The National Student Research Center

E-Journal of Student Research: Consumerism

Volume 6, Number 3, July, 1998

John I. Swang, Ph.D.

Founder/Director

National Student Research Center

2024 Livingston Street

Mandeville, Louisiana 70448

U.S.A.

E-Mail: nsrcmms@communique.net

http://youth.net/nsrc/nsrc.html

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. A Comparison of Diaper Absorbency
2. Which Tile Cleaner Cleans Best?
3. A Comparison of Carpet Cleaners
4. Which Battery Lasts Longer?
5. Can People Tell the Difference Between Coca-Cola and Pepsi?
6. Which Toothpaste Cleans The Best?
7. The Cheapest Place To Buy A Boombox

Title:  A Comparison of Diaper Absorbency

Student Researcher:  John Tilghman
School Address:  Mandeville Middle School
                 2525 Soult Street
                 Mandeville, Louisiana  70448
Grade:  5
Teacher:  Mrs. Santangelo

I.Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:

I wanted to determine which disposable diaper in the 16-28 pound 
range was the most absorbent.  My hypothesis is that the less 
expensive store brands will absorb more than the higher-priced 
name brands.

II.  Methodology:

The materials I used to conduct my research included:

Eleven types of diapers (store brand and name brand from five 
different manufacturers), food scale (grams), pound scale, 
screen mesh with a wooden frame built around it, shallow, wide 
rectangular plastic container to place underneath the screen 
mesh and catch the polyacrylate from the diapers, water, 500 ml 
measuring cup, plastic containers to hold the wet polyacrylate, 
plastic spoon, and paper and pencil to record results.

For each diaper manufacturer, I tore open the cotton liner and 
removed the polyacrylate  by rubbing the cotton against screen 
mesh.  I weighed the polyacrylate on a gram scale.  Then I 
measured and added water until the maximum absorbency was 
reached.  Then I weighed the wet gel.  I repeated the testing a 
second time for each manufacturer.     

III.  Analysis of Data:

I tested diapers from the following manufacturers:  Paragon, 
Associated Hygienics, Proctor & Gamble, Arquest, and Kimberly-
Clark.  

The most absorbent diaper was Arquest (67.3 fluid ounces, 
$4.97/pack), followed by Associated Hygienics (46.5 fluid 
ounces, $4.99/pack),  Kimberly-Clark (35.8 fluid ounces, 
$6.89/pack), Proctor & Gamble (28.7 fluid ounces, $5.98/pack), 
and Paragon Trade Brands (23.5 fluid ounces, $3.99/pack).  

IV.  Summary and Conclusion:

This experiment confirmed my hypothesis, that the less expensive 
store brand diapers would absorb more than the higher priced 
name brands.

V.  Application

The results of this experiment will help consumers decide which 
diaper to purchase by showing them which diaper absorbs the most 
and costs less.  Also, using the most absorbent diaper will help 
the environment by reducing the number of diapers required and 
the number of wet wipes needed.



Title:  Which Tile Cleaner Cleans Best?

Student Researcher:  Heather Keyes
School:  Mandeville Middle School
         2525 Soult St.
         Mandeville, Louisiana  70448
Grade:  4
Teachers:  Mrs. McCants  

I.  STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:

I wanted to find out which tile cleaner is the best cleaner:  
Mr. Clean, Mop and Glo, and Murphy's Oil Soap.  My hypothesis 
stated that Murphy's Oil Soap will clean the best.

II.  METHODOLOGY:

First, I wrote my purpose.  Then I reviewed the literature on 
the claims of each product and developed my hypothesis.  Next, I 
designed my experiment.  Then I collected my materials: nine 
experimental floor tiles, Mr. Clean, Mop and Glo, Murphy's Oil 
Soap, Bounty paper towels, hand lens, ammonia, potting soil, eye 
dropper, paper, pencil, a control tile, and a transparency grid.  
The transparency grid is a clear plastic sheet with 1 cm squares 
drawn on it.  

I rubbed 50 mL of potting soil on each of the nine experimental 
tiles for 1 minute.  One tile was a control.  I dropped 20 drops 
of each tile cleaner on a paper towel using an eye dropper.  I 
"cleaned" a tile by rubbing the paper towel on the tile for 1 
minute.  I studied each tile using a hand lens.  I compared each 
tile I cleaned to the control tile.  I placed my transparency 
grid on the experimental tiles to locate the dirt and drew it on 
a sheet of graph paper.  I counted the number of dirty squares 
left.  I did this on three tiles for each cleaner.  

III.  ANALYSIS OF DATA

Each number below stands for the number of gridded squares that 
were still dirty after I cleaned the tiles with each tile 
cleaner. 

