U.S. METRIC STUDY

INTERIM REPORT

THE CONSUMER

imHHMHPHr
U.S. METRIC SUBSTUDY REPORTS

The results of substudies of the U.S. Metric Study, while being evaluated

for the preparation of a comprehensive report to the Congress, are being

published in the interim as a series of NBS Special Publications. The titles of the individual reports are listed below.

REPORTS ON SUBSTUDIES

NBS SP345-I:

NBS SP345-2:

NBS SP345-3:

NBS SP345-4:

NBS SP345-5

NBS SP345-6

NBS SP345-7

NBS SP345-8

NBS SP345-9

International Standards (issued December 1970, SD

Catalog No. CI 3. 10:345-1, Price $1.25)

Federal Government: Civilian Agencies (issued

July 1971, SD Catalog No. CI 3. 10:345-2, price

$2.25)

Commercial Weights and Measures (issued July

1971, SD Catalog No. CI 3. 10:345-3, price $1.00)

The Manufacturing Industry (issued July 1971,

SD Catalog No. C 1 3. 10:345-4, price $ 1 .25)

Nonmanufacturing Businesses (in press)

Education (in press)

The Consumer (this publication)

International Trade (in press)

Department of Defense (issued July 1971, SD

Catalog No. C 1 3. 1 0:345-9, price $ 1 .25)

NBS SP345-10: A History of the Metric System Controversy in the

United States (in press)

NBSSP345-11: Engineering Standards (issued July 1971, SD

Catalog No. C 1 3. 1 0:345-1 1 , price $2.00)

NBSSP345-12: Testimony of Nationally Representative Groups

(issued July 1971, SD Catalog No. C13. 10:345-12,

price $1.50)

COMPREHENSIVE REPORT ON THE U.S. METRIC STUDY

NBS SP345: To be published in August 1971

Those publications with catalog numbers have already been issued, and

may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, Government

Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 for the prices indicated. Add onefourth of the purchase price if the publication ordered is to be sent to a foreign address. Be sure to include the SD Catalog number with your order.
NATIONAL BUfeMJ OF STSSSAS03

sep ^ TMn

cote- R^.

„ INTERIM REPORT

U.S. METRIC STUDY

THE CONSUMER

Seventh in a series of reports prepared

for the Congress

U.S. METRIC STUDY

Daniel V. De Simone, Director

VJ- L National Bureau of Standards

~t, Special Publication 345-7

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Maurice H. Stans, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Lewis M. Branscomb, Director

Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Spec. Publ. 345-7, 152 pages (July 1 97 1) CODEN: XNBSA

Issued July 1971

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington. D.C. 20402

(Order by SD Catalog No. C 1 3.10:345-7), Price S 1 .25 Stock Number 0303-0864

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

THE HONORABLE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE

THE HONORABLE SPEAKER OFTHE HOUSE OF

REPRESENTATIVES

SIRS:

I have the honor to present the seventh in the series of interim reports

stemming from the U.S. Metric Study, prepared by the National Bureau of

Standards.

This Study was authorized by Public Law 90-472 to reduce the many uncertainties concerning the metric issue and to provide a better basis upon

which the Congress may evaluate and resolve it.

I shall make a final report to the Congress on this Study in August 1971.

In the meantime, the data and opinions contained in this interim report are being evaluated by the Study team at the National Bureau of Standards. My

final report to you will reflect this evaluation.

Respectfully submitted.

Secretary of Commerce

Enclosure

in
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

Honorable Maurice H. Stans

Secretary of Commerce

Dear Mr. Secretary:

I have the honor to transmit to you another interim report of the U.S. Metric Study, which is being conducted at the National Bureau of Standards at your request and in accordance with the Metric Study Act of 1 968.

The Study is exploring the subjects assigned to it with great care. We have

tried to reach every relevant sector of the society to elicit their views on the

metric issue and their estimates of the costs and benefits called for in the

Metric Study Act. Moreover, all of these sectors were given an opportunity

to testify in the extensive series of Metric Study Conferences that were held

last year. On the basis of all that we have been able to learn from these conferences,

as well as the numerous surveys and investigations, a final report will be

made to you before August 1971 for your evaluation and decision as to any

recommendations that you may wish to make to the Congress.

The attached interim report includes data and other opinions that are still being evaluated by us to determine their relationship and significance to all of the other information that has been elicited by the Study. All of these

evaluations will be reflected in the final report.

Sincerely.

Lewis M. Branscomb. Director

National Bureau of Standards

Enclosure

IV
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Letters of Transmittal iii, iv Foreword vi

I. Summary 1

II. Nature of the Consumer Study 3

III. Survey of Consumer Knowledge and Attitudes 6

IV. Selected Areas of Consumer Concern 3

Appendix 1. Metric Study Act 138

Appendix 2. Glossary 139

v
FOREWORD

The U.S. Metric Study needed to determine the attitudes of Americans

toward the metric system and their knowledge of it. This was done through

a representative sample of American households surveyed by the Survey

Research Center of the University of Michigan under the direction of

Professor George Katona.

In this volume, Professor Katona and his staff at the Survey Research

Center report on their efforts to determine:

( 1 ) How much the American people know about the metric system,

(2) Their attitudes toward the use of it, (3) Their opinions regarding conversion to it, and

(4) Their preferences as to what methods should be used to improve

public knowledge about it. To supplement the report of the Survey Research Center, several papers on selected areas of consumer interest are included in this volume. We are

grateful to the individuals and organizations who contributed these papers

and to the American Home Economics Association and its Executive

Director, Dr. Doris Hanson, who arranged for their preparation.

Reports covering other substudies of the U.S. Metric Study are listed on

the inside front cover. All of these, including this report, are under evaluation. Hence, they are published without prejudice to the comprehensive re- port on the entire U.S. Metric Study, which will be sent to the Congress by

the Secretary of Commerce in August of 1 97 1

The preparation of this volume was coordinated by Bruce D. Rothrock.

Other members of the Metric Study staff who assisted him were Jeffrey V.

Odom, Robert W. Carson, Mrs. Linda J. Luhn, Miss Jean M. Simon, Mrs.

Evelyn Tallerico, and Miss Debora Gilbert. In this, as in all aspects of the U.S. Metric Study, the program has

benefited from the independent judgment and thoughtful counsel of its advisory panel and the many other organizations, groups, and committees that have participated in the study.

Daniel V. De Simone, Director

U.S. Metric Study

VI
I. SUMMARY

The Metric Study Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-472) called for an extensive

study of the present and future effects of increasing worldwide and domestic

metric usage on various activities in the United States. The Consumer Study was directed to these effects as they apply to the individual American.

A portion of the Consumer Study involved a survey of attitudes and

opinions of consumers and their level of knowledge of both the customary

and metric systems of measurement. In another portion, experts presented

views on the present impact of metrication on selected consumer activities and the possible future effects with no national program to increase metric

use; or, alternatively, with a planned program of metrication.

The sample survey disclosed that a majority of consumers are satisfied with the customary system, that they know very little about the metric

system, and that they could be expected to react with apathy and indif- ference to any planned conversion program. Those who did not react favorably to metrication gave as reasons, "inconvenience of a change," and

"satisfaction with the present system." However, many of them admitted

that metrication did have some advantages. Those who thought it was a good

idea to change explained, "It is used by most other countries," and "It is a decimal system and easier to use." The fact that a majority of the respondents were unable to name a single

metric measure, and relatively few were familiar with either the relationships

within the metric system or the relationship of metric units to customary

units, suggests that much of the resistance to possible conversion stems from

a lack of knowledge of the metric system. This was corroborated by the fact that those who were familiar with the metric system generally favored conversion, emphasizing the advantages and minimizing the disadvantages.

1
2 THE CONSUMER

The level of knowledge of the metric system was apparently related to the

educational level and to the age of the respondent. Young people and highly

educated people generally were more knowledgeable. Respondents seemed more familiar with prefixes and the relationship of base units and subunits in the metric system than with the relationship of metric measures to customary measures. Experts submitting papers in selected areas of consumer concern verified

that customary units and standards are used almost exclusively in consumer

activities. They reported that the consumer is generally satisfied with the

customary system and is little affected by the increasing worldwide use of

the metric system. In many situations the consumer is totally unaware of the

fact that a purchased item may involve metric language, components, or

standards.

Particular emphasis was directed to the lack of standardization in areas such as retail clothing and foods, and the promulgation of unsystematic and

confusing practices, especially in consumer product information. To some

consumers this situation is confusing and frustrating. For example, ready-to- wear clothing is offered to the consumer in a proliferation of illogically con- ceived sizes, and, similarly, processed foods are packaged in such a variety

of sizes as to make price comparison almost impossible.

The experts almost unanimously agreed that conversion problems and

costs would be confined to the transition period, and once completed, the advantages would outweigh the costs and inconveniences of the changeover.

Some of the direct advantages mentioned were simplification of calculations, elimination of ambiguities in measurement units (e.g., dry and liquid

pints and ounces), and increased facility in foreign travel. Metrication was

also visualized as the opportunity and possibly the incentive to introduce improved standards for clothing sizes, simplification of package and can sizes,

elimination of confusing practices in consumer product information, and

possible standardization at the international level. There was unanimous agreement that the major disadvantage of planned

metrication would be a psychological one of adjustment. Successful conversion would require a massive program of public education.
II. NATURE OF THE CONSUMER STUDY

BACKGROUND OF THE U.S. METRIC STUDY

Since its inception in France in 1790, the use of the metric system has

steadily increased throughout the world. With the decision in 1965 by Great

Britain to begin a 10-year program of changing to the metric system, and

with the subsequent announcements by South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada that they were planning to change to metric, the United

States was left as the only major industrial country not on the metric system

or committed to changing over.

This trend, along with other considerations, led the U.S. Congress in 1968

to pass the Metric Study Act, Public Law 90-472 (app. 1 ), calling for a study

of the present and future effects of metrication in the United States, and an

investigation of the desirability of increasing the use of metric weights and

measures. The Act outlined a comprehensive investigation of all sectors of

the society.

The three basic issues of the U.S. Metric Study are: What is the present impact within the United States of increasing worldwide use of the metric system?

What would this impact be in the future, assuming that the use or nonuse of the metric system continues as at present, with no coordination among the various sectors of the society?

Alternatively, what would be the effect of a coordinated national pro- gram to increase the use of the metric system?

3
4 THE CONSUMER

All consumers are confronted with measurements. They purchase, use,

create, and relax with units of measurement. Who can escape pounds,

inches, yards, miles, cups, and degrees Fahrenheit in food and clothing

purchases, football games, automobile use, food preparation, and weather

reports? These patterns of use establish a sense of familiarity and an engendered complacency. But how much of the customary measurement system

does the consumer really comprehend? And what are the advantages and

disadvantages of its use?

Increasing worldwide use of the metric system presents new units for

possible use by manufacturers and retailers. Any change adopted by them

ultimately will confront the consumer. Consumers have already witnessed

the change in dual labels on grocery store items, in prescription medicine,

and in track events. Claims have been made by consumer spokesmen that the metric system would be to the consumer's advantage. What are these advantages?

The Consumer Study investigated these and other questions as follows:

the extent of the consumer's knowledge of measurement units; the system of

units in use in selected consumer activities, and their advantages and disadvantages; the effect on the consumer of the increasing worldwide use of the

metric system; the possible advantages and disadvantages of changing to the

metric system; attitudes and opinions concerning a planned change to the

metric system; and means of informing and educating the consumer should

there be a planned program of metrication.

METHODOLOGY

For 20 years the Survey Research Center (SRC), Institute for Social

Research at the University of Michigan, has studied the consumer's level of

information and attitudes in many areas. Professor George Katona of

SRC afforded the opportunity for a metric survey to be conducted as a piggy-back to their ongoing quarterly economic consumer survey. This ar- rangement had the advantage of obtaining information on consumers'

knowledge of measurement systems and their attitudes toward metric, at a lower cost than a full-scale survey would entail. A survey totally devoted to the metric issues was not possible because of financial limitations. This personal interview survey used a sample of approximately 1,400

family units representative of all family units living in private dwellings in the

continental United States. Twenty-two questions, about one-quarter of the

total survey, were devoted to metric issues. They first explored the respondent's level of knowledge of the customary system and the metric system,

and his familiarity with relationships between units in the metric and custo- mary systems. Respondents indicating that they had used another measuring

system while living or traveling abroad were queried concerning their ex- perience.
NATURE OF THE CONSUMER STUDY 5

Six questions asked opinions concerning the respondent's ability to adjust

to metric units. Then he was asked whether it would be a good or a bad idea

for the United States to change to the metric system and why. Finally,

respondents were asked to agree or disagree with six statements presented

as arguments either in favor of or opposed to conversion. The results of this survey are contained in chapter III of this report.

The Consumer Study also investigated the advantages and disadvantages

of the present system of measurement and the possible future effects of

planned metrication. Consumer spokesmen concurred that these objectives

could be attained most successfully by asking experts to prepare papers on

selected consumer activities. With the assistance of the President's Committee on Consumer Interest, all national, state, and local consumer groups were invited to submit information and comments pertaining to the metric is- sues. The American Home Economics Association (AHEA) offered their

cooperation and assistance, and convened a steering committee of notable consumer spokesmen. This assured broad consumer representation in the

determination of the areas of consumer concern, and in the selection of experts to prepare papers on them. The areas selected for study were food,

clothing, the home, transportation, and consumer attitudes and education.

Each invitee prepared a paper based on guidelines related to the issues

of the study. These papers are contained in chapter IV of this report.

A National Metric Study Conference on Consumer Affairs was held in cooperation with the AHEA on October 12-13, 1970, at the National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, Maryland. At this conference the invitees

summarized their analyses. The conference was open to the public and all in- terested organizations and persons were invited to attend.
III. SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE

AND ATTITUDES

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

A study of public attitudes concerning a change from the customary measurement system to a new and unfamiliar system found that a program of

planned metrication could be expected to encounter general opposition from

the consumer. It is probable that most people have had satisfactory, or at least not adverse, experience with the prevailing system and that few people

are knowledgeable about metric measurement. In these circumstances, the

findings of this survey are encouraging for proponents of conversion: 33 per- cent of respondents favored a change to the metric system.

The survey confirmed that the vast majority of Americans have little knowledge of metric measures. Only 40 percent of the respondents were able

to name even a single metric measure. Less than 20 percent were familiar

with either the relationships within the metric system or the relationships of

metric measures to measures in the current system. Much resistance to conversion seems to stem from this lack of information. The objections to conversion mentioned most were inconvenience and confusion.

Despite widespread opposition to conversion, many agreed with reasons

for use of the metric system which were presented during the interview.

Thirty-four percent of the respondents agreed that conformity with other

countries was desirable; 47 percent thought a decimal measuring system

would make price comparisons easier; 55 percent agreed that the metric

system would be easier than the customary system for children to learn. What of the probable direction of future changes in public attitudes?

Would public opinion be persuaded by an educational program designed to

6
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 7

win support for conversion? Some of the survey evidence indicates that the answer is "Yes." Receptivity to a change to metric measurement varied significantly among persons with different levels of knowledge about the metric

system. The majority of most knowledgeable persons favored conversion,

giving substantive arguments supporting their position. This suggests that much of the opposition is born of a lack of knowledge and that an opportunity exists to develop interest in metrication.

PURPOSES OF THE STUDY

The major aim of the survey was to provide information with respect to three issues: (1) What is the level of knowledge of the American people concerning the metric system? (2) What problems would be encountered by

private households in the event of a national program to increase domestic

usage of the metric system? (3) What methods of educating the American

public could be used to ease the problems in the event of a national program

of metrication?

For two decades the Survey Research Center has specialized in the study

of attitudes and their relation to behavior. Generally, attitude studies relate to familiar situations or events. Assessing public attitudes concerning the

metric system posed some new problems of investigation since it could not be assumed that many people were knowledgeable about metric measure- ment or the issue of domestic conversion. Therefore, we attempted to make

the survey an information-giving as well as an information-gathering device.

Throughout the interview the metric system was compared with the custo- mary system, areas of daily activity in which measurement plays a part were

indicated, and respondents were given information on the advantages of metrication as well as some problems of conversion. Furthermore, lack of public

knowledge required a modification of the Center's traditional methods of

measuring attitudes. Usually attitudes are studied in a conversational inter- view consisting primarily of open-end questions; respondents express their

opinions and the answers are recorded in their own words. In this case, it was decided that simple statements to which respondents agreed or dis- agreed would elicit more information. Consequently, extensive use was made of fixed-choice questions supplemented with a few open-end

questions.

What use can be made of the findings obtained from the survey? Information concerning the nature and extent of the educational problem is vital if a metrication program is embarked upon. Information on prevailing public

opinion indicates the positive attitudes upon which an educational plan could

build and the concerns against which it must work. The survey indicates

what needs to be explained to the people, the extent of present resistance to increased domestic usage of the metric system, and therefore the direction an educational program must take in order to win support for such a change.

It cannot, however, confirm how easily people would be persuaded by more

information, how they would react to compelling arguments for change, nor

therefore the intensity of effort needed to make a conversion campaign successful.
8 THE CONSUMER

Details of the survey method are discussed in a later section labeled Sur- vey Methods. Suffice it to say here that the method k nown as multistage area

probability sampling was used to select a sample of dwelling units representative of the nation. All family units found in each selected dwelling unit were chosen for an interview, and the head of the family unit was designated

as the preferred respondent. The sample consisted of 1.400 family units,

representing the approximately 62 million family units in private households

in the coterminous United States. The interviewing was conducted between

October 9 and November 15,1 970.

LEVEL OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE METRIC SYSTEM

Respondents were asked a series of questions designed to explore their

level of information about the metric system. Initially respondents were

asked "Have you ever heard of the metric system?" A "yes" response

prompted the query. "Could you tell me the names of some measures in the

metric system?" Respondents naming at least one metric measure were then

probed about relationships within the metric system and metric equivalents

to English measures. Responses to the questions quoted above can be summarized easily in the

form of an "Index of Information." in which each respondent is given points

as follows: — 1 point for having heard of the metric system — 1 to 2 points for naming metric measures

1 point for one type of measure

2 points for two or more types of measure — 1 point for correctly identifying the number of centimeters in a meter — 1 point for knowing the relationship between kilometers and miles

(answers of 1.5-2.0 kilometers in a mile were accepted).

The percentage distribution of the Index of Information is indicated in figure 1 . Thirty percent of the total sample indicated that they had not heard

of the metric system (a score of zero on the index), and almost 60 percent were unable to name even a single metric measure. Only 9 percent of respondents scored four points, and 3 percent scored five on the information scale. Among respondents who correctly named only one metric measure, the

meter was by far the most prevalent response. Twenty-five percent

identified one metric measure and of these 92 percent cited the meter. Respondents were more familiar with the meanings of the prefixes used in the metric system than with the relationships of metric measures to customary measures. Forty-two percent of respondents were asked. "Do you happen to know how the metric measures relate to each other? For example:

How many centimeters are in a meter?" and "Do you happen to know the

relation of any metric measures to our customary measures? For example:
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 9

30

u.J2 20

° z

si

oo

K OL n LUK 10

FIGURE 1 LEVEL OF

INFORMATION

4 5 HIGH

About how many kilometers are in a mile?'" Among respondents asked the

two questions, 43 percent knew the answers to the first question but only 17

percent knew the answers to the second.

A national program to increase domestic usage of the metric system would

in all likelihood need to utilize diverse approaches to reach different groups

of the population. Therefore, it would be of primary importance to investi- gate and identify systematic differences in information about the metric

system among certain demographic classifications. The relationship between

the Index of Information and various demographic variables is summarized

in table 1. Formal education is the single most important explanation of population

differences in information about the metric system. Increasing years of education were associated with increasing metric knowledge. The educational

categories specified in table 1 accounted for 32 percent of the variation in the

Index of Information.

Persons of different age and sex had differing levels of information. Males

scored higher on the index than females. Younger respondents were more

knowledgeable than the older members of the sample.

The relationship between the index and the three variables (age. sex. and

education) taken together is shown in table 2. Together the independent
10 THE CONSUMER

Table 1. Index of Level of Information About the Metric System

b Vo it l& u s D< i n i O] 3 1 a ph ; c Ch a ra cte r i st i cs

(Percent distribution)

Index value

IN UlllUCi 0 1 2 3 4 5 of cases

All respondents 30 28 16 14 9 3 100 (1402) Age in years: Under 25 12 21 19 24 17 7 100 (148) 25-34 21 24 17 19 15 4 100 35-44 24 27 19 16 10 4 100 (237) 45-54 26 34 18 13 7 2 100 (279) 55-64 40 29 14 10 5 2 100 (199) 65 or older 49 32 8 7 3 1 100 (277)

Education

0-11 grades 55 27 10 5 2 1 100 (560)

12 grades 20 38 20 15 6 1 100 (419) Some college, no degree.

6 28 20 27 15 4 100 (243) College degree 5 9 16 25 31 14 100 (175)

Sex of respondent

Male 22 29 17 17 11 4 100 (997) Female 49 28 11 8 4 0 100 (398)

variables accounted for 42 percent of the variation in the index. Within all age and sex subgroups, higher levels of education differentiated respondents

with high levels of metric knowledge from those with lower information

levels. Higher index scores for males than for females were indicated for all age categories. Evidence of negative age correlation was found for persons

with less than a college degree. However, in most of the subgroups in which

significance was wanting, sample size was small and therefore statistical tests were unreliable.

An investigation was made of the relationship between a respondent's oc- cupational class and his level of information. Although higher status occupation tended to be associated with more metric knowledge (table 3). this correlation was primarily an educational effect. After adjusting for education,

the relation between occupational class and the index was maintained only

for persons with less than a high school education.

