VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY HO CHI MINH CITY

INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

THE INFLUENCE OF CONSUMER CAUSAL

BELIEFS ON ESTIMATES OF TIME TO
ONSET
THE CASE OF VIET NAM
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of
BACHELOR OF ARTS in BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Students name: NGUYEN LE THANH TUAN (BABAIU10127)

Advisor: Dr. BUI QUANG THONG

Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

2014

THE INFLUENCE OF CONSUMER CAUSAL

BELIEFS ON ESTIMATES OF TIME TO
ONSET
THE CASE OF VIET NAM

APPROVED BY: Advisor

________________________

Dr. Bui Quang Thong

APPROVED BY: Committee,

______________________________

Ho Thi Bich Van, Ph.D., Chair

__________________________________

Nguyen Huu Dang Khoa, MBA., Secretary

___________________________________

Le Thanh Long, Ph.D.

__________________________________

Albert Low, M.A.

THESIS COMMITTEE

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
At this page, I would like to express my gratitude to teachers, friends, participants and my
family. For those who had supported me during the thesis period.
First and foremost, I want to give an appreciativeness to my advisor, Dr. Bui Quang
Thong. The one who gave me useful advices, encouragements

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ vii
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... ix
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................x
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................1
I. Background .............................................................................................................1
II. Problem statement .................................................................................................3
III. Research questions and objevtives ......................................................................6
IV. Research scope and limitations ............................................................................6
V. Structure of the thesis ............................................................................................7
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................8
I. Placebo effect ...........................................................................................................8
1. Theory of placebo mechanism ..........................................................................9
1.1. Expectancy theory ...................................................................................9
1.2. Classical conditioning ..............................................................................9
2. Placebo effect in marketing ...........................................................................10
II. Theory of causality...............................................................................................13
III. Cognitive load theory ........................................................................................15
IV. Effect of causality on time judgment ...............................................................16
V. Insight in the study of Faro (2010) ....................................................................18

VI. Conceptual framework ......................................................................................20

CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................20
I. Experiment method ................................................................................................21
1. Evaluation of the experiment ..........................................................................21
2. Experiment terminologies ...............................................................................23
3. Experimental research designs ..................................................................... 27
3.1. Pre-experimental designs .....................................................................28
3.2. True experiment ................................................................................... 29
3.2.1. Single factor design.................................................................... 29
3.2.2. Block design ...............................................................................30
3.2.3. Latin square design ....................................................................31
3.2.4. Factorial design .........................................................................32
3.3. Field and Laboratory Experiments .....................................................33
4. Sampling .........................................................................................................35
4.1. Definition ............................................................................................. 35
4.2. Types of sampling ................................................................................36
4.2.1. Probability sampling (representative samples) ........................ 36
4.2.2. Non-probability sampling (non-representative samples) .......... 36
4.3. Sampling in experiment ..................................................................... 36
4.3.1. Random sampling in experiment ...............................................36

4.3.2. Matching sampling in experiment ..............................................37

4.6.2. Convenience sampling in experiment .........................................37
5. Data analysis ...................................................................................................38
5.1. t-test definition .....................................................................................38
5.2. ANOVA definition ...............................................................................39
5.2. ANCOVA definition............................................................................ 40
5.4. Effect size .............................................................................................41
6. Validity in experiment .................................................................................42
6.1 Internal validity.................................................................................. 42
6.1.1. Maturation ..............................................................................42
6.1.2. Testing ......................................................................................43
6.1.3. Instrumentation .......................................................................43
6.1.4. Selection ...................................................................................43
6.1.5. Statistical regression ...............................................................44
6.1.6. Experiment Morality ................................................................44
6.1.7. Diffusion or imitation of treatment ...........................................44
6.1.8. Compensatory rivalry .............................................................45
6.2 External validity ................................................................................. 45
6.2.1. The reactivity of testing on X ....................................................45
6.2.2. Interaction of selection and X ..................................................45

6.2.3. Other reactive factors ...............................................................46

7. Generalization in experiment...................................................................46
II. Description of the two studies ..............................................................................47
1. Study 1............................................................................................................47
2. Study 2............................................................................................................49
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS & DISCUSSION ..................................................52
I. Implementing pretest study ...................................................................................52
II. Implementing the two official experiments ........................................................53
1. The official experiment 1 ..............................................................................54
1.1. Data analysis ........................................................................................ 56
1.2. Discussion............................................................................................. 58
2. The official experiment 2 ..............................................................................59
2.1. Data analysis ........................................................................................ 61
2.2. Discussion............................................................................................. 67
CHAPTER V: GENERAL DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS .................................69
I. General discussion ..................................................................................................69
II. Implications for firms & consumers ...................................................................69
III. Implications for marketers .................................................................................72
IV. Limitations and recommendations for further research .................................72
V. Advices for future experiments ............................................................................73

LIST OF REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 75

APPENDIX ......................................................................................................................80

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1. Previous Researches Synthesis: Placebo effect in medicine and marketing
actions .............................................................................................................................. 10
Table 2.2. Summary of some studies showing an effect of causality on time judgments .17
Table 3.1. Key to design symbols ......................................................................................27
Table 3.2. An example of blocking design ........................................................................31
Table 3.3. An example of Latin Square Design ................................................................ 31
Table 3.4. An example of Factorial Design ...................................................................... 32
Table 3.5. A brief description about the difference between Field and Laboratory
experiment ....................................................................................................................... 33
Table 3.6. Single-factor design in study 1 ...................................................................... 34
Table 3.7. Single-factor design in study 2 .........................................................................34
Table 4.1. Descriptive statistics of Causal and Non-causal group .....................................56
Table 4.2. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between two groups .............56
Table 4.3. Descriptive statistics of line measurement between two groups ..................... 57
Table 4.4. ANOVA statistics of line measurement between two groups ......................... 57
Table 4.5. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement in causal condition during the
interval

.......................................................................................................................... 57

Table 4.6. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement in causal condition during the whole
study .................................................................................................................................. 58
Table 4.7. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement in non-causal condition during the
interval ...............................................................................................................................58

Table 4.8. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement in non-causal condition during the
whole study ........................................................................................................................58
Table 4.9. ANOVA statistics of causal belief between alternative-cause-absent vs
alternative-cause-present group .........................................................................................61
Table 4.10. ANOVA statistics of causal belief between alternative-cause-absent vs strong
alternative-cause-present group vs weak alternative-cause-present ................................. 62
Table 4.11. Descriptive statistics of three conditions ....................................................... 62
Table 4.12. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between 3 conditions ........ 62
Table 4.13. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between alternative-causeabsent vs strong alternative-cause-present condition ........................................................ 63
Table 4.14. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between strong alternativecause-present vs weak alternative-cause-present condition ...............................................63
Table 4.15. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between strong alternativecause-absent vs weak alternative-cause-present condition ................................................64
Table 4.16. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement of participants in the whole study 64
Table 4.17. ANOVA statistics of the likelihood of using an energy bar between 3
conditions .......................................................................................................................... 65
Table 4.18. ANOVA statistics of the likelihood of using an energy bar between
alternative-cause-absent vs strong alternative-cause-present condition ........................... 65
Table 4.19. ANOVA statistics of the likelihood of using an energy bar between strong
alternative-cause-present vs weak alternative-cause-present condition ........................... 66
Table 4.20. ANOVA statistics of the likelihood of using an energy bar between
alternative-cause-absent vs weak alternative-cause-present condition ............................. 66

Table 4.21. The first model regressed the ratings of causal belief on the likelihood of
using an energy bar ............................................................................................................67
Table 4.22. The second model regressed the ratings of causal belief on the estimates of
time to onset for the gum ...................................................................................................67

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2. Summary of the findings of Faro (2010) ........................................................... 18

Figure 3. The relationship between IV and DV in the study ............................................ 25

ABSTRACT

People sometimes feel the effect of product consumption almost instantaneously within
an unrealistically short time after consumption. Such placebo-like effects are typically
attributed to conditioning, motivation, or expectations about product efficacy. The
present research shows such effects can also occur because, under some conditions,
people are more prone to underestimate the time to onset of products they have used in
the past. These recollections of too short a time to onset alter peoples experience of
products and cause them to report more rapid effects. Participants who were led to
believe there was a strong causal link between having consumed a product and improved
performance on a task recalled that less time elapsed before they experienced an effect. In
subsequent consumption, they felt comfortable using the product later in time, started
working on a similar task earlier upon use, experienced the products effect sooner, and
were less inclined to switch to competing products.

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Changing the Future by reshaping the Past: Our memory of time are shortened when we
believe products and events are related (Faro, 2010).

I.

BACKGROUND

Nowadays, more and more advertisement activities are using misleading adjectives and
adverbs, intended to make people believe that a product has an effect that cannot
objectively have, however, that the company risks a lawsuit for false advertising. So, they
use terms as feelings, impressions, hair visibly healthier which only means
that you get the impression that they are, but they are not necessarily so. For example, an
advertising clip on TV shows: a wet cloth with a magic detergent that, without any
apparent effort, removes grease and fouling from a pan (Judicibus, 2011). Although
people believe that these advertisements are not totally true but they can still be
impressed and willing to buy that product. To explain for these kinds of effects, scientists
use a term called placebo effect.

The placebo effect is a fascinating yet puzzling phenomenon, which has challenged
investigators over the past 50 years (Franklin G Miller, David Wendler, Leora C
Swartzman , 2006). In terms of scientific, it is a series of positive reactions against a
therapy which does not derives so much from its active ingredients but from the patients
expectations about it (Judicibus, 2011). In practice, if a patient believes that a certain
therapy is working, he will psychologically place himself in a very positive way against
that therapy, regardless of its effectiveness. The result could be a psychosomatic effect
that leads the body itself to react to the disease, sometimes with positive results (Decher,
2013).

Advocates of alternative medicine have begun using the placebo effect as a way of
marketing their products by stressing that the mind can heal the body in way that medical
science cannot understand (Vitelli, 2012). In medicine, therefore, to assess the
effectiveness of a drug, the placebo effect becomes a very important benchmark. This is
true in medicine (Judicibus, 2011). But if it works in the medical field, why should not it
work in other sectors?

People often feel better simply because they believe they have been treated (Ingraham,
2013). The placebo effect shows that to be convinced of something relative to our body
leads to a specific response by the nervous system that, in some cases, produces precisely
the intended effect. If this is true for a therapy may also be true in other respects.
Realizing the power of this effect, many marketers have used the placebo effect for
several products like: toothpaste, energy drink, cosmetic to win customer in a
unfamiliar way. For instance, an advertisement for toothpaste: is intended to bring home
the sensation of cleanliness of the dentist is likely to make customer experience that
feeling after using toothpaste (Judicibus, 2011).

II.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

The placebo effect makes people sometimes feel the effect of product consumption
almost immediately within an unrealistically short time after consumption (Faro, 2010).
In the past, many researches had built up to examine the impact of placebo effect on
consumer behavior, such as a study of Stewart-Williams, Steve and John Podd (2004)
suggested that classical conditioning procedures are a factor that shapes the placebo
effects on consumer belief. A study of Shiv, Baba, Ziv Carmon, and Dan Ariely (2005)
suggested that belief and expectation of consumer can be evoked by the placebo effect.
Or a study of Irmak, Caglar, Lauren G. Block, and Gavan J. Fitzsimons (2005) showed

the importance of motivation as a driver of marketing placebo effects. Truly, these

researches give a great support for marketers in case of changing and forming consumer
perception and behavior.

Recently, in a noticeable study with the same common concerns, has showed a different
reason for the rapid effect of products, called assessment of time to onset after
consumption. Highlighting the need for renewed research focus in this area, Faro (2010)
suggested that there is an influence of consumer casual belief on estimates of time-toonset, and the casual belief is a cause for the placebo effect happens quickly or slowly.

To examine for his hypothesis, Faro has implemented three experiments which were
established in his university. In the first one, participants first listened to music and later
took part in a creativity task. Half of the participants were then told the music they had
listened to earlier enhanced creativity; the rest were not given that information. "When
asked to recollect the amount of time that elapsed between listening to music and the
creativity task, the first group thought that the time was significantly shorter," Faro
writes. "Hence, even though both groups had (on average) the same experience with the
music and with the creativity task, believing that the two things were related made
participants connect them more closely in time." In a second study, participants first
chewed a stick of gum and then took part in an attention-related task. Later in the study
they were told that chewing gum increases attention. In that case, participants who
considered only the gum as a cause for increased attention gave shorter estimates of timeto-onset than other participants who also considered another contributing cause: practice
with the task. On a later occasion, the participants said they experienced the gum's effect
earlier and they were less interested in trying a competing product. In the last study, as in
study 2, participants first chewed a cube of gum then took part in an attention/ memory
task. After that, they were told that the study was established to examine the effect of
guarana, an ingredient that contains in the gum. Half of the participants were told that
guarana can enhance attention and memory; the others were not given that information.
At the end, the result showed that participants who were given the information, judged

the amount of time that elapsed between starting to chew the gum and the improvement
in the task to be shorter than the others.

In overall, the first two studies show that causal beliefs about products can shape
consumers perceptions of time-to-onset for past consumption, and these perceptions can
have an independent effect on future consumption. The first study suggests that shortened
perceptions of time-to-onset may give the target product an added advantage. Participants
who held shorter perceptions of time experienced the gums effect earlier on a future
consumption occasion, and were less interested in trying other products. The second
study suggests some possibly negative consequences for the product and for consumers.
Participants who held shorter perceptions of time were more likely to use the product too
late, and more likely to begin an activity which depends on the effect of the product too
early. (Gal Zauberman 2010). The last study provides some evidence for the process
through which causal beliefs affect estimates of time to onset by identifying cognitive
load as a moderator of the effect. The paper concludes with a discussion of the
implications of the findings for consumers and marketers.

This study has published on the Journal of Consumer Research which is one of the wellknown journals about consumer behavior in the world, it has ranked 6th position based on
Center of Journal Ranking in 2013. The study has been widely cited, and received a
honorable mention prize in the Robert Ferber Award competition which is held annually
to honor the best interdisciplinary dissertation article, in the year 2011.

The present research proposes a replication of the original Faro (2010) research. The
reason why the author wants to replicate Faro (2010) research can be explained in two
purposes.

First, reviewing past researches about how people estimates about past consumption such
as: in a study of Chandon, Pierre; Brian Wansink (2007) in food industry, they metioned
that consumer will tends to underestimate the caloric content of main food and to choose

another higher-calorie food when restaurants claim to be healthy compared to when they
do not. Or in a study of Menon (1993) about exaiming a process by which behavior
frequency judgments are generated in consumer survey. In addition, in researches about
time judgment, such as a study of LeBoeuf (2010) showed that future time intervals that
end with losses seem shorter than equivalent intervals that end with gains, or a study
demonstrated that people discount delayed task outcomes due to perceived changes over
time in supplies of slack (Zauberman, Gal, John G. Lynch Jr., 2005, see also Yeung;
Catherine W. M; Dilip Soman, 2007). These researches above provide various useful
information for markerters about frequency and recency of use, or time jugdment. But,
the point is there is no research works on estimates of time to onset. At the year 2010,
Faro study was considered as the first paper that works on estimates of time to onset.
Any time a result is surprising, researchers will try to replicate it, to see if the
phenomenon is dependable or just a fluke (a one-time occurrence) (Dewey, 2007).
Therefore, reexamine a new result is quite necessary, it can provides more evidence or
suggests some changes for the initial result.

