TriCities Consumers Concerned About Cereal Companies That Cheat have previously accused Oxford for putting less than the advertised amount of cereal in their boxes.

Case 5:
Oxford cereals (II)
Background information
⦁ Oxford advertises on their boxes that each box of cereal contains 368 grams of Cereal
⦁ TriCities Consumers Concerned About Cereal Companies That Cheat have previously accused Oxford for putting less than the advertised amount of cereal in their boxes
⦁ TriCities Consumers Concerned About Cereal Companies That Cheat still believe that Oxford Cereals is misleading the public in regards to the weight in the cereal boxes
⦁ TCCACCTC then made the claim that cereal boxes produced at Plant Number 2 in Springville always weighed less than the 368

Key Issues
Whether or not Oxford Cereals is misleading the public with the information regarding the weights of their cereal boxes advertised at 368 grams per box.

Constraints and Opportunities
Opportunity
Potential to heighten credibility of TCCACCTC
TCCACCTC has the potential ability to attract more donors for their organization
Constraint
Sample size for all plants are small (valid sample size is 30)
The samples were only collected from plants 1 and 2, however no data was gathered by the TCCACCTC for plants 3 and 4
Pay a Friend donation service is shut down limiting available funding

Assumptions
⦁ TCCACCTC can distinguish which plant a box is from by the barcode
⦁ There was a press release where the TCCACCTC apologized for accusing Oxford so quickly but wanted to further investigate the claim we made against Oxford Cereals

Alternative 1: Continued

Assumptions for F-test:
Samples were independently and randomly selected
Both populations are normally distributed
Level of significance is .05
Outcome:
With the F-Test we were able to find that the variances differ quite greatly between both sample, therefore, it is necessary to conduct a T-Test: Assuming Unequal Variances to analyze the data
Alternative 1: use our TCCACCTC’s data – Quantitative
Assumptions for t-test:
⦁ Samples were independently and randomly selected
⦁ Both plants’ population variances are equal
⦁ Level of significance is .05
Outcome:
⦁ Since both P values remains greater then the level of significance, the evidence is not strong/supportive enough to reject the hypothesis in regards to a mean equivalent to 368

Alternative One – Qualitative Analysis
⦁ The TCCACCTC will no longer request an apology from Oxford.
⦁ We will issue a public apology for the accusation we made against Oxford Cereals by Friday
⦁ State that Oxford is a reliable company, does not cheat their consumers, and that the data we analyzed was not strong enough to support our claim
⦁ We will drop the claim against Oxford
⦁ In the future, be sure we have more supportive evidence before accusing companies of cheating consumers
⦁ Gather bigger samples for data analysis
⦁ Fix the donation site so future funding can help with information and data collection
Alternative 2: use oxfords Data – Quantitative

Assumptions for Levene Test:
⦁ The four populations have equal variances
⦁ The sample data was independently and randomly drawn
⦁ The four populations are normally distributed
Alternative 2: Qualitative Analysis
⦁ When reviewing Oxfords Data the evidence is strong enough to support their defense in regards to cheating their consumers
⦁ A greater sample of 20 was drawn from each of the four production plants allowing for a more thorough analysis
⦁ There still exists the possibility of providing misleading information to the public
⦁ Oxford may have just claimed that they drew samples from every production plant (there was no witness)
⦁ A sample of 20 is still not truly a sufficient sample size for testing the provided data, even though they provided more than the TCCACCTC
Alternative 3: Hire a third unbiased party
Pros:
There would be unbiased analysis data that would not be manipulated
With more funding due to the joining of both parties, the TCCACCTC would be able to provide a greater sample for a more detailed analysis

Cons:
It will take an additional amount of time
With our funding site currently shut down the cost of paying for the third party would be “out of pocket”
The possibility of the third party proving us wrong still exists

Recommended plan of action
⦁ The TCCACCTC will no longer request an apology from Oxford.
⦁ We will issue a public apology for the accusation we made against Oxford Cereals by Friday
⦁ State that Oxford is a reliable company, does not cheat their consumers, and that the data we analyzed was not strong enough to support our claim
⦁ We will drop the claim against Oxford
⦁ In the future, be sure we have more supportive evidence before accusing companies of cheating consumers
⦁ Gather bigger samples for data analysis
⦁ Fix the donation site so future funding can help with information and data collection