<y " .^PTIVDTYAHP OPPOSITION TO THE USE

OF THE METRIC SYSTEM

One of the primary purposes of this study was to investigate and evaluate

attitudes relating to the possible adoption of the metric system by the United

States. Prior to asking respondents their opinions concerning metrication,

it was necessary to provide them with information about metric measures and some of the arguments favoring domestic conversion. Therefore,
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 11

Table 2. Index of Information

(Percent distribution)

Index value Total Number

0 1 2 3 4 5 of cases

Males

Under age 35: 0-11 grades 48 28 13 7 2 2 100 (60) 12 grades 14 32 25 19 8 2 100 (113) Some college, no degree 1 18 17 32 25 7 100 (88) College degree 2 6 11 29 35 17 100 (65) Age 35-54: 0-11 grades 34 37 19 6 2 2 100 (128) 12 grades 16 39 17 19 7 2 100 (137) Some college, no degree 2 25 29 26 16 2 100 (51) College degree 0 9 22 22 31 16 100 (55) Age 55 or older: 0-11 grades 51 31 9 6 3 0 100 (182) 12 grades 11 47 25 13 4 0 100 (55) Some college, no degree 13 33 16 28 5 5 100 (39) College degree 11 5 5 37 26 16 100 (19)

Females

Under age 35: 0-11 grades 77 18 5 0 0 0 100 (22) 12 grades 28 28 19 16 9 0 100 (32) College, with or without degree 0 17 26 30 27 0 100 (23) Age 35-54:

11 9 u 1 no

12 grades 32 45 15 8 0 0 100 (53) College, with or without degree 15 27 22 24 12 0 100 (33) Age 55 or older: 76 18 3 1 2 0 100 (HO)

12 grades 46 43 11 0 0 0 100 (28) College, with or without degree 21 48 15 8 5 3 100 (38)

early in the interviews, respondents were told: "We in the United States use systems for measuring sizes, weights, and temperature which are different

from those used in most other countries

,, and "Some people think that the

relations in the metric system are easier to handle than the relationships in our customary system, such as 12 inches in a foot and 3 feet in a yard,

because the metric system is based on the decimal system so that every measure can be easily divided or multiplied by 10." Respondents were then

asked several questions concerning their willingness to change to the metric

system. Included was the evaluative question: "Do you think it would be a good idea or a bad idea for the United States to change to the metric system

of measure?"

426-991 OL - 71 - 2
12 THE CONSUMER

Table 3. Index of Information by Occupation

(Percent distribution of persons in the labor force)

Index value Total Number

of cases 0 1 2 3 4-5

Opcmi nation class *

All members of the labor force 23 29 18 16 14 100 (1018) White collar workers 11 28 19 20 22 100 (468) Blue collar workers and service workers 34 30 17 12 7 100 (480) Farm workers and miscellaneous groups 27 33 14 14 12 100 (70)

Education and occupation class: 0-11 Grades:

All members of the labor force 49 29 13 6 3 100 (330) White collar workers 33 42 17 4 4 100 (75) Blue collar workers and service workers 55 25 12 6 2 100 (231) Farm workers and miscellaneous groups 46 25 12 17 0 100 (24) 12 Grades:

All members of the labor force 17 38 21 16 8 100 (369) White collar workers 1 A 14 JO

oO 100 (146) Blue collar workers and service workers 18 38 21 16 7 100 (192) Farm workers and miscellaneous groups 26 42 16 6 10 (31) Some college, no degree:

All members of the labor force 4 28 20 27 21 100 (171) White collar workers 4 31 19 28 18 100 (109) Blue collar workers and service workers 3 23 23 26 25 100 (53) Farm workers and miscellaneous groups .... 0 20 20 30 30 100 (10) College degree: 2 10 17 25 46 100 (147) White collar workers 2 10 17 25 46 100 (139)

Survey experience has shown that a single question often gives less satisfactory indications of underlying attitudes than does an index derived

from a combination of questions. Thus a composite measure was developed

to indicate receptivity to domestic usage of metric measurement. The afore- mentioned question was combined with six additional questions to construct

the index. Respondents were asked to agree or disagree with six statements;

three were presented as arguments favoring conversion, the others were

opinions in opposition to such a change.

The index was constructed by assigning points as follows: — Respondents answering that it would be a "good idea" to change to the

metric system were given 2 points; those responding "bad idea" were given minus 2 points. — 1 point was added for each of the following statements with which a respondent agreed, 1 point subtracted for each with which he

disagreed:

"The U.S. should make the change because the rest of the world uses

the metric system."

"Shopping and price comparisons would be easier because the metric

system can be divided or multiplied by 1 0."
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 13

"The metric system would be easier than our present system for our

children to learn." — 1 point was added for each of the following opinions with which a respondent disagreed, 1 point subtracted for each with which he

agreed:

"Life would just be more complicated; we would have to use conversion tables and that would be difficult to handle."

"It would be too costly to change over our household measuring

devices."

"It would be expensive for business to change their measuring equipment."

The resultant index ranged from a minimum of minus 8 (strongly opposed)

to a maximum of plus 8 (very receptive). This range was then compressed

into a 5-point scale as presented in figure 2. The index can be compared to the single evaluative question; both at- tempted to measure willingness to adopt the metric system in the United

States. In answer to the evaluative question, 25 percent of respondents said

it would be a "good idea" for the United States to change to the metric

system, while 59 percent responded "bad idea." According to the index, 30

percent of respondents expressed some degree of receptivity to conversion

and 58 percent indicated some degree of opposition to the change.

40

30

FIGURE 2

DEGREE OF RECEPTIVITY

TO DOMESTIC USEAGE OF

METRIC SYSTEM

20

10

0 Very Moderately

Unreceptive Unreceptive Neutral

Moderately Very

Receptive Receptive
14 THE CONSUMER

Receptivity to domestic usage of the metric system, as measured by the in- dex, and selected demographic characteristics are shown in table 4. Persons of higher educational attainment were more likely to respond

positively to adoption of the metric system; 60 percent of the respondents

with a college degree tended to favor conversion. On the other hand, about

75 percent of the persons with less than a high school degree expressed opposition to the change.

Differences in the index among persons of different age and sex were significant, although the amount of variation which was accounted for by these

variables was not large. Females expressed greater opposition to domestic

use of the metric system than did males. Younger respondents were more

willing to change than were older persons. Receptivity to adoption of the

metric system was not influenced by differences in occupational class after adjustment was made for differences in educational attainment (table 5). An important finding, and one which should be encouraging for proponents of metrication, was the high correlation of a respondent's

knowledge about metric measurement and his receptivity to the use of the

metric system in the United States (table 6). More than 50 percent of per- sons able to answer correctly all the questions which were used to measure

the level of information, strongly favored adoption of the metric system.

Even among persons with the same amount of education, there was a strong

correlation between level of information and the index of willingness to change (table 7). This supports the hypothesis that an educational program

Table 4. Degree of Receptivity to Domestic Usage of the Metric

System by Various Demographic Characteristics

(Percent of respondents)

Very Moder- Moder- Very Number

unre- ately Neutral ately recep- Total of cases ceptive unre- recep- tive ceptive tive

All respondents 35 23 12 13 17 100 (1402) Age:

Under 25 21 29 13 20 17 100 (148) 25-34 32 21 9 16 22 100 (258) 35-44 30 25 12 13 20 100 (237) 45-54 38 21 8 14 19 100 (279) 55-64 42 20 12 10 16 100 (199) 65 or older 45 22 17 7 9 100 (277)

Education:

0-11 grades 46 25 14 8 7 100 (560)

12 grades 38 24 11 13 14 100 (419) Some college, no

degree 24 19 10 20 27 100 (243) College degree 11 15 9 20 45 100 (175)

Sex of Respondent

Male 34 21 10 14 21 100 (997) Female 40 27 16 9 8 100 (398)
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 15

Table 5. Degree of Receptivity to Domestic Usage of the Metric

System by Occupation

(Percent distribution of persons in the labor force)

Very Moder- Moder- Very

unre- ately Neutral ately recep- Total Number

ceptive unre- recep- tive of cases ceptive tive

Occupation class

All members of the labor

force 34 22 11 14 19 100 (1018) White collar workers . .

27 20 9 17 27 100 (468) Blue collar workers & service workers 40 24 12 12 12 100 (480) Farm workers & miscellaneous groups. . .

33 26 14 14 13 100 (70)

Education and occupation

class

fl 1 1 (~iraAf*c • U— 1 1 vJIdUCS . All members of

the labor force. .48 7^ZD 1

1

Q0QO (iiv) White collar JJ 7<; Zj cJ

11 7z J11UUoo (ID) Blue collar workers &

service workers . . 48 7Zj 1 71Z / QO (Zil) Farm workers &

miscellaneous

^838 Z1 7 8

O 1 o 100 1 \J\J VZ4J

1 i_ vjl dues . All mpmhpri of

36 24 12 14 14 100 (369) White collar 1Q 12 15 20 100 H46)

Blue collar WOiKcla oL aci cprvipp v iv^c wnrlfffQ wvji is^ci o . . 37 26 12 14 11 100 (192) Farm workers &

miscciiaiicuua 36 32 13 19 o 100 (31) Some college, no

All mpmhpi\ of

the labor force. .

7fl ZU zu9ft in 21 29 100 n 71"» \L 1 l) White collar 97ZZ 91Z

8o 1 8 31 100 Blue collar workers &

service workers .

15 19 11 28 27 100 (53) Farm workers &

miscellaneous groups 20 20 20 20 20 100 (10) College degree

All members of

the labor force... 10 16 7 21 46 100 (147) White collar 9 16 8 21 46 100 (139)
16 THE CONSUMER

Table 6. Relationship Between Level of Knowledge About the

Metric System and Receptivity to Conversion

(Percent of respondents)

Very Moder- Moder- Very

unre- ately Neutral ately recep- Total Number

ceptive unre- recep- tive of cases ceptive tive

35 23 12 13 17 100 (1402)

Value of index of

information: 0 49 27 16 6 2 100 (418)

1 45 25 11 10 9 100 (399) 2 30 21 10 17 22 100 (217)

3 18 18 7 24 33 100 (199) 4 13 9 9 22 47 100 (127)

5 0 10 12 21 57 100 (42)

Table 7. Degree of Receptivity to Domestic Usage of the

Metric System

(Percent of respondents)

Education and level of Very Moder- Moder- Very

information concerning unre- ately Neutral ately recep- Total Number

the metric system ceptive unre- recep- tive of cases ceptive tive

0-11 Grades:

0 Score-index of

information 48 28 17 6 1 100 (310)

1 47 24 12 8 9 100 (152) 2 43 17 12 16 12 100 (58) 3-5 28 22 5 12 33 100 (40)

12 Grades:

0 Score-index of

information 55 27 11 5 2 100 (83)

1 47 26 11 10 6 100 (161)

2 29 22 12 17 20 100 (82) 3-5 12 19 12 24 33 100 (93) Some college, no degree: 0-1 Score-index of

information 41 21 14 13 11 100 (84) 2 25 25 10 6 33 100 (48)

3 18 17 8 28 29 100 (65) 4-5 2 11 4 37 46 100 (46)

College degree: 0-2 Score-index of information 21 25 6 23 25 100 (52)

3 6 20 7 27 40 100 (45) 4-5 6 6 12 14 62 100 (78)
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 17

would be effective in overcoming resistance to conversion and in winning

support for change.

OPINIONS ABOUT CONVERSION TO METRIC

MEASUREMENT

To be effective, a program to encourage use of the metric system must

focus on specific reasons for resistance to the change. The responses to the

six statements included in the index of willingness to change provided insight

into perceived advantages and disadvantages. Some of these responses are considered individually in this section.

Prior to the six fixed-choice questions, respondents were asked why

they thought conversion to metric measurement would be a good or a bad

idea. The distribution of their responses is presented in table 8. Negative aspects of conversion were frequently mentioned. The most

prevalent unprompted response was that conversion would create confusion

and cause inconvenience. This was mentioned by 33 percent of respondents.

A closely related opinion was voiced by 23 percent of respondents; they in- dicated that satisfaction with the present system was their primary objection

to a change.

Several other survey questions were designed to measure how much in- convenience and difficulty people foresaw in adjusting to a different measuring system. Respondents were asked how much difficulty they thought the

American people would have in adjusting if "speed limits were posted as 80

kilometers an hour instead of 50 miles an hour" and "the temperature re- ported as zero degrees Celsius instead of 32 degrees Fahrenheit." Seventy-four percent of respondents answered that there would be "considerable

Table 8. Advantages and Disadvantages of Conversion to Metric System

Percent of respondents Advantages of using metric system

Used by most other countries 15 Decimal system; easier system 14 Other advantages 1

Disadvantages of using metric system

Cost to household or business; would increase taxes 6

Satisfaction with present system 23

Difficult for older people to learn 11 Inconvenience of the change; complicated 33 Other disadvantages 3

Don't know, not ascertained 11

(')

a Total is greater than 100 percent since some respondents gave more than one reason. The question was: "Do you think that it would be a good idea or a bad idea for the United States to change to the

metric system of measure? Why is that?"
18 THE CONSUMER

difficulty" in adjusting to the former, and 64 percent expressed concern

about the latter change.

Only 6 percent indicated concern about the cost of conversion. However,

a large majority agreed with statements which presented cost considerations

as an argument against conversion. Fifty percent of the respondents agreed

that '"it would be too costly to change over our household measuring

devices'' and 78 percent thought "it would be expensive for business to change their measuring equipment."

Whereas advantages of the metric system were mentioned spontaneously

by less than 30 percent of respondents, the three statements of opinions

favoring conversion elicited more positive attitudes. Thirty-four percent

supported the proposition that "the United States should make the change

because the rest of the world uses the metric system"; 47 percent agreed that price comparisons would be facilitated by a decimal measuring system; and

55 percent thought that metric measures "would be easier for our children to learn." In general, respondents with higher education and those with more metric

knowledge emphasized the advantages and minimized the disadvantages of

metrication (tables 9-12). One notable exception was found in responses to the statement concerning cost to business of a change to the metric system.

Over two-thirds of respondents with college diplomas and those informed

about metric measures thought that cost to business would be a problem of

conversion.

In summary: Although attitudes toward a change in the measurement

system as expressed in this survey indicated opposition to use of the metric

system and genuine concern with the problems of conversion on the part of

the majority of the American public, a crucial question is how such attitudes

would change in response to more information. Most people in the sample were confronted for the first time with metric measurement and it is not sur- prising that many echoed one respondent's opinion, "There are so many

people who have never heard of it; it would be too confusing." Thus, the

opinions and preferences of persons well-informed about the metric system

may be considered relevant. The vast majority of these respondents favored

conversion and gave reasons supporting a change.

ON METHODS OF EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE

METRIC SYSTEM

An extensive investigation of the effectiveness of different media in reaching the general population or particular groups within the population was beyond the scope of this study. However, two questions were asked to explore individual preferences with regard to methods of educating the

public about the metric system. Respondents were initially asked, "What do

you think would be the best way to help people learn the new system? Do

you think it would be better to use TV instructions, adult education courses,

instructional leaflets, newspapers, or what?" This was followed with the
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 19

Table 9. Advantages and Disadvantages of Conversion to Metric

System by Education

(Percent distribution)

0-11 12 Some College

grades grades college, degree no degree

Advantages of using metric system:

Used by most other countries 6 12 23 38 Decimal system ; easier system 6 13 22 33 0 1 2 3

Disadvantages of using metric system: Cost to household or business; would increase taxes 4 6 5 4

Satisfaction with present system 26 24 17 12

Difficult for older people to learn 11 10 9 9

38 36 22 12 Other disadvantages 2 3 3 0 Don't know, not ascertained 17 10 7 6

( a) ( a) ( a

) Number of cases (560) (419) (243) (175)

a Total is greater than 100 percent since some respondents gave more lhan one reason. The question was: "Do you think that it would be a good idea or a bad idea for the United States to change to the metric system of measure? Why is that?"

Table 1 0. Advantages and Disadvantages of Conversion to Metric System by Knowledge About Metric System

(Percent distribution)

Score on index of information

0 1 2 3 4 5

Advantages of using metric system: Used by most other countries 1 8 21 9 33 48 Decimal system; easier system 1 5 18 28 45 53 Other advantages 0 0 1 2 3 4

Disadvantages of using metric system: Cost to household or business; would

increase taxes 3 5 7 4 4 7

Satisfaction with present system 30 29 19 11 10 4

Difficult for older people to learn 9 12 14 11 8 5 Inconvenience of the change; com37 41 31 25 18 2

3 3 4 4 1 1 Don't know, not ascertained 23 10 5 7 3 2

(418) (399) (217) (199) (127) (42)
20 THE CONSUMER

Table 1 1 . Relation Between Some Components of Index of

Receptivity and Education

(Percent distribution)

0-11 12 Some College

r~* i~\ 1 1 ana ucgrec no degree

"The U.S. should make the change because the rest of

the world uses the metric system"

Agree 22 32 46 64

Disagree 64 64 51 35 Don't know 14 4 3 1

T"r\tol iIUUnn 1i nnuu i nnuu 11 nnuu

"Shopping and price comparisons would be easier be- cause the metric system can be divided or multiplied

by 10" Agree 34 47 60 73 Disagree 38 41 34 23 Don't know 28 12 6 4

IUU i nn iUU i nn IUU "The metric system would be easier than our present system for our children to learn" Agree 43 55 67 79

25 24 18 12 Don't know 32 21 15 9

1 nn IUU 1 nn IUU 1 nn IUU 1 uu

"Life would just be more complicated ; we would have to use conversion tables and that would be difficult to handle" Agree 72 64 49 33 Disagree.

15 29 49 65 Don't know 13 7 2 2

1 nn IUU 1 r\r\ luu i nn 1 nn IUU

"It would be too costly to change over our household measuring devices" Agree 63 52 38 22 Disagree 24 43 58 76

13 5 4 2

Total 100 100 100 100

"It would be expensive for business to change their measuring equipment"

80 83 70 69 Disagree 8 11 24 25

12 6 6 6

Total 100 100 100 100 Number of cases (560) (419) (243) (175)
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 21

Table 1 2. Relation Between Some Components of Index of

Receptivity and Level of Information Concerning the Metric System

(Percent distribution)

Score on index of information

0 1 2 3 4 5

''Trip 1 11C Tl_JT . 0^1

. should 311UU1U malfp IJJdPvt thp tilt- rhanop *^lldllgt' hppansp UClaUit thp LllG rpst itM

of the world uses the metric system"

16 25 43 54 65 74

00 oy 30 40 34 XI Don't know 18 6 1 0 l 5

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100

**Shonnin& find r>rice enmnarisons would he easier because the metric system can be divided or

multiplied by 10" Agree 25 41 56 68 78 88

FYica qtpe 42 44 37 29 19 10

33 15 7 3 3 2

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 "The metric system would be easier than our present svstem for our children to learn" Agree 33 49 65 74 90 86

27 26 19 16 6 19 40 25 16 10 4 j

Total. .

100 100 100 100 100 100

"Life would just be more complicated; we would

havp lldVC t

\,\J r\ nop LiiC rnnupTcinn CUll V CI S1U11 tahlpc. LdUlCo dllli anH that llldl \x/r\ii1d W1JL11U hpUC

difficult to handle" Agree 74 72 57 44 29 17

10 Zi Afi 4U KA O J 16 7 3 2 Z Au

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100

**Tt wr\nlH Hp fr»r* r*r*ctlv if\ c\\c\no(^ nvpr nnr hnn<;<*- hold measuring devices" 69 57 42 33 21 19

16 36 54 65 77 81

15 7 4 2 2 0

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100

"It would be expensive for business to change their measuring equipment"

80 83 77 74 66 71

5 11 17 23 29 26

15 6 6 3 5 0

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100

(418) (399) (217) (199) (127) (42)
22 THE CONSUMER

specific inquiry "Would you be willing to attend a course to learn the new

measures?"

The distribution of the replies to the initial question is presented in table

1 3. A large number of respondents recognized the need for a diversified educational program; almost 40 percent of respondents mentioned at least two

methods that should be employed. It was decided that persons mentioning

three or more methods of educating the people were suggesting the use of all forms of public communication and thus not indicating any personal choice.

Therefore, the analysis which follows was restricted to the preferences of

respondents specifying only one or two media.

The most popular means of education indicated was the use of television

instruction; 46 percent of respondents mentioned this as the preferred

method. Interestingly, persons with higher educational attainment were somewhat more likely to mention television. This might, however, reflect awareness of the reach of television as compared with other media and not a personal preference.

Adult education courses, instructional leaflets, and newspapers were each

mentioned by less than 20 percent of the respondents. There were hardly any

systematic differences in the frequency of mention of these methods among

demographic subgroups. However, persons knowledgeable about metric measures and those with more formal education were less likely to indicate a preference for adult education courses. In contrast, the relationship

between willingness to attend a course to learn metric measures and both

education and information level was reversed. Increasing knowledge about

the metric system was associated with increased willingness to attend a course except among persons at the top of the information scale who per- haps did not perceive a personal need for formal instruction in metric measurement. Persons with less than a high school degree expressed less willingness to attend a course than respondents with more formal education

(table 14). Finally, some difference in willingness to attend a course was discernable

for persons of different age and sex (table 14). Males more frequently said

Table 1 3. Preferred Methods of Educating the Public About the

Metric System

Percent

of respondents Television 46 Adult education courses 19 Instructional leaflets 14 Newspapers 18 Education of children 2 Mention of three or more methods needed 17 Other 2 Don't know 3

(»)

a Total is greater than 100 percent since some respondents mentioned two types of media.
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 23

Table 1 4. Degree of Willingness to Attend a Course to Learn

Metric Measures

(Percent distribution)

Willing to Maybe, Not willing attend possibly to attend Don't Total course course know

50 13 34 3 100 Age in years

Under 25 63 12 22 3 100 25-34 JO 14 25 3 100 35^4 60 13 25 2 100 45-54 52 15 31 2 100 55-64 45 17 35 3 100

65 or older 25 10 60 5 100

Education

0-11 grades 39 14 41 6 100

12 grades 55 14 29 2 100 Some college, no degree 61 13 24 2 100

College degree 54 10 35 1 100

Sex of Respondent:

\ 1 ii 1

52 13 33 2 100 Female 44 15 35 6 100

Index of information about the

0 35 15 44 6 100

1 51 14 33 2 100

2 61 12 24 3 100

3 62 15 22 1 100 4 54 10 34 2 100

5 50 5 45 0 100

they would attend a course to learn the new measures than did females.

There was a tendency for age to correlate negatively with willingness to at- tend a course on metric measures; however, the relationship was not consistent and the only marked difference was in the small number of positive

responses among persons over age 65.

EXPERIENCES WITH THE METRIC SYSTEM

Some insight into the types of problems the consumer might encounter

should the United States adopt the metric system may be gained from an

inquiry of persons who have had to temporarily adjust to the metric system.

Therefore, persons who have lived or traveled extensively in metric-using

countries were asked about their experiences in dealing with metric measurements.

