduced classroom

involvement following late-night social media use.

Meanwhile, “Sleepy/tired in class from late-night SM” is fourth with the mean of 3.00, verbally

interpreted as Neutral. This shows that respondents are somewhat divided on whether staying up

late on social media directly affects their alertness in class. The lowest in the rank is “Shorter

attention span in lessons” with the mean of 2.88, also interpreted as Neutral, which means

respondents do not strongly perceive social media as a primary cause of reduced focus during

class discussions.

The results reveal that respondents are more likely to experience missed updates and reduced

responsiveness due to social media use, while they are less inclined to directly attribute tiredness

or shorter attention spans to it. This suggests that the impact of social media on class

participation is present but moderate, with its effects more strongly tied to attentiveness and

awareness of class information rather than to physical tiredness or concentration.

D. Assignment Completion
Item Weighted Mean Std. Dev
16. Submit late due to SM distractions 3.12 0.99
17. Rush through homework 3.25 0.90
18. Forget assignments after using SM 3.33 0.64
19. Skip work due to time online 3.00 0.98
20. Outputs compromised by SM 2.79 1.02
Overall mean 3.10 0.91
Table 4.11 shows the mean, standard deviation, rank, and qualitative description of the

impact of social media use on assignment completion. As seen in this table, the overall mean is

3.10 (SD = 0.91), which verbally interprets as Neutral to Agree. This indicates that, in general,
respondents moderately acknowledge that social media use affects how they manage and

complete their academic tasks.

The highest in the rank is “Forget assignments after using SM” with the mean of 3.33, which

suggests that respondents agree that social media use can cause them to overlook or neglect

academic requirements. Next in the rank is “Rush through homework” with the mean of 3.25,

implying that respondents tend to hastily complete tasks when distracted or pressed for time after

social media use. The third in the rank is “Submit late due to SM distractions” with the mean of

3.12, indicating that distractions from social media sometimes lead to delayed submission of

assignments.

Meanwhile, the fourth in the rank is “Skip work due to time online” with the mean of 3.00,

verbally interpreted as Neutral, showing that respondents are divided on whether they

deliberately neglect assignments because of prolonged social media use. The lowest in the rank

is “Outputs compromised by SM” with the mean of 2.79, also interpreted as Neutral. This means

respondents are less likely to directly associate poor-quality academic outputs with their social

media activities.

The findings reveal that respondents are more likely to forget, rush, or delay assignments due to

social media distractions, but they are less inclined to believe that their outputs are consistently

compromised or that they fully skip assignments because of it. This suggests that the influence of

social media on assignment completion is present but moderate, with its impact showing more in

time management rather than in the quality of work produced.

E. Concentration and Focus
Item Weighted Mean Std. Dev Description
21. Lose focus if SM is accessible 3.17 0.82 Agree
22. Hard to concentrate w/ notifications 3.08 0.83 Agree
23. Keep checking during study time 3.08 0.83 Agree
24. Shorter attention span 3.08 0.83 Agree
25. More productive if avoiding SM 3.38 0.82 Agree
Overall mean 3.16 0.83
Table 4.12 shows the mean, standard deviation, rank, and qualitative description of the

impact of social media use on concentration and focus. As seen in this table, the overall mean is

3.16 (SD = 0.83), which verbally interprets as Agree. This indicates that, in general, respondents

moderately acknowledge that social media has an influence on their ability to concentrate and

sustain attention during academic tasks.

The highest in the rank is “More productive if avoiding SM” with the mean of 3.38, suggesting

that respondents agree they can perform better academically when social media use is minimized

or avoided. Next in the rank is “Lose focus if SM is accessible” with the mean of 3.17, which

implies that the mere availability of social media tends to distract respondents from academic

work.

The next three items are tied, each with the mean of 3.08: “Hard to concentrate with

notifications”, “Keep checking during study time”, and “Shorter attention span”. These indicate

that respondents moderately agree with social media distractions—such as notifications and the

compulsion to check accounts—affect their ability to focus and sustain attention while studying.

The results reveal that respondents are more likely to recognize productivity when avoiding

social media, while also admitting that accessibility, notifications, and constant checking

interfere with their focus. This suggests that social media use exerts a consistent but moderate
effect on concentration, with students perceiving themselves as more academically effective

when disengaged from it.

IV. Relationship Between Social Media Usage and Academic Performance

Variables Compared χ² df p-value Significance
Usage vs Academic Grades 5.053 2 0.0799 Not Significant

Table 4.13 presents the relationship between social media usage and academic grades

using the Chi-square test. As shown in the table, the computed value is χ² = 5.053 with 2 degrees

of freedom and a p-value of 0.0799. Since the obtained p-value is greater than the 0.05 level of

significance, the result is interpreted as Not Significant.

This means that there is not enough statistical evidence to reject the null hypothesis (Ho). Thus,

the null hypothesis stating that there is no significant relationship between social media usage

and academic grades is accepted. In other words, the data indicates that variations in social

media usage do not have a statistically significant effect on the respondents’ academic

performance.

The findings suggest that while earlier descriptive results showed that social media may

influence areas such as study habits, class participation, and assignment completion, these do not

establish a strong or consistent link with actual academic grades when tested statistically. This

implies that other factors beyond social media usage—such as individual study strategies,

motivation, teacher influence, or learning environment—may play a larger role in shaping

academic outcomes.

The results reveal that social media usage does not significantly determine academic grades

among the respondents. While usage patterns may contribute to certain academic behaviors (e.g.,
procrastination, distraction, missed updates), these behaviors do not necessarily translate into

measurable differences in overall academic performance.

V. Suggested Strategies

Based on the findings, the following strategies are recommended as follows

1. Time Management Workshops to train students to balance study hours and online

engagement.

2. Digital Discipline Campaigns to promote responsible and mindful use of social media.

3. Integration of Educational Content to encourage using SM for academic enrichment

4. Parental and Teacher Monitoring to guide students’ online behavior without limiting

necessary access.

5. Focus and Productivity Tools to recommend apps that block distractions during study

hours.