Larged Priceed Food

Ages: The ages that are most likely to purchase the reduced priced expired food are the age ranges of 18-24 (100%)* and 55+ (75%). While the individuals that are in the age ranges 25-35 (50%) and 36-55 (50%) are less likely to purchase it. This may be due to the fact that from the ages 25-55 the likelihood that a person has a child in their household increases and parents may be more cautious as to what they are feeding their offspring. Additionally, those age ranges correlate to when a family has the most expendable income so they are able to purchase food at it’s most expensive cost while when an individual is 18-24 and 55+ their savings may be limited. Sexes:

A higher percentage of men (84% men vs 62% women) are willing to purchase

One hundred percent of those with an income above $125,000 and seventy –eight percent of those with an income between $80,001-$125,000 were willing to purchase it. The individuals surveyed who earned an income less than $42,000 were willing to purchase the reduced priced expired food 65.5% of the time and those who were in the middle class earning between $42,000-$80,000% were willing to purchase it 52% of the time. This deviated from the original hypothesis since it was thought the lower and middle class were more likely to purchase the food than the upper class. It is surprising that the people in the lower class and middle class supported it the least since it can be thought that they would be the class most benefitted by the reduced prices. Perhaps this is because they don’t want to feel inadequate by purchasing the reduced price food while those with a higher socioeconomic status are more secure with their income. Another reason could be that people with a higher socioeconomic status tend to be better educated; therefore, they might be more aware of the environmental distress caused by food waste. **Note: These calculations include the participants who selected the answer choice "depends" since it indicates an interest in purchasing the reduced priced expired

First, upon first consideration the sample size of 100 seemed adequate until you breakdown the categories and see that generalizations are being made based on 20 or so people. A bigger study would be necessary to draw an accurate correlation. Additionally, this study was only conducted on one day, at one time, in one location. A more accurate study would gather data over a greater area to take into account regional differences. There would also need a way to test if the participants actually do what they say would do in the survey. Anyone could say that they would purchase the food but would he or she really? Although this research was adequate for establishing probable cause that the system would be a success, further research is needed. The next steps for this research could be to conduct a larger study with a greater sample size, nationwide. This would better gauge the appropriateness of providing the option of purchasing food past the sell-by date. Knowing this, a few stores can test out the system to see who is really purchasing these items and at what quantity to really determine whether or not people are willing to purchase food passed the sell-by date. If there is a significant amount of support this can be implemented full scale. This can potentially lower the amount of food wasted in the United States from forty percent to thirty, in turn