Question 44

Indicate what some economists would have predicted about Iyengar's experiment

The mention of 'conventional economic wisdom' serves to highlight the expectations that economists have regarding consumer behavior in the context of choice. This sets a contrast against Iyengar's findings, which defy these traditional predictions.

A) explain why Iyengar's experimental results are not considered valid

This option is incorrect because the author does not suggest that Iyengar's results are invalid. Instead, the reference to conventional wisdom is to illustrate a common belief, not to discredit the findings of the experiment.

B) point out how Iyengar came up with the idea for her experiment

This option is incorrect as the text does not provide any information on the inspiration for Iyengar's experiment. The focus is on contrasting conventional wisdom with the results, rather than the genesis of the experiment.

C) consider the methods Iyengar used to gather her data

This option is incorrect because the author does not delve into the methodology of data collection used by Iyengar. The emphasis is instead on the outcome of the experiment relative to economic expectations.

D) illustrate the processes Iyengar used to analyze the results of her experiment

This option is incorrect as well, since the text does not discuss how Iyengar analyzed her results. The mention of conventional wisdom is aimed at framing the context of the findings, rather than detailing analytical processes.

E) indicate what some economists would have predicted about Iyengar's experiment

This option is correct because the author uses 'conventional economic wisdom' to represent the expectations that economists hold about consumer choice. By doing so, it sets the stage for discussing how Iyengar's results contradict these predictions, thereby emphasizing the significance of her findings.

Conclusion

In summary, the correct answer E reflects the author's intent to present the traditional economic perspective on consumer choice, which serves as a backdrop to the surprising results of Iyengar's experiment. The other options fail to capture this intention, as they either misinterpret the author's purpose or focus on irrelevant aspects of the research process.