1. How would you judge the external validity of this study? Purpose of the Study
ID: 3469219 • Letter: 1
Question
1. How would you judge the external validity of this study?Purpose of the Study. The researchers examined preferences for beer under conditions that varied in terms of when information about an ingredient of one of the beers was given: before tasting, after tasting but before preferences were indicated, and never (no information was given to one group about the ingredients). The ingredient given is one that most people think should make the beer taste worse. The research question was whether the timing of the ingredient information would affect the preference for the beer by influencing one’s expectation of taste of the beer. Preference for the beer with the undesired ingredient should be lower in any condition where the information influences the preference. Method of the Study. Pub patrons in Massachusetts were asked to participate in a taste test of two types of beer labeled “regular beer” and “MIT brew.” The “MIT brew” contained a few drops of balsamic vinegar (the vinegar apparently changed the flavor of the beer very little). Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three groups that differed according to when information was given: blind group (no information given), before-tasting group (information given before tasting), and after-tasting group (information given after tasting but before preference was indicated). All participants were given a small sample of each beer to taste. They were asked to indicate which of the two beers they preferred. Results of the Study. In the blind condition, the “MIT brew” was preferred more often (about 60% of the group) than the before condition (only about 30% of the group), indicating that ingredient information had an effect before tasting. However, the “MIT brew” was also preferred more often in the after condition (just over 50% of the group) than in the before condition and was not preferred less often than the blind condition, indicating that when ingredient information is given after tasting, it does not affect preference. Figure B.1 presents the means of the three groups. Conclusions of the Study. The researchers concluded that the timing of information about a beer-drinking experience affects preference for the beer. Their results indicated that when information about the beer ingredient was given before the participants tasted the beer, it affected their tasting experience (and their preferences), but when information was given after the participants tasted the beer, it did not affect their experience or their preference. More generally, this study showed that our expectations of our perceptual experiences affect how we judge those experiences.
Purpose of the Study. The researchers examined preferences for beer under conditions that varied in terms of when information about an ingredient of one of the beers was given: before tasting, after tasting but before preferences were indicated, and never (no information was given to one group about the ingredients). The ingredient given is one that most people think should make the beer taste worse. The research question was whether the timing of the ingredient information would affect the preference for the beer by influencing one’s expectation of taste of the beer. Preference for the beer with the undesired ingredient should be lower in any condition where the information influences the preference. Method of the Study. Pub patrons in Massachusetts were asked to participate in a taste test of two types of beer labeled “regular beer” and “MIT brew.” The “MIT brew” contained a few drops of balsamic vinegar (the vinegar apparently changed the flavor of the beer very little). Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three groups that differed according to when information was given: blind group (no information given), before-tasting group (information given before tasting), and after-tasting group (information given after tasting but before preference was indicated). All participants were given a small sample of each beer to taste. They were asked to indicate which of the two beers they preferred. Results of the Study. In the blind condition, the “MIT brew” was preferred more often (about 60% of the group) than the before condition (only about 30% of the group), indicating that ingredient information had an effect before tasting. However, the “MIT brew” was also preferred more often in the after condition (just over 50% of the group) than in the before condition and was not preferred less often than the blind condition, indicating that when ingredient information is given after tasting, it does not affect preference. Figure B.1 presents the means of the three groups. Conclusions of the Study. The researchers concluded that the timing of information about a beer-drinking experience affects preference for the beer. Their results indicated that when information about the beer ingredient was given before the participants tasted the beer, it affected their tasting experience (and their preferences), but when information was given after the participants tasted the beer, it did not affect their experience or their preference. More generally, this study showed that our expectations of our perceptual experiences affect how we judge those experiences. Figure 3.6 Results of the Beer-Tasting Study 80 70 60 50 40 20 10 0 Blind Before Information group After SOURCE: Results from Lee, Frederick, and Ariely's (2006) study
Explanation / Answer
The main criteria of external validity is the process of generalization, and whether results obtained from a small sample group, in laboratory or external surroundings, can be extended to make accurate predictions about the nature of th3 phenomenon in the entire population.Thus, the given experiment on the effect of expectations on the judgements about the perceptual experiences of beer is externally valid as the researchers had drawn a large sample of beer drinking population from an entire state and they studied them using a real life situation with familiar objects.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.