Introduction
Consumer dissatisfaction normally leads to sales decline and switching of customers loyalty to another brand of product. Inability in meeting consumer expectation due to reduction in quality or quantity leads to dissatisfaction. According to , consumers use the height of the container in making volume judgment. Customers engage in quality assurance behaviors in attempts to increase their satisfaction and to recover from service failures. A study on Consumer response to service and product quality explained that negative service incidents can harm owner perceptions of both the dealer and the manufacturer.
Hypothesis
A hypothesis was designed to know if the brand of soda has less than the advertised 16 ounces of the product. The null and alternative hypotheses for this test are written as
H0: µ ≥ 16 ounces (The mean is equal to 16 ounces) i.e. the company claim is true.
H1: µ< 16 ounces (The mean is less than 16 ounces)
A null hypothesis is a claim (or statement) about a population parameter that is assumed to be true until it is declared false, while an alternative hypothesis is a claim about a population parameter that will be true if the null hypothesis is false. We reject the null hypothesis if the p value is < α, and we do not reject the null hypothesis if p-value ≥ α at a significance level of 5%.
Procedure
Result
The descriptive statistic of the sample is shown in appendix A. The mean of the sample is 14.87 while the standard deviation is 0.55. The median of the sample is 14.8. The confidence interval was constructed at 95%. The margin error was ± 0.2. Therefore, there is a 95% confidence that the ounces of the drinks falls within the interval 14.87 ± 0.2 (two bounds i.e. between 14.66 and 15.08). Testing the hypothesis using normal distribution, since the mean is 14.87, µ is 16 and the standard deviation is (0.5530).
Z=x-µσx=14.87-160.5530=-11.2465
Converting the Z score to probability using the Z table, The Z score of -11.2465 is equivalent to the probability is 0.020021. Since the p value is < than 0.05, we reject the null hypothesis that says that the ounces of the product is ≥ to 16 ounces. The company claim is not true.
Conclusion
I will conclude that the mean ounce of the drinks are less than 16 ounces. There are three possible reasons why the product contain less than what was advertised;
- Faulty calibration of the equipment
- Deliberate Strategy of the company to shorthand their customers.
- Reduction in the size of the bottle or evaporation of the product due to intense heat in the processing plant.
This can be mitigated by having a quality control department to pull bottles randomly to check if the drink has met the required ounces. Calibration of the equipment time to time can reduce the chance of producing drinks of a less ounce than advertised.
References
Archer, N., & Wesolowsky, G. (1996). Consumer response to service and product quality: A study of. Journal of Operations Management, 14(2), 103-118.
Raghubir, P., & Krishna, A. (1999). Vital Dimensions in Volume Perception: Can the Eye Fool the Stomach? Journal of Marketing Research, 36 (3), 313-326.
William, E. Y., & Kellogg, L. D. (1997). The relationship between service customers' quality assurance. Journal of Operations Management, 15(1), 19-32.
Appendix A
confidence Interval=sample mean±zvaluestandard Deviationsample size
confidence Interval=14.87±1.960.5530=14.87±0.2
