No-Charge Electronics owner Buzz Auphf needs to know how much product failure affects customer loyalty. Buzz contacts David Handy, a local market researcher, and they ultimately decide on examining a research question asking, How do current customers react to different levels of product failure? David designs the following experiment to examine the causal effect of product failure on customer purchase intentions, satisfaction, and loyalty.

The experiment is implemented via e-mail using a sample of current and prospective customers. Three free Netflix movies are provided as an incentive to participate. Subjects are asked to click through to an Internet site to download a product that will enhance their computers graphics capability. In the low-failure condition, after the subjects click to the site, there is no change in the graphics of their computers. In the high-failure condition, once they click through to the site, the subjects computers go into an infinite loop of obscene graphical images until a message arrives indicating that a severe virus has infected their computer and some files may be permanently damaged. This goes on for 45 minutes with no remedy. At that time, a debriefing message pops up telling subjects that it was all part of an experiment and that their computer should now function properly. Prepare a position statement either agreeing or disagreeing that the experiment is consistent with good ethical practice.

Case 9.2

Tooheys

Sixty-six willing Australian drinkers helped a Federal Court judge decide that Tooheys didnt engage in misleading or deceptive advertising for its 2.2 beer. The beer contains 2.2 percent alcohol, compared to 6 percent for other beers, leading to a claim that could be interpreted as implying it was non-alcoholic.

Volunteers were invited to a marathon drinking session after the Aboriginal Legal Service claimed Tooheys advertising implied beer drinkers could imbibe as much 2.2 beer as they wanted without becoming legally intoxicated. Drunken driving laws prohibit anyone with a blood-alcohol level above 0.05 from getting behind the wheel in Australia.

So, an experiment was conducted to see what happens when a lot of 2.2 is consumed. But the task wasnt easy or that much fun. Some subjects couldnt manage to drink the required 10 middies, an Aussie term for a beer glass of 10 fluid ounces, over the course of an hour.

Thirty-six participants could manage only nine glasses. Four threw up and were excluded. Two more couldnt manage the minimum nine glasses and had to be replaced.

Justice J. Beaumont observed that consuming enough 2.2 in an hour to reach the 0.05 level was uncomfortable and therefore an unlikely process. Because none of the ads mentioned such extreme quantities, he ruled they couldnt be found misleading or deceptive.

Questions

1. Would a lab experiment or a field experiment be more valid in determining whether Tooheys could cause a normal beer consumer to become intoxicated? Explain.

2. Describe an alternate research design that would have higher validity.

3. Is the experiment described in this story consistent with good ethical practice?

4. Is validity or ethics more important?