## 4 Results
### Questionnaire Survey and Data Analysis
#### 4.3.2 Analysis of Reliability and Validity of Collected Questionnaire Data
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Lebel** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Minimum** \\ **Value** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Maximum** \\ **Value** \\ \end{tabular} & **Mean** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Standard** \\ **Deviation** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Strongly** \\ **Agree (5)** \\ \end{tabular} & **Agree (4)** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Average** \\ **(3)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Disagree** \\ **(2)** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Strongly** \\ **Disagree (I)** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Agree or** \\ **Above** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline T7 & 3 & 5 & 4.47 & 0.63 & 54.7\% & 37.7\% & 7.5\% & 0\% & 0\% & 92.4\% \\ \hline T8 & 2 & 5 & 4.32 & 0.74 & 47.6\% & 38\% & 13.3\% & 0.9\% & 0\% & 85.6\% \\ \hline T9 & 3 & 5 & 4.40 & 0.65 & 49\% & 41.5\% & 9.4\% & 0\% & 0\% & 90.5\% \\ \hline T10 & 1 & 5 & 3.77 & 1.12 & 33\% & 28.3\% & 25.4\% & 9.4\% & 3.7\% & 61.3\% \\ \hline T11 & 1 & 5 & 4.15 & 0.77 & 34.3\% & 49.5\% & 14.3\% & 1.0\% & 1.0\% & 83.8\% \\ \hline T12 & 1 & 5 & 3.66 & 1.02 & 25.7\% & 28.5\% & 32.3\% & 12.3\% & 0.9\% & 54.2\% \\ \hline T13 & 1 & 5 & 3.70 & 1.05 & 26.4\% & 33.9\% & 23.5\% & 15\% & 0\% & 60.3\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 11: _Cont.__Step 2: Finding the latent dimensions of the questions from the collected data_  
In the structural analysis of the questionnaire data, the objective is to categorize the questions of each scale into meaningful subsets, each associated with a _latent dimension_. To achieve this, the _exploratory factor analysis_ (EFA) utilizing _principal component analysis_, along with the _varimax method with Kaiser normalization_, were applied using the SPSS package. The outcomes of these procedures, using Tables 10 and 11 as inputs, are presented in Tables 13 and 14 for the two scales, namely \"magic viewing experience\" and \"multimedia technology understanding\", respectively. After examining the tables, it is seen that the questions in the first scale fall into three groups, FSI through FSI, aligning with three latent dimensions termed \"emotion \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**No.** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Latent Dimension: Magic Viewing Experience**} \\ \hline  & **1** & **2** & **3** \\ \hline S2 & 0.781 & 0.218 & 0.060 \\ \hline S3 & 0.721 & 0.220 & 0.303 \\ \hline S11 & 0.692 & 0.246 & 0.394 \\ \hline S1 & 0.660 & 0.107 & 0.196 \\ \hline S5 & 0.609 & 0.377 & 0.356 \\ \hline S6 & 0.592 & 0.310 & 0.482 \\ \hline S4 & 0.133 & 0.855 & 0.175 \\ \hline S13 & 0.221 & 0.823 & 0.291 \\ \hline S7 & 0.407 & 0.599 & 0.290 \\ \hline S12 & 0.446 & 0.594 & 0.308 \\ \hline S9 & 0.187 & 0.291 & 0.832 \\ \hline S10 & 0.337 & 0.272 & 0.784 \\ \hline S8 & 0.503 & 0.317 & 0.584 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 13: Rotated component matrix of the first scale “magic viewing experience”. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**No.** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Latent Dimension: Multimedia Technology Understanding**} \\ \hline  & **1** & **2** & **3** \\ \hline T7 & 0.865 & \(-\)0.051 & 0.180 \\ \hline T10 & 0.815 & \(-\)0.033 & 0.134 \\ \hline T8 & 0.782 & 0.058 & 0.259 \\ \hline T1 & 0.764 & 0.184 & 0.080 \\ \hline T9 & 0.623 & 0.350 & \(-\)0.059 \\ \hline T2 & 0.530 & 0.411 & 0.312 \\ \hline T3 & 0.099 & 0.882 & 0.152 \\ \hline T4 & 0.032 & 0.878 & 0.196 \\ \hline T6 & 0.182 & 0.840 & \(-\)0.060 \\ \hline T5 & 0.058 & 0.826 & 0.230 \\ \hline T13 & 0.116 & 0.221 & 0.823 \\ \hline T12 & 0.222 & 0.024 & 0.756 \\ \hline T11 & 0.090 & 0.116 & 0.579 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 14: Rotated component matrix of the second scale “multimedia technology understanding”. impact\", \"magic impression\", and \"entertainment satisfaction\" according to the common characteristics of the questions in each group.