A critical comment towards the appraisal of the research is why the research workers used 20 fanciful trade name extensions of merely high quality trade names to analyze the attitude towards a peculiar trade name extension alternatively of utilizing existent life trade name extensions divided in certain degrees of quality of the original trade name, in such a mode that consumers could do a direct connexion between the trade name and the extension? This is a signifier of verification prejudice. Harmonizing to Evans ( 1989 ) and Nickerson ( 1998 ) , verification prejudice is looking for or construing for confirmations in a manner that are limited to bing beliefs, hypothesis or outlooks. The research workers should instead utilize both existent life extensions and trade names that were qualitatively different from each other to analyze how consumers form a peculiar attitude and perceptual experience towards a certain trade name extension. Because now it appears that the research workers were corroborating their beliefs of consumer ratings of trade name extensions into their ain research on intent.
The research workers sought to analyze the rating of trade name extension on consumers. A critical comment towards the pick of sampling is the fact that this research was merely conducted among 107 undergraduate concern pupils that joined a specific class ( Aaker & A ; Keller, 1990 ) . But this group is merely a peculiar type of consumer. In extension with the five rules of causal generalisation ( Shadish et Al, 2001 ) , the research workers made an mistake in doing favoritisms, or in this instance, the deficiency of, between different types of consumers. Therefore, they fail to accept know aparting factors in set uping a causal theory of consumer ratings of trade name extensions.
The pupil as a type of consumer is, harmonizing to Hoyer and Macinnis ( 2009 ) , wholly dissimilar from other consumers. This consumer type is exceptionally drawn to innovative trade names that buy fresh merchandises at first reaching and earlier than the great mass of consumers ( Hoyer & A ; Macinnis, 2009 ) . This announcement is shared by Rogers ( 1995 ) , he claimed that this peculiar type of consumer belongs to the early adoptive parents, which are, harmonizing to Rogers ( 1995 ) , extremely educated immature persons that have a big societal engagement and are attracted to new merchandises. The degree of credence towards new merchandises and services are higher than the mean consumer ( Rogers, 1995 ) .
This sample was constructed on the footing of non-probability. There is no information nowadays on what basiss and features these pupils were selected other than the fact that they followed a specific class. Non-probability sampling, in this point of view, is a prejudice in causal generalisation, refering the effects that were founded with this type of units may non keep if other types of units were examined and the effects that were founded in this peculiar scene -a university in California- may non keep if in another scene, for illustration a university in Pennsylvania ( Shadish et Al, 2001 ; Schreuder et Al, 2001 ) , therefore diminishing the dependability of the survey ( Babbie, 2009 ) . For case, the evaluated perceptual experiences on trade name extension can be assumed to be different if other types of consumers would be studied. Probability trying would be more appropriate in this survey to generalise results to the population ( consumers ) .The advantage of utilizing a method of chance sampling is that it guarantees the replies that were found through the sample about covers the replies if it were asked to the whole population and it simplifies the external cogency of the illations ( Shadish et Al, 2001 ) .
Whereby, it strengthens the opportunity that units are, in many facets, every bit likewise to assorted consumer types ( Shadish et Al, 2001 ; Babbie, 2009 ) . Schreuder & A ; Alegria ( 1995 ) revealed the effects for illation of using a chance sample from a represented population to gauge the sums of the population when the choice chances are treated as equal.For the 2nd studyof this research, which is smaller than survey one, the same critics can be sited on the sampling method. In the 2nd survey the research workers used a different group of 121 pupils in a different semester. That they used different units in this research can be a publication prejudice.
Publication prejudice, which is besides called ‘the file-drawer job ‘ , occurs when any leaning constructed by the research workers is neglecting to administer survey consequences on the footing of the strengths and/or way of the findings in a research survey ( Rosenthal, 1979 ; Shadish et Al, 2001 ; K. Dickersin & A ; Y. Min, 2006 ) , whereby the chance exist that a survey is published that relies on the statistical significance of its findings ( Sterling, 1959 ; Scargle, 1999 ) .