Sixteen percent of the respondents (excluding persons who grew up in countries which use metric measures) indicated that they had used a dif-
24 THE CONSUMER

ferent measuring system while living or traveling abroad and 17 percent of

these persons mentioned problems in adjusting. However, there was

evidence that many respondents were recalling their experiences with dif- ferent monetary units rather than with units of the metric system. Therefore, no conclusions may be made concerning the relative ease of adjustment

among persons who have dealt with the metric system and discussion must

focus on the responses of the 3 percent of the total sample who spoke of

problems in adjusting to measures other than monetary measures. Among persons reporting difficulty in adapting to metric measurement

(there were 41 such persons), 11 persons mentioned driving as a specific

problem, nine persons reported difficulty in shopping, seven others mentioned problems associated with both shopping and driving, five responded

"everything," and nine persons indicated they experienced difficulty in deal- ing with metric measures but were unable to identify specific problem areas. In order to convey a qualitative picture of some of the problems which

were encountered, a few cases are summarized below. It should be

emphasized that these cases are typical only of those few people who spoke

of problems in adjusting to the metric system.

A 41-year-old male with a college degree: "I never understood it; particularly difficult in using road maps and road signs."

A 76-year-old male with eight grades of schooling: "I had difficulty while

driving and even trying to buy any little necessity. It was awful!"

A 35-year-old female with a college degree: "Just a nuisance — you had to break out a chart or guess."

A 46-year-old female, high school graduate: "I had to carry a book and

look everything up."

A 73-year-old male with a college degree: "We always had to ask someone

to help us." A 60-year-old female, college graduate: "It was confusing at first but just a matter of learning the measures."

SURVEY METHODS

Data for the analysis of the population's information and attitudes concerning the metric system of measure was collected during the October—November consumer attitudes survey, a quarterly survey conducted

by the Survey Research Center. Information was obtained from personal in- terviews with 1,402 families. The samples of the Survey Research Center represent cross-sections of

the population living in private households in the United States, excluding

Alaska and Hawaii. Transients, residents of institutions, and persons living on military bases are not included. The method known as multistage area

probability sampling is used to select a sample of dwelling units representative of the nation. First, 74 primary sampling units (each composed of a county or groups of counties) are selected: 12 of the largest metropolitan

areas are selected with certainty, and 62 other sampling units are selected by
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 25

probability methods from among all remaining counties in the coterminous

United States. In each primary sampling unit three of six secondary selections of cities,

towns, census tracts or rural areas are made. In the third stage of sampling,

urban blocks or small portions (blocks) of rural areas are chosen. For each

survey, a new sample of dwelling units, in clusters of about four, is drawn

from the block selections.

The basic unit for sampling is the dwelling unit, and for interviewing, the

family unit. A family unit is defined as all persons living in the same dwelling

unit who are related to each other by blood, marriage, or adoption. A single

person who is unrelated to the other occupants of the dwelling, or who lives alone, is a family unit by himself. In some dwelling units, there are two or even several family units. The head of the family unit is designated as the respondent. Five visits,

and in some cases more, are made at different times in the day at dwelling

units at which no one has been found at home. If a designated respondent

refuses to give relevant information, a letter is sent urging him to reconsider.

The letter is followed by another visit. The Survey Research Center maintains a nationwide staff of interviewers,

selected and trained by a staff of traveling supervisors. The interviewers are

instructed in the careful and uniform use of the fixed-question open-answer

technique. They pay particular attention to the establishment of rapport with

respondents. Many questions are answered in the respondent's own words,

which the interviewers record verbatim (or as nearly verbatim as possible).

Nondirective probes are used to clarify the answers received.

Properly conducted sample interview surveys yield useful estimates, but

they do not yield exact values. Errors may arise from several sources: sampling, nonresponse, reporting and processing. Each source of error must

be considered in evaluating the accuracy of survey information.

Sampling errors arise in surveys because only a fraction of the population

is interviewed. The sampling error depends on the magnitude of the reported

percentage and on the size of the sample (or the number of respondents in the particular subgroup used).

Sampling errors are presented in two ways: first, as they relate to survey

findings (table 15); second, as they relate to differences in survey findings

Table 1 5. Approximate Sampling Errors

1 of Survey Findings

(Sampling error in percent, by size of sample or subgroup)

Reported percentages Number of interviews

2000 1000 700 500 300 100

50 3 4 5 6 8 14 30 or 70 3 4 5 6 7 13 20 or 80 2 4 4 5 6 11 10 or 90 2 3 3 4 5 8

5 or 95 1 2 2 3 4

a The chances are 95 in 100 that the value being estimated lies within a range equal to the reported percentage plus or minus the number of percentage points shown.
26 THE CONSUMER

(table 16). Sampling errors are not a measure of the actual errors involved in specific survey measurements. They mean that, except for nonsampling er- rors, errors greater than those shown in table 15 or differences larger than

those found in table 16 will occur by chance in only five cases out of a hundred.

Nonresponse errors arise because some persons selected for the samples

refuse to be interviewed, are not at home after repeated callbacks, are ill or do not speak English. The response rate for this survey was approximately

81 percent.

Reporting errors — due to misunderstanding of questions or answers, lack

of interest by the respondent, or intentional falsification — are kept at a minimum by careful training of interviewers, by attempting to gain the confidence and cooperation of the respondent so that he will answer to the best

of his ability, and by watching for inconsistencies in the process of coding

and analysis. Because answers are influenced by the wording of questions,

conclusions based on answers to a single question are less reliable than those

emerging from answers to several questions or from the interrelationship of answers to several questions.

Table 16. Sampling Errors of Differences3

(Differences required for significance, in percent)

Size of group

Size of group

1000 700 500 300 200

1,000. 700. . 500. . 300. . . 200. . .

1,000. 700 .. , 500. . . 300. . . 200. . .

1,000. 700. . 500. . 300. .

1,000. 700. . 500. . 300. .

For percentages from 35 to 65 percent

9

10

10

! 1

For percentages around 20 and 80 percent

For percentages around 10 and 90 percent

For percentages around 5 and 95 percent

111112

1314

9

9

10

1

a Differences required for significance (95 percent probability) in comparison of percentages derived from two different subgroups of the same survey.
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 27

QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUMMARY OF RESPONSES

The distributions of answers to all questions concerning the metric system

asked of the national sample respondents are given in this section, in the order

in which the questions were asked.

Some questions were asked only of an appropriate subsample, but the per- centages given are always of the total national sample. Where the ap- propriate subgroup is less than one-half the total sample, percentages are carried to one-tenth of a percent. Where the subgroup is greater than onehalf the sample, percentages are rounded to the nearest percent.

Percent

of respondents

1. Have you ever heard of the metric system? Yes 70 No 30

100

2. Could you tell me the names of some measures in the metric system?

Meter, millimeter, centimeter, kilometer, other prefix with meter 23 Gram, milligram, centigram, kilogram, other prefix with gram 1 Liter, milliliter, centiliter, kiloliter, other prefix with liter 1 Two of the above 13 Three of the above 4

Incorrect response, don't know 28 Not asked this question, never heard of Metric System 30

100

3. Do you happen to know how the metric measures relate to each other? For

example: How many centimeters are in a meter? One-hundred 17.9

Incorrect response, don't know 23.5 Not ascertained 0.2 Not asked this question, never heard of Metric or unable to name

measures 58.4

100.0

4. Do you happen to know the relation of any metric measures to our cus- tomary measures? For example: About how many kilometers are in a

mile?

1 kiiometer = 5/8 or 6/10 of a mile or 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers 3.9

1 kilometer = 1 /2 or 2/3 of a mile or 1 mile =1.5 or 1.7-2 kilometers 3.1

Incorrect response, don't know. 34.4 Not ascertained 0.2 Not asked this question, never heard of Metric or unable to name

measures 58.4

100.0

5. Thinking about our customary system, can you tell me: How many pints are in a quart? How many inches in a yard?

One correct response 15 Two correct responses 82 No correct response 3

100

426-991 OL - 71 - 3
28 THE CONSUMER

Percent

of respondents

6. Have you as an adult, ever lived or traveled extensively in a foreign country,

other than the British Commonwealth countries, where you had to deal with a different measuring system than ours? Yes 17 No 83

100

7. Did you have any problems in adjusting to the measuring system? (1 do

not mean problems with money.)

Yes 3.2 No 13.6 Don't know, not ascertained 0.2 Not asked this question 83.0

100.0

8. Did you have problems while driving, shopping, working, or what?

Driving 0.8 Shopping 0.7 Working 0.0

Other 0.1

Everything, more than one mentioned 1.0 Not ascertained 0.6 Not asked this question 96.

100.0

9. Suppose speed limits were posted as say 80 kilometers an hour instead of

50 miles an hour. Do you think the American people as a whole would

adjust fairly easily or with considerable difficulty? Fairly easily 20 With considerable difficulty 74 Don't know, not ascertained 6

100

10. Do you think the American people as a whole would adjust fairly easily or with considerable difficulty to having the temperature reported as zero degrees centigrade instead of 32 degrees Fahrenheit?

Fairly easily 29 With considerable difficulty 64 Don't know, not ascertained 7

100

11. Do you think that it would be a good idea or a bad idea for the United

States to change to the metric system of measure? Good idea 25 Pro-con 4 Bad idea 59 Don't know 12

100
SURVEY OF CONSUMER KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES 29

Percent

of respondents

12. Why do you say that? Rest of world uses metric 15 Metric decimal easier; U.S. system outdated 14 Customary system good; we're used to it 23 Cost reference (cost of change to households, business; taxes) 6 Age reference (hard for old; easy for young) 11 Change would be inconvenient, difficult 33 Other 3 Don't know, not ascertained 11

( a)

13. Suppose the United States decided to change to the metric system. What do you think would be the best way to help people to learn the new system?

Do you think it would be better to use TV instructions, adult education courses, instructional leaflets, newspapers or what. TV 46 Adult education courses 19 Children's education 2

Instructional leaflets 14 Newspapers 17 Other 2 Everything, more than 2 responses 16 Don't know, not ascertained 3

<)

14. Would you be willing to attend a course to learn the new measures? Yes 50 Maybe, possibly 13 No 34 Don't know, not ascertained 3

100 Now I'm going to read you reasons some people have given in favor of a change to the Metric system. Would you tell me if you agree or disagree with each opinion.

15. The United States should make the change because the rest of the world

uses the metric system. Agree 34 Disagree 58 Don't know

Not ascertained 1

100

16. Shopping and price comparisons would be easier because the metric sys- tem can be divided or multiplied by 10. Agree 47

Disagree 37 Don't know 15 Not ascertained 1

100

0 Adds to more than 100 percent because some respondents gave more than one answer.
30 THE CONSUMER

Percent

of respondents

17. The metric system would be easier than our present system for our children

to learn. Agree 55 Disagree 22 Don't know 23

100 And here are the opinions of people who don't think the United

States should change to the metric system. Tell me if you

agree or disagree with these statements.

18. Life would just be more complicated; we would have to use conversion tables and that would be difficult to handle. Agree 61 Disagree 31 Don't know 7 Not ascertained 1

100

19. It would be too costly to change over our household measuring devices. Agree 50

Disagree 42 Don't know 7 Not ascertained 1

100

20. It would be expensive for business to change their measuring equipment.

Agree 78 Disagree 14 Don't know 8

100

21. The rest of the world should change to our measuring system. Agree 12 Disagree 77 Don't know 11

100
IV. SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER

CONCERN

The papers contained in this chapter are those prepared by experts on

areas of consumer concern. Most of the individuals were associated with

universities and were in departments concerned with the activity assigned.

Others were employed full time in occupations related to the activity. Consequently, all had a firm understanding of the present situation and with

careful analysis could reasonably consider probable future effects of metrication on the selected area of consumer concern. In addition to their professional qualifications, many hold memberships in consumer organizations and

have had extensive experience in working in areas of consumer interest.

31
32 THE CONSUMER

PURCHASING PROCESSED FOODS

Jean A. Phillips

College of Home Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State

University

INTRODUCTION

The English system (customary system) of weights and measures brought

to this land by the colonists prior to the formation of the United States has

been used since that time in trade and commerce, and has been retained es- sentially unchanged. Current legal restrictions are such that the customary

or U.S. system of measure is presently used in retail markets for all foods,

with metric units sometimes available as parenthetical information. Thus in- dividual consumers are experienced with the customary system and use this for making judgments of quantity.

In general, home economists, who by definition are concerned with the

well-being of families and individuals, would be a group of persons in the

United States who are knowledgeable about current usage of measuring

systems in purchasing processed foods. A survey [ 1] of representatives

from the various areas within home economics indicated little current use of

the metric system except by those home economists in government and

public health research. Further, as far as it was possible to determine, no one

person (or group) was familiar with and knowledgeable about the entire metric system of measurement units. Those home economists whose positions

involved research in the physical and life sciences or who work in product

development and marketing expressed greater familiarity with the metric

system than did those who were less involved with actual need for precise

measurements. The working knowledge was usually limited to the base units

of the system as these applied to the area of specialization. Since home

economists have an active part in consumer education at all levels,

knowledge of the customary system apparently meets the personal and

workday needs of these persons and negates any impact of the worldwide in- crease in the use of the metric system on our domestic situation.

This dearth of knowledge about and limited use of the metric system in our domestic food markets is probably due to reliance on the comfort of the

familiar, i.e. the customary system, as well as on legal requirements for units

of measure used for processed food products. Some products are labeled

with customary and metric units of measure and may have been packaged in other countries for market in our retail food stores, or may reflect similar

practices by processors in the U.S. who market food products in countries

that use the metric system as official measure. Other rationale for a lack of utilization of the metric system in retail food

markets in the U.S. is presented later in this paper.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 33

EXISTING LABELING REGULATIONS AND MARKET

PRACTICES

The Declaration of Policy in the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (Public

Law 89-755, November 3, 1966) states: Informed consumers are essential to the fair and efficient functioning of

a free market economy. Packages and their labels should enable con- sumers to obtain accurate information as to the quantity of the contents and should facilitate value comparisons. Therefore, it is hereby

declared to be the policy of the Congress to assist consumers and

manufacturers in reaching these goals in the marketing of consumer

goods.

Elucidation of this "accurate information" as to contents is spelled out in section 4 of the Act which provides in addition to the identity of a commodity the requirement that "the net quantity of contents (in terms of weight,

measure, or numerical count) shall be separately and accurately stated." For

those packages which contain less than 4 pounds or 1 gallon, the weight or measure shall be expressed both in ounces (with identification as to avoirdupois or fluid ounces) and if applicable, in pounds for weight units, with any

remainder in terms of ounces or common or decimal fractions of the pound;

or in the case of liquid measure, in the largest whole unit (quarts and pints, or

pints as appropriate) with any remainder in terms of fluid ounces or common

or decimal fractions of the pint or quart. It is interesting to note here the in- clusion of the base 10 or decimal units with the customary system.

The regulations for the enforcement of the FPL Act, (Part 1, Title 21

Code of Federal Regulations as amended July 21, 1967, and September 20,

1967, effective December 31, 1967, and July 1, 1968), 1.8b (a) state that the

net contents declared on labels for food products shall be:

in terms of fluid measure if the food is liquid, or in terms of weight if the

food is solid, semisolid, or viscous, or a mixture of solid and liquid.

. . If there is a firmly established general consumer usage and trade

custom of declaring the content of a liquid by weight, or a solid,

semisolid, or viscous product by fluid measure, it may be used.

Whenever the Commissioner determines that an existing practice of

declaring net quantity of contents by weight, measure, numerical

count, or a combination in the specific packaged food does not

facilitate value comparisons by consumers and offers opportunity

for consumer confusion, he will by regulation designate the ap- propriate term or terms to be used for such commodity.

Subparagraph (b) of 1.8b designates weight in terms of the avoirdupois

pound and ounce, and fluid measure in terms of the U.S. gallon, quart, pint,

and fluid ounce. Dry measures are designated as the U.S. bushel, peck, dry

quart, and dry pint. Provision is again made for the use of common fractions

(halves, quarters, eighths, etc.) and of decimal fractions.
34 THE CONSUMER

It is easy to see from the above regulations that careful attention is needed on the part of consumers to avoid confusion between weight and volume

when the term ounce is used, and the qualifying term avoirdupois or fluid are

essential for clarity. The dry quart and pint are less frequently used which

helps to eliminate some confusion from ambiguity. Allowance of sub-units

as common fractions or as decimal fractions compounds possible confusion.

In order to provide a basis for discussion of the utilization of these measures a limited survey was made of all processed foods in one retail outlet of

a national chain food store. Some of the findings of major food items are summarized in table 1. This survey indicated that the regulations for expresTable 1 . Net Contents as Listed on Labels for Some

Processed Foods*

Categories Items Avoirdupois Metric Count

Total

yield or

serv- ings

Wt. (oz.) Percent

Vol. (ft. oz.) Percent Dairy Products

Milks, fresh fluid . . Milks, canned

Cheese

Frozen desserts. . .

Canned

Fruits Fruit juices Meat, fish, poultry

Vegetables

Soups

Mexican foods

Frozen

Fruits Meat, fish, poultry.

Vegetables

Baked goods

Dehydrated—Fruits. . .

Sweeteners

Artificial Sirups

Sugars.

Miscellaneous

Cookies-crackers. .

Herbs-spices Sauce mixes

Rice & rice mix

Baking powder. . .

Instant coffee

137 40

57

70

10964

17

IS 2h

4

46

6224

16

1

84

984226

69

100.0 100.0

7.0

100.0

100.0 100.0

100.0 100.0

100.0

100.0 100.0

100.0

100.0

36.4

100.0

100.0 100.0

100.0 100.0

100.0

100.0

71 .4

21.1

100.0 63.6

Measure

(gal-qt-pt) Percent

100.00

71.9

10.9 35.3 33.3 69.2

9.1

wt.

Percent

10.0

8.6

50.0

12.5

47.6

30.6

14.3

11.5 50.0

Vol. PerceniPercent

17.5 19.3

4.3

5.9

30.4

58.3

12.5

12.5

* Survey in one retail outlet.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 35

sion of quantity were followed by food processors with the exception of

weights expressed in ounces. Often the qualifying term avoirdupois (av.) was

omitted for solid and semisolid foods. These are listed in the table as weight measure because of the nature of the food item. This omission of the qualifying term is probably due to allowances for using labels printed prior to the

activation date of the regulations. One very confusing category was sirups,

which were labeled in volume units or fluid ounces (63.6%) and in mass units or avoirdupois ounces (36.4%). Viscosity of the product or common trade

usage may account for the decision to label in mass or in volume units; what- ever the reason, the fact remains that this practice seems confusing for the consumer.

All items were found to have expression of measure as required, with sup- plementary measure in metric units for some. These categories of food items

which included metric information on more than 25 percent of the labels were for food produced under one brand name in each category, indicating

that some food processors are either marketing under the same brand name

in other countries or are interested in expanded metrication in the United

States. Those labels for processed foods which included metric units on more than 50 percent of the labels were for foods which are popular with

Spanish-speaking Americans who are probably more familiar with the metric

system than with the customary system.

To lessen confusion for individual consumers it seems that yield (either

total or as numbers of portions, if portion size is stated) should be of benefit. However, this information was provided on few items, and most of these were items which change in volume due to cooking or required dilution before serving. Personal conversation with consumers revealed that many

purchasers select processed food by visual examination of the container size rather than close attention to weight or volume measure. This would indicate

that experienced consumers have empirical knowledge of the appropriate

size to purchase in order to adequately feed a group, family or individual.

These consumers reported that careful reading of label detail (unit of measure) was practiced only when comparing a new product with a familiar one

or when a thrift campaign was initiated. On this basis attention should be

given to container sizes. Frozen foods are packaged in relatively standardized boxes, cans, plastic

bags and bowls. All of the frozen foods are sold by customary weight or volume units; however, not all frozen food items are packaged in the same

weight or volume units since there is variation in density of these food items,

and portion size is more desired than portion weight. For example, similarly

sized containers may contain: 5 oz. onion rings, 8 or 9 oz. green beans, 10

oz. corn, 8 or 10 oz. lima beans, 10 oz. broccoli, or 12 oz. seasoned cooked

rice.Heat processed foods are usually packaged in metal (tin or aluminum) or

in glass jars. In 1949 a list of 32 can sizes, with can name, dimensions and

probable products, was promulgated by the National Bureau of Standards in an effort to simplify selection. These can sizes are known by a variety of numerical, letter, or word designations, or a combination of these. Since then

there have been more variations in container sizes utilized, and 20 of these
36 THE CONSUMER

"newer" can sizes are commonly found in retail markets. Some recipes use can sizes of frequently used containers as measures of ingredients; thus, con- sumers need to be knowledgeable about the identity of some can sizes. The 53d edition (1969) of The Almanac of the Canning, Freezing and

Preserving Industries [2] reports:

According to well-established can manufacturing practice, both the

diameter and the height of containers are described by three digits.

The first or left-hand digit gives the number of whole inches. The

next two digits give the additional fraction of the dimension ex- pressed as sixteenths of an inch. The first three digits always

represent the diameter of the can, while the last three digits give the

height of the can. The dimensions of the No. 303 can, for example,

are expressed as 303 x406. This means that the can is 3

3/i6" in diameter and 4

6A H

" in height. Each dimension is "overall" with the

diameter being measured to the outside edge of both double seams

and the height being measured to include the distance between the

outside edge of both terminal seams. Glass containers are also identified by the same terms of reference used

for cans. For example, the specifications of 303 x41 1 identify a No.

303 jar that has a diameter of 3

3A 6" and a height of 4 UA 6" within

manufacturing tolerances. Glass jars of unusual shape and form are frequently identified by the net quantity in terms of avoirdupois

pounds and ounces for mixtures of solids and liquids or in terms of

U.S. fluid gallons, quarts, pints, and ounces for juices and other all- fluid products.

Probably few people know the meaning behind the term 303 can, or the ap- propriate weight for food items packaged and processed in a No. 303 can; however, most consumers will quickly learn the number of servings availa- ble in this and other containers.

