A Soft Drink Manufacturer Has Been Supplying Its Cola Drink

8a Soft Drink Manufacturer Has Been Supplying Its Cola Drink In Bott

A soft-drink manufacturer has been supplying its cola drink in bottles to grocery stores and in cans to small convenience stores. The company is analyzing sales of this cola drink to determine which type of packaging is preferred by consumers. a. Is this study observational or experimental? Explain your answer. b. Outline a better method for determining whether a store will be supplied with cola in bottles or in cans so that future sales data will be more helpful in assessing the preferred type of packaging.

Paper For Above instruction

The study conducted by the soft-drink manufacturer, which involves analyzing sales data on bottles versus cans, is an observational study. In this scenario, the company observes existing differences in sales based on the packaging type without actively manipulating or controlling the packaging assignment for different stores. The manufacturer simply records what has already happened—grocery stores predominantly sell in bottles, and convenience stores in cans—without assigning these packaging types randomly or systematically changing them for experimental purposes. Therefore, the key characteristic that defines this as an observational study is that the researcher is passively observing and recording data without intervention or randomization, which distinguishes it from an experimental study where variables are deliberately manipulated to establish causality.

Conversely, an experimental study would involve randomly assigning different stores or customers to receive either bottled or canned cola, then measuring the resulting sales or preferences. This random assignment helps control for confounding factors and allows for stronger causal inferences about consumer preferences. Since the manufacturer is not controlling or assigning any packaging but is only observing past and current sales, the initial approach is purely observational.

For more accurate and useful data on consumer preferences, a better method would be to implement a controlled experiment—often called a randomized controlled trial (RCT)—where the packaging type is systematically varied and consumers are randomly assigned to different packaging options. Such a design helps eliminate biases introduced by external factors, such as store location, customer demographics, or purchasing habits. For example, the manufacturer could randomly assign certain stores or even individual customers to receive either bottled or canned cola over a specified period and then compare sales and customer satisfaction levels across groups.

This experimental approach enables the collection of high-quality, causal data about consumer preferences for packaging types, independent of confounding variables. It would also facilitate the assessment of whether packaging preferences are consistent across different geographical areas, store types, or demographic groups. Conducting such randomized experiments can inform more strategic packaging decisions, optimize supply chain logistics, and lead to increased customer satisfaction and sales.

In addition, the manufacturer could complement experimental approaches with surveys or taste tests directly assessing consumer preferences, which provide qualitative insights in conjunction with quantitative sales data. Combining these methods can offer a comprehensive understanding of consumer behavior and help refine packaging strategies that align with consumer preferences.

In summary, while the current observational sales analysis provides some insights into existing preferences, implementing randomized experiments with controlled assignment of packaging types will yield more robust, actionable data. These experimental methods help uncover true consumer preferences, reduce biases, and support data-driven decision-making for future packaging strategies.

References

• Fisher, R. A. (1935). The Design of Experiments. Oliver & Boyd.
• Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Researchers. Houghton Mifflin.
• Brandon, T. H., & Moudon, A. V. (1994). Achieving Actionable Results With Observational Studies. Preventive Medicine, 23(2), 102–105. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.1994.1009
• Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-Experimentation: Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Houghton Mifflin.
• Chalfin, A., & McCrary, J. (2017). The effect of packing design on consumer choices. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 302-323.
• J. Malhotra, N. (2010). Marketing Research: An Applied Approach. Pearson Education.
• McNutt, L. A., Wu, C., Fox, C., & Reactome, K. (2003). Estimating the Effect of Randomization in a Clinical Trial. Statistical Science, 18(2), 151–151.
• Locascio, J. J., & Boring, D. H. (1978). Experimental Design and Data Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. McGraw-Hill.
• Bernard, H. R. (2017). Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Rowman & Littlefield.
• R. V. Hogg, R., & Tanis, D. (2005). Probability and Statistical Inference. Pearson Education.