Chapter 9.5, Problem 9.75ACI

Temptation in consumer choice. Are you willing to pay more for a tempting vice option (e.g., eating a hamburger, surfing the Internet) than a virtuous option (e.g., eating broccoli, reading the newspaper)? The costs and benefits of consumer temptation choice were investigated in the Journal of Marketing Research (February 2012). In one experiment, the researchers used a 2 × 2 factorial design involving a sample of 180 consumers. The first factor varied as to whether consumers were asked to imagine ordering a steak (vice) or organic pasta (virtue) at a restaurant. The second factor varied as to whether the restaurant described was homogeneous in its offerings (either “only tasty, less healthy dishes like steak” or “only healthy, less tasty dishes like organic pasta”) or offered a mixed menu (both “tasty, less healthy dishes like steak” and “healthy, less tasty dishes like organic pasta”). Consumers were randomly assigned to one of the four order/menu conditions and then asked to give the maximum amount (in dollars) they would be willing to pay for theirchoice. A partial ANOVA table for the data is shown below.

1. a. Fill in the missing degrees of freedom values in the ANOVA table.
2. b. Give a practical interpretation of the test for interaction using α = .05.
3. c. The F-values (and corresponding p-values) missing in the table were not provided in the journal article. Are these results required to complete the analysis of the data? Explain.
4. d. In a follow-up to the ANOVA, the researchers compared the mean willing to pay values for the homogeneous and mixed-menu conditions at each level of the order condition. In the virtue condition, the mean for the homogeneous menu ($11.08) was significantly lower than the mean for the mixed menu ($13.26). In the vice condition, the mean for the homogeneous menu ($17.11) was significantly higher than the mean for the mixed menu ($15.00). Demonstrate why these results support your answer to part b. Illustrate with a graph.