Brand     Trial 1    Trial 2     Trial 3   Average 

Mr. Clean          54         56          54         54.6
Mop & Glo          41         47          53         47
Murphy's Oil Soap  31         14           7         17.3

IV.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
  
I found out that  Murphy's Oil Soap did clean the best in each 
of the 3 trials because it removed the most dirt.  Therefore, I 
accept my hypothesis which stated that Murphy's Oil Soap would 
clean the best.

V.  APPLICATION

It is very useful to know which tile cleaner cleans the best 
when there is a dirty floor to clean.  It will save time to use 
the best cleaner because it will clean better the first time, 
and a second time is not needed.   Another important fact to 
consider is that polymers might prevent dirt from forming in the 
future.  Choosing a biodegradable cleaner that is friendly to 
the environment is also important.  There are many things to 
consider when buying a cleaner. 



Title:  A Comparison of Carpet Cleaners

Student Researcher:  Sandra Riedel 
School Address:  Cary Junior High, 
                 233 Oriole Tr.
                 Cary, IL. 60013
Grade:  7th 
Teacher:  Mrs. Schietzelt

I.  Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:

The purpose of my experiment was to find out which kind of store 
bought cleaner worked the best on carpets.  I used the three 
cleaners on the market; sprays, mix-with-water shampoos, and 
powders.  My hypothesis stated that sprays would work the best 
because that's what my family has always used.

II.  Methodology:

In my experiment I had to use the following materials:
eight carpet swatches, three powder cleaners, three spray 
cleaners, three mix with water cleaners, rags and a scrub brush, 
Dr. Pepper, ketchup, butter, and a 1/4 teaspoon measuring spoon.

I used the following procedure in my experiment:

I blocked all of my swatches into ten squares.  I prepared three 
stains of ketchup, butter, and Dr. Pepper on each of the carpet 
squares.  Each stain was 1/4 teaspoon of the substance.  I let 
the stains set for 30 minutes before cleaning the square with 
the designated cleaner for that square.  I duplicated steps two 
and three for each carpet square.

There were nine cleaners, nine stained carpet squares that were 
cleaned, and one square that was stained and not cleaned so I 
could compare it to the cleaned square.

III.  Analysis of Data:

My results showed that my hypothesis was correct.  The spays 
worked the best.  I used a scale from 1 to 5, 1 being no stain 
was taken out and 5 being the whole stain was taken out.  The 
sprays had six 4's and two 5's.  The mixes had two 2's, two 3's, 
three 4's and one 5.  The powders had two 2's and six 3's.

IV.  Summary and Conclusion:

In finding out which carpet cleaners work the best, my 
hypothesis was correct.  I had to judge for myself how well the 
carpets were cleaned and the sprays took the whole stain out or 
most of the stain out.  The mixes worked the second best.  They 
took most of the stain out, usually.  The powders worked by far 
the worst.  I think it turned out this way because the liquids 
wash and rinse the carpets out while the powders were rubbed 
onto the stain, sticking to it, and are then vacuumed off; in 
most cases, not vacuuming off very well.

V.  Application:

I was interested in helping people through consumer science and 
this was a good choice.  People will now know how to clean their 
carpets thus preserving them and not having to buy new carpets 
as often.



Title:  Which Battery Lasts Longer?

Student Researcher:  Jameson Hadju 
School Address:  Cary Junior High, 
                 233 Oriole Tr.
                 Cary, IL. 60013
Grade:  7th 
Teacher:  Mrs. Schietzelt

I.  Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis:

The reason for me doing my project was to find out which battery 
would last longer.  Before I underwent my project, my hypothesis 
stated that one brand of batteries would last longer than 
another because it may have more chemicals in it than the other 
brand.

II.  Methodology:

To test my hypothesis, I ran two "AA" batteries of the same 
brand in a portable CD player for two hours.  When the two hours 
were up I measured the voltage of the batteries with a digital 
volt meter.  Then I recorded the data.  The materials that I 
used in the process of my project where: six Duracell, 
Energizer, and Osco "AA" batteries, one portable CD player, one 
digital volt meter, one stop watch, and one CD.  The manipulated 
variable that I had was that there were different brands of 
batteries.   The control variables that I had in my experiment 
were that I used that same CD player, that I ran each brand for 
two hours, I used the same volt meter to test the voltage of the 
batteries, and all of the batteries were brand new when I used 
them.  The steps that I took to undergo my experiment are: 1) 
Buy 6 "AA" batteries of at least three different brands.  2) Buy 
a portable CD player if not already owned.  3) Take the voltage 
of the batteries right out of the package and record the data.  
4) Insert the batteries of one brand into the CD player (do not 
mix brands).  5) Get the stop watch.  6) Put the CD into the CD 
player.  7) Hit the play button on the CD player and the stop 
watch at the same time.  8) When the time on the stop watch gets 
to two hours stop the stop watch and the CD player.  9) Get the 
volt meter.  10) Take the voltage of the batteries and record 
the data.  11) Repeat this process with the other brands of 
batteries.  12) When done, repeat the entire process three times 
or trials to see if the data changes.