The use of numerical count as a measure of quantity is limited to some

foods which are marketed in discrete pieces. Two examples of count vs. weight or volume are frozen dessert products and bakery goods. Ice cream

packaged in bulk containers (gallons, quarts and pints) are labeled in terms

of liquid measure in the frozen state; however, confections individually

wrapped (Popsicles, Eskimo Pies, etc.) are labeled by count with liquid measure in fluid ounces as supplementary information. Bakery goods are marketed by weight, (pounds and ounces) when sold as one unit for division by

the consumer and by count when the items (e.g. rolls, biscuits, cookies) are predivided by the producer. There seems always to be an exception in the

food market and in bakery items; this exception is sliced bread which is sold

by weight. This is probably due to the fact that bread was customarily sold

by weight of unsliced loaf and the practice of preslicing for convenience is comparatively recent. Convenience items such as mixes for cakes, puddings, flavored gelatin

and specialty foods are marketed in customary units, although for any one

category there is variation in quantity per package. The consumer is in- terested in total yield, not in quantity per package, and therefore is more in-
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 37

terested in the fact that cakes of equal volume may result from packaged

mixes with weights of 19 or 20 ounces. Similarly flavored gelatin (3 oz. box)

and unflavored gelatin (4 packages/ 1 oz. box) will yield 4 and 16 servings

respectively when hydrated and formulated in the home into a salad or dessert.Paper goods for individuals which are commonly sold in grocery stores are labeled by count, with supplementary information about (1) dimension for

flat items such as napkins, towels and tissues, and (2) volume capacity for

cups and containers. Wrapping materials (waxed paper, foil, plastic

wrappings) are prominently labeled according to length, and less prominently according to width and total area. All of these measures—dimension, length, area, and volume are in the units of the customary

system.

The present status of quantity indicators for processed food and paper

items in the United States today is complete use of the customary system of

measuring units (with the ambiguities of the unit terms ounce, quart, and

pint) and with supplementary use of metric units for a small number of items.

These units, customary or metric, serve as bases for trade regulation and to a limited extent for comparison by individual shoppers. It is much more likely that individuals use empirical knowledge of brand name and/or container

appearance rather than net contents in weight or volume in making selec- tions to provide an adequate quantity of food items. Storage facilities for ex- cess or "leftovers" would of course be a factor in the purchase or no- purchase decision, but neither storage facilities nor precise units are as likely to be as important as is total yield or number of portions.

POSSIBLE CHANGES

Current trends in the food market indicate that the quantity of processed

foods consumed per individual will increase with a corresponding decrease

in use of fresh foods. Processing of foods includes packaging for protection

of the item, which in turn establishes a need for some system of indicating

quantity per package. Under the free enterprise system any increase in metrication would be dependent on: (1) utilization of one label for products marketed both in the United States and in other countries by producers involved

internationally, and (2) inclusion of supplementary metric units by processors who are interested in furthering the use of metric units, (3) persuasive

forces of competition or consumer demand, and/or (4) changes in the Code

of Federal Regulations.

Those processors in other countries who export food to the United States must comply with U.S. regulations, and as long as current regulations are in force there may be pressure to change our system, but not compulsion. The

many varieties of domestic processed foods available to consumers in suffi- cient quantities to satisfy hunger and provide nourishment will preclude

coercion from the current world metrication for a change in the units of measure in our markets. This may not be true for those markets along the land

boundaries which may use a dual labeling system.
38 THE CONSUMER

ADVANTAGES FROM INCREASED METRICATION

A planned program of metrication would surely benefit consumers since

this would aid in eliminating present ambiguities. The different terminology

for the metric units designating mass, volume, and length coupled with the ease of arithmetic computation in decimal units should facilitate food

shopping for processed foods. The fact that metric units of measure are comparable to the existing U.S. monetary system may simplify the change for some, although understanding of the system should not prove insurmountable, particularly with consumer education as an integral part of the change. Much has been accomplished with recent legislation to eliminate qualify- ing adjectives such as a "large" gallon or a "super" quart; however, conversion to the metric system for mass and volume measure in retail food markets would further aid consumers. Metrication would eliminate the varied (and confusing) subunits such as 16 avoirdupois ounces/pound and 32 fluid ounces/quart, and facilitate arithmetic calculations needed for price comparisons.

Little effect would be noticed in the processed foods market as a result of measure for distance from inches, feet, or yards to centimeter, decimeter, and meter, for no foods are presently marketed by distance or length (except

for "foot-long" hot dogs). Change in unit of measure for distance or length would affect only food wrapping materials such as waxed paper, foil, etc. DISADVANTAGES FROM INCREASED METRICATION

Two disadvantages may result from a change in the measuring system. One of these would be the need to educate consumers in metric equivalents

to our customary system. However, this would not seem to be a monumental

task. The simple procedure of dual labeling over a period of time should

serve the purpose of solid and semisolid processed foods quantitized by

weight. Placing metric units subsidiary to customary units for a period of

time, then reversing the order and size would be one means of education by

subtle infusion. The other disadvantage may occur as a possible change in container size for fluid materials (fresh milks, vinegars, oils, sirups). Liquid processed foods, particularly fluid milks, would require some change in sizes of containers with attendant changed labeling and need for understanding by

the consumer. This change in milk packaging could prove to be a benefit from a nutritional standpoint since one-fourth and one-half liter will yield

slightly more than the currently used half-pint and pint. If height of any container is crucial for filling machinery this dimension could be kept constant, and variation made in diameter or cross-sectional size. SUMMARY

The advantages of metrication, more easily interpreting labeling of quantities with simplified arithmetic for comparison shopping certainly are of

greater significance than the disadvantages.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 39

As a part of consumer education, conversion charts listing appropriate in- crements in weight, volume, length or distance and temperature would be

needed. These charts may be mailed to those people on the Internal Revenue mailing list, made available in post offices, and distributed through

the public schools. REFERENCES

[ 1] Report of the Consumer Interests Committee on the Effect on Consumers if United States Adopted the Metric System, American Home Economics Association, (June 1970).

[ 2] The Almanac of the Canning, Freezing, Preserving Industries, (Edward

E. Judge and Sons, Westminster. Md., 1 969) p. 110.
40 THE CONSUMER

PURCHASING FRESH FOODS

Marjorie M. Merchant

Extension Management and Family Economics, University of

Massachusetts

(Hi ffiODOCiniOM

This paper covers the consumer activity of purchasing fresh foods in retail food markets. Retail food market in this report refers to retail stores which

offer food for sale to consumers and includes self-service supermarkets, both

chain and independent operations; small owner-manager food stores; specialty stores (i.e. fish markets); and roadside markets.

The term fresh foods in this report refers to food sold in retail markets in the fresh form. Fresh red meats, fish, poultry, eggs, fruits and vegetables are included.

The information was obtained in several ways. Personal knowledge and

experience in working in the area of food marketing was supplemented by

library research. The original draft of the report was reviewed by personnel

employed in consumer education in nutrition and foods. The report used

data from 158 questionnaires, on the impact of a change to the metric system on consumers, completed by home economists in various educational,

research and business positions. This data related principally to the possible

future effects of planned metrication on consumers.

PRESENT CONSUMER PURCHASES BASED ON

CUSTOMARY UNITS

Purchasing fresh foods in United States retail food markets has not been

influenced to any significant degree by worldwide or domestic metrication.

Even when the fresh products are imported from a country whose measure- ment system is metric, they are purchased in this country in customary units. This is readily understood from the fact that fresh meats, fruits and vegetables are not usually imported in consumer size units. The breakdown into consumer units for retail sale is performed in this country, and conforms to the customary system.

Approximately 96 percent of livestock food commodities and 89 percent

of crop food commodities sold in this country are from domestic production

[ 1] . The United States production and distribution of fresh meats, fruits and

vegetables are based on customary units of measurement. Thus, there is no

significant influence of the metric system from imports.

Fresh red meats, poultry, and most fresh fish are sold by the pound. However, some fresh fish, especially shellfish, are measured by volume, i.e. shucked oysters are usually sold by the quart.

Market classification of poultry relies in part on weight ranges in pounds.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 41

For example, ready-to-cook chickens weighing between IV4 to 2V2 pounds

are classified as broilers; between 2V2 to 4

3/4 pounds as roasters; and stewing

hens usually range between 2V2 to 5V2 pounds. Similar weight ranges in pounds are used for the market classifications of turkey.

The consumer has the advantage, in purchasing fresh meats, fish and

poultry, of a fairly consistent measurement base. Comparison of cost and

utilization can be easily made where all the consumer size offerings are in units based upon the pound. Such uniformity is not present among many

other food products, and especially not among the retail market offerings of

fresh fruits and vegetables.

Units based upon the pound for fresh meats, fish and poultry are consistent with recipe standards and cooking temperatures and times used in this country. As more processed meat, fish and poultry items arrive in retail food markets in units based upon the kilogram, comparison between the

fresh item and the processed selection could conceivably be confusing and

difficult for consumers without dual labeling or complete reliance on metric

units. There is a current trend toward simplification of the customary unit used

in purchasing fresh meats, fish and poultry by expressing fractional parts in decimal fractions. This simplification is used especially in the self-service

retail food industry. Decimal fractions of the pound are also being applied to packaged fresh produce.

Eggs are sold by count, based on a dozen, and size, based on weight

classes. There are six U.S. weight classes for eggs based on the minimum

weight of a dozen eggs. These are Jumbo, 30 ounces; Extra Large, 27

ounces. Large, 24 ounces; Medium, 21 ounces; Small, 18 ounces; and

Peewee, 15 ounces. One can question whether consumer purchases of eggs are related to knowing the weight classes, or rather to size, appearance, and individual

preference. If size, appearance and preference are the consumer's guide to selection of eggs, then the measurement base could be either customary or metric without a direct impact on the consumer. Many fresh fruits and vegetables are offered in retail food markets by

customary units based on the pound. In the self-service supermarket, con- sumer-size packages containing one pound or multiples of one pound are commonly used for such fruits as oranges, grapefruit, and apples and for vegetables such as carrots, potatoes, and onions. In other instances, the

fresh produce item is packaged in fractional units based on the pound. In smaller food markets, consumer-size packages may not be used; however,

such fresh product items, unpackaged, are still sold by a customary unit

based upon the pound.

Fresh produce selections offered in units based on the pound and priced

by the unit provide consumers with the opportunity to make price comparisons. However, such price comparisons can only be realistic if quality is consistent. There is very little consumer grade-marked produce available in

retail markets, though 13 U.S. consumer grades have been developed (as of

January 1970). Selling by grade, using U.S. trading grades, is more common

with producers and wholesalers than with retail merchants. Therefore,
42 THE CONSUMER

though retail selling by units based on the pound offers the advantage of

price comparisons, the success of such comparison is dependent to a large

degree on the ability of individual consumers to judge quality.

Selling by measure, using units based on the bushel, is still practiced in some markets, especially for items such as apples and potatoes. This unit of

measurement is more likely to be found at local markets adjacent to growing

areas during the harvest season. This method of selling fresh produce per- mits pricing discrepancy, as equal volumes of the same item will not weigh

the same, due to the differences in size, shape and density of the product.

However, this form of selling is limited in scope, and in most instances the

pricing disadvantages to consumers are offset by individual consumer

preference for local produce in bulk containers.

Selected fresh produce may be sold in retail food markets by the individual

unit, such as head or melon. For example, lettuce or cabbage heads are often

sold at a price per head, irrespective of variations in quality and size. This

form of merchandising produce eliminates any opportunity for consumers to make meaningful cost comparisons. In addition, it discriminates among

buyers; one buyer can obtain more of a product at a specific price than

another buyer in the same market at the same time.

Not all markets use this form of selling such items as lettuce. In many in- stances, this type of produce is sold by the pound. If unit pricing based on

weight were adopted for food products in all sections of the country, it is conceivable that selling by the individual item, such as head, would be significantly curtailed.

Number or count continues to be a familiar measure for merchandising some fruits and vegetables, not only at the retail level, but also, from the

producing area through the distribution system. Asparagus, for example, is usually sold by the bunch, with a range in number of stalks per bunch, dependent upon the size and/or grade classification and production area. Consumer packages based on count have been used extensively for such

fruits as grapefruit, oranges, plums, pears, lemons and nectarines. This type

of food lends itself easily to merchandising and packaging by count. Pricing

fruit and vegetables by count rather than by mass or volume prohibits

meaningful cost comparisons. This method of selling fresh fruits and vegetables will not be affected by metrication in this country unless means are taken to eliminate this practice or insure that the additional information of

price per unit of weight is also available to the consumer.

Small fruits and vegetables such as berries, cherries, brussel sprouts and

cherry tomatoes, are usually available for sale in retail markets by measure

based on the quart. The physical characteristics of these items lend themselves readily to this type of measurement. Measurement by volume for

these selections, especially for berries, relates to consumer use and measure- ment in cooking.

It would be reasonable to assume that for purchases of fresh meat, fish and

poultry, units based on the pound are understood and utilized to an appreciable extent by concerned consumers in determining amounts to buy and in price comparisons. The question here would appear to be one of consumer
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 43

motivation and interest, not one of complexity and confusion relative to the

unit of measurement.

The situation is not as straightforward among fresh fruit and vegetable

selections, where there is a lack of uniformity in measurement units. There

is no consistent measurement base among fresh fruit and vegetable offerings

for meaningful consumer price comparisons.

CURRENT TRENDS IN RETAIL MARKETS

There is no current trend toward metrication in the purchasing of fresh

food in retail markets. Assuming no Federal Government program to in- crease the use of the metric system, continued increasing worldwide and

selected domestic use of metric measures would have little or no effect. It is unrealistic to assume a change in measurement units for consumer size of- ferings of agricultural commodities without a change throughout the distribu- tion system of such products. The economic impact of metrication on

U.S. livestock and crop production and distribution is of considerably less magnitude than for other domestic industries. The changes needed within

the area of fresh foods would be for practical purposes negligible.

Thus, it is inconceivable that the consumer engaged in purchasing fresh

foods will make selections among choices based on the metric system of

measurement without a planned metrication program within the United

States.

CHANGES AND EFFECTS OF METRICATION ON FRESH

FOOD PURCHASES

If the United States changed to the predominant use of the metric system,

the number of language, unit and size changes would be relatively minor for the consumer purchasing fresh foods. For fresh meats, fish and poultry, the

principal change would be from units based on the pound to units based on

the kilogram.

This change would involve language changes to gram and kilogram from

the customary ounce and pound. In the conversion, there would be no size change if the change were to metric equivalents. For example, one pound of

ground beef is equal to 454 grams or 0.45 kilograms.

There would be slight variations in the size of the unit of fresh meat, fish or poultry if the conversion was not to exact metric equivalents, but rather

to metric units of easily calculated multiples of grams and decimal fractions

of the kilogram. Such variations in size would be relatively insignificant, if the units developed adhered closely to the actual metric equivalent of the

customary unit and were uniformly adopted.

The problem of size difference would exist in the transfer from the custo- mary unit of the pound to the metric unit of the kilogram, especially in rela- tion to the base unit for pricing. Pricing on the basis of the kilogram would

require that consumers recognize that one kilogram represents 2.2 pounds.

426-991 OL - 71 - 4
44 THE CONSUMER

In pricing consumer size packages of fresh foods, it would not be unrealistic to consider using the decimal fraction of the kilogram equivalent to the

customary unit of the pound.

In fish products purchased by liquid measure the change would be one of

language, from units based on the quart to units based on the liter. The size would be changed, as the liquid quart is 0.946 of a liter, and weight classes

of eggs would remain the same in respect to the minimum amount of egg the consumer receives in each size designation, with conversion to metric

equivalents. The unit of measurement would be based on the kilogram and

the language change would be to grams per dozen.

The weight changes among fresh fruits and vegetables sold in units based on the pound would be similar to the changes in fresh meats. Conversion to the metric system would not affect items sold by count or individual unit, unless it became mandatory for all items to be sold by weight.

As retailing of fresh fruits and vegetables by measure, based on the bushel,

is limited in the United States, conversion to the metric system would only

affect certain local market situations. Under metric conversion there would

be a change from a unit based on the bushel to a unit based on dekaliters, and

a language change from pecks and bushels to liters and dekaliters. It is reasonable to assume that within a relatively short time, retailing by measure

based on the bushel will have diminished appreciably — even at the local,

seasonal markets. If this happens, conversion to the metric system would

affect consumers only in relation to the standard for a unit of mass. Small fruits and vegetables sold in pints and quarts would be affected principally as a language change. Consumer size units of these small produce

items would be somewhat smaller, as the quart is equivalent to 1.10 liters in dry measure. However, even where containers might undergo slight dimensional changes as the result of rounding off linear measurements under conversion, size changes would be relatively insignificant.

Standards for the grading of fresh fruits and vegetables which contain size classifications, such as potatoes, would be affected by a language change

under metrication, principally from inches to centimeters.

All change produces its transition period of confusion, concern and adjust- ment. Conversion to the metric system would require of consumers the

learning of a new language. This relearning process would not be limited to speaking of kilograms, liters, centimeters, and millimeters, but even more

demanding would be the need to base purchase decisions on these new

language units. The intensity of reaction to a change in the measurement system would be

directly related to age, economic and educational factors. Young people

working with metric language and units in school would not face the same

difficulties as older consumers. It is to be expected that consumers from the

lower economic and educational levels would be most confused. Even with- out a change in the measurement system, many of these consumers are operating at a disadvantage with the customary system.

Accepting the simplicity and logic of the metric system as one of the

greatest advantages to consumers, changes could be initiated toward achieving the same advantage within the customary system. These could include
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 45

the simplification of the customary unit by expressing parts of the unit in decimal fractions. As indicated earlier, this practice is being used in many

parts of the country for fresh meats, fish and poultry. The extension of this practice to all fresh foods would be an advantage for consumers. A change to the metric system would require extensive emphasis on con- sumer education. In a limited survey of home economists throughout the

country, considerable concern was expressed by the respondents relative to consumer understanding and use of the customary system. They all agreed

that U.S. consumers do not know or use the metric system. One of the first steps would be the re-education of the consumer educator in the new language

and units. Of the 158 professional home economists surveyed. 44 percent in- dicated little or no familiarity with the metric system. In-service education

programs would be necessary in many professional areas. Educational

materials designed to meet a variety of consumer levels would be needed.

The market itself could serve as a communicator for consumer education.

Point-of-sale information, such as a conversion chart, could help consumers

at the time of decision. Market scales in the fresh fruit and vegetable area could display conversion information. In the case of prepackaged selections,

such as the 3-pound bag of apples or the 5-pound bag of potatoes, dual label- ing could be used during the transition period. Pocket and wallet size conversion charts could be available in food stores. Amount to buy information

could be coupled with conversion factors, helping consumers to think in the new units. The impact of conversion to the metric system on consumer purchases of

fresh foods could be expected to be relatively minor. Where household scales are used with these foods, the consumer could easily convert weights with a conversion chart. Amount to buy charts in cookbooks could also be converted

easily to metric language and units. A part of the consumer education effort would need to be directed toward helping consumers understand the ease with which current household equipment could be used with metric units

and language.

REFERENCE

[1] National Food Situation. (Economic Research Service. U.S.D.A..

August 1970).
46 THE CONSUMER

FOOD PREPARATION - RECIPES AND THEIR CONVERSION

Fern E. Hunt and M. Eloise Green

School ofHome Economics, Ohio State University

INTRODUCTION

Increasing worldwide use of the metric system of measurement has had

little impact on home food preparation in the United States. Few women in this country know or use the metric system in food preparation at home.

Among those who have read or heard that a conversion from the U.S. custo- mary system to the metric system is under consideration here, few seem to have a clear idea of how it would affect them. There is some concern that a changeover would require discarding old favorite recipes and cookbooks,

necessitate expensive replacement of measuring and cooking devices and

utensils, and that learning a new system would be very difficult. People who have immigrated to the United States from countries on the

metric system have encountered some difficulty in adapting to our customary units of measurement for food preparation and in some cases have obtained measuring devices from their homeland to use instead of those

customarily used here. On the other hand. U.S. citizens living or travelling

abroad have reported no great difficulty in adjusting to the metric system.

They have noted that European recipes list exact weights or volume measures or both but that European homes are not all equipped with accurate weighing and measuring devices. In fact, with good pastry shops in almost

every urban neighborhood, kinds of cookery requiring careful measurement

of ingredients are reportedly uncommon in European homes. To facilitate cooking, certain items such as baking powder are available in some countries

in small preweighed packets.

The metric system or a combination of the metric system with the U.S.

customary system is in common use in the United States in food and nutri- tion research, in dietetics, in food composition tables, and in scientific publications. Potencies of medicines and substances such as ascorbic acid, which

is used in food preservation to prevent darkening of certain fruits in freezing, are stated in metric units. Quantities in both metric and U.S. customary units are marked on the containers of a number of food products, but many people

are unaware of this. Consumers experience no inconveniences or problems in the above-mentioned situations because the necessary information is provided for them by

physicians, dietitians, nutritionists, and food specialists in terms the lay per- son can comprehend. Although information in metric units may appear on

products, most people do not need to know or understand the metric system

and may disregard the information.

In the present situation, there is no readily apparent advantage to the con- sumer in having information on quantity available in metric units, and no

trend toward increasing use of the metric system in food preparation in U.S.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 47

homes is evident. Continued worldwide expansion in use of the metric

system is not likely to affect home food preparation methods in this country

unless changes in other areas affecting consumers force the issue. If the

homemaker finds herself required to know and use two systems of measure- ment—one for food preparation and another for dimensions for furnishings

and equipment, for clothing sizes, and for quantities of gasoline and distance

in use of the family automobile, for example, she is likely to become more in- terested in converting to one system completely — possibly the metric

system.

QUANTITY MEASUREMENT IN HOME FOOD

PREPARATION

PRESENT SITUATION

Recipes most commonly used in homes in the United States specify

quantity of ingredients by volume based on the U.S. customary system of

measurement. The volume measures used include the quart, cup, tablespoon

and teaspoon units and fractions of these. The measuring cup, if graduated,

bears markings in fourths and in thirds. In nested cup sets, common sizes are one, one-half, one-third, and one-fourth cup. Measuring spoons are usually

sold in sets having one tablespoon, one teaspoon, one-half teaspoon and onefourth teaspoon.

Capacity of the one-cup measure for both liquid and dry materials is established at 8 fluid ounces or 236.6 milliliters; for one tablespoon, 14.79

milliliters; and for one teaspoon, 4.93 milliliters [ 1] . Variation in capacity of

standard measuring devices is limited by the standard to ±5 percent, but

compliance of manufacturers with these standards for measuring devices is voluntary. Capacities of these measures are derived from the one-quart fluid measure. 1 One cup level full is equivalent to one-fourth quart and also to 16

level tablespoonfuls. One level tablespoon is equivalent to 3 teaspoonfuls.