Second, the author desires to replicate the study of Faro (2010) but in a new context
which is conducted for Vietnamese consumers. When replicating the obtained results,
one can use different manipulations, materials, or ways of measuring the dependent
variable. This may also lead to new interesting results, which could provide more insight
into the content under investigation (Stel and Vonk 2005). Actually, because of
investigating in the new sample, the research can generates some suggestions about
whether it have any difference in the consumer perception between Eastern and Western.

Replication, a re-study repeats the findings of an initial study (Seale, 2004), is divided in
various forms: external, internal, operational (Drotar, 2010). The present research will
applied the form of external replication, which refers to data gathered from new samples
collected in different settings and/or at different times than an original sample (Drotar,
2010), to examine the initial findings in the sample of Vietnamese consumer.

III.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND OBJECTIVES

The research aims to answering these following questions:

How can the causal beliefs of Vietnamese people impact on estimates of time-toonset in a product?

Is there any difference between Western and Asia people in the assessment of
time-to-onset for past consumption?

Therefore, the objectives of study are follows:

To investigate whether the casual beliefs of people can impact on estimates of

time-to-onset, in the case of Vietnamese people.

To analyze any difference between Western and Asian consumers in the

assessment of time to onset for past consumption.

To recommend several suggestions for consumers and marketers.

IV.

RESEARCH SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

The present research is conducted from Feb 2014 to May 2014, in Ho Chi Minh City.
Due to time constraint and level of an undergraduate student, the author only
implemented two first hypotheses which were also two first experiments of Faro (2010)
research. Therefore, the findings cannot generalize for the whole results of the authentic
paper.

Participants who take part in two studies are students studying the International
University Vietnam National University. They will receive bonus mark in their course
after participating the study.

V.

STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS

The thesis is divided into five chapters which focus on different contexts

Chapter I: Introduction
Giving a brief background about the thesis topic, followed by the research problem
statement, research questions and objectives, research scope and limitations.

Chapter II: Literature Review

Synthesizing all theories relating to the topic and conducting a theoretical framework that
will be applied in the research.

Chapter III: Research Methodology

Explaining all terminologies of experiment then giving a deep description about two
upcoming studies.
Chapter IV: Data Analysis & Discussion
Describing two studies and a discusssion about the findings from the collected data.

Chapter V: General Discussion & Implications

Giving general discussions and implications for firms and consumers.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

I.

PLACEBO EFFECT

In terms of medical literature, the placebo effect is defined as a genuine psychological or

physiological effect produced by a substance or a procedure that has no inherent power to
create that effect (Stewart-Williams and Podd, 2004). In more colloquial terms, the
placebo is essentially a sugar pill. The study of Stewart-Williams and Podd (2004)
show a general example in a medical setting as follows: a doctor gives a his patient a pill
which, unbeknownst to the patient, is merely a sugar pill. They called this pill is the
placebo. Lately, the patients health improves, apparently because of the belief that the
pill was a real medicine, effective for the condition. The effect after consumption of
patient is called placebo effect.
The definition is even simpler than understanding process of placebo effect. Indeed,
scientists had spent a long time to examine on the nature of placebo effect and applied it
in a large number of medical settings, from relatively benign maladies, such as warts and
the common cold, to more serious diseases, such as diabetes, angina, and cancer (Kirsch,
1997). Applications about placebo effect have strongly spread in pharmaceutical science,
like pain reduction (Montgomery, Guy and Irving Kirsch, 1996), cardiovascular disease
(Bienenfeld, Frishman and Glasser, 1996) and depression (Kirsch, Guy Sapirstein, 1999).

1.

Theories of placebo mechanism

According to a numerous past researches, there are two main concepts that belong to the
basis placebo effect are: expectancy theory and classical conditioning (Shiv, Carmon and
Ariely, 2005).

1.1 Expectancy theory

Expectancy theory is a cognitive process theory of motivation that is based on the idea
that people believe there are relationships between the effort they put forth at work, the
performance they achieve from that effort, and the rewards they receive from their effort
and performance (Lunenburg, 2011). In other words, people will be motivated if they
believe that strong effort will lead to good performance and good performance will lead
to desired rewards.

Based on the expectancy theory, placebo effects arise because beliefs about a substance,
procedure serving as a placebo activate expectations that a particular effect will occur,
which then affect the subsequent effectiveness of the substance procedure (Shiv, Carmon
and Ariely, 2005). In a simple way, the substance of placebo will produces an effect if
people expect it to have the effect.

1.2 Classical conditioning

Classical conditioning is defined as a particular form of learning when an organism is
being exposed to conditioned and unconditioned stimuli which results in relevant change
in organism state or behavior (Stewart-Williams and Podd, 2004).

For some past researches, these two theories have been contrasted and debated. For
instance, Kirsch (1991) argues that expectancy theory can explain the process of placebo
response whereas classical conditioning is unable to fully account for placebo effect. On
the other hand, Voudouris et al. (1990) try to examine that classical conditioning
processes are superior when explaining the framework of placebo effect. However,
classical conditioning and expectancy theory can support each other when creating
placebo effect. Stewart-Williams and Podd (2004), they explains that the increase
acceptance of expectations as the basic mechanism for placebo effects has led to an
increased interest in how beliefs lead to placebo effects and the role of expectancies in

mediating this effect. In other words, classical conditioning processes shape placebo
effect and expectancies help to mediate it.

2.

Placebo effect in marketing

In economics, it is universally acknowledged that the more quality of product, the more
expensive to produce. In case of consumers who have inadequate information about the
quality of alternative products, they may evaluate the quality of product based on the
price of this product. Then, a belief and expectation about higher priced goods are of
higher quality or more effective will come to their mind. If the beliefs and expectations
derived from the price of a product are strong enough, it will be conceivable that the price
of the product could trigger a placebo effect and actually influence how effective the
product is.

In a series of experiments, Shiv, Carmon and Ariely (2005) suggest that the price of the
product affects performance through the commonly known placebo effect. Shiv and his
coauthors express that consumer beliefs and expectations, shaped by experiences in their
daily lives, often influence their judgments of products and services and affect their
subjective experiences. Besides price, they also point out other researches about placebo
effect applied in marketing such as: a drink may taste better if it has a favorite brands
label than if it is unlabeled (McClure et al. 2004), meat that is labeled 75% fat free tastes
better than the same meat that is labeled as containing 25% fat (Levin and Gaeth, 1988).

Table 2.1. Previous Researches Synthesis: Placebo effect in medicine and marketing
actions
Topic

Tittle

Author

Journal

Theoretical
background
of placebo
effect

The placebo effect:

dissolving the
expectancy versus
conditioning debate

StewartWilliams and
Podd

Psychological
bulletin, (2004),
130(2), 324340

10

Content
The authors provide an
extensive overview of the
literature regarding the
placebo effect. They define
and separate such notions
as placebo, placebo effect,

nocebo. The main focus of

Stewart-Williams and Podd
(2005) is to understand
which of two main theories
that are believed to
contribute to the placebo
effect

classical
conditioning
and
expectancy theory is the
basis of placebo processes.
The main conclusion is that
one shouldnt separate
these two theories when
finding the basis of placebo
effect. On the contrary, the
relationship of two theories
gives rise to placebo effect

Placebo
effect in
medicine

Placebo
effect in

The importance of
placebo effects in
pain treatment and
research.

Placebo Effects of
Marketing Actions:
Consumers May Get

Turner et al

Shiv, Carmon
and Ariely

11

J.A.M.A.,
(1994), 271(20),
16091614

Journal of
Marketing
Research, 2005,

The article provides an

overview of the relevant
literature with an objective
to identify the importance
of placebo effects in the
treatment of pain. The
authors examine placebo
effects
of
medical
treatments
and
sham
surgeries.
The
factors
influencing the placebo
responses both form the
patient and provider sides
are examined and assessed.
The authors conducted a
series of experiments to
prove the influence of
marketing
actions
(in
particular,
price
promotions) on the actual
efficacy
of
products.
Moreover the research
focuses on the role of
expectations in mediating
placebo effect (higher

marketing
actions

Placebo
effect in
marketing
actions

Influence of
Marketing
Actions

What They Pay For

The Placebo Effect

in Marketing:
Sometimes You Just
Have to Want It to
Work

The Effect of Price,

Brand Name, and
Store Name on
Buyers Perception
of Product Quality:
an Integrative
Review

XLII
(November),
383393.

Irmak, Block
and Fitzsimons

Rao and
Monroe

12

Journal of
Marketing
Research,
(2005), XLII
(November),
406409

Journal of
Marketing,
(1989), 26(3),
351357

expectancy level lead to

greater placebo effect). One
of the main findings is that
non-conscious expectations
about the price-quality
relation
can
influence
consumers and encourage
placebo effect.
The authors also revealed a
number
of
important
statements regarding the
placebo
effect
in
marketing:
- buying product with a
discount produces greater
placebo effect than paying
more for a product
-favorable
ads
can
reinforce negative pricequality perceptions
-drawing
attention
to
positive marketing claims
(encouraging expectations)
stimulates the amplitude of
the placebo effect.
Authors conducted an
experiment with energy
drink
revealing
the
importance of motivation
as an important factor
contributing to placebo
effect in marketing
Authors investigate the
influence on highlighting
the effectiveness of a
product
using various
marketing tools. On the one
hand, it stimulates initial
purchase but might have a
negative
post-purchase
experience that would hurt
pong-term sales. However
Rao and Monroe (1989)

argue that this happens

only if the effectiveness
cues are salient in the
consumption context and
are removed in the
consumption context

Influence of
Marketing
Actions

Influence of Beer
Brand Identification
on Taste Perception

Allison, R. I., &

Uhl, K. P.

Journal of
Marketing
Research,
(1964), 1(3), 3639.

The authors conducted an

experiment
aimed
at
identifying the influence of
brand name on taste
perception. The market of
beer has been chosen as an
example.
The
results
suggest
that
taste
perception arise primarily
with the help of marketing
actions rather than from
physical
product
differences.
From
a
managerial point of view it
means
that
physical
product differences had
little to do with the various
brands' relative success or
failure in the market

Source: (Chigirinova, 2012)

II.

THEORY OF CAUSALITY

David Hume (1711 1776), one of the British empiricists of the early modern period, is
famous for the theory of casual relation which has become the starting point for most
modern treatments of causation. According to Hume, causality is a regular succession of
event-types: A and B, we say that A causes B when the two always occurs together, that
is, are constantly conjoined. Whenever we find A, we also find B, and we have a
certainty that this conjunction will continue to happen (Lorkowski, 2010). In other words,

13

if we believe a causal relationship exists between two events, then one of these events,
the cause, will readily recall the other, the effect (Shanks, 1985). For example, one ball
colliding and causing the movement with a second ball.

The concepts of "cause" and "effect" are used both for defining simultaneous events,
events that are contiguous in time, and events whose effect is born with the cause
(Spirkin, 1983). Borrowing from his example, a solar flare causes magnetic storms on the
earth and a consequent temporary interruption of radio communication. Spirkin (1983)
proposes a formula for the mediate connection between cause and effect: if A is the cause
of B and B is the cause of C, then A may also be regarded as the cause of C. Though it
may change, the cause of a phenomenon survives in its result. An effect may have several
causes, some of which are necessary and others accidental.

More specifically, Woo-kyoung and Charles (2002) explain the definition of causality by
stating two simple questions: how people think about causal relations and how people
indentify causes. Based on two questions, Woo-kyong and his coauthor propose the
explanation of causality in two views: mechanism view and regularity view .
In mechanism view, they suggest that people beliefs about causal relations include 3
factors: a notion of force or necessity, a belief in a causal process that takes place
between a cause and an effect, and a set of more or less elaborated beliefs about the
nature of that mechanism, described in theoretical terms. In regularity view, they also
suggest that an associationist approach characterizes the belief that A caused B to be
primarily an expectation about a general pattern of co-variation between A and B. By
showing through some examples, they propose that people may have strong intuitions
about causes even in the absence of good evidence or expectations about patterns of covariation about general cases. Therefore, Woo-kyoung and Charles (2002) conclude that
to believe that A caused B is to believe that there is a consistent relation between events
of type A and events of type B.

14

III.

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY

The idea of cognitive load is first published by Sweller et al. in 1998, a theory relating
working memory characteristics and the design of instructional systems. In fact, theories
of structure of human memory give a distinction between long term memory and short
term memory (Jong, 2010). Long term memory is defined as a part of memory that store
large amount of information, whereas short term memory is the memory system where
small amount of information are stored (Cowan, 2001). In recent papers, the term short
term memory has been replaced by working memory, because this part of memory has
responsible for the processing of information.

According to Van Gerven et al., (2003), cognitive load theory is an instructional theory
that comes from the idea that people working memory is overloaded with respesct to the
amount of information it can hold, and also the number of operations it can perform on
that information. Van Gerven suggests that learners should be encouraged to use his or
her limited working memory efficiently when learning a difficult task. Learning is
hampered when working memory capacity is exceeded in a learning task (Jong, 2010).
Moreover, the main trait of this theory is the relation between long term memory and
working memory, and how instructional materials interact with this cognitive system
(Ayres, 2006).
Categorization of cognitive load theory

Based on cognitive load theory, there are three different types of cognitive load can be
distinguished:

Intrinsic cognitive load: refers to the number of elements that must be processed
simultaneously in working memory for schema construction (i.e., element
interactivity) (Artino, 2008).

15

Extraneous cognitive load: (or ineffective cognitive load) is the result of

instructional techniques that require learners to engage in working memory
activities that are not directly related to schema construction or automation
(Artino, 2008).

Germane cognitive load: (or effective cognitive load) is the result of beneficial
cognitive processes such as abstractions and elaborations that are promoted by the
instructional presentation (Artino, 2008)

IV.

EFFECT OF CAUSALITY ON TIME JUDGMENT

The perception and estimation of elapsed time, and temporal information more
generally, is a complex process subject to various conscious and unconscious
influences (Faro, 2010). Faro proposes that consumers assessments of the time-toonset of an effect refer to the amount of time they believe it takes for a product to
show its effect after consumption. For instance, in several products such as
pharmaceuticals sold by prescription and over-the-counter medications, consumers
care not only about whether the product has an effect, but also how quickly it begins.
Moreover, consumers must often assess the time-to-onset to decide future
consumption because they may need to experience the effect of a product before
starting another activity. Borrowing his examples, caffeine before an exam, digestion
aids before food consumption, relaxation drugs before a flight, and erectile
dysfunction drugs before a sexual encounter. In such cases, assessments of time-toonset can affect the timing of consumption, the timing of subsequent activity, and,
consequently, both the perceived and real effectiveness of the product.
The relationship between time and causality is bidirectional (Faro et al., 2013), the
perception of causality can affect peoples judgments of time in such a way that they
perceive events that they know to be causally related to have occurred closer in time

16

to each other. For example, a series of researches focused on intentionality of action

and showed that perceived time between a voluntary movement (e.g., pressing a key)
and its effect (e.g., an auditory tone) was shorter compared to a baseline condition in
which the action and its effect occurred within the same amount of time but without
any causal link (the intentional binding effect; Haggard et al., 2002; see also Moore et
al., 2009; Ebert and Wegner, 2010). Faro et al. (2013) also point out several
researches about estimates of time elapsed between pairs of historical events that
were causally related with estimates of time between historical events that were not
causally related (see more in Faro et al., 2013) to conclude that perceived causality
shortened estimates of elapsed time.