III.  Analysis of Data:

The voltage of the Duracell batteries right out of the package 
was 1.61 volts through all three trials.  The voltage of the new 
Energizer batteries for all three trials was 1.59 volts.  The 
voltage of the new Osco batteries was 1.57 volts for all three 
trials.  

The voltage of all of the Duracell batteries after two hours was 
1.37.  The voltage of all of the Energizer batteries after two 
hours was 1.35.  The voltage of all of the Osco batteries after 
two hours was 1.33. 

IV.  Summary and Conclusion:

After my experiment was done, I went over the data and found out 
that Duracell was the best battery because Duracell had the 
highest voltage after the two hours.  In regards to my 
hypothesis, I believe that Duracell was better because they may 
have more of a cathode mix, electrolyte paste, or maybe a larger 
carbon rod.  This was indicated because Duracell batteries were 
heavier than the others.  Therefore, I accept my hypothesis 
which stated that one brand of batteries would last longer than 
another because it may have more chemicals in it than the other 
brand.

V.  Application: 

In the real world, I think that my information would be helpful 
to the average human being because if they know what batteries 
to buy for their money, they would then be able to save money 
and still get great quality out of their batteries.  If someone 
were to do a further research they could run the batteries down 
in the CD player until they stopped running and see which one 
lasted longer. Other researchers could do a long term project.  
An example of a long term project would be to put batteries of 
different brands into different flashlights and let them set for 
a year.  When the year is up take the flashlight, turn them on, 
and see which one would be brighter.



Title:  Can People Tell the Difference Between Coca-Cola and 
        Pepsi? 

Student Researcher:  Ashley Tomek 
School Address:  Cary Junior High, 
                 233 Oriole Tr.
                 Cary, IL. 60013
Grade:  7th 
Teacher:  Mrs. Schietzelt

I.  Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis: 

In my experiment, dealing with Coca-Cola and Pepsi, I wanted to 
find out if people could really tell the difference between 
these two soft drinks.  My hypotheses stated that people will be 
able to tell the difference between Coca-Cola and Pepsi because 
Coca-Cola has a secret ingredient that Pepsi does not have.

II.  Methodology: 

The materials that will be needed in this experiment are; 60 or 
more people, 1 liter of regular Pepsi, 1 liter of regular Coca-
Cola, 60 plastic cups, a pencil, 4 sheets of unlined paper, a 12 
inch piece of yarn, a flat surface, and some paper towels.  For 
the procedure of this experiment: 1) line up your 60 or more 
people, 2) place the yarn down the flat surface, 3) put 30 
plastic cups filled with Pepsi on one side, and 4) on the other 
side put 30 plastic cups filled with Coca-Cola.  Then place one 
cup of each in front of the person and have the person drink 
them.  Ask the person which is Pepsi and which is Coca-Cola.  
Then write the results down with your paper and pencil.

III.  Analysis of Data: 

I found out that 20 people out of 60 could identify the Pepsi 
and thirty out of 60 could identify Coca-Cola.  Ten out 60 had 
no idea what they were drinking.

IV.  Summary and Conclusion: 

In conclusion, I was correct about my hypothesis.  I think, and 
a lot of other people think, that they can tell the difference 
between Coca-Cola and Pepsi because Coca-Cola has a richer, 
stronger, and more bitter taste unlike Pepsi. Or it may be 
because of that secret ingredient that Coca-Cola has.

V.  Further Study: 

I'm sure there are many ways that people can put further 
research into this experiment.  Some of those may be to test 
just girls or guys, more than two sodas, and maybe something 
other than a soft drink.  Lastly, people can put a nose pin on 
so that the people can't use their sense of smell while tasting.



Title:  Which Toothpaste Cleans The Best?

Student Researcher:  Erik Shea Wilson
School Address:  Cary Junior High, 
                 233 Oriole Tr.
                 Cary, IL. 60013
Grade:  7th
Teacher:  Nancy Shietzelt

I.  Statement Of Purpose and Hypothesis

The purpose of this experiment is to find out which toothpaste 
cleans your teeth the best.  The reason why I'm doing this 
research is because of pure curiosity.  I believe that Colgate 
toothpaste will work the best to clean teeth because it is the 
most widely advertised toothpaste.

II.  Methodology

1) Obtain sixteen molars or tiles that are somewhat white, or 
teeth colored.  2) Rinse the tiles with boiling water and dry 
them thoroughly.  3) Fill four empty bowls with Coke.  Then fill 
four empty bowls with coffee.  Repeat this with tea and also 
grape juice.  4) Place four tiles labeled with which toothpaste 
they will be brushed with into each of the four substances.  5) 
Soak each tile in its substance for 5 minutes.  6) Then remove 
the tiles individually and brush them with 40 strokes for 2 
minutes with the toothpaste that is labeled on them.  7) At the 
end of the period, observe the condition of each tile.  Look for 
signs of deterioration and discoloration.