Capacity of the one-cup measure was originally established in the Code of

Specifications of the National Bureau of Standards prior to 1926 [2,3] and

standards for tablespoon, teaspoon, and fractions of cup and teaspoon were

adopted in 1926 [4]. According to information in early literature on stan- dards for measuring equipment [2-6] considerable time elapsed between

establishment of the government standard, production of reasonably accurate devices by manufacturers, and adoption of homemakers accustomed to estimating quantities by "breakfast cups" and "teacups."

In the United States, use of utensils and measuring devices standardized

for capacity and/or dimensions has greatly facilitated food preparation and

food information exchange. Standardization of measuring equipment has

permitted establishment of basic proportions on the basis of volume for in- gredients for various food items. Although considerable time was required

for accomplishment of the present level of adoption of standardized measur1 One quart, liquid measure equals 0.95 liter; one quart, dry measure equals 1.10 liters.
48 THE CONSUMER

ing equipment in homes, women have become accustomed to using and relying upon these items in cooking.

Most homemakers are familiar with the terminology of the currently used

system of measurement by volume and recognize equipment of particular

sizes. Some, however, may not be aware of the proportional relationship

between cup and spoon volume measures and may have no real need to know this in the cooking that they do. Women know also the common units

of weight (pounds and ounces), but few own or use scales or balances in actual preparation of food.

The accuracy with which women use their measuring devices is another

matter and may be affected by such factors as training and experience in food preparation, personal standards, haste, and occasion for which the food

is to be used. A number of women with whom we have spoken to about use

of measuring devices said that they are likely to follow a new recipe as exactly as possible on the first few occasions of preparing food from it. When

they have become familiar with the recipe and the product, they are then

likely to speed up preparation by giving less care to the measure- ment—possibly even estimating quantities by eye or other means. Further, some women admit that if the food is for everyday consumption by the family, less attention may be given to preparation than if it is for a special occasion or purpose.

Considerable variability occurs in amounts of ingredients obtained by

volume measurements because of techniques used in measuring. Matthews

and Batcher [7] found, for example, that weights of cups of flour unsifted

and dipped with the cup were about 29 percent greater than for flour sifted and spooned. Cups of flour unsifted and spooned were about 10 percent

heavier than were those sifted and spooned.

In addition, Matthews and Batcher found that fairly consistent weights were obtained by individuals for one cup of flour in 5 replications. Among in- dividuals, however, the difference between the highest and lowest mean

weights per cup was just under 5 percent.

In view of the fact that the size of the one-cup measure can vary by ±5

percent, the variations within a given type of ingredient such as flour may ac- count for some differences in weights of given volumes, that method of measuring affects amount, and that considerable variability due to individual

practices can occur in the measurement of an ingredient such as flour, one wonders that successful baking ever occurs. Women in the United States seem to be satisfied with the present convenient system of measurement of

ingredients in food preparation.

THE FUTURE

Trends in the food industry and in styles of living raise questions about the

need for measuring devices in homes in the future. A growing array of food

mixes requiring a minimum of preparation, heat-and-serve foods, and readyto-eat items are available to families. The trend toward more meals away

from home is continuing. In addition, food ingredients such as butter and
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 49

margarine are packaged in forms easily measured without measuring cups.

It would seem that the need for measuring devices might decline.

Three manufacturers of measuring cups and spoons whom we consulted

about the future of measuring equipment reported that the demand for these

items is continuing at a high level. Although less measuring per food item

prepared may be required, some ingredients must still be measured. In response to an inquiry sent to 15 people associated with selected food and

equipment manufacturers and food editors with women's magazines, eleven

expressed the opinion that reliable, standard measuring devices are and will continue to be needed whether or not women use them correctly.

Among the respondents in the above-mentioned survey, eight recom- mended retaining volumetric measurements in recipes if the U.S. should

change to the metric system of measurement. A combination of statements

of volume for liquid ingredients and weight for dry or solid materials in recipes was suggested in three responses. A few people suggested that quantities in recipes should be stated in metric units for both weight and volume

to give homemakers a choice in the matter.

Various recommendations have been made for easing conversion of com- monly used sizes of measuring devices in U.S. customary units to metric

units for food preparation. Difficulties arise in obtaining conveniently

rounded values without changing relationships between basic proportions of

the devices such as those existing between the cup, tablespoon, and

teaspoon. One suggestion for conversion is shown in table 2. If the relationship between a measure corresponding to the customary cup

and the customary tablespoon and teaspoon could be preserved in a conversion to the metric system, old family favorite recipes could be used with the new metric measures with no adverse effects to the product. The yield of the

recipe would simply be increased slightly if cup size is increased to 250 milliliters, tablespoon to 15.6 milliliters and teaspoon to 5.2 milliliters. In a recipe for a 9-inch pumpkin pie, for example, the increase in yield of filling was calculated at less than one-fourth cup. On the other hand, a homemaker

could use her U.S. customary measuring devices with recipes in the metric

and turn out a yield slightly smaller than when metric measures are used.

Retaining the 16: 1 ratio between cup and tablespoon would not be adhering strictly to a decimal concept. There is precedent for it, however, in the measures used in countries now on the metric system, as shown below:

CONVERSION TO THE METRIC SYSTEM

U.S.

1 tablespoon

1 cup 236.6 milliliters 16 tablespoons

3 teaspoons

Germany

1 Suppenteller

1 Essloffel

250 milliliters 16 Essloffeln 3 Teeloffeln
50 THE CONSUMER

Spain

1 taza

1 cucharada = 200 milliliters = 16 cucharadas = 3 cucharaditas

Table 2. U.S. Customary Units, Metric Equivalents and Possible

New Measures for Metrication in Home Preparation of Food:

Volume

Current units of measurement Possible new

standard measures

U.S. customary

Metric

equivalents

Tolerance (±5%)

permitted

by 1963

standard 1

II

1 quart

1 pint

1 cup

Va cup % cup

Vi cup

Vi cup

Va cup

1 tablespoon.

1 teaspoon.

Vi teaspoon.

14 teaspoon.

ml

946 473.2

236.6

177.45

157.7 118.3 78.9

59.15 14.79 4.93 2.46

1.23

ml

247.3

223.7 11.8 8.9

7.9

5.9 3.9 3.0

.74

.25 .12

.06

ml

1000 500

250

187.5

166.7

12583.3

62.5

15.6

5.2 2.6

1.3

ml

1000 500

3250

American Standard: Dimensions, Tolerances, and Terminology for Home Cooking and Baking

Utensils. Z61.1—1963. American Standards Association, Incorporated (now American National Standards

Institute).

- Not in American Standard Z61. 1—1963.

3 Marked with 25-milliliter graduations; nested devices based on selected rounded metric subunits of

this measure.

4 Basic 10-milliliter spoon.

Eight of 1 1 respondents to the questionnaire sent to food and equipment

manufacturers and to food editors were in favor of changing the capacity of

the standard measuring cup from 236.6 to 250 milliliters if the U.S. converts

to the metric system. Graduations of 10 or 25 milliliters were suggested most

often. Additional markings suggested for the new cup in several responses were halves, thirds and quarters; others suggested that these marking should

be avoided.

In order to differentiate 250-ml from customary 237-ml cups, the term

metric cup [8] or "metricup" has been suggested. In actual use of these

items, markings such as capacity and graduations should serve to dif- ferentiate them (fig. 1 ). The shape of the measuring device could be changed

to facilitate differentiation if this seems advisable. In recipes, the quantity

could be specified in actual metric units (as 250 ml) rather than as fractions

of a cup or spoon.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 51

Suggested graduations for a

250-milliter measuring device

FIGURE 3

Suggested capacities for measuring spoons calibrated in metric units

varied among representatives of food and equipment manufacturers and

food and equipment editors of women's magazines. Suggestions included the

following:

(a) retaining present tablespoons and teaspoons without change,

(b) changing tablespoons to 15 milliliters and teaspoons to 5 milliliters,

and

(c) developing a 10-milliliter basic spoon.

The terms for volume in the metric system which would most commonly

be used in food preparation are liter and milliliter. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF ALTERNATIVES

Problems encountered in use of the current system of measurement are

chiefly of two types. First, some people have difficulty in performing the

necessary mathematics with fractions and mixed numbers when they need

to reduce or increase the yield of a recipe. The same type of difficulty is en- countered by people with limited mathematical aptitude who may need to reduce amounts of ingredients to basic proportions for recipe analysis. A

change in the metric system which is based on multiples of 10 should

facilitate such computations.
52 THE CONSUMER

Secondly, some people may encounter a limitation on use of food information and recipes from other countries imposed by lack of knowledge of the

metric system of measurement and lack of measuring equipment calibrated

in metric units. Conversely, then, advantages of change to the metric system of measure- ment for food preparation in homes could include —

( 1 ) simplification of calculations and comparison of dietary information

and recipes if quantities can be stated in multiples of 10, and

(2) easier international exchange and use of food preparation information. Complete international acceptance of the metric system of measurement in food preparation could eventually lead to establishment of international

standards for measuring devices and cooking and baking utensils. A major disadvantage of change to the metric system of measurement for households would be obsolescence of presently owned and used utensils,

measuring devices and recipes from the standpoint of markings and lan- guage. Changes that would minimize needs for discarding presently owned

and used items until a homemaker wants to replace them either because she

wants to own up-to-date items or to replace worn-out equipment would be

desirable. Information to permit easy adaptation of presently owned materials to the new system of measure would be needed.

WEIGHT VERSUS VOLUME

In view of the fact that quantities of ingredients listed in recipes from

countries now using the metric system of measurement are specified in weight for most dry or solid ingredients, a question arises about the desirability of following this method in the United States in the event of conversion

to the metric system. An argument for this is that with volume measurement,

variability in weight of a given volume of a specific ingredient is common.

This variability can occur because of variations in measuring techniques and

variations among brands of a specified type of ingredient. Fortunately, pro- portions of ingredients in many foods, even cakes, can be varied considerably without serious detriment (complete failure) to the product

although characteristics may be slightly altered. For accurate, carefully controlled work such as is necessary in experimental work with food, in- gredients must be weighed.

At present, few homemakers weigh ingredients in food preparation and

there was little interest in going to this among women with whom we have

consulted informally. For those who wish to weigh, however, scales or balances in metric units are available and simple tables or a graph such as is shown in figure 2 for conversion from avoirdupois to metric units (grams)

could be used if needed. Dual statements of quantity of ingredients giving

both volume and weight in metric units may be desirable in new recipes.

Weights per unit of volume for selected ingredients are presented in the

AHEA Handbook of Food Preparation [ 9] and in table 3.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 53

16

14

12

10

(A Q u

c

3O 6

wWBmmBSmmm

^^^^^^^^^

... SB

IMIilH

IHSHI

:;. ..... ...

100 200 300

Grams

400 500

FIGURE 4

Weight conversion chart

The two terms for weight in the metric system with which women would

need to become familiar are kilogram and gram.

Some thought has been given to whether weighing of ingredients is really

necessary for the kind of cooking women in the U.S. do and to whether

weighing or measuring of ingredients is the more difficult or troublesome.

Disadvantages associated with weighing of ingredients include the initial cost of a set of accurate scales, the storage space requirement for the scales,

and the need to train women to use them to achieve accurate weighing. Unless the scales are stored in a readily accessible place, the effort to get them

out would discourage their use by most women. A few immigrants whom we

have consulted from countries on the metric system have indicated that they

considered weighing of ingredients an inconvenience in cooking and would

prefer to use volume measurements in food preparation.

Assuming that a person knows how to use scales and has them conviently

located in the food preparation center, he or she could probably weigh as

easily as measure flour, sugar, and other solid or dry ingredients. The quantity of solid shortening, however, would be easier and more accurately deter- mined by weight than by volume. On the other hand, butter and margarine

are available in market units which can be readily subdivided into needed

amounts without use of either scales or measuring cups. Liquid ingredients and substances used in small quantities, such as baking

powder, salt, baking soda, spices and the like, are more easily and probably more accurately measured by volume than weighed on home-type scales. If
54 THE CONSUMER

Table 3. Weight (grams) of Selected Ingredients:

U.S. Customary Cup and Proposed Metric Cup

1FnnH UUU itpm 1 l \. 1 1 1

U.S.

custom3.ry

Cupi

(237 ml)

Metric Cup (or metricup)2

1 (ZjU mi)

( 3/4) (lO /.J ml)(%)

tloo. / ml)

(,1-Zj ml)

m\t>i. i ml)

04)

ml)

grams grams grams grams grams grams grams

Fat: Butter or margarine. . .

224 236 177 158 118 79 59

Oil 210 222 168 148 111 74 56 Lard 220 232 174 154 116 77 58 Hydrogenated products. 188 198 150 132 99 66 50

Flour: All purpose sifted. . .

1 1 <\ 121 90 oO DO 40

Sugar:

Brown, light or dark,

packed 200 211 159 140 106 70 53 Cane or beet. granulated 200 21

159 140 1U6 /O 53

Liquids: Milk 244 257 192 172 128 86 64

Leavening agents

Baking powder:

Phosphate 197 208 156 138 104 69 52 SAS-phosphate .... 173 182 138 122 91 61 46

Tartrate 182 192 144 128 96 64 48 Baking soda 181 191 144 128 96 64 48

Miscellaneous:

Salt, free-flowing 228 240 180 160 120 80 60 Cocoa 112 118 90 78 59 39 30

1 Handbook of Food Preparation. 1964 revised ed. Washington, D.C.: American Home Economics

Association.

3 Calculated values.

some ingredients are to be weighed and some measured by volume, women

would undoubtedly prefer volume measurements entirely for everyday food

preparation.

COOKING UTENSILS

If a change is made from the current system of measurement to the metric

system, and if capacities of measuring equipment are rounded to convenient

quantities, corresponding adjustments in utensil sizes should be considered

in order to accommodate changed yield from recipes. Consideration should

be given also to the effect of change in volume and shape of pans on cooking

time and quality of the finished food.

Dimensions for baking utensils commonly used in the United States are expressed in inches, but they could be expressed in centimeters. Scales for conversions in length between the two systems are commonly available.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 55

Some rounding of dimensions may be necessary and should take into consideration recommendations for rounding of volume or weight in measure- ment of ingredients in recipes. Possibilities for common pan sizes rounded in metric units are shown in table 4. The unit of length in the metric system

which women would need to learn in relation to food preparation is the centimeter.

Table 4. Utensils: Standard Sizes in U.S. Customary Units, in Equivalent Metric Units, and in Rounded Metric Units

Utensil U.S. customary Equivalent in Metric units, units metric units rounded

inches centimeters centimeters Cake Pans Oblong 10 X O X 1*4 25 4 X 15 2 X J 8 25 x 15 x 4

11 X 7 X 11/2 27 9 X 17.8 X 3 8 28 x 18 x 4

12 X 71/2 2 2 30 5 X 8 3 X 5 1 30 x 8 x 5 13 X 9 X 2 33 0 X 22 9 X 5 1 33 x 23 x 5 D /~\ linn 8 X 1*4 20 3 X 3 X 20 x 4

9 X 1*4 22 9 X 3 8 23 x 4

10 X 1*4 25 4 X 3 8 25 x 4

8 X 8 X 2 20 3 X 20 3 X 5 1 21 x 21 x 5 9 X 9 X 2 22 9 X 22.9 X 5 1 23 x 23 x 5 10 X 10 2 25 4 X 25 4 X 5 1 25 x 25 x 4

9 X 3*4 22 9 X 8 9 23 x 9

10 X 4 25 4 X 10 2 25 x 10

Pie Pans or Plates 41/4 X 41/4 10 8 X 3 2 11 x 3 5 X 1 12 7 x 2

c

1 J X J 6 X 1 15 2 X 2

cJ

1 S v 1 1 J A '

7i/2 X Wa 19 0 X 3 Z

1 Q v 1 1 y X J

91/2 X Wa 24 1 X 3 1 Z4 X j 10 X 1 1A 1/2 25 4 X i 8 25 x 4

IO1/2 X

1 1 / 1/2 26 7 X 3 8 27 x 4

11 X 1*4 27 9 X 3 8 28 x 4

12 X 1*4 30 5 X 3 8 30 x 4

Cookie sheets 10 X 8 25 4 X 20 3 25 x 21 14 X 10 39 6 X 25 4 36 x 25

151/2 X 12 39 4 X 30 5 39 x 30

16 X 11 40 6 X 27 9 41 x 28

17 X 14 43 2 X 35 6 43 x 36

18 X 12 45 7 X 30 5 46 x 30

Jelly Roll Pan 15i/

2 X IOI/2 X 1 39 4 X 26 7 X 2 5 39 x 27 x 3

7*4 X 33/4 X 21/4 19 0 X 9 5 X 5 7 19 x 10 x 6

X 41/2 X 21/2 21 6 X 11 4 X 6 3 22 x 11 x 6

91/2 X 5 X 3 24 1 X 12 7 X 7 6 24 x 13 x 8

11 X 7 X 3 27 9 X 17 8 X 7 6 28 x 18 x 8 16 X 4 X 4 40 6 X 10 2 X 10 2 41 x 10 x 10

Muffin or Cupcake Wa X 1 4 4 X 2 5 5x2

2/2 X Wa 6 3 X 3 2 6x3

3 X 1*4 7. 6 X 3 8 8x4

oource vcuiurmii i auu z.;. rtiiicucaii jidiiumu. wiuiwiaiu.w, i^*w.«. Cooking and Baking Utensils. Z61. 1—1963. American Standards Association, Incorporated (now

American National Standards Institute).
56 THE CONSUMER

Dimensions of standard utensils used for baking in U.S. homes are stated

in inches to the nearest one-fourth inch. Tolerances of ± one-fourth inch are recommended by American Standard Z61. 1-1963 [1]. Measurements of

width, length, and diameter are made at the top. inside. Depth is measured

inside and perpendicular to the bottom. Dimensions for some common utensils are shown in table 4. Standardized pan sizes permit smaller household inventories of utensils

than would otherwise be possible and facilitate specification of pan sizes and

cooking times in recipes and cooking instructions. Chances of obtaining

uniform baking results from one time to the next are thus improved if pans of

specified size are used each time.

Capacities of saucepans and casseroles are stated in liquid measures, level

full, and usually in quarts or fractions of quarts. If they are standard utensils,

actual capacity is within ±5 percent of total stated volume. With the metric

system, capacities would be stated in liters or milliliters. Sizes of skillets or frying pans are specified by inside top diameter in inches. In the metric system, this measurement would be given in centimeters.

COOKING TEMPERATURES

Cooking temperatures in current use in food preparation in homes in the

United States are stated in degrees Fahrenheit. Temperatures are specified

for baking and roasting; for determining end-points of cooking for icings,

candy, and meat; and for temperatures for fat in deep-fat frying. Estimates of

cooking time in minutes or hours are usually included with recipe information as guides for cooking given quantities of food in a given temperature

range. Oven temperature controls are commonly calibrated in 25° intervals on

the Fahrenheit scale. Meat thermometers are usually in 10° intervals; candy.

2°; and deep-fat thermometers, in 2° or 5° intervals. In the Schlessinger and Kennedy study [8] of conversion to the metric

system of measurement for food preparation, no difficulty was foreseen in conversion from the Fahrenheit to the Celsius (Centigrade) scale for temperature measurements in cooking. Until ranges and appliances with temperature controls calibrated in the Fahrenheit scale are replaced by those

with Celsius scales, however, and as long as women wish to retain and use

old favorite cookbooks and recipes, conversion tables for temperature

should be available to them.

Assistance on conversions may be provided in simple tables showing

Fahrenheit and Celsius temperature equivalents. Charts could also be

available from which temperatures could be converted directly from

Fahrenheit to Celsius (fig. 3). In addition, clever conversion devices are

available on which either Fahrenheit or Celsius scales can be read, depending upon the angle at which the surface of the device is viewed.

For listings of suggested cooking temperatures with recipes, possible

roundings on the Celsius scale are suggested in table 5 with current descrip-
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 57

—40 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280

Degrees Celsius

FIGURE 5

Temperature conversion chart

tive terminology. Temperatures in Celsius could be readily rounded for oven

temperatures, roasting, and deep-fat frying without detriment to products. It may be necessary to compromise on oven temperature values to some extent

to be consistent with the temperature intervals manufacturers can provide

in Celsius on range controls. For candy-making, use of exact conversion

values in Celsius would be desirable because end-point temperatures are

critical.

EDUCATING FOR CONVERSION

In order to help consumers adapt to a new system of measurement, short

programs on television (shown at suitable hours) on differences and similarities between the metric and U.S. customary measures and on practical applications of the new measures in food preparation would be desirable. Editors

of newspapers and women's magazines would undoubtedly feature information on the new measuring system — what it will mean and how to adapt to it in using old and new recipes, measuring devices, and utensils. Conversion

tables and charts on temperature, volume, weight, and length will be desirable. Excellent conversion information is provided in the AHEA Handbook

ofFood Preparation.

Conversion to the metric system should be planned to allow women to continue to use present equipment (ranges, electric portable cooking ap-
58 THE CONSUMER

Table 5. Cooking Temperatures for Foods:

Fahrenheit and Centigrade Scales

Cooking operation

Temperature

Possible rounding of temperatures

°F °C °C

Baking: Oven temperatures: 250 and 275 121 and 135 izu and Hd

Slow. 300 and 325 149 and 163 150 and 165 Moderate 350 and 375 177 and 190 175 and 190 Hot 400 and 425 205 and 218 205 and 220 Very hot 450 and 475 232 and 246 230 and 245

Roasting: Internal temperatures: Beef: 140 60 60 Medium 160 71 70 Well-done 170 77 80

Deep-fat frying:

Chicken 350 177 175 Doughnuts, fish 350 to 375 177 to 190 175 to 190 375 to 385 190 to 196 190 i y\s tnlu 195 iyj Potatoes 385 to 395 196 to 201 195 to 200

Candy-making

Thread 230 to 234 110 to 112

Soft ball 234 to 240 112 to 115 Firm ball 244 to 248 118 to 120 No rounding

Hard ball 250 to 266 121 to 130

Soft crack 270 to 290 132 to 143 Hard crack 300 to 310 149 to 154

Source: Handbook of Food Preparation. Washington, D.C. : American Home Economics Association. Revised 1964. (Additional information is calculated from figures in the Handbook.)

pliances. utensils, and the like) and recipes until they need or feel compelled

to replace with new. Conversion information from U.S. customary to metric

units in a readily understandable form should be available to them. New

equipment for replacements would be expected to be calibrated in metric

units and new recipes would be written with metric terminology and units of measure.