Table 2.2. Summary of some studies showing an effect of causality on time

judgments (David Faro, Ann L. McGill, Reid Hastie, 2013)

References

Experimental task
(operationalization
of cause and effect)

Method of
interval
assessment

Range of
studied time
intervals

Proposed process

Implications

Buehner and
Humphrey,
2009;

Press keyhear
auditory tone

Numeric
estimates, event
synchronization

150 ms4s

Priming of general
causality-time
relationship

Anticipated action
timing

Ebert and
Wegner, 2010

Pull/push joystick
see object move on

Numeric
estimates

100700 ms

Retrospective
inference

Binding associated
with explicit sense of
authorship

250 ms

Predictive motor
process based on
expectations and
perceptual
associative process

Privileged
representation of
intentional actions

38 s6.5 min

Retrospective
inference based on
general causalitytime relationship

Delayed
consumption, early
experience of effect,
reluctance to switch
to alternative
actions

3184 years

Retrospective
inference based on
physicalmechanical

Evaluation of actions
undertaken by others

Engbert and
Wohlschlger,
2007

Press keyhear
auditory tone

Libet clock
method

Faro, 2010

Take energy
productfeel
enhanced alertness

Numeric
estimates,
reproduction

Faro et al.,
2005, 2010

Sputnik launch
Apollo 11 landing
(historical events)

Numeric
estimates

17

Haggard et al.,
2002

Press keyhear
auditory tone

Libet clock
method

Moore and
Haggard,
2008; Moore
et al., 2009

Press keyhear
auditory tone

Libet clock
method, numeric 100700 ms
estimates

V.

250600 ms

causality
Predictive motor
control process
linking intentional
actions and their
outcomes
Predictive motor
control process and
retrospective
inference

Coherent experience
of agency, early
experience of effect
Coherent experience
of agency, early
experience of effect

INSIGHT IN THE STUDY OF FARO (2010)

Faro (2010) claims that altered perceptions of customer about time to onset may affect to
their future consumption decisions and experience. Experience in the past consumptions
plays an important role in generating the future expectations (Bettman, 1979). According
to Faro (2010), in case of strong causal belief, consumers hold perceptions that the time
to onset is shorter in the past consumptions, then, they might feel the effect of the product
earlier in the future. This influence is more noticeable when the effect of product is quite
ambiguous (Hoch and Ha, 1986). The result of the study of Faro (2010) sumarized as
follows:

Figure 2. Summary of the findings of Faro (2010)

Target Products

are products have used in the past

(especially products have ambiguous
effect)

Consumers believe that its effect

have a short time to start because
of stronger causal belief

compare to alternative products

for the subsequent consumption
The effect of alternatives
might starts slower

They might tend to believe that

the effect of product starts sooner

18

In Faro (2010) study, he manipulated the causality after the consumption of a product;
however, Faro mentions that the same result might be occurred if the causality was
manipulated before the consumption of the product. Based on the results of Haggard et al.
(2002), the stronger causal beliefs result in estimates of shorter time if causality were
manupulated before consumption might happens. Nevertheless, causal intervals were
judged to be shorter, proposing that the effect on estimates of time to onset can extend to
situations in which causal beliefs differ before product consumption. Furthermore, the
judged causal intervals in study of Haggard et al. (2002) were of milliseconds, whereas
Faro claims that product consumptions normally requires longer durations. In several
cases, a previous changes to causal beliefs may trigger factors unrelated to causality (e.g.,
mood, arousal, attention to time) that can alter the subjective experience of the interval
and affect time estimates as a result (Faro, 2010).

The effects of causal belief on future consumptions and experience are assumed to be
motivated by recollections of time to onset. However, if we ignore the appearance of
time-to-onset, does the causal belief about product will directly affect to future
consumptions and experience? For instance, similar to expectations of performance of
efficacy, strong causal belief about a product may leads to a quicker experience of its
effect (Faro, 2010; see also Baba Shiv, Ziv Carmon, Dan Ariely, 2005). Faro proposes
that recollection of time to onset can have an effect above and beyond any such direct
effects of causal beliefs. That is. Recollections of time to onset have a life of their own;
they are an independent piece of information on which future decisions and experiences
are based (Faro, 2010)

19

VI.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

As mentioned, the present research only replicates the two first hypotheses of Faro (2001)
as follows:

Previous researches showed a stronger perceived causal relationship between two events
results in estimates of shorter time (Haggard et al., 2002; see also David Faro, Ann L.
McGill, Reid Hastie, 2013). Stated another way, in case of strong causal belief,
consumers hold perceptions that the time to onset is shorter in the past consumptions,
then they might feel the effect of the product earlier in the future (Faro, 2010). Based on
the following previous researches as well as Faro (2010) hypothesis, I propose the first
hypothesis as follows:

H1: Altered by stronger causal beliefs, estimates of shorter time to onset for past
consumption will lead to earlier experience of the effect in future consumption.

Furthermore, Faro claims that if these consumers compare the product to another
alternative products in the aspect of time to onset, the alternatives may appear slower
than if stronger causal beliefs had not previously shortened the consumers estimates of
time to onset for the target. This tendency may bring an advantage for the product
because if consumers want to change to alternative products for any motivation, they
might less likely to do so. The second hypothesis is established as follows:

H2: Altered by stronger causal beliefs, estimates of shorter time to onset for past
consumption will reduce the inclination to switch to competing products when fast action
is desired

20

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

I.

EXPERIMENT METHOD

Experiments are studies involving intervention by the researcher beyond that required for
measurement. The usual intervention is to manipulate some variable in a setting and
observe how it affects the subjects being studied (e.g. people or physical entities). The
researcher manipulates the independent or explanatory variable and then observes
whether the hypothesized dependent variable is affected by the intervention (Copper and
Schindler, 2011).
1. Evaluations of the experiment
Copper and Schindler (2011) proposes that there are four reasons that bring advantage to
the experiment as follows:

Due to the main ability of researchers is to manipulate the independent variable

then the probability that changes in the dependent variable are a function of that
manipulation increases.

Contamination from extraneous variables can be controlled more effectively than

in order designs. By this way, researchers may find it easy to isolate experiment
variables and evaluate their impact over time.

Because of the convenience and cost of experimentation are higher than other
methods, it allows the experimenter opportunistic scheduling of data collection
and the flexibility to adjust variables and conditions that evoke extremes not
observed under routine circumstances. In addition, the researcher can collect
combinations of variables for testing rather than having to search for their random
appearance in the study environment.

21

One of popular methods in experiment called replication which is replicating an

experiment with different subject groups and conditions, leading to the discovery
of an average effect of the independent variable across people, situations and
times. If a treatment is truly effective, the long-term averaging effect of
replication will reflect its experimental worth. If it is not effective, then the few
members of the experimental population who may have reacted to the treatment
will be negated by the large numbers of subjects who were unaffected by it.
Replication reduces variability in experimental results, increasing their
significance and the confidence level with which a researcher can draw
conclusions about an experimental factor.

Experimenters can use naturally occurring events and, to some extent, field
experiments (a study of the dependent variable in actual environment conditions)
to reduce subject perceptions of the researcher as a source of intervention or
deviation in their daily lives.

By contrast, there are several limitations that experiment cannot deter:

The artificiality of the laboratory is accidental the major disadvantage of the

experimental method.

Almost nonprobability samples can pose problems despite random assignment.

The extent to which a study can be generalized from college students to managers
or executives is open to question. And when an experiment is unsuccessful
disguise, volunteer subjects are often those with the most interest in the topic.

Despite the low costs of experimentation, many applications of experimentation

far outrun the budgets for other primary data collection methods.

Experimental studies of the past are not feasible, and studies about intentions or
predictions are difficult.

Management research is often concerned with the study of people. There are
limits to the types of manipulation and controls that are ethical.

22

2. Experiment terminologies
Independent variable (IV): variable that the experimenter manipulates (i.e. changes)
assumed to have a direct effect on the dependent variable (McLeod, 2012)
Dependent variable (DV): variable that the experimenter measures (McLeod, 2012)
In a causal relationship must have at least two variables are: independent variable (IV)
and dependent variable (DV), in some way the IV causes the DV to occur. Copper and
his coauthor mention that there are three types of evidence form the basis that
experimenter must complete before going to conclude the result:

Firstly, there must be an agreement between independent and dependent variables. The
presence or absence of one is associated with the presence or absence of the other.

Secondly, beyond the correlation of independent and dependent variables, the time order
of the occurrence of the variables must be considered. The dependent variable should not
precede the independent variable. Both of them may occur almost immediately, or the
independent variable should appear before the dependent variable.

Thirdly, to ensure that experimenters are confident that other extraneous variables did not
influence the dependent variable, they control their ability to confound the planned
comparison. Under laboratory conditions, standardized conditions for control can be
arranged.

Extraneous variables (EV): all variables which are not the independent variable, but
could affect the results (DV) of the experiment (McLeod, 2012)
Treatment: are the different procedures we want to compare. These could be different
kinds or amounts of fertilizer in agronomy, different long distance rate structures in

23

marketing, or different temperatures in a reactor vessel in chemical engineering (Oehlert,

2010).

Control group: A control group in a scientific experiment is a group separated from the
rest of the experiment where the independent variable being tested cannot influence the
results. This isolates the independent variable's effects on the experiment and can help
rule out alternate explanations of the experimental results (Helmenstine, 2014).

Blinding: occurs when the evaluators of a response do not know which treatment was
given to which unit. Blinding helps prevent bias in the evaluation, even unconscious bias
from well-intentioned evaluators. Double blinding occurs when both the evaluators of the
response and the (human subject) experimental units do not know the assignment of
treatments to units. Blinding the subjects can also prevent bias, because subject responses
can change when subjects have expectations for certain treatments (Oehlert, 2010).

Informed Consent: being designed to ensure that participants who take part in the
experiment are completely voluntary, also, this form must states clearly about the nature
of the experiment and the rights of the participant. Before the start of the experiment,
participants should be asked to read this form, and sign it to indicate that they have read
and understood their rights. The experimenter must promise that there is no personal data
is collected, or if it collected, that it will not be published, and will be destroyed. If a
participant appears to be experiencing any stress (for example due to task difficulty, or
perhaps through factors unrelated to the experiment), it is important to remind them that
they are free to withdraw at any time. If a participant is experiencing physical pain (e.g.
because of extensive use of the mouse for the task) then abort the experiment
immediately and consult a senior colleague or the appropriate university ethics committee
for advice on whether to proceed with the experimental procedure (Kristensson, 2012)

24

Participant briefing: for the purposes of experimental control, every participant should
be given the same instructions before they commence the experimental task. Briefing
instructions are normally written out in full, in order to ensure that this is done. The
instructions can either be read from a script by the experimenter, or given to the
participant to read, after which they are asked if they have understood everything, and are
ready to start. If an experimenter script is used, it is a good idea for this to include all
instructions and actions that the experimenter must carry out throughout the experimental
session (Kristensson, 2012)
Debriefing: at the end of an experimental session, participants should normally be
debriefed. Debriefing involves a short interview, often semi-structured, with some
prepared questions that you ask every participant and follow-up questions in the event
that interesting points are raised. This provides a valuable data collection opportunity,
especially as participants' subjective experience of the experiment could be of value in
interpreting either their individual performance, or behavior observed more broadly
across the sample group (Kristensson, 2012).
Pointing out experiment terminologies in the present research
In this research, independent variables are considered as causal belief of participants
when they take part in two experiments. The first one is try to make participants believe
that listening to music will enhance creativity and the second one is about chewing gum
will increases attention. Dependent variable is considered as shortening estimates of
time to onset of participant when they attend attention tasks.
Figure 3.1. The relationship between IV and DV in the study
Shortened estimates
of time to onset

Stronger causal belief

(IV)

(DV)

Based on the evaluation of experiments, the author realized several benefits when
choosing the experiment as the main method in the present research. Firstly, the abilities

25

when manipulate the independent variables which are the causal belief of participants. In
fact, the author finds this easy to control and detect the causal belief of a group of people
in a small room instead of observing its fortuitous appearance in the outside environment.
For example, I give them a piece of music and then saying that music increases creativity
of people, by this way, it may somewhat affects to the belief of participants because of
environment, limited knowledge will increase persuasiveness of participants. Secondly,
the author can controls extraneous variables in an effective way. In a first study of the
research, when participants arrive to the setting room, they will receive a consent form
informing them that the study would involve various consumer experiences, such as
listening to music. However, interestingly, to prevent participants from looking at their
watches when estimating time to onset, they will be asked to put away mobile phones,
watches, and any other devices that could cause distraction or make noise (the procedure
of removing watches was similar in all subsequent studies). Last but not least, the recent
research is the replication of the authentic study of Faro (2010), therefore, it may
discovers more average effect of the causal belief across region (Western and Asia),
people (different universities) and time.

Stating about experiment terminologies, in the present research, participants after

listening to the music and taking to the creativity task, haft of them will be told that the
music they had listened to earlier enhance creativity, and the rest wont be given that
information. In this case, the two groups are considered as the treatment group. In the
second experiment, participants first chew a stick of gum and then take part in an
attention-related task. Later in the study they are told that chewing gum increases
attention. Likewise, we also have 2 treatment groups are participants who considered
only the gum as a cause for increased attention and other participants who also
considered another contributing cause. This experiment also gives the participants the
blinding condition, because they cannot determine which group they belong to (strong
causal belief or weak causal belief).

26

Furthermore, in the first study, participants will receive a consent form (read more in the
appendix) informing them that the study would involve various consumer experiences,
such as listening to music. In the second study, another consent form will be design to
inform that participants will would take part in consumer experiences, including trying
chewing gum and completing various other evaluation tasks. Those who have food
allergies can withdraw from the study and take part in other available studies. At the end
of two studies, participants will be debriefed about the actual purpose of the experiment
and thanks for their contribution.

3. Experimental research designs

Researchers design the experiment to control infection of the relationship between
independent and dependent variables. According to Cooper and Schindler (2011), there
are three popular accepted designs including pre-experiments, true experiments and filed
experiments.
Table 3.1. Key to design symbols (Cooper and Schindler, 2011)
An X represents the introduction of an experimental stimulus to a group. The effects
of this independent variable(s) are of major interest.
O An O indentifies a measurement or observation activity
R An R indicates that the group members have been randomly assigned to a group
E An E represents the effect of the experiment and is presented as an equation
X

The Xs and Os in the diagram are read from left to right in temporal order.
Time

When multiple Xs and Os appear vertical to each other, this indicates that the stimuli
and/or the observations take place stimultaneously

27

O
O

Time
q
Parallel rows that are not separated by dashed lines indicate that comparison groups have
been equalized by the randomization process

O
O

Those separated with a dashed line have not been so equalized

O
O

3.1 Pre-experimental designs

All three pre-experimental designs are weak in their scientific measurement power that
is, they fail to control adequately the various threats to internal validity. This is especially
true of the after-only study.

After-only study
This may be diagram as follows:

O
Observation or measurement
of dependent variable

X
Treatment or manipulation
of independent variable

28

One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design

This design meets the various threats to internal validity better than the after-only study,
but it is still a weak design

O
Pretest

X
Manipulation

O
Posttest

Static Group Comparison

This design provides for two groups, one of which receives the experimental stimulus
while the order serves as a control.

O1
O2

3.2 True experiment

3.2.1 Single factor design
According to Hoshmand (2006), in this design, a single factor varies while order factors
are held constant. For example, when the experimenter is interest in finding whether one
variable is superior to another, he or she will use a single-factor experiment in which the
single variable factor is the variety, and the treatments or factor levels are different
variables.
Single-factor experiment can be grouped under two distinct experimental designs. The
first design involves a small number of treatments and is called complete block design.
As the name implies, complete block designs are characterized by blocks, each of which
contains at least one complete set of treatments. The second group of design is
incomplete block designs. These designs contain a large number of treatments and are
also characterized by blocks. However, each block contains only a fraction of the number
of treatments.