The materials I used included 16 Tiles the color of teeth, 1 
Sink to wash tiles in, 4 Bowls or dishes, 1 Can of Coke, 1 Can 
of grape juice, 1 Cup of coffee, 1 Cup of tea, 16 Toothbrushes, 
1 Tube of Colgate, 1 Tube of Crest, 1 Tube, and 1 Tube of Aqua 
Fresh
 
III.  Analysis of Data

When I finished my experiments, I rated each sample on a scale 
of one to four with one being the worst and 4 being the best.  
When I totaled up the scores, I found out the best toothpaste 
was Colgate.  In the four stains that we put the tiles through, 
Colgate showed to be the best on a scale of one to four.  Crest, 
Mentadent, and Aqua Fresh were close behind.

            Coke  Grape Juice  Tea  Coffee  Total
Colgate       4        3        2      4     13
Crest         2        3        4      3     12
Mentadent     3        4        2      2     11
Aqua Fresh    1        1        1      2      5

IV.  Summary and Conclusion

When I started this experiment, I thought that Colgate was going 
to be the best toothpaste.  When I had finished, it turned out 
that my hypothesis was correct.  The reason I think Colgate was 
the best is because of the abrasives.  I think that Colgate had 
more abrasives, therefore got more of the stain off the tiles.

V.  Application

I think most people would find the results of my experiment very 
interesting. It might even influence their decision on which 
toothpaste to buy.  If I were to pursue further studies, I would 
probably study the cleaning effects of more specific 
toothpaste's, such as, tartar-control toothpaste's, or whitening 
toothpaste's, etc.  I could also test the same stains on real 
teeth.  These stains worked very good at staining ceramic tiles, 
but I am not sure they would stain tooth enamel the same way.



TITLE:  The Cheapest Place To Buy A Boombox   

STUDENT RESEARCHER: Barrett Ainsworth & Jack Bell
SCHOOL:  Mandeville Middle School
         Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE:  6
TEACHER:  John I. Swang, Ph.D.

I.  STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS: 

We would like to do a consumerism research project on the prices 
of boomboxes.  Our hypothesis states that Campos will have the 
cheapest prices on boomboxes.

II.  METHODOLOGY:

First, we chose a topic.  Then we developed a statement of 
purpose.  Next, we wrote a review of literature about electronic 
equipment, sound, the electronic industry, and consumerism.  
Then we developed our hypothesis.

We then developed our methodology to test our hypothesis.  After 
we had gathered our materials, we started our survey.  We called 
Campos, Sears, Radio Shack, and Wal-Mart and asked for the 
prices of their largest and smallest boomboxes.  We then wrote 
the prices on our data collection sheet.  

After that we analyzed the data with charts and graphs.  Then we 
wrote our summary and conclusion where we accepted or rejected 
our hypothesis.  Finally, we applied our findings to the world 
outside the classroom.

Our control variable was the type of boomboxes we gathered 
information about.  Our manipulated variables were the different 
stores and the different kinds of boomboxes included in our 
survey.  Our responding variable was the price of boomboxes.

III.  ANALYSIS OF DATA:

At Sears, the smallest boombox costs $16.99 and the largest 
boombox cost $109.00.  The average cost was $63.00.

At Campos, the smallest boombox cost $19.95 and the largest 
boombox cost $199.96.  The average cost was $159.96.

At Wal-Mart, the smallest boombox cost $14.97 and the largest 
boombox cost $159.96.  The average cost was $87.47.

At Radio Shack, the smallest boombox cost $40.00 and the largest 
cost $199.00.  The average cost was $119.50.     

Prices of Different Sized Boomboxes At Different Stores

            Sears     Campos     Wal-Mart     Radio Shack  
Smallest  |         |          |             |              |      
Boombox   |  16.99  |   19.95  |     14.97   |     40.00    |                      
Largest   |         |          |             |              |         
Boombox   | 109.00  |  199.96  |    159.96   |    199.00    |                      
Average   |         |          |             |              |        
Price     |  63.00  |  159.96  |     87.47   |    119.50    |                      

IV.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:

The cheapest average price of boomboxes both large and small 
could be found at Sears.  The cheapest small boombox could be 
found at Wal-Mart and the cheapest large boombox could be found 
at Sears.  Therefore we reject our hypothesis which stated that 
Campos would have the cheapest average price for boomboxes.    

V.  APPLICATION:

Our findings indicate that if you want to get a cheap large 
boombox, you should go to Sears.  If you want to buy a cheaper 
small boombox, you should go to Wal-Mart. 

© 1998 John I. Swang, Ph.D.