REFERENCES

[1] American Standard Z61 . 1-1963: Dimensions. Tolerances, and

Terminology for Home Cooking and Baking Utensils. (Sponsored by

American Home Economics Association). (American Standards

Association Inc.. Now American National Standards Institute. N.Y..

1963).

[2] Fisher. Marian Cole. Twenty Lessons in Domestic Science, (Marian

Cole Fisher. St. Paul. 1922).

[3] Housekeepers vote for standard measures. Good Housekeeping, pp. 80. 183 (April 1925).
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 59

[4] Sweeney, Elizabeth, Some cooking and baking utensils studied. J. Home Economics 40, 309-3 10 (June 1948).

[5] Halliday, E. G., and Noble. I. T.. Hows and Whys of Cooking, pp. 3 1 - 32 (The University of Chicago Press. Chicago. 1 928).

[6] Peet. L. J., and Sater. L. E.. Household Equipment, p. 147 (John Wiley

and Sons Inc.N.Y.. 1934).

[7] Matthews. Ruth H.. and Batcher. Olive M.. Sifted versus unsifted flour.

J. Home Economics 55, 1 23-1 24 (February 1963).

[8] Schlessinger. Phyllis E.. and Kennedy, Barbara M. Metric

measurements in food preparation, J. Home Economics 59, 121-123

(February 1967).

[9] Handbook ofFood Preparation, (American Home Economics

Association, Washington, D.C.. Revised 1 964).

426-991 OL - 71 - 5
60 THE CONSUMER

PURCHASE AND USE OF KITCHEN EQUIPMENT

Helen M. Goetz

Department Home Management, Consumer Economics and Equipment,

School of Home Economics, University ofAlabama

PRESENT MEASUREMENT SYSTEM USAGE

This paper considers the implication of increased use of the metric system

in the manufacture of kitchen equipment and how this would affect the consumer. It relates to the following items:

Small portable appliances (electric and nonelectric)

Refrigerators and freezers

Ranges (gas. electric and microwave)

Dishwashers and food waste disposals

Imports do not play an important role in the purchase of large appliances

at the present time. The 550-page buyers guide of the trade journal. Made in Europe, lists only one manufacturer of refrigerators. This company from

Portugal advertised a refrigerator giving the capacity in liters; however,

below the picture of the refrigerator were shown TV sets, and the size of the screen was given in inches. Small electrical appliances from Belgium. Italy.

Germany, etc. may be purchased either in 110V or 220V. Dimensions

and capacities were listed in both the metric and the imperial system. Cookware (enameled, stainless steel, or aluminum) from France, Germany,

Denmark, and other countries gave dimensions and capacity in both measurement systems, with the metric system in round numbers and the American system in fractions. None of the advertisements made reference to the

gauge of the material. Cutlery and small cooking utensils were quoted in both systems. Literature from Japan generally uses the customary system,

although Japan itself has adopted the metric system.

At the present time, the following measurements are used by the American industry manufacturing houseware or kitchen appliances:

(Since electricity is already measured in metric units, electrical measure- ments will be omitted here).

Interviews with neighbors, colleagues, and utility home economists bore

out the contention that Mrs. American Homemaker in her kitchen is not handicapped by the use of the customary measurement system, nor would

she benefit from knowing that the capacity of her refrigerator were 380 liters instead of 1 3.4 cubic feet. She could operate under one of the two systems or even use both simultaneously. In reality, she has been doing this for some

time. She demonstrates the use of metric measurements when she explains

that her toaster uses 1 .200 watts. Regardless of which system of measurement will finally be adopted, stan- dardization and improvements could make measurements of. for instance,

the capacity of a freezer less complicated and less confusing. It is a known

fact that the volume of 150 pounds of whipped topping varies considerably

from that of 1 50 pounds of beef roast.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 61

Small Appliances: Description of size , dimensions, etc.

Coffeepots Cups—not very accurate as size of cups varies. Motor Driven Horsepower and RPM measurements are not very meaningful to the homemaker. The size of mixing bowls is not important, except for "large" or "small."

Cookers, fryers, toasters, Not all thermostats give temperature; some indicate waffle irons, etc. food to be cooked. Usefulness depends on available

recipes. Major Appliances:

Food Disposers Dimensions in inches, size of motor in horsepower,

capacity in quarts.

Trash Compactor Dimensions in inches; pressure of compressing 2000

lbs/sq. in. capacity—60 gallons garbage, size in inches.

Dishwasher Dimensions in inches. Heating element in degrees Fahrenheit. Capacity—number of place settings (not very meaningful). Water used in gallons.

Ranges:

Gas Fuel in cubic feet. Heating value of gas in British Thermal Units /cubic

foot. Dimensions in inches; oven size in inches; temperature

in Fahrenheit.

Electric Dimensions in inches; oven size in inches; temperature

in Fahrenheit, thermal efficiency, a measure not used by the homemaker.

Micro-wave Power in metric system ; outside dimension in inches

Refrigerators and Freezers. . . . Temperature in Fahrenheit; capacity in cubic feet (food

storage); shelf area in square inches; dimensions in inches; horsepower of motor not used by homemaker; capacity of freezer either in pounds or in cubic feet.

Cutlery Length of blades in inches. Cookware Capacity in quarts or fractions thereof; gauge of metal

in numbers which represent fractions of inches.

FUTURE IMPACTS OF METRICATION

Before considering the effect on the consumer of increased use of the metric system, it would be wise to ask this important question: "Do we plan to convert the designation of things to metric names or numbers, or do we in- tend to convert the things themselves?" For example, a standard 8Vi"X 1 1"

sheet of paper would have 3Vi millimeters trimmed from the side and 2.1 centimeters added to the length to make a 21x30 centimeter sheet of

paper in order to have round, decimal-free numbers.
62 THE CONSUMER

The American consumer's situation could become rather difficult if some

branches of our industry and business decided to replace the customary

system or make a complete conversion to the metric system while others

retain the old. In purchasing new pieces of equipment, the consumer would

be required to learn the new nomenclature. Here, mass confusion is not foreseen since such pieces of equipment are not acquired very often, and

once the purchase has been made, the homemaker does not concern herself

with such measurements. However, when the question of replacement of

existing equipment arises, especially if it pertains to built-in equipment, one may run into more problems. The building industry would have to coordinate its activities with the appliance industry. Increased standardization and prefabrication of kitchen cabinets would demand a unified system

of dimensions. It is safe to assume, though, that any remodeling of existing

space will require skilled labor to make adjustments, regardless of the

system of measurements used, and will, therefore, be costly.

An undertaking of the dimensions of the proposed changeover to the metric system demands careful planning and direction as well as uniformity in timing and degree. A nationally planned program— Federally Coordinated—should reduce the amount of confusion, discrimination and costs imminent in a changeover.

Within the area of kitchen equipment, the units to be changed would be mass (ounces to grams), length (inches to centimeters) and temperature

(degrees Fahrenheit to degrees Celsius). Although there may be initial cost of conversion to the manufacturer, a reduction in the cost of manufacturing

and ultimately in consumer prices could result. Industry has. over the years, increased its use of the metric system and is. therefore, far ahead of the con- sumer. Some advantages to the metric system would be that it is more

exact, eliminates fractions, and ultimately would be less costly since it would do away with duplication of tooling.

From the beginning efforts should be made to eliminate some of the

meaningless descriptions such as pounds in describing the size of a freezer. Such improvements would be desirable even if our system of measurement

does not change.

While the consumer might be upset about the prospects of such a change,

it would not take too long to make the adjustment; at least, not in the area of

the kitchen equipment discussed here. It will take the efforts of government

together with industry, retail trade, and educational institutions to overcome

any mental blocks people may have, such as "too difficult." Education should begin early in school. Our mass communication system

has made names and concepts and even bad grammar "household words" in very short time. It should not be too difficult to employ it in this educational

pursuit. Charts and conversion tables, as well as government and other bulletins should be readily available. In the opinion of the author, there should be less difficulty to switch to the

metric system than to unlearn the old. In the purchase and use of kitchen

equipment described in this paper there would be little immediate advantage

to the individual consumer, and adoption of the new system could be gradual

without hampering general advancement.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 63

METRIC LABELING FOR FOODS, DRUGS, AND COSMETICS

Wallace F. Janssen

Food and Drug A dministration

Jack and Jill went up the hill To fetch a pail of water

Jack fell down and broke his crown And Jill came tumbling after.

In the days of Charles I the jackpot, the gill and the pail were common

units of measure, and measures were a base for taxation, even as some are today. A sales tax was introduced on the jackpot; at the same time its quantity was reduced, increasing the number of taxable units and perhaps to conceal the amount of the tax. Chauncey Leake tells the story in his 1 959 lecture on "Standards of Measurement and Nursery Rhymes." [ 1 ] In an absolute monarchy, the poor had no opportunity to protest; their views were reflected in back-alley satire. This Mother Goose rhyme concealed a bitter public resentment. As Leake sums it up. "In this verse are three common volume measures, one of which, the jackpot, lost its value as guaranteed by the crown, and the result was a general depreciation of stan- dards." This measure, originally used for the purchase of small amounts of

milk, honey, wine, and perhaps cereals, survives today only as a gambling

term. In the 18th century, variation and confusion in weights and measures was

a centuries-old problem, victimizing the poor and enriching the traders. One

of the chief things desired by the people was uniformity in measures, so they

would no longer be cheated in the market place. It was no accident that the

metric system originated as a planned project of the French Revolution.

This paper looks at conversion to the metric system as it may affect con- sumers of products regulated under the Federal Food. Drug and Cosmetic

Act and the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act. Particularly, it explores the

health significance to consumers of metrication.

HEALTH

The search for background for such a discussion reveals much that is in- teresting, but less which has a direct bearing on the subject. Certainly no

facts or reasons were found to conclude that changing to the metric system

would have any adverse effects on the health or safety of the U.S. consumer. On the contrary, it is clear that the metric system has made a tremendously

important contribution to public health. The value of that contribution is in- calculable, because the metric system is an integral element in all scientific

activities.
64 THE CONSUMER

As to health products and services, the United States has long since converted, very largely, to the metric system. That change was evolutionary,

rather than compulsory. It came because of the advantages of a more scientific and accurate system of measure for research, manufacturing, control

and dosage.

LABELING REGULATIONS

The Federal Food and Drug Act of 1906 required packaged foods to be

plainly and conspicuously marked in terms of weight, measure, or numerical

count. Food labeling regulations required avoirdupois weight, liquid measure based on the U.S. gallon, or dry measure in terms of the U.S. standard

bushel. But the food regulations also provided "that statement of quantity

may be in terms of metric weight or measure [2]." There was no cor- responding regulation as to drugs.

The Federal Food. Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938. which replaced the

Act of 1906. requires a quantity statement "in terms of weight, measure, or numerical count . . . which are generally used by consumers. " Regulations

spelled out the details in terms of English units, as in the 1906 Act, but per- mitted a supplementary statement in metric terms for foods and cosmetics.

As to drugs, the 1938 regulations permitted either English (apothecaries')

units or metric units [3]. The absence of a statement of quantity was defined

as misbranding, subject to the legal penalties of the Act. Manufacturers of proprietary nonprescription medicines generally elected

to give the dosage in the apothecaries system. This was also the practice of

firms which marketed prescription drugs directly to physicians, where the

dosage was well established in apothecaries' measure. A former pharmaceutical industry executive who went through the conversion recalls that its cost and inconvenience were not inordinate. "We re- calculated our manufacturing formulas, the formula statements on labels, the

dosages, and revised our package inserts. It necessitated a change of

balances and scales, and the calibration of containers, revision of labels, in- serts and copy on cartons. Beyond this there was a minimum of inconvenience. Compared to the problems of conversion in other industries, conversion in the pharmaceutical industry was a breeze."

The conversion was necessitated and hastened by the discovery and in- troduction of vitamins and hormones into medical therapy. The dosages of

such drugs were so small that when expressed in apothecaries' terms they were odd portions of grains, difficult to use and remember. It was much simpler to express the dose in milligrams.

Another factor which hastened the change was a growing trend in teaching

medical students to use the metric system. Later, when they went into practice and found apothecaries' dosage still in the catalogues and labeling of

firms which had not converted, they saw it as an inconvenience, forcing

them to make a conversion in reverse, so to speak.

Today prescription medicines and many other medical products are manufactured, controlled, labeled and administered with metric measurements.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 65

But what of the 5 gr. aspirin tablets, or the cough medicine given by the

teaspoon? For the U.S. consumer there has been no change, even though the

manufacturer may control the dosage metrically. In Britain, however,

change is beginning to have its impact. A special section of the London

Times of July 14. 1970. devoted to Britain's conversion to metrics and

decimal money, makes this evident:

Less spectacular but more insidious was the battle at the pharmacy.

Perhaps because a man's resistance is at its lowest in sickness the

victory was easiest there. But we have scarcely yet seen what it means. It means for a start that a well-tried measure has gone. No

longer do we use the dear, indeterminate teaspoon that allowed us to be lavish with the honey and sparing with the tincture of quinine.

Now the chemist issues with our prescriptions a measure that is plastic, forbidding and exact. It is marked incomprehensibly "5 ml."

For the record, a teaspoon is 4.9 ml., and a 5 gr. aspirin would be a 324

mg. aspirin.

The survey of home economists, by the Consumer Interests Committee of

the American Home Economics Association, disclosed that 23 percent of

the respondents saw no consumer advantage in such a change while 34 per- cent felt that world uniformity in measurements would have indirect

benefits. In contrast. 61 percent of the sample saw a direct advantage

through easier price comparisons in the market place.

METRIC LABELING

One may ask whether these results, especially the 61 percent figure,

reflect some wishful thinking. Certainly American consumers have had a very real need for better means to relate quantity and price, a need met only

partially by the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act of 1966. A major purpose

of that law was to enable the shopper to make an easier calculation of the

price per ounce. To that end the quantity in a package is required to be conspicuously stated, in a uniform location, and in multiples enabling the

shopper more readily to determine the unit price. A plan for voluntary stan- dardization of sizes was included to deal with cases of "undue proliferation."

The Fair Packaging and Labeling Act broadened the coverage of Federal

packaging law to all "consumer commodities." Sec. 4(a)(3) of the Act

requires use of English units, with common or decimal fractions of the avoirdupois pound, ounce, or liquid measures for any remainder from such units. Prescription drugs, however (as defined by the Federal Food. Drug and

Cosmetic Act), are specifically excluded from the definition of "consumer"

found in Sec. 10(a).

FDA regulations for the enforcement of both laws are contained in Part 1

Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations; Sec. 1.102c(b) allows either

English or metric declarations of quantity on prescription drugs. As to over-the-counter drugs, Sec. 1.1 02d required avoirdupois weight or liquid measures based on the U.S. gallon, but the strength of dosage may be

stated in either grains or milligrams.
66 THE CONSUMER

With the exceptions noted, the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act requires

quantity to be declared in the English system of measure, while permitting

by regulations the optional and additional use of a metric declaration. Section 1.8b of the FPLA regulations provides for this additional statement of

quantity. Such a dual declaration is most frequently seen in our supermarket on packages of imported foods, and occasionally on U.S. foods and

cosmetics which are packaged for export as well as domestic sale. Examples of such packages were interesting for several reasons. Exhibit 1. A package of pastry shells labeled 3% ounces and 106 grams.

This truly international package had display labeling in five languages —

English, French, Danish, German and Spanish. Obviously the English

biscuit manufacturer intended it for sale in all the countries where those

languages are spoken. It illustrates why Britain is going metric.

Exhibit 2. A package of Italian noodles with the round metric quantity of

500 grams in the upper right corner, and the English weight in the lower left corner in large type which more than complies with the U.S. Fair Packaging

and Labeling Act. It reads "16 and 10/i6 ozs. or 1 lb. and 10

/ie ozs." Exhibit 3. A can of Scottish Haggis, a kind of scrapple made from sheep

liver, oatmeal and onions. The standard No. 303 can is marked 14Vi ozs. and

410 grams.

Exhibit 4. A quarter pound tin of Twinning's Earl Grey tea. containing

1 1 3 grams, metrically.

To make mandatory this type of dual declaration would, of course, require

amendment of both the Food. Drug and Cosmetic Act and the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act.

METRICATION IN GREAT BRITAIN

At this point, the best information for predicting consumer reactions to metrication comes from Britain. The report of the Metrication Board. "Going Metric — the First Five Years" is a complete and revealing reference. But

it was in that special section of the London Times, previously quoted, that one finds the viewpoint, the "flavour." so to speak, of consumer reaction.

Dropping the imperial system should make calculations quicker and more accurate, both for humans and machines. Working in tens should also reduce the numbers of different sizes of products

required, simplifying manufacture and cutting stocks.

Education will show the fastest return on the change. Present time for teaching basic mathematics is likely to be cut by at least a third. In- stead of pupils dropping mathematics at the earliest possible moment at school, more will persevere and become the scientists and

engineers that industry needs.

Changing over is to be gradual. Each section of the economy can move

at its own pace. The front runners are those already influenced by in- ternational trade, the pharmaceutical industry, papermakers. en- gineers and others.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 67

The Government can afford to be complacent about costs — the bills will not be delivered to Whitehall. Mr. Wedgewood Benn, then Minister

of Technology, said in 1968: "There can be no questions of compensation. The costs of adopting metric weights must lie where they

fall." This may be equitable for a large company, which hopes to gain from streamlining its operations by metrication and can set off some of the cost against tax. But how much thought, 1 wonder, has

been given to the chap who runs a corner shop? He could find it dif- ficult to finance new equipment. He is also the one at the end of the

line who is going to have to explain to customers that they cannot

have pounds, pints, or yards any more. Difficulties in retailing— it is not expected that shopping will be metric until two or three years

ahead — will be eased by the trend to sell goods by number or packet

instead of weight or volume. The giant economy size and the handy

minipack have severed any connection they ever had with weights

and measures. Nobody need fear that going metric will take all the eccentricity out of

shopping. In France, where it all began, many wives find the kilo- gram, weighing roughly 2.2 lb., too big for their needs. Traders

oblige by selling foods in half kilos. They call it selling by the pound.

Actually metrication in Britain has not gone far enough, as yet, to get a good reading on its consumer impact. The major change today is the related

conversion to decimal money, which the United States has enjoyed for 180

years. It is as though the entire nation was shifting to a foreign currency, but one quickly understood. The Times article quoted said that there were

1,250,000 cash registers to be converted by February 15, 1970, when the

changeover would become final, not to mention countless pay telephones

and vending machines.

Notwithstanding the absence of compulsory legislation, the British

industries are cooperating to work out the problems of a far-reaching

economic and social change. Expecting a transition which will last many

years, they intend nevertheless to go all the way. They have compelling

reasons for conforming their measures with those of the great majority

of the other nations.

Particularly significant, from the consumer standpoint, are the initial moves toward standardization of package sizes in metric terms. Gasoline, beer and milk were singled out for more rapid change. The Metrication Board report states that all new price computing pumps installed

since October 1 , 1 968, have convertible heads to dispense in liters when the

changeover is made. Conversion of older pumps is scheduled for completion

in 1975.

Concerning milk the Board states: "Our view is that a round metric quantity as the unit of sale for milk is of special significance. It will bring the reali- ty of metrication into the home and classroom more than any other change."

The returnable pint bottle is the basic package for milk in Britain, and

there is great reluctance to change, which will require legislative action. The

industry wishes to retain the pint bottle — whether or not it be labeled 568
68 THE CONSUMER

milliliters. Metric proponents suggest a 600 ml. bottle. Many intricate questions and problems are involved in this debate.

Beer poses a similar complex of problems, as well as the conversion of the

dispensing meters used for draft beer. At a series of meetings in 1969 British food manufacturers agreed in principle on a model series of metric quantities which were to be considered in detail by different industries. As examples, 125 grams would be the replacement for XA lb., 250 grams for V2 lb., 500 grams for 1 lb., and one kilogram for

2 lbs. A working group representing Germany, France and the United Kingdom is reported to be considering the possibility of common European stan- dards.

METRICATION, PACKAGE SIZES, AND LABELING

It is the arithmetic of package sizes which is the most significant aspect of

metrication from the consumer-purchaser's point of view.

To merely place metric numbers on standard English units of measure will not simplify the consumer's arithmetic or price comparisons.

To do this on the multitude of products which are packaged in odd sizes

will further complicate what consumers fought to correct through the Fair

Packaging and Labeling Act. A dual system would be necessary in a transitional period. But only

through complete conversion and standardization of sizes can decimalized

numbering, measuring and money be fully coordinated to provide the con- sumer with substantial direct benefits.

It is apparent that consumers very frequently need quantities that are much less than a kilogram and much more than a gram. An intermediate unit or units, in decimal terms, would have practical advantages. We have long

been decimalizing the pound in weighing and marking such products as cheese and meats. The next step might be a "metric pound: of 500 grams, di- vided into 10 "metric ounces" of 50 grams. This would make possible such

quantity declarations as: 10oz.= 1 lb. = 500 grams

7 oz. = 0.7 lb. = 350 grams

9.5 oz. = 0.95 lb. = 475 grams

1 1 oz. = 1 . 1 lb. = 550 grams

Then if a product were priced at 95 cents per pound, the price per ounce

could be instantly known to be 9.5 cents. Arithmetic, or a slide rule, would

still be needed to get the unit price for non-standard, odd-size quantities.

As the Metrication Board puts it, "Metrication is an investment in effi- ciency." The United States has already gone metric in countless ways —

trend that is bound to continue. By decimalizing, for example, measuring

agricultural products by the hundred weight instead of bushels, we are

getting around some of the problems of nonscientific measures. Inevitably we must — and will — go farther.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 69

REFERENCES

[ 1] Systems of Units, Pub. No. 57, (American Association for the

Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C., 1959).

[ 2] Probably in deference to 1 866 "Act to Authorize the Use of the Metric

System of Weights and Measures." U.S. Rev. Stat. 3570.

[ 3] General Regulations for the Enforcement of the Federal Food, Drug

and Cosmetic Act, Dec. 28, 1938. 3 F.R. 3167.
70 THE CONSUMER

PURCHASING WOMEN'S READY-TO-WEAR CLOTHING

Margaret Warning

Textiles and Clothing, College ofHome Economics, Iowa State University

ijf

'J 'TIS" CTION

In the area of women's ready-to-wear apparel, definite advantages could

result if the United States of America were to change from using the custo- mary system to the modernized metric system of weights and measures. There would be a few disadvantages and problems which might disturb con- sumers, too. In this paper, the advantages of consumers are presented first, then the

disadvantages and problems are considered. Following those presentations

is a list of actions which seem necessary if the U.S. is to convert to the metric system, and in conclusion, my opinions and recommendations. Although

I have consulted manufacturers and retailers, I was invited to write as a consumer of women's apparel and the opinions expressed here are given

primarily and intentionally from a consumer's point of view.