29

Figure 3.2. An example of single factor design (Creswell, 2009)

Baseline A

Treatment B

Baseline A

O-O-O-O-O-O-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-O-O-O-O-O
This design involves multiple observations of a single individual. The target behavior of a
single individual is established over time and is referred to as a baseline behavior. The
baseline behavior is assessed, the treatment provided, and then the treatment is
withdrawn.

3.2.2 Block Design

If there is a single major extraneous variable, the randomized block design is used.
Random assignment is still the basic way to produce equivalence among treatment
groups, but the researcher may need additional assurances. First, if the sample being
studied is very small, it is risky to depend on random assignment along to graduate
equivalence. Second, block design can help experimenter learns whether treatment bring
different results among various groups of participants.
In this design, one can measure both main effects and interaction effects. The main effect
is the average direct influence that a particular treatment of the independent variable has
on the dependent variable, independent of other factors. The interaction effect is the
influence of one factor or variable on the effect of another. Whether the randomized
block design improves the precision of the experimental measurement depends on how
successfully the design minimizes the variation within blocks and maximizes the
variation between blocks. If the response patterns are about the same in each block, there
is little value to the more complex design. Blocking may be counterproductive.

30

Table 3.2. An example of blocking design (Cooper and Schindler, 2011)

Active Factor
Price Difference
7 cents
12 cents
17 cents

Blocking Factor
Customer Income
High Medium Low
R X1
X1
X1
R X2
X2
X2
R X3
X3
X3

3.2.3 Latin Square Design

The Latin square design may be used when there are two major extraneous factors.
Treatments are then randomly assigned to these cells so that a given treatment appears
only once in each row and column (Cooper and Schindler, 2011). Because of this
restriction, a Latin Square must have the same number of rows, columns, and treatments.
Table 3.3. An example of Latin Square Design (Cooper and Schindler, 2011)
Store Size
Large
Medium
Small

Customer Income
High Medium Low
X3
X1
X2
X2
X3
X1
X1
X2
X3

Treatments can be assigned by using a table of random numbers to set the order of
treatment in the first row. For example, the pattern may be 3,2,1 as shown above.
Following this, the other two cells of the first column are filled similarly, and the
remaining treatments are assigned to meet the restriction that there can be no more than
one treatment type in each row and column. The experiment takes place, sales results are
gathered, and the average treatment effect is calculated. From this, we can determine the
main effect of various price spreads on the sales of company and national brands. The
cost information allows us to discover which price differential produces the greatest
margin.

31

A limitation of the Latin square is that we must assume there is no interaction between
treatments and blocking factors. Therefore, we cannot determine the interrelationships
among store size, customer income and price spreads. This limitation exists because there
is not an exposure of all combinations of treatments, store sizes and customer income
groups. Such an exposure would require a table of 27 cells, while this one has only 9. If
one is not especially interested in interaction, the Latin square is much more economical.
3.2.4 Factorial Design
One commonly held misconception about experiment is that the researcher can
manipulate only one variable at a time. This is not true, with factorial designs, you can
deal with more than one treatment simultaneously (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Table 3.4. An example of Factorial Design
- Price spread Unit price
Information? 7 cents 12 cents 17 cents
Yes
X1Y1
X1Y2
X1Y3
No
X2Y1
X2Y2
X2Y3
The illustration is known as a 2x3 factorial design in which we use two factors: one with
two levels and one with three level of intensity. The version shown here is completely
randomized, with the stores being randomly assigned to one of six treatment
combinations. With such a design, it is possible to estimate the main effects of each of the
two independent variables and the interactions between them. The result can help to
answer the following questions:
1. What are the sales effects of the different price spreads between company and
national brands?
2. What are the sales effects of using unit-price marking on the shelves?
3. What are the sales effect interrelations between price spread and the presence of
unit-price information?

32

3.3 Field and Laboratory Experiments

Table 3.5. A brief description about the difference between Field and
Laboratory experiment (McLeod, 2012)
Definition

Advantages

Laboratory experiment
A study is conducted in a wellcontrolled environment and accurate
measurements are possible. The
researcher decides where the
experiment will take place, at what
time, with which participants, in
what circumstances and using a
standardized procedure. Participants
are randomly allocated to each
independent variable group.
Although the name is laboratory but
experiment can set up in another
place which has well-designed and
well-controlled
It is easier to replicate a laboratory
experiment. Because of a
standardized procedure is used.
Also, researcher can easily control
of extraneous and independent
variables precisely.

Disadvantages The artificiality of the setting may

produce unnatural behavior that
does not reflect real life (i.e. low
ecological validity). This means it
would not be possible to generalize
the findings to a real life setting.
Another one is demand
characteristics or experimenter
effects may bias the results and
become confounding variables.

33

Field experiment
A study conducted outside the
laboratory, in a natural setting.
Field experiments are conducted
in open, natural settings. The
experimenter still manipulates
the independent variable, but in a
real-life setting (so cannot really
control extraneous variables)

Behavior in a field experiment is

more likely to reflect life real
because of its natural setting (i.e.
higher ecological validity than a
lab experiment). In addition,
there is less likelihood of
demand characteristics affecting
the results, as participants may
not know they are being studied.
There is less control over
extraneous variables that might
bias the results. This makes it
difficult for another researcher to
replicate the study in exactly the
same way.

Applied experimental design in the present research

Because of the current research is replicating from the origin study of Faro (2010), so the
author desires to use the same experimental designs of Faro study in this research. The
research is laboratory experiment which is set up in a well-designed room in the
university. There are a total of two primary experiments in the study and both of them are
applied the single-factor experimental design. In the first study, the single factor is
considered as causality as well as the only one factor that varies while others are kept
constant. The 2-level designs of causality are casual condition and non-causal condition.
More specific about the unchanged factors like: time all participants are received the
same amount of time when taking part in the study; creativity task all participants also
receive the same positive feedback from the experimenter after finishing the task.
Therefore these factors are seemed constant in the study.
Table 3.6. Single-factor design in study 1
2-level

Causality
causal

non-causal

In the study 2, the single factor is also the changing of causality between alternative cause
absent and alternative cause present. All unchanged factors are the same as study 1.
Table 3.7. Single-factor design in study 2

2-level

Causality
Alternative cause
Alternative cause
absent
present

34

4. Sampling
4.1 Definition
Cooper and Schindler (2011) proposes the basic idea of sampling is that collecting some
of the elements in a population, we may draw conclusion about the whole population. In
other words, sampling is a process of taking any portion of the population or universe as
representative of that population or universe. The main objective of drawing a sample is
to make inferences about the larger population from the smaller sample.
General terminologies relating to sampling:
Population element: is the individual participant or object on which the measurement is
taken. The element which is considered as unit of study may be a person or easily
something else (ibid).
Population: is the total collection of elements about which we wish to make some
inferences (ibid).
Sampling frame: is simply a list of the study population, or the actual list of sampling
units from which the sample, or some stage of the sample, is selected (ibid).
Sampling error: is the degree of error to be expected for a given sample design or the
difference between the sample mean and the population mean (ibid).
Sampling bias: refers to the notion that those selected are not "typical" or
"representative" of the larger populations that have been chosen from (ibid).
Sample size: the number of elements in the obtained sample (ibid).
Margin of error: refers to the precision needed by the researcher. A margin of error of 5
percent means that the actual findings could vary by as much as 5 points either positively
or negatively (ibid).

35

4.2 Types of sampling

4.2.1

Probability sampling (representative samples)

Probability samples are selected in such a way as to be representative of the population.

They provide the most credible results because they reflect the characteristics of the
population from which they are selected (e.g., residents of a particular community,
students at an elementary school, etc.).
4.2.2

Non-probability sampling (non-representative samples)

Non-probability samples are chosen subjectively. Each member of the population does
not have a known chance of being included. Although these kinds of sample are less
desirable than probability samples, however, a researcher may not care about
generalizing to a larger population. The validity of non-probability samples can be
increased by trying to approximate random selection, and by eliminating as many sources
of bias as possible. The limitation of these samples is generalization; they do not truly
represent a population, so the experimenter cannot make valid inferences about the larger
group from which they are drawn.

4.3 Sampling in experiment

4.3.1

Random sampling in experiment

In this technique, each population element is given an equal chance of being selected as
subject. The entire process of sampling is done in a single step with each subject selected
independently of the other members of the population. The key to random selection is
that there is no bias involved in the selection of the sample. Any variation between the
sample characteristics and the population characteristics is only a matter of chance
(Sommer, 2011).
There are many methods to proceed with simple random sampling. The most primitive
and mechanical would be the lottery method. Each member of the population is assigned
a unique number. Each number is placed in a bowl or a hat and mixed thoroughly. The

36

blind-folded researcher then picks numbered tags from the hat. All the individuals
bearing the numbers picked by the researcher are the subjects for the study. Another way
would be to let a computer do a random selection from your population. For populations
with a small number of members, it is advisable to use the first method but if the
population has many members, a computer-aided random selection is preferred
(Explorable.com, 2009)
4.3.2

Matching sampling in experiment

Matching is useful when randomization cannot assign participants to groups due to

recruit a nonprobability quota sampling approach (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Matching sampling tends to allocate each experimental and control subject accorded on
every feature applied in the study. As a result, the experimenter might face complex
because of the raise of groups and variables amount. However, if the experiments
features only relate to treatment or the dependent variable, investigator can define, match
and manipulate (ibid.).
4.3.3

Convenience sampling in experiment

Convenience sample is nonprobability samples that are unrestricted area. They are the
least reliable design but normally the cheapest and easiest to conduct. Saying another
way, a convenience sample is simply one in which the researcher uses any subjects that
are available to participate in the research study. This means by stopping people in a
street corner or surveying people in a mall, also, asking friends, students, or colleagues
that the researcher has regular access to (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Relying on available subjects, however, is extremely risky and comes with many
cautions. For example, this method does not allow the researcher to have any control over
the representativeness of the sample. That is, the researcher cannot control how well the
characteristics of the sample (gender, age, race, education, etc.) match the characteristics
of the larger population it is intended to represent (ibid).

37

Applied sampling method in the present experiment

Random sampling method is chosen for both experiments during the study. In
the first experiment, participants will be randomly divided into two groups in laboratory:
one receives the treatment about music improves creativity and the second is music does
not improve creativity. In the second experiment, there also has two separate groups
which are the group believe in gum is main reason for improving memory and alertness
during a test and the group believe in gum and practice are main reason for improving
their performance during the test.
5. Data analysis
5.1 t-test definition
The simplest way for using t-test in experiment design is to compare performance in two
conditions: experimental condition (treatment) and control condition. T-test help the
experimenter to decide whether the difference between the conditions is "real" or whether
it is due merely to chance fluctuations from one time of testing to another. Moreover, the
t-test enables us to decide whether the mean of one condition is really different from the
mean of another condition (Hole, 2009).
Hole (2009) proposes that there are two types of t-test:

Dependent-means t-test (also called matched pairs or repeated measures ttest): is applied when he same subjects participate in both conditions of the
experiment.

Independent-means t-test (also called independent measures t-test): is applied

when the experiment has two different groups of subjects, one group performing
one condition in the experiment, and the other group performing the other
condition.

* Both cases also required one independent and one dependent variable with two levels
(two different conditions of the experiment).

38

Borrowing his example, an example when t-test is appropriate, the effects of alcohol on
reaction-time performance. (The IV is "alcohol consumption", with two levels - drunk
and sober and the DV is reaction-time performance). A repeated-measures t-test could be
used here; each subject's reaction time could be measured twice, once while they were
drunk and once while they were sober.

5.2 ANOVA definition

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a statistical method for testing the null hypothesis
that the means of several populations are equal. The one-way ANOVA is used to
determine whether there are any significant differences between the means of two or
more independent (unrelated) groups. For example, using one-way ANOVA to
understand whether exam performance differed based on the test anxiety levels among
students, dividing students into three independent groups (e.g., low, medium and highstressed students) (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
There are several conditions must be met when using ANOVA. Firstly, the sample must
be randomly selected from the normal populations, and the populations should have equal
variances. In addition, the distance from one value to its groups mean should be
independent of the distances of other values to that mean. Unlike the t-test, which uses
sample standard deviations, ANOVA uses squared deviations of the variance so that
computation of distance of the individual data points from their own mean or from the
grand mean can be summed (standard deviation sum to zero) (ibid.).
The total deviation of any particular data point may be partitioned into between-group
variance and within-group variance. The between-group variance represents the effect of
the treatment, or factor. The differences of between-groups mean imply that each group
was treated differently, and the treatment will appear as deviations of the sample means
from the grand mean. The within-groups variance describes the deviations of the data
points within each group from the sample mean (ibid.).

39

5.3 ANCOVA definition

The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) is typically used to adjust or control for
differences between the groups based on another, typically interval level, variable called
covariate. The ANCOVA is an extension of ANOVA that typically provides a way of
statistically controlling for the effects of continuous or scale variables that you are
concerned about but that are not the focal point or independent variable(s) in the study.
For example, imagine that we found that boys and girls differ on math achievement.
However, this could be due to the fact that boys take more math courses in high school.
ANCOVA allows us to adjust the math achievement scores based on the relationship
between number of math courses taken and math achievement. We can then determine if
boys and girls still have different math achievement scores after making the adjustment
(Leech, Barrett, & Morgan, 2005).

A one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) evaluates whether population means on

the dependent variable are the same across levels of a factor (independent variable),
adjusting for differences on the covariate, or more simply stated, whether the adjusted
group means differ significantly from each other. The one-way ANCOVA is used to
analyze data from several types of studies; including studies with a pretest and random
assignment of subjects to factor levels, studies with a pretest and assignment to factor
levels based on the pretest, studies with a pretest, matching based on the pretest, and
random assignment to factor levels, and studies with potential confounding (Green &
Salkind, 2003).

Applied data analysis method in the present experiment

The purpose of the research is to examine is there any difference between two
groups of participants: causal vs. non-causal (study 1), alternative cause absent vs.
alternative cause present (study 2); so the author uses the ANOVA method for analyzing
the result. Specifically, the one-way ANOVA is applied to determine whether there are

40

any significant differences between the means of causal vs. non-causal group in study 1
and alternative cause absent vs. alternative cause present in study 2.
5.4 Effect size
Effect size is basically a way of quantifying the size of the difference between two
groups. It is straightforward and can be applied to any measured result in education or
social science. Also, effect size is particularly valuable for quantifying the effectiveness
of a particular intervention, relative to some comparison. It helps the researcher to answer
from a simple question, like Does it work or not? to a complicated question like How
does it work in a range of contexts? Furthermore, by placing the emphasis on the most
important aspect of an intervention - the size of the effect - rather than its statistical
significance (which conflates effect size and sample size), it promotes a more scientific
approach to the accumulation of knowledge (Coe, 2002).

Calculating effect size:

Effect size =

[ ][ ]

The effect size also be calculated in case of the researcher cannot determine which of two
groups is experimental or control. In this case, the effect size simply measures the
difference between them, so it is important in quoting the effect size to say which way
round the calculation was done (ibid.).

