Selective attention and selective recall often impact how we interpret news, remember events, and experience everyday interactions. Here’s a fun study asking how expectations aff ect real-time experiences, not just after-the-fact characterizations of an event. Bar
patrons were approached in two local student bars and asked to
participate in a short study involving free beer. Almost all (n = 388)
agreed (Lee, Frederick, and Ariely, 2006: 1055):
Respondents consumed two beer samples: one unadulterated
sample and one sample of “MIT brew,” which contained
several drops of balsamic vinegar—a beer fl avoring that most
participants fi nd conceptually off ensive, but that does not, at
this concentration, degrade the beer’s fl avor (in fact, it slightly
improves it). Respondents were randomly assigned to one of
three conditions. In the blind condition, they tasted the two
samples without any information about the contents. In the
before condition, they were told which beer contained balsamic
vinegar, prior to tasting either. In the after condition, they fi rst
tasted the beers and were then told which beer contained
balsamic vinegar.
(a) Using the characteristics of scientifi c research, how would you
evaluate this description of the research methodology?
(b) What would you change in or add to the research design?
(c) What kinds of additional research may be interesting to
conduct based on the fi ndings from this study that expectations
often override experience?
“The results across three experiments suggest that information (about the presence of a conceptually off ensive
ingredient) infl uences preferences more when received
before consumption than when received after
consumption.
“The MIT brew was liked much less when disclosure
preceded sampling than when respondents learned about
the balsamic vinegar after they had tasted both samples”
(Lee, Frederick, and Ariely, 2006: 1057)

nothing to calculate just I need critical thinking answer in each letter.