ADVANTAGES WHICH MIGHT COME TO THE CONSUMER

WITH A CHANGE TO THE METRIC SYSTEM

Several advantages would probably benefit the consumers of women's

ready-to-wear apparel if the U.S. changed to the metric system. The most

obvious of these would be that a complete change to another system would

give an opportunity to plan carefully and to establish an efficient structure

for sizing and labeling and categorizing women's ready-to-wear apparel

which we will not undertake if we continue to use our established customary

system. This is not due to the metric system, but is an advantage which

would result from making an extensive change.

Any consumer of women's ready-to-wear apparel will agree that the

system of sizing garments for women is faulty. In the first place, the system

is inconsistent: A garment such as a dress may be marked as a size 14 in a moderately priced department of a store; a customer may try on the size 14

dress, be satisfied with the fit of the garment, but if she goes up three or four

flights to a higher priced department of the same store she may find that a

size 1 4 dress is too large for her and that she should buy a size 1 2 dress. Per- haps she goes to a department where raincoats are sold; there she may find a size 10 is large enough to fit her. If she shops for foundation garments or undergarments such as slips, she does not ask for any of these sizes 14, 12, or 10, but asks to try on garments which she designates by her waist or her

bust measurements. If she wants to purchase a brassiere, she not only asks

for a garment which corresponds to her bust measurement, but she must ask

for the correct size cup and these are designated by letters which indicate

sizes A, B, C, and D. For some garments, the consumer asks for the size she
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 71

wants by using a title such as Half Size. In shopping for shoes, she asks for

last or length in number measurements, while the widths of shoes are in- dicated by letters which are doubled or tripled to indicate a narrower shoe,

for example her shoe might be an SV2AA. Hats are sometimes sized by actual dimensions of the head circumference, for example 22 inches. Gloves are sized by the measurement of the hand around the back and palm, but the

length of the glove is given as so many buttons. With all of these ways of siz- ing and indicating the sizes of the garments, it is no wonder that customers

are confused and frustrated when they shop for women's ready-to-wear gar- ments. Our present system has become established by practice through the

years without a consistent plan. It would be theoretically possible to change

the methods of sizing and labeling without changing to the metric system, but

I doubt that this would ever be undertaken unless the U.S. changes to a completely new measurement system. A change would give the industry and

the consumer the opportunity and the motivation to plan an efficient,

uniform, and consistent way of sizing and designating sizes of garments for women.

Another advantage to consumers is that changing to a new system might

make it possible to establish the habit of indicating sizes of women's gar- ments by giving actual dimensions of some of the important measurements

such as bust measurement of a dress, waistline measurement, skirt at the

hips, length from neckline to waist at center back, skirt length from waist to hem and long sleeve length. Labeling with a few actual dimensions would be

a tremendous advantage to the consumers of women's garments over our

present ways of sizing. Only a few dimensions would be needed and they

would not be difficult to obtain because they would have been known at the

garment cutting stage. Ideally, all women's garments in the future would be

labeled with dimensions of the garments so that the consumer could know

what she was selecting rather than having to interpret sizes from some

meaningless title, from numbers which once suggested chronological age. or from letters of the alphabet.

It would be difficult to introduce the practice of sizing garments by actual

dimensions in our present market, because we are used to the established,

faulty system. If we were to change to an entirely different system of measurements, however, it might encourage us and motivate us to make a greater change than we would be willing to undertake otherwise.

An important advantage to consumers which would come about with

planned metrication is that our ways would be more like the rest of the

world. People who live in the United States seem to want to be respected

and liked by the people in other countries of the world. We have tried to establish and to maintain a favorable impression and we have been bitterly

disappointed when we find that people in other countries misunderstood our

motive, our behavior or our intentions. At present we are practically alone

in using our customary system. If we changed to the system which is used by

90 percent of the world, we would seem to be less different and more like other people, not only in their eyes, but to ourselves as well. We need to do

everything we can to encourage the sense of unity among people around the

globe. Members of our society do not want to be nor to remain ethnocentric.
72 THE CONSUMER

but this characteristic is one which we appear to have and it is a characteristic which is difficult to overcome. We need to do everything possible to correct it and to indicate to others that we are not really ethnocentric.

Changing to the system used by most of the people in the world would be one big and important first step in that direction.

To convert to the metric system to reduce ethnocentricity among members of our society would be for philosophical and psychological reasons, but

there would be a very practical advantage, too. A common system of measurements would simplify world trade and the importing and exporting of

women's garments. The U.S. has for years imported high fashion garments

from Paris. Throughout our history, some of our consumers of women's apparel have purchased garments from Europe. Today women's ready-to-wear

apparel which is produced outside the United States is imported from a wider variety of countries than was true a generation ago, but most of these

countries are using the metric system. There is also an increase in the

amount of partially constructed garments which are imported into the U.S.

from countries where metric measurements are used. For example, partially

constructed or cut pieces of garments were sent to foreign countries and re- shipped to U.S. as finished garments as follows: brassieres from Mexico,

Caribbean, and Phillipines; dresses from Mexico, Jamaica, Costa Rica;

pants, slacks, and shorts for women from Mexico; blouses from Mexico and

Trinidad; coats and jackets from Mexico and Canada. Most of these countries already use or are now converting to the metric system.

We are "good" customers in world trade, so for our convenience, gar- ments which are made in other countries are usually measured, labeled, and

described in our customary units, increasing the costs, efforts and confusion.

Even magazines and catalogs of women's garments published in other countries, but for use in the United States, have been made to suit our vocabularies, our expressions, and our convenience. Having two different inventories

and two different publications to suit customers who are using different

systems of measurement must be difficult, time-consuming, and costly and

sometimes confusing. The difficulties could be reduced if we had the same

system of measurements throughout the world. World trade is a small part of

the women's ready-to-wear industry, but it is an interesting small part. World

trade in women's ready-to-wear would be simplified if we had one international standard used by everyone.

Citizens of the U.S. are traveling to other countries in increasing numbers.

There are many complaints about difficulty in communication when

shopping for garments which are to be gifts for people at home. If all countries used the same system, there would be fewer mistakes in selection. A

fifth advantage if we were to change to the metric system would be that shopping in foreign markets would become more familiar and less difficult. Another advantage of a change to the metric system would benefit a group

of people directly, and consumers of women's ready-to-wear indirectly:

Many people who are employed in the United States in the apparel industry

learned to do their work in other countries where the metric system is used.

They have learned to design, to create, to drape, to cut, to construct gar- ments using the metric system. They are delayed and disturbed when they
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 73

have to work with unfamiliar tools and measuring devices and measurements. If we used the same system, the transfer of these highly skilled and

experienced and valuable workers would be less difficult. Another group of people, although a much smaller number and less likely to remain as a permanent part of our society, are the international students

whose learning is sometimes delayed because of having to try to learn our customary system. For example, an instructor from a South American

University indicated that her greatest difficulty in a pattern drafting class in the U.S. was in learning to use the customary measurements and tools rather

than the metric to which she is accustomed and which she finds more accurate for her use. This brings us to the question of educating groups of our

people in the U.S.

Educating the children in our society to be intelligent consumers would be more satisfactory if we were to change to the metric system, because it is based on tens and is a logical, decimal system. A young person could be

taught to make calculations easily so the comparing of prices and quantities

is quickly understood. With our present system, the units of measurement

must be thoroughly memorized and even then the calculations are more dif- ficult to carry out as a young consumer shops and tries to compare values.

Some ethnic groups, for example, some of the migrant workers near the

southwestern borders of the U.S.. have found learning to be intelligent con- sumers very difficult because of our complicated customary system of measurements. Because the costs of converting are relatively slight in the women's readyto-wear area, the benefits of change would far outweigh the costs of changing

to the metric system. For consumers, about the only changes which would

be necessary would be to become familiar with units for measuring lengths.

The tools for fitting and altering women's ready-to-wear garments could

easily be replaced with very small expense: just a metric tape measure, a hem marker, and a meter stick. Even people who are not enthusiastic about changing to the metric

system, because of the difficulties in relearning for the adult consumers in our society or because of the costs encountered in making the changes, believe that change to the metric system is inevitable. If this is true and the

change is coming sometime, then the sooner we undertake making the

change, the better for the consumers. We might as well start right away as soon as careful plans are made for what we want to accomplish; then let us carry out the plans for a gradual, efficient change to the metric system and a convenient, useful structure for sizing and labeling women's ready-to-wear.

DISADVANTAGES AND PROBLEMS IN CHANGING TO

THE METRIC SYSTEM

The greatest problem is not in the metric system itself, but is the

psychological difficulty of adjusting to something unfamiliar and different. Adults do not like to change. Even though we recognize that our customary

system is faulty, we are used to it. accept it. and are content to go on in the

habitual manner.
74 THE CONSUMER

It is considered desirable for women in our society to be small, at least to be slender, and we associate small measurements with beauty. That is why

women are flattered and pleased when they think they wear smaller sizes

because of sizing in the "better dress" departments. The measurements in centimeters rather than inches would sound large to women, as well as

unfamiliar. They may find this psychologically difficult to accept and to become accustomed to, but the adjustment would not require a very long

period of time.

For children, learning the metric system would have great advantages; for the older people in our society a good plan for educating them would be

absolutely essential. Psychologists and educators as well as researchers

would be needed to bring about a successful change if we convert to the

metric system.

The units of measurement for lengths are not exactly the same in the metric and customary, so some slight changes may have to be decided upon to make the use of round numbers possible. For example, a pair of shoe laces now measures 22 inches. In metric units should the laces be made 56 centimeters long? Maybe 50, 60. or 55 centimeters would be the best length.

Making these decisions and setting standards for women's ready-to-wear

would be a time-consuming, possibly controversial, and certainly an essential part of a successful change to the metric system.

It appears that the costs of converting would not be as great in women's

ready-to-wear apparel as they may be in some areas. There would be some

increases in cost, however, and perhaps some discarding and waste, so the costs of garments may have to go up in the future to cover the costs of the

changes. In the long run, the metric system would cause costs of operation

to be less, but it may be hard for consumers to look that far ahead. Education

of consumers would be important in this respect, too. Until the change to metric is complete, there is a chance for some confusion and misunderstanding. With careful planning for the women's ready-to- wear industry to change over, this confusion could be kept to a minimum and

should not prove to be a serious difficulty. In talking to various people about the possible advantages and disadvantages of changing to the metric system, it was surprising to learn that many of our citizens are not aware of the possible change. This would in- dicate that knowledge about the possibilities and problems is not widespread

throughout our population. People in general and especially people who are involved in producing, distributing, and consuming women's ready-to-wear,

must be alerted and informed about the imminent change, if we are to have

the benefit of their thinking and planning for the future.

ACTIONS CONCERNED WITH PURCHASING WOMEN'S

READY-TO-WEAR WHICH WILL BE NEEDED IF THE

UNITED STATES CHANGES TO THE METRIC SYSTEM

1. Study the procedures used and the results of the procedures in countries such as Great Britain and parts of Africa which have recently con-
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 75

verted to the metric system, to learn what to do and what to avoid in the

United States.

2. Plan ways of motivating consumers, producers, and distributors of

women's ready-to-wear to WANT to make the changes which are needed.

3. Agree on how sizes are to be indicated on labeling of women's gar- ments. Ideally, specific dimensions would be shown in metric units of length.

4. Decide on numbers and variety of sizes of garments to offer on the

retail market.

5. Change terminology in books, magazines, newspapers, mail-order

catalogs and similar publications.

6. Encourage individuals to re-educate themselves to use metric units of

measurement.

7. Motivate students, faculties, and associates to learn to use metric units

of measurement quickly and easily.

8. Plan for the retraining of sales people and for their practice in using the

new metric terms and units of measurements.

9. Plan to educate all parts of our society to be familiar with units, to know the metric system and to practice using it until they become

thoroughly familiar with the metric system. Methods used to educate various

groups in our society should be varied and appropriate.

10. Work on standards and agree on specific dimensions of garments and

on parts of garments and ready-to-wear. This may include standards for materials used in the manufacturing of garments.

1 1. Set policy for rounding off when units are not exactly the same in the

metric and the customary system.

12. Plan for a gradual, but steady changeover to metric. Have a reasonable date set by which the change is to be completed.

426-991 OL - 71 - 6
76 THE CONSUMER

PURCHASING CHILDREN'S CLOTHING

(Mrs.) Elsie K. Williams

Textiles and Clothing, College ofHome Economics, Iowa State University

INTRODUCTION

For this study, children's clothing has been interpreted as wearing apparel

for children from birth through adolescence, to include the entire period of

physical growth and development, with full realization of an appreciation for the other areas of personal development which correlate with and are af- fected by physical growth: namely social, physiological and emotional

development. It is specifically concerned with ready-to-wear.

Various methods of obtaining information were used, including a search

for literature on the subject that might serve as guidelines. It was concluded

from an almost fruitless effort that meaningful studies of the impact and

implications of the United States' adoption of the metric system for sizing

of children's clothing are nonexistent.

Other methods used for compiling information were: conferences with

managers and owners of retail stores directly involved with the sale of chil- dren's ready-to-wear; correspondence with various individuals concerned

with the clothing industry, both on the manufacturing and distribution level; informal conversations with consumers of different ages with varying

backgrounds of experience and education, but who are all presently and actively involved with purchasing children's clothing; conferences with professionally employed people in textiles and clothing, both in education and busi- ness; conferences with students at Iowa State University who are majors in textiles and clothing and have had an opportunity to participate in a workstudy program conducted cooperatively by the university and various retail- stores; and assistance by two graduate students in their preliminary efforts

to: ( 1 ) study and evaluate present methods used for sizing children's clothing

in the United States and (2) study responses of a group of high school girls

enrolled in a class in home economics. (These studies are still in process and no definitive results are available at the present time.)

PRESENT IMPACT

The present impact of the increasing worldwide and domestic use of the

metric system is minimal on the consumer of children's clothing. This

generalization is based on the following facts:

(1) For all practical purposes children's clothing on the retail market in the

United States is sized by the customary system. This is true whether the clothing is produced domestically or is foreign

made. Foreign made clothing sizes are converted to the English

system before they are sent to the United States.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 77

(2) Few consumers have had any contact with children's clothing sized by

the metric system, so obviously they have not considered the

possibility of the use of the metric system of sizing children's

clothing, much less given any thought to the possible advantages or disadvantages of such a system of sizing.

(3) A small percentage of individuals who have had an opportunity to purchase children's clothing in countries outside of the United

States have been confronted with the metric system in clothing

sizing. Generally, the sales person is able to make the conversion for them and guide them into buying the correct size. This

is another example of America's expecting people from other

countries to bridge the gaps in communication rather than doing

it themselves.

CURRENT SIZING PRACTICES

In no consumer activity is there greater variety and inconsistency in in- dicating size than there is in the area of clothing. Vague terms as "small."

"medium" and "large" (or the letters S. M. L) are common for designating

sizes such as: 0. 3. 6, 12. or 18 months. Another manufacturer may choose

0, Vz, \,\Vi for garments with comparable dimensions. To add to the confusion, a size "12 months" is not necessarily the same as size "1 year."

The letter "X" is frequently used to indicate an "in-between" size, such

as in a size range of 1 to 3X.

Ambiguous numbers which have no relationship to age may also be used

to indicate size. A prime example is the sizing of shoes with a range of sizes

from 00 to 1 3 , with the age of the child being fitted almost totally unrelated, ex- cept for the fact that the larger the number, the larger the shoe. Further clas- sification is made for width by such terms as narrow, medium, or wide. Some

manufacturers choose to designate width by letters such as A. B. C. From

experience, consumers learn that A is comparable to "narrow." B is comparable to "medium." and C means "wide." More specific and satisfactory

size indications for clothing are based on actual body dimensions. These are sometimes used in addition to vague descriptive terms or abbreviations

(small, medium and large or S. M. L). or they may be used by themselves.

The body dimensions used to indicate size are usually those critical for the

particular garment, such as girth for two piece pajamas and training panties,

and inseam leg length on creepers or slacks and trousers. Clothing for infants and toddlers is often sized with an arbitrary letter or number accompanied by a height and weight chart based on the recommendation of the U.S. Department of Commerce [1]. This probably is the best

method of size marking presently in use. Similar standards have been

developed for Boys. Girls, and Sub-Teen and Teen-age girls, but rarely, if ever, are clothes for these age groups sized by height and weight.

Each manufacturer also classifies its garments for individual types. In small children's sizes the designation is frequently Infants. Babies. Toddlers,

and Children. For boys the classification may be regular, slim, husky or

robust. Girls' classifications may be regular and chubbie. As the youngster
78 THE CONSUMER

approaches adolescence and begins to experience rapid change in body pro- portions and size, an entirely new classification becomes necessary. For

girls, the range may be pre-teen, sub-teen, teen, hi-teen. junior, etc. Boys

may be designated as student or prep. Some numbers or letters overlap in each type classification, so it would be possible — even likely — that a baby,

his toddler sibling, his teenage sister and his mother could all be fitted in a

"size 3" in various garments.

More examples of the wide range of sizing techniques commonly practiced in the United States could be cited, but those listed should adequately

illustrate the inconsistency and confusion that exists. In an attempt to get some consumer reactions to the system of sizing

presently in the use in the United States, mothers of children in various age

groups were interviewed. When they were asked if they felt the present

system of sizing was adequate, the general reaction was one of sur- prise—they really hadn't thought much about it. They were used to it and ac- cepted it. Guided by a few leading questions and given time for a little deliberation, they could cite specific instances of inconsistency and confusion, but had given little consideration to changes that would make for improvement. When asked if they felt a change to a metric system of sizing

would be a good idea, a very small percentage of homemakers interviewed

had considered the possibility but none were familiar enough with what such

a change would involve to have a firm opinion. Those who were aware of the

possibility of a change had obtained their information through reading arti- cles recently published in newspapers and popular magazines.

These discussions with homemakers were on a very limited basis, and

while their reactions may be typical of U.S. consumers of clothing, it would

suggest that a broad scientific study would be needed in order to determine

how to begin an effective educational program for the consumer on the metric system of sizing.

Correspondence and discussions with people in the clothing industry at both the retail and manufacturing levels indicated that the industry has not progressed much beyond the awareness state in its consideration of what a change to the metric system in the United States would involve.

There are many instances of garments being produced in other countries

for the United States market, but all necessary conversions and markings of

sizing are done prior to their arrival in the United States. A few large companies have retail outlets outside the United States. Sears. Roebuck and Co..

for example, has stores in Mexico and Central America. "Garments for

these locations are manufactured to metric specifications issued by Sears

and also purchased on the open market — all using metric dimensions [2]."

POSSIBLE FUTURE EFFECTS OF METRICATION

As indicated previously, at the present time the use of the metric system

for sizing clothing in the United States is practically non-existent; nor is there any indication of a trend toward a voluntary adoption of the metric

system by the industry.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 79

On this basis, it would appear that the clothing consumer in the U.S. will not be affected to any great extent by an increasing worldwide and domestic

use of the metric system in the near future if no specific program of coordination or encouragement is undertaken by the Federal Government.

If the United States were to change to predominant use of the metric

system, however, it would seem logical to change to a labeling system where

size was indicated by critical body dimensions. With such a uniform system,

it is conceivable that a child's shoes and socks, or his undershorts and slacks

could be a consistent size regardless of manufacturer source. Sizing clothing is a unique problem, inasmuch as people are not of stan- dard size and proportions. Therefore, it is possible that a change to the metric system could be a disservice to the consumer if we did not retain the essential advantages of our present system. It would be important to the con- sumer to retain typical classifications of certain garments. These serve as a valuable guide to proper fit, but the size label should also include vital body

dimensions. For example, a 13-year-old girl could identify her type (subteen, pre-teen, or teen) by comparing her body size and proportion to type

descriptions, (such as those used by the pattern companies), but if actual size labeling was done in terms of specific body dimensions, it would undoubtedly take much of the guesswork out of fitting and help eliminate costly

mistakes or extra time required by both the consumer and retail salesperson

in finding the correct size by trial and error. Neither would it be entirely beneficial to force the clothing industry to standardize sizes. Many manufacturers use the Recommended Commercial

Standards of the United States Department of Commerce as a guide in their

sizing system, but they reserve the right to adapt these standards to their

market [ 3] . Style is an essential factor in the "cut" of a garment, and style is important in sales. For example, one brand of western jeans in the U.S. is famous for its trim style of fit. If the manufacturer had to conform to some

standard dimensions set by the industry, his unique "style" would be lost. A

comment such as: "I always buy {brand name) for my daughter. It is the

only one that fits her properly," is not uncommon. It is conceivable that standardization of garment sizing could result in some individuals being unable to ever buy a well-fitted garment. If size could be stated in terms of body

dimensions, comparison of brands could be made more easily, quickly, and

accurately.

If the United States should change to the metric system, it would be in- evitable that some consumer resistance and confusion would be involved,

particularly during the early period of changeover, when it is probable that garments would be available on the retail market marked by either system.

Undoubtedly the greatest resistance to a change would be among older consumers who are used to and are generally satisfied with the "status quo,"

and have not had and will probably never have the opportunity to learn the

metric system in a formal educational situation. Both advantages and disadvantages are foreseeable in a changeover from

the English system to the metric system of sizing.

The main disadvantages would undoubtedly be economic and psychological. Some predict that the greatest obstacle to be overcome would be human
80 THE CONSUMER

resistance to change. Learning, unlearning and relearning is always a large

undertaking and on a nationwide scale it would be even more momentous.

Undoubtedly the lion's share of the burden of change would fall on the in- dustry itself: in equipment changes, training and retraining personnel, and

cost. The consumer would pay ultimately, but how much and for how long,

and whether the final result would be more economical for consumers are questions presently unanswerable.

The permanent advantages, however, would appear to outweigh any

short-term disadvantages.