Interpreting in effect size number:

One feature of an effect size is that it can be directly converted into statements about the
overlap between the two samples in terms of a comparison of percentiles.
An effect size is exactly equivalent to a 'Z-score' of a standard Normal distribution. For
example, an effect size of 0.8 means that the score of the average person in the
experimental group is 0.8 standard deviations above the average person in the control
group, and hence exceeds the scores of 79% of the control group. With the two groups of

41

19 in the time-of-day effects experiment, the average person in the 'afternoon' group (i.e.
the one who would have been ranked 10th in the group) would have scored about the
same as the 4th highest person in the 'morning' group. Visualizing these two individuals
can give quite a graphic interpretation of the difference between the two effects (ibid.).
6. Validity in experiments
A study is valid if it truly represents what it was intended to represent. Experimental
validity refers to the manner in which variables that influences both the results of the
research and the generalizability to the population at large (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Validity is determined from both internal and external approaches.
6.1 Internal validity
Internal validity refers to a studys ability to determine if a causal relationship exists
between one or more independent variables and one or more dependent variables. A
question is posed: Do the conclusion a researcher draw about a demonstrated
experimental relationship truly imply cause? Obviously, researchers must be aware of
aspects that may reduce the internal validity of a study and do whatever they can to
control for these threats. These threats, if left ignored, can reduce validity to the point
that any results are meaningless rendering the entire study invalid (Cooper and Schindler,
2011).
6.1.1 Maturation
The processes within subjects which act as a function of the passage of time. These are of
special concern when the study covers a long time, but they may also be factors in tests
that are short as an hour or two. A subject can become hungry, bored, or tired in a short
time, and this condition can affect response results (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Solution: To prevent this threat, the author uses randomization method for both groups
(control and treatment). By this way, if both groups experience the same maturation then
the good control group will most likely eliminate the internal validity threats to the single

42

group design (Stanley, 1963). Furthermore, assisstants of the author have responsibility to
remind the participants to concentrate to the experiment during 30 mins.
6.1.2 Testing
The process of taking a test can affect the scores of a second test. The mere experience of
taking the first test can have a learning effect that influences the results of the second test
(Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Solution: The two studies of the experiment are conducted with different participants, so
the situation about a participant involve two studies will not happens.
6.1.3 Instrumentation
This threat to internal validity results from changes between observations in either the
measuring instrument or the observer. Using different questions at each measurement is
an obvious source of potential trouble, but using different observers or interviewers also
threatens validity. There can even be an instrumentation problem if the same observer is
used for all measurements. Observer experience, boredom, fatigue and anticipation can
all distort the results of separate observations (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Solution: Participant just works with a paper including around two measureable
questions and three scale-questions. There is no change in measurement device,
interviewer so this threat can be minimized at the lowest level.
6.1.4 Selection
Selection refers to the manner in which subjects are selected to participate in a study and
the manner in which they are assigned to groups. If there are differences between the
groups prior to the study taking place, these differences will continue throughout the
study and may appear as a change in a statistical analysis (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Solution: Randomization helps the researcher to reduce this risk. Each participant is
given an equal chance of being selected in treatment or control group.

43

6.1.5 Statistical regression

This factor operates especially when groups have been selected by their extreme scores. It
refers to the tendency for subjects who score very high or very low to score more toward
the mean on subsequent testing. If a person gets a 99% on a test, for instance, the odds
that your score will be lower the second time are much greater than the odds of increasing
your score (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Solution: There is no extreme score evaluation in the present research
6.1.6 Experiment Morality
This occurs when the composition of the study groups changes during the test. Attrition is
especially likely in the experimental group and with each dropout the group changes.
Because members of the control group are not affected by the testing situation, they are
less likely to withdraw (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Solution: In the end of study 2, there is a question asking about the effect of chewing
gum. Those who feel that chewing gum does not have any effect can withdraw the study.
To prevent the distortion, the assistants will suggest those kinds of people staying until
the end of the study.
6.1.7 Diffusion or imitation of treatment
If people in the experimental and control group talk, then those in the control group may
learn of the treatment, eliminating the difference between the groups (Cooper and
Schindler, 2011).
Solution: The two groups (treatment and control) sit in two different ranges in a room.
They perhaps, know that they belong to a group but do not know what kind of group is.

44

6.1.8 Compensatory rivalry

This may occur when members of the control group know they are in the control group.
This may generate competitive pressures, causing the control group members to try
harder (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Solution: The same solution in diffusion or imitation of treatment.

6.2 External validity

External validity refers to the generalizability of a study. In other words, can we be
reasonable sure that the results of our study consisting of a sample of the population truly
represent the entire population? Threats to external validity can result in significant
results within a sample group but an inability for this to be generalized to the population
at large (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
*X: experimental treatment
6.2.1 The reactivity of testing on X
The reactive effect refers to sensitizing subjects via a pretest so that they respond to the
experimental stimulus (X) in a different way (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Solution: there is no pretest in the present research.
6.2.2 Interaction of selection and X
The process by which test subjects are selected for an experiment may be a threat to
external validity. The population from which one selects subjects may not be the same as
the population to which one wishes to generalize results (Cooper and Schindler, 2011).
Solution: The way in which choosing participants is the author randomly select a class
including 40 50 students in the university, asking for their permission and conducting
the study. One study can be conducted in 2 3 classes then the author will collect and

45

compare the results of these classes. By this way, the author expects that it can create the
generalize results for the research.
6.2.3 Other reactive factors
The experimental settings themselves may have a biasing effect on a subjects response
to X. An artificial setting can obviously produce results that are not representative of
large populations. If subjects know they are participating in an experiment, there may be
a tendency to role-play in a way that distorts the effects of X (Cooper and Schindler,
2011).
Solution: When participants come to the laboratory, they are announced that the study
related to various consumer experiences such as listening to music, chewing gum and
they will answer some questions about music and gum later. The actual purpose of the
experiment will be explained at the end of the experiment. Therefore, although
participants know that they are joining in an experiment, but the true topic of the
experiment still remains confidential, so it hard for them to role-play in this study.

7. Generalization in experiment:
In a simple way, generalization is defined as making conclusion about a much broader
population than your sample actually represents. In an ideal world, Shuttleworth (2008)
proposes that in order to test a hypothesis, you would sample an entire population. But in
reality, it is imposible, therefore the experiment must choose a sample that qualified to
reflect the whole population.
Shuttleworth (2008) suggests that experimenter should be criticized for generalizations
about sample, time and size. As follows:

Ensuring that the sample group is as truly representative of the whole population
as possible.

46

For many experiments, time is critical as the behaviors can change yearly,
monthly or even by the hour.

The size of the group must allow the statistic to be safely extrapolated to an entire
population.

Another option that is if the sample groups are small, is to use proximal similarity and
restrict the generalization. This is where the experimenter accept that a limited sample
group cannot represent all of the population (ibid.).

II.

DESCRIPTION OF THE TWO STUDIES:

As mentioned, the author will replicates two studies of Faro (2010) in order to test two
main hypotheses in the research. The two studies are implemented in the International
University with the participation of over 100 students which are freshmen, sophomore,
junior and senior. Students will receive bonus marks in their course after joining the
experiment.
1. Study 1:
The purpose of the study is to show that causal belief can affect recollection of time to
onset for personally experienced consumption (hypothesis 1). Participants will be
informed that they are attending a study called Impacts of certain types of auditory
stimulation on creativity. Mobile, clock and anything that relating to time will be asked
to leave outside the room.
Participant: 50 students (expected number).
Instrument: Participants will work on paper which is provided by the experimenter. The
experimenter explains all information during the study on slide.
Assistants: 2 people.
Description:

47

Participants first listen to a piece of instrumental music named Cannon in D of

famous composer, Pachelbel. After listening to the music which lasted about 3 minutes,
they see a picture of landscape on the slide during an interval of 38 seconds. Participants
take part in a Rorschach task afterwards.

The Rorschach task

This task was originally developed as a projective means of exploring personality but
later used to assess creativity (King, 1999). In the original task, cards are presented one at
a time, and the participants report what he or she sees in the inkblot or what the inkblot
might represent. In this study, participants write the first word that come to mind when
they view a series of five Rorschach inkblots on the slide.

Causality Manipulation
After the task, the experimenter gives a false feedback which is announced that
participant answers are the same as top creative people in the past and the experiment
feels consentient about this. Coming up, participants in the causal group read that the
music they have listened before can increases creativity for people based on the basis of
previous evidence, the experimenter expected that the type of music they listened to
would enhance their creativity in the Rorschach task. Meanwhile, participants in the noncausal group read that this kind of music does not increase creativity for people and it
belong to a neutral music which have no effect to the brain, the experimenter did not
expect that the type of music they listened to would enhance their creativity in the
Rorschach task.

Time-to-Onset Estimates
In this study, the time-to-onset is operationalized as the time between the
consumption of a product (music) and an event that could be seen as the effect of that
product (creativity) (Faro, 2010). Participants are asked to estimate the length of the
interval between the music and the Rorschach task by writing their answer in number of
second. Participants, then, judge the length of time between the music and the Rorschach

48

task by comparing it to the length of another interval they experienced during the study
based on a theory of (Zakay and Block, 1997) a second comparative measure.
Specifically, there is a line representing the duration of the music which is already drawn
on the paper. Below that line, participants need to draw another line that represent for the
length of the interval between music and the Rorschach task.

Other Measures
When estimating the interval, participants post-experience feeling can distort the
time estimates (Faro, 2010, see also Galinat and Borg, 1987). Participants who in causal
condition feel more pleasure when hearing that music can increases creativity than those
in non-causal condition. In fact, pleasurable intervals are felt to be subjectively shorter.
In order to control this feeling of participants, they attend final task that is rate how they
feel during the interval and during the study on three scales. The scales are 1 (sad) to 7
(happy), 1 (bad) to 7 (good), and 1 (bored) to 7 (interested). Finally, participants will be
debriefed about the actual purpose of the experiment and thanks for their participation.
2. Study 2:
The purpose of study 2 is to show the implications of this effect on future product
experience and the inclination to switch to alternative products (hypothesis 2).
Participants will be informed that they are attending a study called consumer experience
when chewing gum. Participants can withdraw the study if they had food allergies.
Mobile, clock and anything that relating to time will be asked to leave outside the room.

Participant: 100 students (expected number).

Instrument: Participants will work on paper which is provided by the experimenter. The
experimenter explains all information during the study on slide.
Assistants: 2 people.
Description:

49

After informing the purpose of the study by the experimenter, participants receive a gum
and know that they will join a test called alertness and memory. They start to chew gum
provided by the experimenter and shortly thereafter begin working on the task.

The alertness and memory task

The task measured how fast and how accurately participants were able to respond to a
message that appeared on the computer screen. The experimenter shows a 2x3 matrix
with one of the six cells marked on the slide. The matrix is corresponded to six numbers
(from 1 to 6) on an answer sheet. Participants have to choose the number that indicated in
the matrix. There are 50 trials, composed of five blocks.

Participants receive false feedback on their performance after each block. The feedback
which is announced by the experimenter is the same for all participants. This is the false
feedback about their performance is improving over each block.

Causality Manipulation
After completing the task, participants in the alternative cause-absent condition read that
the mere act of chewing gum could improve performance on alertness and memory tests
based on the basis previous evidence. They are just given only this information with
some additional details. Meanwhile, participants in the alternative-cause-present
condition read that, besides the effect of chewing gum, the act of practice with the
alertness task also affect to their performance and that therefore participants would be
asked to answer questions about any effect of practice on their performance as well.
Time-to-Onset Estimates
Participants come to the next task afterwards. They are asked to estimate the time elapsed
until they feel that chewing gum had an effect on their performance. The length of the
interval is estimated in minutes and seconds. Specially, they are free to say that the gum
has no effect on their performance, those participants will stop the study at this moment.

50

Likelihood of Switching to a Different Product

After this task, participants read that consuming an energy bar before a task could also
improve alertness and that energy bar takes about 10 minutes to digest and affect
performance. They are questioned to indicate how likely they were to consume an
energy bar instead of chewing gum to improve their performance in a similar alertness
task in the future. The scale from 1 = not at all likely to 7 = very likely.

Other Judgments
Participants in both alternative-cause-present and alternative-cause-absent conditions are
asked to rate the degree to which they believed that chewing gum improved their
performance. Also, those in alternative-cause-present condition rate on more question
about the degree to which practice with the alertness task improved their performance.
Ratings were on a scale from 1 (do not believe at all) to 7 (believe very strongly).

More interestingly, Faro (2010) proposes that although the practice with alertness task
was a reasonable cause to the gum for the most participants, for a few others it was not.
Because, after that, participants did not believe strongly that practice had an effect and
tended to believe more strongly in the effect of the gum, then he divided the group of
alternative-cause-present conditions into two sub-groups: those who believe more
strongly in practice and those who did not (strong and weak). Therefore, to remain the
origin design of Faro, the author added one more question to separate them in two subgroups. The question was which kinds of method (chewing gum or practice) that you
believe most?

Finally, similar to study 1, participants completed a mood measure composed of three

scales from 1 (sad) to 7 (happy), 1 (bad) to 7 (good), and 1 (bored) to 7 (interested).

51

CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS & DISCUSSION
I.

IMPLEMENTING PRETEST STUDY:

The pretest study implemented for both studies which included 10 participants per study.
The purpose is to ensure that the official study runs completely prefect and no unexpected
faults occur, also, the author decides to implement a pretest study for some reasons:

To examine whether the participants can understand all given questions in the two
studies?

To examine is there any unexpected faults may occur during the two studies?

To examine the operation system (projector, computer, speaker ) in the

experiment room.

Identified faults in the pretest

In the first pretest study, when instructing the Rorschach task, a few participants did not
understand clearly how to do. Instead of writing the first word that came to their mind for
each picture of Rorschach, they only wrote one word for the series of 5 pictures.
Moreover, participants responded that the time for each Rorschach picture appeared is
relative fast, therefore they could not follow the series of five pictures. In the task of
estimates time-to-onset, participants quite confused about the the interval between the
music and Rorschach task, they did not know how to determine this interval. In addition,
when asking to draw a line representing the length of this interval, most of them did not
know how to estimate it based on a line representing the length of music. Finally,
participants were asked to write any confused point that they thought during the study
and thanked for their participation.

52

In the second pretest study, when giving a gum for each participant, haft of them started
chewing gum immediately whereas the others did not by which may distort the
estimation of time-to-onset. Likewise the first study, in the alertness and memory task,
the time when showing each matrix on the slide was quite fast which was results in
participants could not completely answer all questions. We also got a problem in
separating the alternative-cause-absent and alternative-cause-present condition but it has
been designed again more accurate in the official study. Finally, participants were asked
to write any confused point that they thought during the study and thanked for their
participation.

II.

IMPLEMENTING THE TWO OFFICIAL

EXPERIMENTS:

The two studies were implemented in the International University Vietnam National
University which was lasted for 15 20 minutes per study. There are two assistants who
are friends of the author would help him to control the experiment, moreover, advisor of
the author supported him in booking room and instructing participants throughout the two
studies. Participants when came to the room were asked to leave mobile phone, clock and
anything related to time in their backpack. This was an action of voluntary participation,
those who were not interested in the study, had the right to withdraw from the study;
whereas those who participated the study would receive the bonus mark for their related
course later. In addition, the author required the participants should be responsible for
concentrating while the study took place. More interestingly, to prevent participants read
all tasks and contents of the study, they would just receive one paper for a task, after
finished this task, they would receive another paper for the following task.
The experimenter still kept the experiment steps and processes similar to part 9. Only a
few points had been changed to eliminate the identified faults in the pretest study
.

53

1. The official experiment 1:

As mentioned, the study examined whether causal belief can affect recollection of time to
onset for personally experienced consumption (hypothesis 1). The study employed a
single factor (causality: causal vs. non-causal).