Because it can be presupposed that the research workers premeditated to hold an affirmatory and positive consequence whereby diverse pupils from different semesters were used until they acquired a satisfied result, in mixture with the verification prejudice portrayed beforehand. The usage of diverse units in survey one and two, in add-on, explains the unsimilarities on the mean values for survey two. Those were higher than the average values examined in survey one.A concluding comment on this article is that the research workers used a 2×2 factorial design with two degrees to mensurate. The first degree existed out of the original trade name quality cue and the 2nd out of the trade name extension property amplification. Each participant was assigned to a 1 of the four groups. Although, this seems a good design to step, the factorial design in field scenes has some disadvantages ( Shadish et Al, 2001 ; Gravetter & A ; Forzano, 2008 ) . Harmonizing to Shadish et Al ( 2001 ) , implementing a factorial design into field scenes, in this instance a selling research, is hard to measure, due to the instance that the research worker ca n’t command all environmental influences to accordance and it demands a close control over the combination of intervention that is given to units.
In a 2×2 factorial design, measuring takes topographic point over four different factors ( Shadish et Al, 2001 ) . Although, this seems accomplishable to acquire the needed consequences, however there are extra drawbacks harmonizing to Gravetter and Forzano ( 2008 ) . Gravetter and Forzano ( 2008 ) acknowledge that this type of experimental design can be clip devouring that upsurges the chance that abrasion, loss of units ( Shadish et Al, 2001 ) , takes topographic point before the survey has ended. Particularly with merely 121 pupils divided over four groups abrasion can act upon the research consequences.
In this paper different critics on the research article “ Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions ” were discussed.This means that the research happening on survey 1, as written before, could non be generalized to the full population of consumers but that it can merely pull decisions and can be generalized to a larger group of pupils. The usage of chance trying methods would lend to the generalisation to the full population of consumers.
Aaker, D.A. , & A ; Lane Keller, K. ( 1990 ) . Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions.Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, 27-41.
Babbie, E.R. ( 2009 )The Practice of Social Research( 12th edition ) . Wadsworth Publishing, California ; Thomson Learning.Cronbach, L.J.
, ( 1982 ) .Planing ratings of educational and societal plans. San Francisco: Jossey-BassDickersin, K. , Min, Y. ( 2006 ) . Publication Bias: The job that wo n’t travel off.New York Academy of Sciences.
Vol. 703, p. 135-148.Evans, J.
St. B. T. ( 1989 ) . Bias in human logical thinking:Causes and effects. Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumHoyer, W.
D. , Macinnis, D.J. ( 2009 ) .Consumer Behavior. South-Western College Publishing, BostonGravetter, F.J.
, Forzano, L.B. ( 2008 ) .Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences.
Wadsworth Publishing, California ; Thomson Learning.Nickerson, R.S. ( 1998 ) . Confirmation Bias: A Omnipresent Phenomenon in Many Guises.Review of General Psychology, Vol. 2, No 2, p.
175-220.Rogers, E.M. ( 1995 ) .
Diffusion of inventions, Ed. 4. The Free Press, New York.Rosenthal, R. ( 1979 ) .
The “ File Drawer Problem ” and Tolerance for Null Results.Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 86, No3, p. 638-641.Scargle, J.D. ( 1999 ) .
Publication Bias ( The “ File-Drawer Problem ” ) in Scientific Inference.Journal of Scientific Exploration.Schreuder, H. T. and Alegria, J. ( 1995 ) .Stratification and secret plan choice regulations, abuses, and effects. Fort Collins, Colo.
: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.Schreuder, H.T.
, Gregoire, T.G. , Weyer, J.P. ( 2001 ) . For What Applications Can Probability and Non-Probability Sampling Be Used? .
Journal of Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.Vol. 66, No. 3, p.
281-291.Shadish, W. R. , Cook, T. D.
, & A ; Campbell, D. T. ( 2001 ) .Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalised causal illation. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Sterling, T.
D. ( 1959 ) . Publication Decisions and Their Possible Effects on Inferences Drawn from Trials of Significance – or vica versa.Journal of the American Statistical Association.
Vol. 54, No. 285, p. 30-34