Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Coke vs Pepsi Challenge
Similar to Coke vs Pepsi Challenge (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Coke vs Pepsi Challenge
- 1. EXSC 513: Evaluation in Exercise Science Statistics Project Cola: Coke vs. Pepsi Miranda Burd Rachel Hikes Jennifer Kelly Molly McNeil Kayla Muth Stephanie Suarez
- 2. Overview History Methodology Data Literature Statistical Analysis Conclusions Limitations
- 3. History Both Coke & Pepsi Founded by Pharmacists 1886- Coke was founded- “Secret Formula” 1898- Pepsi Founded; Brand Name 1902 1975 –Pepsi Challenge Pilot Went National in 1976 Ran Through Early 1980’s
- 4. Methodology Location: Koehler Fieldhouse Type: Blind, Convenient sample Time & Dates: Day 1: Tuesday March 8th, 2011 Time: 11:00 am – 12:15 pm Data Collectors: Molly, Rachel, Stephanie Day 2: Wednesday March 9th, 2011 Time: 11:00 am – 12:00 pm Data Collectors: Jennifer, Kayla, Miranda
- 5. Methodology Continued A B Pencils and Survey Table placed in Koehler Fieldhouse lobby Surveys and pencils centered Clear plastic cups were filled with approx. 3 oz. of liquid and placed under their corresponding “A” or “B” sheet on either side Passing individuals were encouraged to participate in our statistics project entitled: “Coke vs. Pepsi Challenge”.
- 6. Survey Example Subjects were asked to fill out the top two portions before sampling the beverages.
- 7. Original Data Main Question
- 10. Demographics Table 1: Demographics of participants surveyed
- 11. Majors Surveyed Figure 1a: Representation of Health Related Majors Figure 1b: Representation of Non-Health Related Majors Table 2a: Majors of Students Surveyed- Health Table 2b: Majors of Students Surveyed- Non Health
- 12. Pre- and Post- Test Cola Preferences Coke Pepsi Coke Pepsi 42 Figure 2a: Pre-Test Preference Figure 2b: Post-Test Preference
- 13. Literature “Consumers with positive initial attitudes to a brand showed higher opinion and evaluation scores to products with this brand name than to products with an alternate brand name, regardless of the actual products sampled”. ~Belke & Pierce “The Coke label created wild activity in the part of the brain associated with memoires and self image, while Pepsi, though tasting better to most, did little to these feel good center in the brain”. ~Szegedy-Maszak
- 14. Literature cont’d 2010 Annual reports: Pepsi Revenue: ~21 Billion Coke Revenue: ~25.5 Billion Facebook Survey:
- 15. Is there a difference amongst cola groups and their ability to identify preference? dF= 1 *p > 0.05 χ2 = 10.55 Conclusion: Reject the null Ho
- 16. Is there a difference amongst pre and post cola preference in accuracy? dF=1 *p > 0.05 χ2 = 36.19 Conclusion: Reject the null Ho
- 17. Is there a difference between gender and their activity level? dF= 2 p < 0.05 χ2 = 0.98 Conclusion: Fail to Reject the null Ho
- 18. Is there a difference between cola drinkers and non cola drinkers in their taste test accuracy? dF= 1 p < 0.05 χ2 = 0.89 Conclusion: Fail to Reject the null Ho
- 19. Is there a difference between education level and taste test accuracy? dF= 1 p < 0.05 χ2 = 1.38 Conclusion: Fail to Reject the null Ho
- 20. Conclusions: There is no difference between Cola preference and correctly identifying the beverage in this blind taste test study. Originally, ~64% of the sample favored coke, but after a blind taste test, only 38% favored coke. There is no difference between the activity levels and gender within those who had a preference status. Of the people who had a preference, there was no difference within education level.
- 21. Limitations Location Only 1 building on campus surveyed. Only building surveyed has a majority of students in health related majors. Negative connotation attached to “soda drinking” with health related majors. Negative connotation attached to “inactivity” with health related majors. Many students were athletes.
- 22. Limitations Continued Data Collection: Clarification of “soda” and “cola.” Palate cleansers before first and in between cups. “Zero” column for soda frequency & activity. Too much data/questions on survey. Used a convenient sample.
- 23. And the battle continues… Questions?
- 24. References: Belke, T.W. et al. (1988). Stimulus Control of Consumer Opinion by Brand Names: A Social Conditioning Analysis. The Psychological Record, 38, 227-236. Blakeslee, S. (2004, October 19). If You Have a 'Buy Button' in Your Brain, What Pushes It?. The New York Times. Coke vspepsi: a timeline. (2011). Advertising Age, 82, 6. McClure, S.M. et al. (2004, October 14). Neural Correlates of Behavioral Preference for Culturally Familiar Drinks. Neuron, 44, 379-387. Szegedy- Maszak, M. (2005, February 28). Mysteries of the Mind: Your Unconscious is Making your Everyday Decisions. U.S. News & World Report, 9(2), 53-61.
Editor's Notes
- One table was set up in the lobby on the first floor of Koehler Fieldhouse.Sheets labeled “A” & “B” were placed on opposite ends of the table, with surveys & pencils in between.Clear Cups were filled with approx. 3 oz. of liquid at a different table and placed under their corresponding “A” or “B” sheet.Soda bottles were concealed under a box beneath the table.Passing students were encouraged to participate in our statistics project entitled, “Pepsi vs. Coke Challenge”.Soda bottles were kept cold for palatability.
- As you can see subject number 10 AND 70 were highlighted because there overall information was not considered in any of our testing because they did not answer our main question of placing them into a Coke or Pepsi preference cola drinker. While subject 70 was highlighted because their survey response did not provide us with any useful information other then they are a faculty member and their exercise frequency. ***Our overall Subject Number was 77 people surveyed.
- For every question we asked, We created a separate Excel sheet that was similar to this sample
- The total amount of students surveyed was 62. We Italicized and Placed the undeclared people under Non health majors because we did not inquire how much health related courses they have taken. As you can notice, there is a significantly larger amount of health majors vs. non health majors surveyed, therefore we could not utilize majors to identify a significance in difference amongst these two groups.
- Since FB is one of the most popular social networks, as of 6pm Tuesday April 11th, 2011 these are the current numbersCoke is clearly winning by….
- χ2calc > χ2 book at the p=.05, (df=1)Conclusion: Reject the null hypothesis at the .05 alpha level. There is a statistically significant difference between subjects that identified themselves as Pepsi drinkers between subjects that identified themselves as Coke drinkers in their ability to accurately identify their cola of choice in a blind taste test.
- 36 is huge!!χ2calc > χ2 book at the p=.05, (df=1)Conclusion: Reject. There is a statistically significant difference at the .05 alpha level between subjects who had the same cola preference before the blind taste test and after the blind taste test in their ability to identify the cola correctly.
- χ2calc < χ2 book at the p=.05, (df=2)Conclusion: Fail to Reject. There is no statistically significance at the .05 alpha level between genders and weekly activity levels.
- χ2calc < χ2 book at the p=.05, (df=1)Conclusion: Fail to Reject. There is no statistically significant difference at the .05 alpha level between subjects who identified themselves as cola drinkers and identified the cola accurately during a blind taste test.
- χ2calc < χ2 book at the p=.05, (df=1)Conclusion: Fail to Reject: There is no statistically significant difference at the .05 alpha level between graduate and undergraduate students in their ability to identify cola in a blind taste test.
- Point one agrees with literature
- - Many of the athletes were in season or conditioning and didn’t want to drink any soda