Participants experienced two events separated by an interval. The first event involved
the consumption of a product (listening to music). The second event (being creative)
could be attributed to consuming the product. The manipulation of causality took place
after both events (and the interval) had occurred. Participants later estimated the time that
had elapsed between the events.
Participant: 42 students (first year and second year)
Instrument:
Participants worked on papers which is provided by the experimenter. Each paper
presented one task, the next paper (task) would be given after they finished the previous
one. The experimenter explained all information during the study on slide.
Assistants: 2 people.
Description:
Participants were informed that they are attending a study called Impacts of certain
types of auditory stimulation on creativity. Mobile, clock and anything that relating to
time were asked to leave outside the room.

Participants first listened to a piece of instrumental music named Cannon in D which was
composed by Pachelbel. After listening to the music which lasted about 3 minutes, they
saw a picture of landscape on the slide during an interval of 38 seconds. They took part in
the Rorschach task afterwards.

54

The Rorschach task

As described, the experimenter showed pictures on the slide (one by one), the participants
would wrote the first word that came to their mind after watching each picture. To
prevent the mentioned faults occur, the experimenter explained the Rorschach task twice
to make sure everyone could understand. The pictures had showed manually instead of
setting time.
Causality Manipulation
After the task, the experimenter gave the false feedback to participants. Coming up,
participants in the causal group received a paper wrote that the music they listened
previously could enhance creativity based on the previous evidences, the experimenter
expected that the type of music they listened to would enhance their creativity in the
Rorschach task. Meanwhile, participants in the non-causal group read a paper about this
kind of music did not increase creativity for people and it belong to a neutral music which
have no effect to the brain, the experimenter did not expect that the type of music they
listened to would enhance their creativity in the Rorschach task.

Time-to-Onset Estimates
Participants were asked to estimate the length of interval between the music and
Rorschach task by writing the number of second. Also, they continued by drawing a line
that represent for the length of the interval between music and the Rorschach task. The
experimenter gave a deeply explained about this task before they started to work,
ensuring that everyone could understand how to do.

Other Measures
Participants rated their mood during the interval and during the study on three scale
mentioned before. Finally, participants were debriefed about the actual purpose of the
experiment and thanked for their participation.

55

1.1 Data analysis

As predicted, the interval between music and Rorschach task which was estimated by
participants in causal condition was significantly shorter than those in the non-causal
condition. Specifically, participants in the causal condition estimated the interval Mcausal =
32.71 seconds (SD=10.484) less than participants in the non-causal condition Mnon-causal =
63.90 seconds (SD=61.198). (Table 1.1)

Table 4.1. Descriptive statistics of Causal and Non-causal group

N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Causal
21
32.71
10.484
10
Non-causal
21
63.90
61.198
20
Total
42
48.31
46.148
10

Maximum
50
300
300

An ANOVA showed that there was a significant difference between causal condition and
non-causal condition in the interval estimation with F(1,41) = 5.299, p = .027 < .05
(ANOVA 1)

Table 4.2. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between two groups

ANOVA 1
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
10214.881
77102.095
87316.976

df
1
40
41

Mean Square
10214.881
1927.552

F
5.299

Sig
.027

Measuring the line representing this interval, the author also received a similar result,
participants in causal condition drew the line significantly shorter than those in noncausal condition. Mcausal = 3.8857 centimeters (SD=1.52620), Mnon-causal = 5.3667
centimeters (SD=1.88158) (Table 4.3)

56

Table 4.3. Descriptive statistics of line measurement between two groups

Causal
Non-causal
Total

N
21
21
42

Mean
3.8857
5.3667
4.6262

Std. Deviation
1.52620
1.88158
1.85065

Minimum
1.60
2.50
1.60

Maximum
6.90
11.00
11.00

Analyzing on the ANOVA, the author found that there was also a significant difference
between causal condition and non-causal condition in the line estimation with F(1,41) =
7.847, p = .008 < .05 (ANOVA 2).
Table 4.4. ANOVA statistics of line measurement between two groups
ANOVA 2
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
23.029
117.392
140.421

df
1
40
41

Mean Square
23.029
2.935

F
7.847

Sig
.008

Participants mood ratings for the target interval and for the study as a whole did not
differ between conditions (Fs < 1). As follows ANOVA 3 to ANOVA 6:

Table 4.5. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement in causal condition during the
interval
ANOVA 3
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
.032
93.238
93.270

df
2
60
62

57

Mean Square
.016
1.554

F
.010

Sig
.990

Table 4.6. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement in causal condition during the
whole study
ANOVA 4
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
1.238
142.476
143.714

df
2
60
62

Mean Square
.619
2.375

F
.261

Sig
.771

Table 4.7. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement in non-causal condition during

the interval
ANOVA 5
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
.286
33.143
33.429

df
2
60
62

Mean Square
.143
.552

F
.259

Sig
.773

Table 4.8. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement in non-causal condition during

the whole study
ANOVA 6
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
1.937
60.000
61.937

df
2
60
62

Mean Square
.968
1.000

F
.968

Sig
.386

1.2 Discussion
Based on the analyzed data, it shows that changes in causal beliefs can influence
estimates of time-to-onset for products consumed in the past. In particular, participants
who were tended to believe that the music could partly create their performance and
increased creativity gave shorter estimates for the interval between the music and the
Rorschach task than those who tended to believe that the music had no effect in their
performance. Furthermore, the mood measurement shows that participant attitude did

58

not affect the results of the whole study because the manipulation of causality took place
after the experience of the interval and the data also argued against its playing a role. In
sum, we accepted the hypothesis 1.

2. The official experiment 2:

The purpose of study 2 is to examine the implications of this effect on future product
experience and the inclination to switch to alternative products (hypothesis 2). Study 2
also introduces a different manipulation of causality. In study 1, the ostensible debriefing
informed participants that the product could or could not cause the effect; study 2
manipulates causal beliefs in a target product by introducing to some participants a
second cause that could result in the same effect.

The study employed a single factor (causality: alternative cause absent vs. alternative
cause present).

Participant: 76 students took place in this study, whereas 7 participants chose chewing
gum did not create any effect on their performance on the alertness and memory task. The
remains were 69 people.
Instrument: Participants worked on papers which is provided by the experimenter. Each
paper presented one task, the next paper (task) would be given after they finished the
previous one. The experimenter explained all information during the study on slide.
Assistants: 2 people.
Description:
Participants informed that they were attending a study called consumer experience when
chewing gum. Participants could withdraw the study if they had food allergies. Mobile,
clock and anything that relating to time were asked to leave outside the room.

59

Participants received a gum and knew that they would join a test called alertness and
memory. The experimenter allowed participants started to chew gum and shortly
thereafter begin working on the task.

The alertness and memory task

To prevent the faults before, each matrix was showed manually instead of setting time.
However, after each block, the speed of showing a matrix would be increased. After that,
participants receive false feedback on their performance after each block.

Causality Manipulation
Participants were asked to put away the gum to continue the following task.
When completed the task, participants in the alternative cause-absent condition read that
the mere act of chewing gum could improve performance on alertness and memory tests
based on the basis previous evidence. Meanwhile, participants in the alternative-causepresent condition read that, besides the effect of chewing gum, the act of practice with the
alertness task also affect to their performance and that therefore participants would be
asked to answer questions about any effect of practice on their performance as well.
Time-to-Onset Estimates
Participants, then, were asked to estimate the time elapsed until they felt that chewing
gum had an effect on their performance. They wrote their answer by minutes and
seconds. Specially, they were free to say that the gum had no effect on their performance,
those participants would stop the study at this moment.

Likelihood of Switching to a Different Product

Compare to an energy bar, participants indicated how likely they were to consume the
energy bar instead of chewing gum to improve their performance in a similar alertness
task in the future.

60

Other Judgments
Participants in both alternative-cause-present and alternative-cause-absent conditions are
asked to rate the degree to which they believed that chewing gum improved their
performance. Also, those in alternative-cause-present condition rate on more question
about the degree to which practice with the alertness task improved their performance. To
separate them in two sub-groups, the question which kinds of method (chewing gum or
practice) that you believe most was given? Finally, similar to study 1, participants
completed a mood measure. At the end, participants were debriefed about the actual
purpose of the experiment and thanked for their participation.

2.1 Data analysis

Causal belief in gum effect

Firstly, analyzing the causal belief in the gum between two groups (alternative-causeabsent vs alternative-cause-present), the ANOVA showed that there was not a significant
difference in two groups: F <1; p>.05 (ANOVA 7)

Table 4.9. ANOVA statistics of causal belief between alternative-cause-absent vs

alternative-cause-present group
ANOVA 7
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
.022
87.283
87.304

df
1
67
68

Mean Square
.022
1.303

F
.017

Sig
.898

Secondly, after separating participants in three groups as mentioned: alternative-causeabsent, weak alternative-cause-present, strong alternative-cause-present; the ANOVA of
this new three-level factor on the ratings of causal belief in the gum showed a significant
main effect. In particular, F(2,68) = 2.892, p = .06 (although the difference was slightly
significant but it also partly reflected the origin result) (ANOVA 8)

61

Table 4.10. ANOVA statistics of causal belief between alternative-cause-absent vs

strong alternative-cause-present group vs weak alternative-cause-present
ANOVA 8
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
7.034
80.270
87.304

df
2
66
68

Mean Square
3.517
1.216

F
2.892

Sig
.06

According to table 10, the participants in alternative-cause-absent and weak alternativecause-present had higher causal belief in gum than those in strong alternative-causepresent condition. Mabsent = 4.24 > Mstrong present = 3.9; Mweak present = 4.8 > Mstrong present =
3.9.
Table 4.11. Descriptive statistics of three conditions

Causal belief
Time-to-onset estimate
Inclination to use energy bar

Alternative
cause absent
(N= 33)
4.24 (1.2)
90.61 (27.748)
3.73 (1.126)

Weak alternativecause-present
(N=15)
4.8 (.941)
92.06 (36.222)
3.40 (1.056)

Strong alternativecause-present
(N=21)
3.9 (1.044)
121.67 (36.617)
4.33 (1.238)

Time-to-onset estimates
An ANOVA showed a main effect of the newly formed causality variable on participant
estimates (in seconds) of time to onset. F(2, 68) = 7.388, p = .001 < .05 (ANOVA 9)
Table 4.12. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between 3 conditions.
ANOVA 9
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
15413.387
68848.816
84262.203

df
2
66
68

62

Mean Square
7706.693
1043.164

F
7.388

Sig
.001

Alternative-cause-absent vs Strong alternative-cause-present condition

Comparing the two conditions above in time estimation, the author realized that
participants in the alternative-cause-absent estimated the time that chewing gum had an
effect on their performance more quickly than those in the strong alternative-causepresent condition.
Mabsent = 90.61 (SD = 27.748) < Mstrong = 121.67 (SD = 36.617); F(1,53) = 12.512, p =
.001 < .05 (ANOVA 10)

Table 4.13. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between alternativecause-absent vs strong alternative-cause-present condition.
ANOVA 10
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
12381.103
51454.545
63835.648

df
1
52
53

Mean Square
12381.103
989.510

F
12.512

Sig
.001

Strong alternative-cause-present vs Weak alternative-cause-present

condition

Likewise, participants in the weak alternative-cause-present estimated the time that

chewing gum had the effect on their performance sooner than those in strong alternativecause-present condition. Mweak = 93.20 (SD = 37.197) < Mstrong = 121.67 (SD = 36.617);
F(1,35) = 5.220, p = .029 < .05 (ANOVA 11)

Table 4.14. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between strong

alternative-cause-present vs weak alternative-cause-present condition.
ANOVA 11
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
7090.572
46187.067
53277.639

df
1
34
35

63

Mean Square
7090.572
1358.443

F
5.220

Sig
.029

Alternative-cause-absent vs Weak alternative-cause-present condition

Furthermore, participants in alternative-cause-absent compared to weak alternativecause-present condition did not differ significantly. F(1,47) = .073 < 1, p = .789 > .05
(ANOVA 12)

Table 4.15. ANOVA statistics of estimates of time-to-onset between strong

alternative-cause-absent vs weak alternative-cause-present condition.
ANOVA 12
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
69.388
44008.279
44077.667

df
1
46
47

Mean Square
69.388
956.702

F
.073

Sig
.789

Similar to study 1, participants mood ratings did not affect to the manipulation (F < 1)
(ANOVA 13)

Table 4.16. ANOVA statistics of mood measurement of participants in the whole

study
ANOVA 13
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
1.517
330.087
331.604

df
1
204
206

Mean Square
.758
1.618

F
.469

Sig
.626

Likelihood of Switching to a Different Product

An ANOVA showed a main effect of causality on the likelihood of using an energy bar
instead of gum. F(2,68) = 3.206, p = .047 < .05 (ANOVA 14)

64

Table 4.17. ANOVA statistics of the likelihood of using an energy bar between 3
conditions
ANOVA 14
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
8.434
86.812
95.246

df
2
66
68

Mean Square
4.217
1.315

F
3.206

Sig
.047

Alternative-cause-absent vs Strong alternative-cause-present condition

Comparing the two conditions above in time estimation, participants in the alternativecause-absent would be less likely to use an energy bar instead of gum to improve their
alertness than those in the strong alternative-cause-present condition. Mabsent = 3.73 (SD =
1.126) < Mstrong = 4.33 (SD = 1.238); F(1,53) = 3.442, p = .06 (although the difference
was slightly significant but it also partly reflected the origin results) (ANOVA 15)

Table 4.18. ANOVA statistics of the likelihood of using an energy bar between
alternative-cause-absent vs strong alternative-cause-present condition

ANOVA 15
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
4.714
71.212
75.926

df
1
52
53

Mean Square
4.714
1.369

F
3.442

Sig
.06

Strong alternative-cause-present vs Weak alternative-cause-present

condition

Likewise, participants in the weak alternative-cause-present also would be less likely to

use an energy bar instead of gum to improve their alertness than those in strong
alternative-cause-present condition. Mweak = 3.40 (SD = 1.056) < Mstrong 4.33 (SD =
1.238); F(1,35) = 5.601, p = .024 < .05 (ANOVA 16)

65

Table 4.19. ANOVA statistics of the likelihood of using an energy bar between
strong alternative-cause-present vs weak alternative-cause-present condition
ANOVA 16
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
7.622
46.267
53.889

df
1
34
35

Mean Square
7.622
1.361

F
5.601

Sig
.024

Alternative-cause-absent vs Weak alternative-cause-present condition

Furthermore, participants in alternative-cause-absent compared to weak alternativecause-present condition did not differ significantly. F(1,47) = .905 < 1, p = .346 > .05
(ANOVA 17)
Table 4.20. ANOVA statistics of the likelihood of using an energy bar between
alternative-cause-absent vs weak alternative-cause-present condition
ANOVA 17
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
1.105
56.145
57.250

df
1
46
47

Mean Square
1.105
1.221

F
.905

Sig
.346

A mediation analysis
Relying on the Faro (2010) paper, the author conducted the mediation analysis to realize
whether estimates of time to onset help to interpret the pattern of likelihood of switching
to the competing product.
The first model regressed the ratings of causal belief on the likelihood of using an energy
bar, the result showed that there was a significant negative effect with = -.316, t = 2.866, p = < .05

66

Table 4.21. The first model regressed the ratings of causal belief on the likelihood of
using an energy bar
Model 1
(constant)
energy bar

Unstandardized
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
5.476
.443
-.316
.110

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Sig.

