Reasoning Skills

...

The most serious problem with the study has to do with its sample not being representative of the group about which the inferences are drawn. On the basis of this study inferences are drawn about consumer choices in response to the labelling of food products. However, the habits, attitudes, behaviours and situations of the small sample of predominantly male university students studied may differ significantly from those of consumers in general thereby making these generalizations unwarranted. Male undergrads may or may not exhibit behaviours similar to their female counterparts who may be a bit more health conscious and who may pay more attention to labels. However, even if we were to assume that all undergrads share similar concerns about their health and are equally attentive to labels, the more serious problem has to do with the fact that this group as a whole is not representative of the general consumer. Undergrads live in unique situations and may not share the health concerns of other consumers. Consumers such as parents of young children might be more concerned about the nutritional value of the food they purchase for their families. Older consumers might also be concerned about high cholesterol or diabetes etc. For the sample to be representative it would need to consist of a variety of consumers including those from different age groups and those living in different circumstances.

In addition to problems with the sample there are also problems with the

method 1 used and with the inferences drawn. Having the participants log their selections before the labels were introduced and then having them do so again 6 months later does not seem to be the best way to determine if labelling had any impact on their choices. Perhaps initially (immediately after labels were posted) students’ choices may have been impacted yet the study didn’t measure this, instead measuring only the long-term impact of labelling in a less healthy food environment. However, while researchers drew their conclusion about selections in such environments, the main inference drawn is about consumer menu selections in general. The fact that only 30% of the offerings were healthy might have affected the students’ choices. Perhaps if a greater variety of healthy meal options been offered, students may have made better selections. Although we might be willing to consider the researchers’ claim, that (like the subjects studied), consumers (in general) may not pay attention to labels in less healthy environments (such as when dining out in a restaurant), this wouldn’t lead us to accept the inference that labels don’t influence their choices in ordinary circumstances on a daily basis.

Another problem with the study has to do with the fact that the two special interest groups which commissioned it have a financial interest in proving the inefficacy of labelling. Labelling food items is costly so grocery manufacturers and restaurants would be seeking reasons in support of their resistance to conforming to the newly legislated labelling requirements. This might explain why the inference drawn in the headline and

lead paragraph extends beyond the inference drawn by researchers. The study has been commissioned by groups currently lobbying for less stringent labelling requirements so it would make sense that they might release the results as they would want them to be received in order to gain support for their cause.

In conclusion, due to the serious issues with the sample, method and issues with the interest groups commissioning the study, the proficient reasoner would not accept the main conclusion drawn in the report on the basis of this study at this time.

1 The fact that the researchers relied on self-reported logs could affect the accuracy of the study. Accuracy of reporting could be a problem if students failed to document their selections properly due to carelessness or forgetfulness etc. Some of you suggested that honesty might be a problem with self-reporting and you could have made a case for this. However, since subjects weren’t aware of the nature of the study nor were they shy about admitting their unhealthy eating habits it doesn’t seem to have been a serious weakness with the study.