• CarbonScored [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Piaget’s theory of cognitive development

      One example of an experiment for testing conservation is the water level task. An experimenter will have two glasses that are the same size, fill them to the same level with liquid, and make sure the child understands that both of the glasses have the same amount of water in them. Then, the experimenter will pour the liquid from one of the small glasses into a tall, thin glass. The experimenter will then ask the child if the taller glass has more liquid, less liquid, or the same amount of liquid. The child will then give his answer.

      I always thought this test was “children think taller and thinner = more”. But actually it’s way different, this test is “children think taller and thinner = more, but they think it so hard that they think the quantity of liquid literally expands to fill the space.”

  • the_itsb [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    ·
    7 months ago

    This happened with the dog food we were buying during the pandemic. The largest bag had been 42 lbs, but then it changed to a 38 lb package. The best part was that they also changed the labeling to say it was “38 LBS!! BONUS SIZE!!” — I have a really good memory for numbers and was instantly pissed about the marketing bullshit.

    Same price, of course.

    • jayWL
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      Oh, I heard the very reason for this was that it used like 5% less aluminium

        • WalrusDragonOnABike [they/them]@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Assuming all the sides use the same amount of material per sq or you accurately measure that as well. Given its also more complex than a simple cylinder, weighing would be the easiest option. Could even weigh like 10 at once and average if your scale isn’t precise enough for weighing one at a time.

      • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        The shape of a soup can is the optimal surface area to volume ratio for a cylinder. If the materials were evenly distributed, it’s roughly the optimal shape for using as little metal as possible. Deviating quite a bit from that shape is probably going to use more metal unless they decided to make some parts much thinner, something they could presumably do with the other cans as well.

        • jayWL
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          I think the point was that due to a different construction, the walls could be made thinner or something, idk. I can’t find it now and it was probably false. Most articles I find talk about how the new cans “feel more luxurious” and thus sell better.

  • OgdenTO [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    7 months ago

    Lucky for us, in this open and free market system, we have the alternatives for buying whatever kind of overpriced cola we want. Or, the freedom to make our own HFCS-laden cola at home

    • SSJ2Marx@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      7 months ago

      explaining to the DEA that I only tried to order Coca leaves for cola-making purposes

    • Barabas [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      They stopped selling the short cans in Sweden last year, all the tall cans now.

      But there wasn’t a difference in cost. Just that it uses slightly less aluminium, and the “bonus” of people thinking that a tall can might have more in it.

  • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    Coming up with new sub-terminology for “marketing”.

    If you pay close attention to the price per weight of different sizes of products, it’s pretty common that the bigger ones are actually more expensive per gram of crunch or goop despite costing less to manufacture. There are marketing geeks that think they can wow you with the packaging and size itself (or they overproduced the smaller one) and they point to all kinds of studies about how making products seem bigger makes them more desirable and likely to be purchased. The larger one might just plain be better because it’s a more appropriate size for the person buying it, but rather than reflecting production efficiency, they just crank up the price, just enough that you don’t notice, to rake in those sweet profits.

  • DyingOfDeBordom [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    I fantasized about taking a manager of Harris teeter hostage at gunpoint while screaming about how they can’t keep getting away with it

    The trigger for this fantasy? Harris teeter parboiled rice is like 1.59, the Success Rice equivalent is 3.59 and is the exact same fucking thing and you can guess which they’ve been sold out of for weeks