12.350
.000
-.330
-2.866
.006
Dependent variable: Causal belief

The second model regressed the ratings of causal belief on the estimates of time to onset
for the gum, the result showed that there was a significant negative effect with = -.008,
t = -.247, p = .041 < .05

Table 4.22. The second model regressed the ratings of causal belief on the estimates
of time to onset for the gum

Model 2
(constant)
time-to-onset

Unstandardized Coefficients
B
5.061
-.008

Std. Error
.406
.004

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Sig.

12.469
.000
-.247
-2.087
.041
Dependent variable: Causal belief

2.2 Discussion
As predicted, study 2 indicates that recollections of time-to-onset were shortened by a
stronger causal beliefs. Specifically, when asking to recall the moment that chewing had
an effect on their performance, participants who were told that chewing gum caused
increased alertness reported a quicker onset of an effect on reaction time compared to
participants who were led to believe that improved performance could also come about
through practice effects. Likewise study 1, mood did not affect to the manipulation of the
study.

67

Another point that interpreting from the study is recollections of time-to-onset also
changed the inclination to switch to another competing products. Time-to-onset played a
role as a mediator in a connection between the effect of causal beliefs and the experience
of the effect in future consumption. In particular, the participants who had a strong causal
belief in chewing gum could enhance alertness and memory would less likely to use a
competing product in the future than those who did not. Therefore, the hypothesis 2 has
been accepted.

68

CHAPTER 5
GENERAL DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS

I.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

In general, the outcomes of two studies revealed the same results of the original research,
Faro (2010). The two studies showed that causal beliefs can impact estimates of time-toonset for past consumption and that these can in turn affect future consumption decisions.
Participants who believed strongly in effect of product could shorten estimates of time-toonset and were less inclined to switch to competing product. In order words, peoples
recollection of the time elapsed before they experienced an effect of a product is
influenced by the degree to which they believe the product was responsible for that
effect.
Additionally, correlating to the findings of Faro (2010), the current research also provides
the same results. This implies that there is no difference between Western and Asian
people in the assessment of time-to-onset for past consumption, the geographic distance
does not affect to the outcomes of this topic.

II.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FIRMS & CONSUMERS:

The main purpose of this research is to examine the effect of causal beliefs on estimates
of time-to-onset and future consumption. In fact, the elapsed time between actions and
effects may affect peoples plans for when a given action would need to be taken to
produce timely impact in the future. Faro (2010) states that people causal beliefs can be
affected by factors like advertising, self-study, lead to change their consumption
decisions and experience by reshaping how we remember our past experience with
product. An important question related to practical purposes is a relationship between

69

estimates time-to-onset and actual time-to-onset. What if customer underestimates or

overestimates time-to-onset? Whether changes in causal beliefs make estimates of timeto-onset more or less accurate. Does it have any effect in specific products?
In both studies, participants in the strong causal belief condition thought the products
(music and chewing gum) took a shorter time to have an effect on their performance.
Actually, people tend to underestimate the time between causes and effects relative to the
actual interval (Faro et al., 2005). Past research has suggested that one important
determinant of over and underestimation of duration is the actual duration. When
estimating a duration of a previous task, people tend to overestimate the duration for
short task and underestimate for long ones (Roy and Christenfeld, 2008).
Although the accuracy and the extent deviations from actual time-to-onset may depend
on the truly specific context, it is obvious from the present research that actions that
strengthen consumers causal beliefs are more likely to underestimate later. Borrowing a
Faro (2010) example, after seeing an ad showing the results of new trials, past consumers
of a product are more likely to underestimate the time the product took to show its effect
when they used it in the past. Furthermore, they may more likely to use the drug too late
in the future and begin activities that are dependent on its effect too early. Applying a
specific product, Shisedo has been launched a new skin brightening cream on the market.
When using the new trials, past loyalty customers of Shiseido more likely underestimate
the time the cream shows its effect when they used it in the past (e.g 20 days now
decrease to 15 -10 days). The negative consequence is a few number of past customers
think that the new cream is not as effective as the old ones in term of effective time; then
they may less likely to switch into the new creams of Shiseido. Obviously, this could
generate a harmful influence when timely consumption is important for product
effectiveness. Because the recollection of too short a time-to-onset can alter consumer
experience in the next consumption, leading them to estimate prematurely rapid effects in
the next consumption. The suggestion is manufacturers, marketers may need to intervene
and manage how consumers perceive their past experience with products by collecting
and disseminating information about actual time-to-onset (see also Keller and Lehmann,

70

2008). Taking the example above, Shisedo when lauching the new brightening cream
should annouces for their customer that the difference of effective time between the old
and new ones. For example, giving a brighten skin after 20 days using compare to 30
days for the old edition. Another example is energy drink, manufacturers should classify
and indicate the information of actual time-to-onset on each product line, by this way, it
will provides customers an exactly number of time-to-onset instead of estimates by causal
belief.
Relying on strong causal beliefs shorten estimates of time-to-onset, it also gives products
a special advantage. As in study 2, the results showed that participants who holding
shorter estimates of time-to-onset experienced the effect of chewing gum earlier in
subsequent consumption and were less interested in switching to other products
especially these products which its effect is quiet ambiguous. But in case of products
having unambiguous effect, it can conflict with the estimates of time-to-onset for past
consumption which leads to disappointment and dissatisfaction of consumers (Oliver
1980). Therefore, the more ambiguous effect the more advantages bring to this product.
Consumers when satisfy with such kinds of product (e.g. energy drink, sleeping pill, acne
cream) will less likely to switch to another competing product. The suggestion for
marketer is forming a strong causal beliefs of consumers is also a special strategy to
compete with other competitors. In fact, manufacturers should concern more in education
marketing which is a way to generate a strong belief of consumers on that product.
To summed up,

For consumers who usually use products that timely consumption is important for
product effectiveness, the resreach suggests that they should strictly follow user
manual instead of relying on past experience to get the best effect.

For manufacturers especially products that have ambiguous effect (e.g. gum,
coffee, energy drink, sleeping pill). The way to generate a strong causal beliefs
for consumers will aim them less likely to choose another competing products in
future. Therefore, education is highly appreciate for these kinds of product.

71

III. IMPLICATIONS FOR MARKETERS

Forming and changing consumers causal beliefs about products are considered as a vital
activity in marketing strategy. McGill (2000) proposes that preception and assessment of
causality are considered as important component in consumer decision making. He
mentions that there are several kinds of judgments can affect consumers beliefs about
products, manufacturers and retialers. For instance, when consumers are asked to explain
unusually or bad good performance, they may think of the reasons for changes in price or
distribution, they indicate advertising and sales claims to good or bad motives, or wonder
why advertisers aim some product attributes over others McGill (2000).
Obviously, these kinds of perception influence consumers voluntary to believe
advertising claims or to buy products on promotion. Hence, understanding the selection
of causal comparisons, may enhance efforts to inform and persuade consumers. The
research of McGill (2000) is one of much research which were studying on causal beliefs
of consumers. The recent research suggests the marketers in order to form and change the
causal beliefs of consumer, they should pay more attentions on the effect of causal belief
on estimates of time-to-onset for goods people consumed in the past and future
consumption decisions.

IV.

LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

FURTHER RESEARCH:

Mistakes occur at the very worst time. Of course, there are several limitations involed in
the present research that need to point out. Along with the shortcomings of the research, a
suggestion of new direction for further research will be made.
Firstly, as mentioned, although the study replicates based on Faro (2010), the author only
examined 2 over 4 hypotheses of the origin study. Therefore, the findings can not

72

represent for the whole implications of the study. It is impled that further research should
expand in two latest studies of Faro which are related to future consumption of
consumers.
Secondly, the two studies were designed on paper and slide instead of computer like the
origin research, it maybe the reason why the results just showed a slightly significant (p =
.06) in the alternative-cause-absent and strong alternative-cause-present conditions.
Therefore, the suggestion for future experimenters is they should design on computer to
increase the precision of results.
Thirdly, due to the time constraint, the number of participants were not equal to the
original number. Specifically, in study 1, 42 participants compare to 48 original ones; in
study 2, 76 participants compare to 153 original ones. Later, the furture research should
collect more or equal the authentic number of colleague to generalize the findings.
Finally, due to time constraint, some information in the study has not been latest updated.
As a result, subsequent research should consider updating this information to give a better
result.

V.

ADVICES FOR FUTURE EXPERIMENTS:

In my point of view, conducting an experiment is quite new and interested than

quantitative methods. However, everything always has two sides, if it gives a researcher
less time-consuming in implementation and data analysis then it takes him much time in
experiment design and theories. In this part, I recommend some advices for students who
intend to conduct the experiment method in future especially IU students.
I think that the most difficult problem in experiment method is theories and experiment
design. Therefore, if you desire to choose experiment as a main method in your thesis, I
suggest having a well-prepared in experiment theories as well as the way to design an
experiment. First point, ensuring that you can understand all terminologies in experiment
method, what kinds of design you are going to conduct, only one small mistake in the

73

design will leads to distort result. The second important point is your participants, the
advice is do not find the participants by yourself, you must deal with your advisor that he
will give you a hand in participant finding. The reason why experimenter pays an amount
of money ($5 - $10) for each participant/ study because he wants them show their
responsibility in the study instead of voluntary participation. In fact, you must prepare
something to make sure that participants attend your study with a part of responsibility.

74

LIST OF REFERENCES

Artino, A. J. (2008). Cognitive load theory and the role of learner experience: An abbreviated
review for educational practitioners. AACE Journal, 425 - 439.
Ayres, P. (2006, November 10). Cognitive load theory at University of New South Wales .
Retrieved from http://education.arts.unsw.edu.au/research/
Baba Shiv, Ziv Carmon, Dan Ariely. (2005). Placebo Effects of Marketing Actions: Consumers
May Get What They Pay For. Journal of Marketing Research, 383393.
Bettman, J. R. (1979). An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice. Addison-Wesley.
Bienenfeld, Laura A, William H. Frishman, Stephen P. Glasser. (1996). The Placebo Effect in
Cardiovascular Disease. American Heart Journal, 12071221.
Chigirinova, D. (2012). The placebo effect in marketing:. University of Kassel.
Coe, R. (2002). It's the Effect Size, Stupid - What effect size is and why it is important. Annual
Conference of the British Educational Research Association. England: University of
Exeter.
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental
storage capacity. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 87 - 114.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design Third Edition . United States of America: SAGE
Publication.
David Faro and Claire Tsai. (2010). Cue Substitution: Inferential Processes in Judgements and
Experiences of Time. Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 37, p219.
David Faro, Ann L. McGill, Reid Hastie. (2013, May 14). The influence of perceived causation
on judgments of time: an integrative review and implications for decision-making.
Retrieved from frontiers in psychology:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3653058/
Decher, D. (2013, February 16). ListVerse. Retrieved from http://listverse.com/2013/02/16/10crazy-facts-about-the-placebo-effect/
Dewey, D. (2007). Intropsycho. Retrieved from
http://www.intropsych.com/ch01_psychology_and_science/importance_of_replication.ht
ml

75

Donnal R. Cooper and Pamela S. Schindler. (2011). Business Research Methods. New York:
McGraw-Hill Education (Asia).
Drotar, D. (2010). Editorial:A Call for Replications of Research in Pediatric Psychology and
Guidance for Authors. Journal of Pediatric Psychology , 801 - 805.
Einhorn, Hillel J. and Robin M. Hogarth. (1986). Judging Probable Cause. Psychological
Bulletin, 3-19.
Explorable.com. (2009, July 13). Random Sampling. Retrieved from Explorable.com:
https://explorable.com/simple-random-sampling?gid=1578
Faro D., Leclerc F., Hastie R. (2005). Perceived causality as a cue to temporal distance. Psychol.
Sci., 673-677.
Faro, D. (2010). Changing the Future by Reshaping the Past: The Influence of Causal Beliefs on
Estimates of. Journal of Consumer Research, 279-291.
Faro, D. (2010). Changing the Future by Reshaping the Past: The Influence of Causal Beliefs on
Estimates of Time to Onset. Journal of Consumer Research, 279 - 291.
Faro, D., Leclerc, F., and Hastie, R. (2005). Perceived causality as a cue. Psychology Science, 673
- 677.
Fletcher, J. O. Garth, Paula Danilovics, Guadalupe Fernandez, Dena Peterson, and Glenn D.
Reeder. (1986). Attributional Complexity: An Individual Difference Measure,. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 875 - 884.
Franklin G Miller, David Wendler, Leora C Swartzman . (2006, September 06). Speaking of
Medicine. Retrieved from PLOS medicine:
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0020262
Galinat, Withold H. and Ingwer Borg. (1987). On Symbolic Temporal Information: Beliefs about
the Experience of Duration. Memory and Cognition, 308-317.
Green, S. B. (2003). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and Understanding
Data (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Haggard, P., Clark, S.,and Kalogeras, J. (2002). Voluntary action and conscious awareness. Nat.
Neurosci, 382 - 385.
Harris, A. D., McGregor, J. C., Perencevich, E. N., Furuno, J. P., Zhu J., Peterson, D. E., &
Finkelstein, J. (2006). The use and interpretation of quasi-experimental studies in medical
informatics. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 116-123.

76

Hartmann, S. (2009). Events Psychology: How to Understand Yourself and Other People.
DragonRising Publishing.
Helmenstine, T. (2014). About.com Chemistry. Retrieved from
http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryterminology/a/What-Is-A-Control-Group.htm
Hoch, Stephen J. and Young-Won Ha. (1986). Consumer Learning: Advertising and the
Ambiguity of Product Experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 221233.
Hole, G. (2009). Research Skills.
Hoshmand, A. R. (2006). Design of Experiments for Agriculture and the Natural Sciences Second
Edition. Taylor & Francis Group.
Ingraham, P. (2013, December 7). saveyourself. Retrieved from
http://saveyourself.ca/articles/placebo-power-hype.php
James W. Moore, David Lagnado, Darvany C. Deal, Patrick Haggard. (2009). Feelings of control:
Contingency determines experience of action. Cognition, 279 - 283.
Jeffrey P. Ebert and Daniel M. Wegner. (2010). Time Warp: Authorship Shapes the Perceived
Timing of Actions and Events. Conscious, 481 - 489.
Jong, T. d. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some
food for thought. Instruction Science Journal, 105 - 134.
Judicibus, D. d. (2011, October 2). Retrieved from The Independent:
http://www.lindipendente.eu/wp/en/2011/10/02/placebo-effect-in-advertising/
Keller, Punam A. and Donald R. Lehmann. (2008). Designing Effective Health Communications:
A Meta-analysis. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 117 -130.
King, B. J. (1999). Creativity as a Factor in Psychological Assessment and Healthy Psychological
Functioning. Journal of Personality Assessment, 200 - 207.
Kirsch, Guy Sapirstein. (1999). Listening to Prozac But Hearing Placebo: A Meta-Analysis of
Antidepressant Medications. American Psychological Association, 303320.
Kirsch, I. (1997). Response Expectancy Theory and Application: A Decennial Review. Applied
and Preventive Psychology, 6979.
Kristensson, P. O. (2012). Retrieved from University of Cambridge :
https://camtools.cam.ac.uk/wiki/site/e30faf26-bc0c-4533-acbccff4f9234e1b/controlled%20experiments.html
Lagnado, David A. and Steven A. Sloman. (2008). Time as a Guide to Cause. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 451 - 460.

77

Leech, N. L. (2005). SPSS for Intermediate Statistics: Use and Interpretation (2nd ed.). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Levin, Irwin P. and Gary J. Gaeth. (1988). How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing of
Attribute Information Before and After Consuming the Product. Journal of Consumer
Research, 374 - 378.
Lorkowski, C. M. (2010). David Hume: Causation. Retrieved from Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy: http://www.iep.utm.edu/hume-cau/
Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Expectancy Theory of Motivation: Motivating by Altering
Expectations. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, BUSINESS, AND
ADMINISTRATION, VOLUME 15, NUMBER 1.
McGill, Ann L. (2000). Counterfactual Reasoning in Causal Judgment: Implications for
Marketing. Psychology and Marketing , 323 - 343.
McLeod, S. (2012). Experimental Method. Retrieved from Simply Psycholog:
http://www.simplypsychology.org/experimental-method.html
Montgomery, Guy and Irving Kirsch. (1996). Mechanisms of Placebo Pain Reduction: An
Empirical Investigation. Psychological Science, 174176.
Oehlert, G. W. (2010). A First Course in Design and Analysis of Experiments. Library of
Congress Cataloging in Publication Data.
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction
Decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 460 - 469.
Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D. and Krishnan, R. (2004). Marketing research. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Price and Oswald. (2008, 10 7). California State University, Fresno. Retrieved from Research
Methods for Dummies:
http://psych.csufresno.edu/psy144/Content/Design/Experimental/placebo.html
Roy, Michael M. and Nicholas J. S. Christenfeld. (2008). Effect of Task Length on Remembered
and Predicted Duration. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 202 -207.
Samuel M. Mcclure , Jian Li , Damon Tomlin , Kim S. Cypert , Latan M. Montague , P. Read
Montague. (2004). Neural correlates of behavioral preference for culturally familiar
drinks. Neuron, 379 - 387.
Schlottmann, A. (1999). Seeing It Happen and Knowing How It Works: How Children
Understand the Relation between Perceptual Causality and Underlying Mechanism.
Developmental Psychology, 303 - 317.

78

Seale, C. (2004). SAGE research method. Retrieved from The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social
Science Research Methods : http://srmo.sagepub.com/view/the-sage-encyclopedia-ofsocial-science-research-methods/n851.xml
Shanks, D. R. (1985). Hume, on the Perception of Causality. Hume Studies, 94 - 108.
Shuttleworth, M. (2008, Nov 15). What is Generalization? Retrieved from Explorable.com:
https://explorable.com/what-is-generalization
Sommer, B. A. (2011). Psychology. Retrieved from UCDAVIS University of California:
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/sommerb/sommerdemo/sampling/types.htm
Spirkin, A. (1983). In R. Cymbala, Dialectical Materialism. Progress Publishers.
Stanley, D. C. (1963). Experimental and Quasi experimental design for research. Boston:
Houghton Miffin Co.
Steve Stewart - Williams; John Podd. (2004). The Placebo Effect: Dissolving the Expectancy
Versus Conditioning Debate. Psychological Bulletin, 324340.
Sweller, J., van Merrinboer, J. J. G., and Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional
design. Educational Psychology Review, 251 - 296.
Van Gerven, Pascal W. M. (2003). The efficiency of multimedia learning into old age. British
journal of educational psychology, 489-505.
Vitelli, R. (2012, November 11). Psychology Today. Retrieved from
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/media-spotlight/201211/exploring-the-placeboeffect
Voudouris, N. J., Peck, C. L., Coleman, C. (1990). The role of conditioning and verbal
expectancy in the placebo response. Pain, 121128.
Woo-kyoung Ahn, Charles W. Kalish. (2002). The Role of Mechanism Beliefs in Causal
Reasoning. In F. Keil, Explanation and Cognition. MIT press.
Zakay, Dan and Richard A. Block. (1997). Temporal Cognition. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 112-116.
Zikmund, W. G. (1991). Business Reseach Methods . US: The Dryden Press.

79

APPENDIX
I.

APPENDIX A

EXPERIMENT STEPS IN STUDY 1

Informed consent
MU NG THAM GIA VO TH NGHIM
Ngi nghin cu: Nguyn L Thanh Tun
ti: Nghin cu v tc ng ca m thanh kch thch thnh gic to nh hng n
kh nng sng to ca con ngi.
Xin cho bn,
Ti hin la sinh vin nm cui ca trng i hoc Quc T i hoc Quc Gia
Tp.HCM. Bn ang tham gia vao mt th nghim da trn ti nghin cu ca ti c
tin hnh ti trng i hoc Quc T. Tt c cu tr li ca bn ch c gi tr cho nghin
cu ny v khng c bt k kin nao c nh gi la ng hoc sai c. Ti xin cam
oan ch s dng kt qu nghin cu nay di dng thng k, phc v cho mc ch
nghin cu v moi thng tin s c gi kn.
Phng thc tin hnh: Bn s c nghe mt on nhc c cung cp bi ngi
nghin cu, sau tham gia vao mt bi kim tra v t duy sng to. Cui cng s l mt
bi kho st ngn ly kin phn hi ca ngi tham gia v bui th nghim. Bn c
th t cu hi cho ngi nghin cu v nhng vn lin quan trc khi bui th
nghim bt u. Tng thi gian d kin cho bui th nghim ko di trong khong 20
30 pht.
Lu : Trong lc tin hnh th nghim, bn vui lng khng nhn vao ng h hoc in
thoi. Vui lng t in thoi hoc cc thit b gy ting ng khc ch im lng.

80

Mi nguy hi: khng c bt k mi nguy hi no trc tip nh hng n ngi tham gia
trong sut qu trnh th nghim.
Xin chn thnh cm n bn!
Ti ng tham gia vo bui th nghim ny:
Ngy: ___________________________________
Tn: ____________________________________
Email: ___________________________________
Ch k: _________________________

81

Task 1: Bn ang c nghe mt on nhc c cung cp

bi ngi nghin cu.

Vui lng ct ng h, t in thoi v cc thit b gy

ting ng khc ch im lng

82

Task 2: Bn ang tham gia vao bai kim tra v kh nng t

duy sng to c tn Rorschach task.

Ch ci u tin xut hin trong u bn khi bn nhn thy hnh

nh trn slide l g?
Hnh 1:
Hnh 2:
Hnh 3:
Hnh 4:
Hnh 5:

V d:

Ngi nghin cu chon ch M cho

hnh bn cnh.

83

 This paper was only given for participants in causal condition

"Bn hy c k on vn sau"

Mc ch ca nhng vic va ri la nh gi s tc ng ca m nhc ln

kh nng sng to ca bn trong bai tp hnh nh (Rorschach task).
on nhc bn nghe lc u la tc phm giao hng kinh in tn Cannon
in D ca nha son nhc ngi c tn la Pachelbel.
on nhc nay c chng minh la c tc dng tng kh nng sng to.
V th, chng ti tin rng on nhc trn tng sc sng to ca bn trong
bi Rorschach lc ny.

84

 This paper was only given for participants in non-causal condition

"Bn hy c k on vn sau"

Mc ch ca nhng vic va ri la nh gi s tc ng ca m nhc ln

kh nng sng to ca bn trong bai tp hnh nh (Rorschach task).
on nhc bn nghe lc u la tc phm giao hng kinh in tn Cannon
in D ca nha son nhc ngi c tn la Pachelbel.
on nhc nay c chng minh la loi nhc trung tnh ngha la khng
nh hng n s sng to ca con ngi.
V th, chng ti tin rng on nhc trn khng c nh hng g n s
sng to ca bn trong bai tp Rorschach lc ny.

85

Task 3:

Bn hy c lng khong thi gian (tnh bng giy) t lc on nhc Cannon in

D kt thc cho n khi bt u lam bai kim tra Rorschach.
Theo ti, khong thi gian trn ko dai __________ (giy)

Bn hy so snh di ca hai khong thi gian sau:

(1) khong thi gian t lc on nhc Cannon in D kt thc cho n khi bt u lam
bai kim tra Rorschach.
(2) khong thi gian bn nghe on nhc Cannon in D va ri.
Cch lm: Chng ti v mt on thng th hin dai khong thi gian bn nghe
nhc bn di. Ngay di on thng chng ti v sn, bn hy v ra on thng th hai
sao cho th hin dai tng i ca khong thi gian t lc nghe ht on nhc cho n
khi bt u lam bai kim tra Rorschach. dai ca hai on thng cng th hin dai
ca hai khong thi gian (1) va (2) ni trn.
Khi v xong bn c th lt tip sang trang mi.

on thng th hin thi gian nghe nhc:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vui lng v ti y

86

Task 4: Bn hy nh du X vo bng nh gi bn di

1) Tm trng ca bn nh th no trong sut khong 1 trn?

Sad

Happy

Bad

Mc nh gi

7
Good

Bored

7
Interested

2) Tm trng ca bn nh th no trong sut bui th nghim?

Sad

Happy

1
Mc nh gi

Bad

Good

Bored
1

7
Interested

XIN CM N BN THAM GIA NGHIN CU NY !!!

CHC BN HC TP TT

87

II.

APPENDIX B

EXPERIMENT STEPS IN STUDY 2

Informed consent

MU NG THAM GIA VO TH NGHIM

Ngi nghin cu: Nguyn L Thanh Tun
ti: Nghin cu tri nghim ca ngi tiu dng v sn phm ko cao su
Xin cho bn,
Ti hin la sinh vin nm cui ca trng i hoc Quc T va hin ang lam lun vn tt
nghip v hanh vi ngi tiu dng. Ti xin mi bn tham gia vo mt th nghim nh ca
ti. Tt c cu tr li ca bn ch c gi tr cho nghin cu ny v khng c bt k kin
nao c nh gi la ng hoc sai c. Ti xin cam oan ch s dng kt qu nghin cu
ny phc v cho mc ch nghin cu v moi thng tin c nhn s c gi kn.
Phng thc tin hnh: Ti mi bn dng 1 vin ko cao su hiu Cool Air, sau khi nhai
ko xong, bn s lm mt bi kim tra s tp trung, sau tr li mt s cu hi lin
quan. Tng thi gian d kin cho bui th nghim ko di trong khong 15 pht.
Lu : Trong lc tin hnh th nghim, bn vui lng khng nhn vao ng h hoc in
thoi. Vui lng t in thoi hoc cc thit b gy ting ng khc ch im lng.
Mi nguy hi: nu bn d ng vi ko cao su, bn c th ngng tham gia th nghim ny.
Xin chn thnh cm n bn!
Ti ng tham gia vo bui th nghim ny

88

Task 1: Bn ang tham gia vao bai memory & alertness

test
Ni dung:
Trn slide s xut hin ln lt nhng hnh c ngu nhin nh du
X vo mt trong 6 (nh hnh 1).
Mi trn hnh c gn s th t t 1 n 6 (nh hnh 2).
C mi ln xut hin, bn hy ghi ng s th t ca c nh du
X vo giy tr li (nh hnh 3)

X
Hnh 1

Block 1

Hnh 1 1 2 3 4 5 6
Hnh 2 1 2 3 4 5 6

Hnh 2

Hnh 3

Vui lng ghi cu tr li ra giy c cung cp bi ngi

nghin cu

89

 This paper was only given for participants in alternative-causeabsent

"Bn hy c k on vn sau"

Cc bai tp va ri nhm nh gi tc ng ca ko cao su ln s tnh to va

tr nh ca bn
Trong mt nghin cu mi cng b ca cc nha khoa hoc Nht Bn, nhai
ko cao su gip con ngi tnh to hn va tng kh nng tp trung. Hanh
ng nhai ko cao su khng ch c tc dng th gin ma cn tng ham lng
mu, tng oxi cho no, t gip ci thin tr nh. c bit la ko cao su
khng to ra bt k tc dng ph nao nh ca ph, nc tng lc ...
(Brain and Cognition Journal of Psychology - 2012)

90

 This paper was only given for participants in alternative-causepresent

"Bn hy c k on vn sau"

Cc bai tp va ri nhm nh gi tc ng ca ko cao su ln s tnh to va

tr nh ca bn
TC NG CA KO CAO SU V BI TP TEST ALERTNESS & MEMORY

Trong mt nghin cu mi cng b ca cc nha khoa hoc Nht Bn, nhai

ko cao su gip con ngi tnh to hn va tng kh nng tp trung. Hanh
ng nhai ko cao su khng ch c tc dng th gin ma cn tng ham lng
mu, tng oxi cho no, t gip ci thin tr nh. c bit la ko cao su
khng to ra bt k tc dng ph nao nh ca ph, nc tng lc ...
(Brain and Cognition Journal of Psychology - 2012)

Vic thc hnh bi test alertness and memory (bai test lc u tin) gip
tng s tnh to ca no b, gip con ngi tng kh nng tp trung.
Nhiu nghin cu cng chng minh la vic thc hin cc bai test trc cc
k thi gip sinh vin tng kh nng tp trung, t tng hiu qu lm bi.

91

Bn hy c lng khong thi gian t lc nhai ko n lc ko cao su bt

u c tc ng n hiu qu lm bi kim tra s tp trung (khong thi gian
c c lng bng pht v giy):
a) Thi gian t lc ti nhai ko n lc ko bt u c tc ng
ln hiu qu lm bi l ______ pht _______ giy
b) Ko cao su khng c tc ng no ln hiu qu lm bi kim tra
s tp trung ca ti.

Lu : nu chon p n (b), xin hy nh du vo ch (b), v bn c th

ngng th nghim ti y ma khng cn tr li cc cu hi bn di - xin
cm n bn.

92

Task 3:
Trong mt nghin cu mi y, nu trc khi lm bi kim tra s tp trung ma n mt
thanh ko energy bar (l loi thc phm nhm vo nhng ngi mt nhiu nng lng
nh cc vn ng vin chi th thao, ngi luyn tp th dc. Loi nng lng chng ta
c c t loi thc phm ny l nng lng t carbohydrate, l ngun nng lng
chnh ca tt c cc t bo trong ton b c th, v l ngun nng lng duy nht cho
no v cc t bo hng cu), th cng u c tc dng tng kh nng tp trung, tr
nh, kim sot tnh to ging nh ko cao su. Nhng energy bar cn n 10 pht
tiu ha v to ra nh hng.
Bn hy cho bit kin ca bn vi kin sau:

Trong tng lai, nu bn phi lm mt bi kim tra s tp trung, bn s chon ko

energy bar thay cho ko cao su nhm lam tng hiu qu lm bi.
Bn cho kin bng cch nh vo mt trong nhng la chn di y
1. Rt khng ng
2. Khng ng
3. Hi khng ng
4. Trung lp
5. Hi ng
6. ng
7. Rt ng

Mc nh gi

Rt khng ng
1

Rt ng
3

93

Bn c tin rng ko cao su thc s c th tng kh nng tp trung, tr nh v kim

sot tnh to cho ngi dng?

Mc nh gi

Hon ton khng tin

1

Hon ton tin

3

Bn c tin rng vic thc hnh bi tp memory and alterness task thc s c
th tng kh nng tp trung v kim sot tnh to cho ngi dng khng?

Mc nh gi

Hon ton khng tin

1

Hon ton tin

3

(This question was only given for participants in alternative-cause-present)

Tm trng ca bn nh th no trong sut bui th nghim?

Mc nh gi

Sad
1

Mc nh gi

Bad
1

Mc nh gi

Happy

Good
2

Bored
1

Interested
2

94

Task 4:
Gia ko cao su v vic thc hnh bi kim tra tr nh va s tp trung, bn
tin rng (nh du X vo vo la chon ca bn):
a. Ko cao su tc ng mnh hn n kh nng tp trung, tr nh v
kim sot tnh to ca bn
b. Bi kim tra tr nh v s tp trung tc ng mnh hn n kh
nng tp trung, tr nh v kim sot tnh to ca bn
c. C hai tc ng bng nhau

XIN CM N BN THAM GIA NGHIN CU NY !!!

CHC BN HC TP TT

95

96