If a change to the metric system should become mandatory, it would pro- vide the clothing industry with the need to totally rethink and re-evaluate

present sizing practices and to make changes that could result in a more

uniform and simplified system. Changing to the metric system would therefore provide the opportunity to "wipe the slate clean" and make a fresh start. Obviously, the same total overhaul could be done with our present system,

but it seems highly unlikely that the industry would voluntarily choose to make sweeping changes as long as the customary system is in effect. The children's clothing market would probably benefit more by a specific

and uniform system of sizing than would any other segment of the clothing

industry for two particular reasons: ( 1 ) A higher percentage of clothing is purchased as gifts for infants and children than for adults [4] , and thus there

is more chance of costly errors in selecting the needed size, and (2) many articles of clothing for infants and children are prepackaged and purchased

without trying on, again increasing the possibility of choosing the wrong size. A sizing system that would reduce the number of errors made in size selec- tion would result in direct savings in time and money as well as greater con- sumer satisfactions.

There is a trend toward self-service in all segments of the retail market and

the clothing market is no exception. Labor costs and the rapid turnover in sales personnel, as well as inadequately trained personnel, are among the reasons for this trend. The advantages of improved methods of size labeling

in a self-service market are obvious.

A more adequate system of marking for clothing sizes should also result in a more efficient operation for mail order companies and services. There

could be substantial savings in time, money and frustration if consumers

could reduce the number of errors in selection of sizes. A thorough, well-planned and well-executed educational program

designed to familiarize the consumer with the adopted system for size marking would be essential prior to the appearance on the retail market of any ar- ticles of clothing marked by the new system. An even more vigorous and

thorough training program would have to occur with retailers and retail sales people. Well-informed sales people, able to explain to the consumer how

metric sizes compare to the customary sizes, could take much of the anxiety out of a new system of sizing for a large majority of consumers. Conversion charts containing the minimum of essential information, conveniently located for easy reference by both the sales person and the

customer would be essential. A number of charts might be needed, depending upon the type of garment being sold. Earlier in this paper the wide variety
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 81

of sizing systems presently in use was described. Conversion charts would

have to relate directly to the type of garment in question, and the size marking system presently in use. One chart that would attempt to show all size

classifications presently in use with the metric equivalent for each would be

overwhelmingly complicated.

Retaining present type classification of garments would have an additional

advantage of helping the consumer bridge the association between the old

and the new. For example, a conversion chart would still identify garments

by types with the familiar terms of Infants, Babies, Toddlers and Children,

but would also include the height and weight associated with each — both in the English system and the metric system.

The clothing consumer would have to replace only a minimum of equipment as a result of a change to the metric system of sizing. A meter stick and

a metric tape, each available for approximately a dollar, would provide the consumer with the necessary equipment to take the body measurements

needed as guides for selecting correct clothing sizes. SUMMARY

The advantages of a change to the metric system of sizing appear to out- weigh the disadvantages. Consumer resistance could be reduced to a minimum if the changeover at the retail level could be made in the shortest

possible period of time, so that the confusion of having both systems in use

concurrently will not be prolonged. Previous to the actual change, an all-out effort would be needed to educate and inform consumers as the industry

retools and re-educates.

REFERENCES

[ 1] U.S. Department of Commerce, "Recommended Commercial

Standards on Body Measurements for the Sizing of Apparel for Infants,

Babies, Toddlers and Children." Pub. TS-5 184.

[2] Lowrey, Wm. III., Sears, Roebuck & Company, personal letter, Sept.

16, 1970.

[ 3] Marques, J. E., "A Comparative Study of Standards for Sizing

Children's Garments." M.S. thesis. Texas Women's University,

Denton, Texas, 1957.

[4] Brew, M. L., O'Leary, R. R., and Dean, L. "Family Clothing

Inventories and Purchases," Agri. Inf. Bui. No. 148. Household

Economics Research Branch, Agri. Research Service, U.S. Dept. of

Agriculture, April, 1956, p. 4.
82 THE CONSUMER

PURCHASING MEN'S CLOTHING

Margaret Boyle Conte

Textiles and Clothing, School ofHome Economics, Purdue University

PRESENT STATUS

The present status of the consumer in purchasing men's clothing seems

not to be threatened by customary units nor the international system. A sur- vey of several men's wear shops revealed that domestic garments are labeled

in customary sizes as defined by the National Bureau of Standards and imported garments are marked in like manner. Some American sizes relate to body measurements, actual neck or chest girth in inches. Others are symbolic of a series of specified component measurements to which a "size symbol" is assigned.

If the country of origin for the cutting and manufacture of the clothing is on the metric system, the ultimate consumer is unaware of the conversion

accomplished for him. Scandinavian sweaters are marked S, M, and L in accordance with American standards. Wool jersey slacks from Italy are sized by inseam and waist measurements. One store buyer who assisted with

this paper indicated that a line of suits from Spain are not only marked for U.S. shops, but they are cut as a specific line for export to the United

States according to the larger body structure of the American male. The

same buyer indicated that none of the metric measurements, conversions,

etc. appear on the orders, invoices, or other papers related to the wholesale

purchase.

The survey of the retail market for men's wear revealed a predilection for "honest" sizing which may not exist in women's wear. A 36 Long or 38

Short jacket was marked without obvious value judgment on stature. No

symbolic colors, letters or other codes were found. The conclusion might be

that there is nothing threatening about a size 36 Medium or 40 Short.

EFFECTS OF METRICATION

Since the purchase of men's clothing by consumers revealed no problems

related to size and measurement, it seemed important to identify possible dif- ficulties at the production level. Although the National Metric Study Conference Program included response from consumer-related industry at the

meeting of September 21-25, the position of the consumer in the market

place is contingent on the garment industry.

Two large manufacturers in Chicago revealed that metrication is not an

issue at the moment. Mr. William White of Hart, Schaffner, and Marx re- ported that they utilize the decimal inch which they find advantageous in computer applications. Mr. Dubrow of Kuppenheirner said that metrication

is probably in future planning at management levels, but he does not foresee

immediate impact in pattern grading, cutting and assembly.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 83

Apparently it remains for the men's wear industry to clarify the place of

metrication in that segment and to interpret results to the retailer and con- sumer. Various aspects of costs of new instrumentation and procedures

should be analyzed at all levels. "The apparel industry thinks the number of sizes offered under the metric

system will be a principal disadvantage among other problems, but feels the

change should be made eventually despite the difficulties involved," was re- ported at the Consumer-Related Industry Conference. Members reported concern about retraining personnel, adjusting sizes, record keeping, storage,

and conversion of tools and fittings [ 1]

Projections on metrication include contemplation of a time table for implementation rather than acceptance or rejection of the concept. A bilingual

system, hard conversion, or status quo are the alternatives. At the point of consumer purchase of men's clothing there appears to be no advantage to a prolonged period of use of the customary units in combination with metric

units. As has been stated, conversion from one system to another is easily

accomplished as the market now exists. Labels are so printed. Whether the

numbers of sizes offered could be reduced concurrently with metrication is debatable. Fewer choices to the consumer might actually decrease satisfaction. Recent anthropometric studies of American males by the U.S. Space

unit at Natick reinforce the diversity of the human condition as well as in- creased size in general over previous surveys. Until the geneticists stan- dardize the male form, the cause for increased standardization of sizes seems to have little enthusiastic support. David Carlin in Alteration of

Men's Clothing [2] reaffirms this: "The best experience and training a fitter can have is in the custom tailoring field where partially finished garments are

tried on men of every shape and size and adjustments are made." Metrication, hard or soft, would probably exert minimal detriment to the consumer

of men's clothing. Compared to effects from other consumer industries it should be relatively nonexistent.

From the Consumer-Related Industry Conference comes the support of

soft metrication in the initial stages. Donald F. Martin, director of research.

National Association of Wholesale Distributors, recommends serious consideration of empirical evidence before schemes for hard metrication are developed [3]

During the bilingual period many devices and tools could be developed to aid retailers and consumers. Presently banks, travel agencies, and other in- terested organizations print conversion charts for those who will travel and

shop in metric system countries. These may be utilized to show that the

men's size 7 hat is in fact a 6% in England and 56 in Europe. His size 10 shoe

is a 9Vi in England and 44 in Europe. It is disconcerting in the space age to apply an assortment of measures to the male form as geographic boundaries

change. Let us call a metric module a metric module and get on with it. REFERENCES

[ 1] "Changing to Metric System Not Urgent, U.S. is Told," Daily News

Record, Friday September 25, 1970.
THE CONSUMER

David Carlin, Alteration ofMen's Clothing, Fairchild Publications,

Inc., New York, 1967.

"Wholesale and Retail Representatives See Metric Base Beneficial for

U.S. ," Daily News Record, Tuesday, September 22, 1970.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 85

HOME SEWING, YARD GOODS AND PATTERNS

Mildred Graves Ryan

The McCall Pattern Company

INTRODUCTION

This paper considers the home sewer from the point at which she selects her pattern through the steps which must be taken to complete the garment

to a wearable state. The segments of the sewing industry checked were:

Patterns Fabrics

Notions

Measuring Tools

Sewing Equipment

The methods used to obtain this information were:

Interviews with home sewers, sewing industry personnel, educational and

technical experts, persons who have used both methods of measurement.

Thorough study of both measuring methods by two members of McCalFs

Meg Carter Service who work with consumers.

Personal experience of over 40 years in the teaching of sewing, writing of

books and articles on the subject, consultant to manufacturers,

educational director, head of product development and use of

the metric system in Brazil.

USE OF THE METRIC SYSTEM BY THE HOME SEWER

In general, the adult home sewer is not familiar with the metric system.

Her look is one of bewilderment when questioned about it. Unless she has

lived in a foreign country where the metric system is used, she has had no

contact with it. She has not even wondered why a "cm" is printed in the seam allowance of a pattern. She thinks only in inches and yards.

The student who sews is introduced to the metric system in science and

mathematics classes but usually does not apply the knowledge to sewing.

She is aware that another measuring system exists but has not really used it or considered it important.

Some of the items which the home sewer uses are made according to metric units or according to metric engineering standards; however, at the point

at which she purchases and uses them, she thinks of them only in inches and

yards. She may use trimmings, buttons, buckles, fabrics, ribbons and sewing

machines that have been manufactured in countries using the metric system

and have, therefore, been made according to metric engineering standards.

For instance, Schiffli machines which are used in this country to make some
86 THE CONSUMER

embroidered trims would be based on the metric system. However, these

products are offered to the home sewer in inches and yards.

SYSTEM OF UNITS PRESENTLY USED IN HOME SEWING

1. Patterns: Inches are used to indicate body measurements for the vari- ous pattern sizes. The body measurements established as a standard are summarized into a shorter and more useful expression called a size (fig. 4). Widths of various parts of the garment — hem widths, width at bottom of

pants — are expressed in inches.

2. Fabric: Fabric is produced in a variety of widths expressed in inches.

Some of the widths most often used are 35-36", 44-45", 54", 56", 58", 60". Fabric is purchased in lengths according to yards and eighths of yards: V%, Va, %, Vi, %, % and %. Knit fabrics are classified by weight in ounces, but

are purchased by the home sewer in yards.

3. Notions:

a. Thread is measured and labeled by yards but is purchased by the spool.

The thread weight is also marked on the spool. The number

used represents the number of yards of thread which is spun

from a pound of cotton.

b. Seam tapes and bindings: The width is measured in inches and fractions

of inches and when the width is labeled, it is labeled acFIGURE 6

PATTERN SIZING CHART

I

e

l

s

f

!

BODY MEASUREMENT CHART

as established by the Pattern Fashion Industry

Misses' patterns aie designed (of a well piopoitioned. and

developed figure about 5 5 to 5 6' without shoes

Silt 6 ! 10 12 14 16 19

Bust 30': 31", 32"! 34 3l 3l 40~

22 23 24 25", 27 29 31 32", 33", 34", 36 38 40 42

ISVi 15'. 16 16". 16", 16>. 17

Waist

H,p Back Waist Length MISS PETITE

This new sue lange is designed

toi the shorter Miss figure, about

5

2' 1o 53' without shoes

6mp Omp lOmp 12mp 14mp 16mp

31', 32", 34 36 38

23", 24", 26 27', 29",

33", 34', 36 38 40

14'. 15 15". 15', 15'i

Bust Waist

Hip Back Waist Length JUNIOR

Junioi patterns aie designed tor a well proportioned, shoitei waisted tigure. about 5

4' to 5 5 without shoes

Size

Bust

Waist

Hip Back Waist Length

30 31 32 33", 35 37 21", 22", 23", 24', 26 28

32 33 34 35", 37 39

15 15". 15", 15». 16 16".

WOMEN'S

Women's patterns aie designed lor the larger, more tully mature

figure, about 5 5" to 5

6' without shoes

Size 31 40 42 44 46 41 50

Bust 4? 44 46 48 5n 52 54

Waisf 34 36 38 40", 43 45", 48

' Hip 44 46 48 50 52 54 56

Back Waist Length 17V. 17(4 17V, 17* 17V. 17% 18 HALF- SIZE

Halt size patterns are lor a tully developed figure with a short backwaist length Waist and hip are larger in proportion to bust than othei figure types, about 5

2' to 5 3" without shoes. Sue 10V, 12V, 14'/, 16V, l«v, 20V, 22", 24V,

f

1

i

Bust

Waist

Hip Back Waist Length

33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47

26 28 30 32 34 36", 39 41V,

35 37 39 41 43 45", 48 50V,

15 15". 15", ISr. 15% 16 16V. 16V. JUNIOR PETITE

Junior Petile patterns aie designed (oi a well pioporlioned,

petite figure, about 5 to 5

1' without shoes

Sire 3ip Sip 7jp 9ip i i jp nip

Bust 30", 31 32 33 34 35

Waist 22 22", 23", 24", 25", 26",

Hip 31V, 32 33 34 35 36

Back Waist Length 14 14". 14V, 14V. 15 15V<
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 87

FIGURE 7

BUTTON SIZING CHART

BUTTON GAUGE

The Button Gauge is a fast and easy way to determine the size of a button. The size is measured in "lines"— 40 lines equal one inch. To obtain the correct size required, measure the length of the buttonhole and refer to the sizes below to find the nearest corresponding measurement or line.

1. Line 20 or 24—general size for shirts and shirtwaist dresses.

HELPFUL MEASURING HINTS:

2. Line 30—size of a dime. 4. Line 40—size of a quarter. Line 36—size of a nickel, 5. Line 60—size of a silver dollar.

cordingly. These tapes are purchased in yards and eighths of

yards. They are labeled in yards when pre-packaged.

c. Zippers are measured and labeled in inches.

d. Buttons are classified by "lines." In the English System, there are 40

lines to 1 inch. Buttons are often labeled in both lines and inches

(fig. 5). e. Buckles are measured by their widths (the part the belt slides through) in inches.

f. Trimmings include lace, ruffling, braid, embroidered trims, rick-rack,

novelty trims, edging. These trimmings are purchased by yards

and eighths of yards. Often the width of trims is determined by

what the designer feels is right for the fashion "look" of that particular season, rather than some scale of measurements. As

a result, the width of trims is usually not labeled. When widths

are labeled, they are expressed in inches and fractions of inches.

g. Ribbon widths are designated in the industry by "width numbers;" 1 Vi, 2,

3, 5, 7, 9, 16, and 40 are widely used. These numbers have their

base in the French system of "lignes" which is probably based on the metric system (though we have not been able to determine the relationship). When labeled, the widths are expressed

in "width numbers" (fig. 6). Ordinarily, ribbon is purchased in yards and eighths of yards. Pre-packaged ribbon is labeled in either yards or feet.
88 THE CONSUMER

h. Hooks and eyes, snaps: The traditional measurement system used for

these items does not seem to be related to the English or the

metric system. Snaps are available in the following sizes: 4/0,

3/0, 2/0, 0, 1 , 2, 3, 4. Hooks are sizes: 0, 1 , 2, 3.

i. Elastic widths are marked in inches and fractions, while lengths are marked in yards.

4. Measuring Devices: Measuring tools used by the home sewer are marked according to the English System. The units most frequently marked

are eighths of inches, inches, feet and yards.

5. Sewing Equipment:

a. Sewing machines have stitch length regulators and seam width guide

lines. These markings are calibrated in inches but may not be

labeled as such. Stitch length is sometimes referred to by numbers indicating a progression from large to small stitches. But- tonhole templates are labeled in inches and fractions of inches.

b. Needles and pins: The needle number indicates diameter, but in general,

the length and diameter are related. In sewing machine needles,

the number refers to diameter. Pins are measured in sixteenths

of an inch and the size number indicates the number of six- teenths. The diameter is referred to by the names of the pin:

pleating, silk, dressmaker, and bank.

c. Scissors and shears are labeled by the length of the blade in inches.

FIGURE 8

RIBBON SIZING CHART

RIBBON

WIDTH

FRENCH LIGNE

EQUIVALENTS

No. 1 1/2 warn 3 1/2

No. 3 ~z:r~~: 7 HHHHI 11

17

25
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 89

Where the home sewer refers to the various items by their specific units and

sizes, she is aided by her familiarity with the concepts these units represent.

The home sewer understands the English system as it relates to the sewing

in which she is involved. Through her experience in sewing she develops

fairly accurate concepts in her own mind as to the length of a yard, the size

of a seam allowance (%"), and other measurements which she frequently uses

in sewing. She also develops a concept of the size and the shape of a person

who wears a particular pattern size. The home sewer does not always use the units and sizes which the industry applies to the various items used in sewing, but instead follows directions

which are placed on the pattern envelope for her guidance.

The pattern envelope contains information as to the amount of fabric and

the size, lengths, and amounts of notions used for the particular garment.

The home sewer's own knowledge and the information on the pattern en- velope are used as guides in selecting the items she purchases to complete

her garment. Packaging of certain items allows her to buy without thought of

measurement in inches or yards.

1 . Patterns: The home sewer compares her measurements in inches to the

measurements on the Body Measurement Chart, also expressed in inches.

She understands that if she takes the measurements listed on the chart and

selects the size that is nearest to those measurements, she will achieve the

best fit for her figure. She has some idea of the extent she will need to alter her pattern where her measurements and the measurements on the Body

Measurement Chart do not coincide. She may or may not use the measure- ments listed for the finished lengths and widths of garments.

2. Fabrics: In most cases, the home sewer follows the yardage requirements listed on the pattern envelope. Since fabric is sold in yards and eighths

of yards, this is the only way she purchases it. Many home sewers have

developed a "feel" for the amount of fabric in yards needed for various types

of garments. This "feel" is gained through her experience in selecting fabric for previous sewing projects and through her familiarity with concepts of

length in yards. Although knits are classified by weight in the industry, the

home sewer does not deal with this concept. She handles the fabric to deter- mine its suitability for her use.

3. Notions:

a. Thread is purchased by the spool. The home sewer may or may not know

how much thread is on the spool, but many home sewers learn

how many spools are required for a particular garment. She may

also know that it is more economical to buy a large 500 yard

spool in basic colors; the smaller 125 yard spool in unusual

colors. She is probably aware that thread is available in different degrees of fine- ness, but probably does not know anything about the measurement system

used to indicate the fineness. She may know that #650 is the size thread she

most often uses and will probably realize that there is a Heavy Duty thread

as well as a Carpet or Button thread and will know when it is appropriate to use them.
90 THE CONSUMER

b. Seam tapes and bindings: These are usually pre-packaged and these

packages are labeled by length in yards. In most cases the home

sewer follows the width and length suggestions listed on the pat- tern envelope. She will buy the number of packages which cor- respond to the amount listed or the amount she feels she needs.

c. Zippers: In most cases the home sewer buys her zippers in the length (in

inches) listed on the pattern envelope. Because of her familiari- ty with inches she has a concept of the various zipper lengths.

She knows, too, that zippers of certain lengths will be used in certain places on the garment.

d. Buttons: "Lines" is a term used mainly within the industry. Button sizes are commonly referred to by inches and fractions of inches

under the "suggested notions" section of the pattern envelope.

At least one pattern company uses both inches and lines. The

home sewer is more likely to refer to the button size by inches

than by lines because of her familiarity with the inch.

e. Buckles: The home sewer selects her buckles by the width marked in inches or by selecting the buckle size that looks best to her.

f. Trimmings purchased by length: Pattern envelopes list suggested

trimmings by inches and fractions for their widths and by yards

for their lengths. The home sewer will then buy the amount of

trim suggested on the pattern envelope. She may select the

width suggested or she may use her own judgment. She will tend

to rely on her own feeling about what will look good on her gar- ment rather than to consult the label to see what the width of the

trim is; the look is more important than the measurement.

g. Ribbon: Width number designations for ribbon are used mainly within the

industry. The home sewer either refers to the pattern envelope

which lists the width in inches and length in yards for the

required ribbon, or she makes her own decision on the width

based on what she thinks looks best. If for some reason she

must use a ribbon of a particular width and no other width will do, she will use inches and fractions of inches to make her selection.

h. Hooks, eyes and snaps: Some pattern envelopes list the sizes of snaps

and hooks and eyes to be used. In other cases, the home sewer

selects what looks best for her use.

i. Elastic: The home sewer buys the width suggested and the number of

packages needed to equal the amount suggested on the pattern

envelope.

4. Sewing Equipment:

a. Sewing machine: The seam width markings on the sewing machine are an

aid to accurate sewing. The home sewer who understands how

much accuracy in the construction contributes to the proper fit of a garment will use the seam width markings on her machine

to insure accurate construction of her garment.

The home sewer learns what stitch lengths (based on stitches per inch) are
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 91

necessary for a particular fabric and construction technique she is using. She

learns to use the stitch length regulator to achieve the desired lengths. Her

knowledge of stitch lengths is not too precise, but she has a general relative

knowledge and can make acceptable choices. When the home sewer makes

worked buttonholes, she determines the necessary buttonhole length in inches and selects the appropriate template marked in inches.

b. Needles and pins: The home sewer is more likely to use her own

judgment by looking at the length and thickness of needles or

pins than to use the sizes indicated on the package.

c. Scissors and shears: The home sewer may use the listed measurement if someone has told her to purchase shears of a certain size. Otherwise, she looks at the selection and decides which one is appropriate.

CURRENT TRENDS

Since the customary system of measurement is being used successfully in the home sewing industry, the feeling is to continue to use the existing

system of measurements. In no part of the industry did we find any trend

toward the use of the metric system as far as the home sewer is concerned.

If there is no Federal Government program initiated to change the home

sewing industry to the metric system, there would be no motivation to adopt

the metric system. The home sewer is using a system of measurements with

which she is familiar and which she uses in other areas of her everyday life.

It should be remembered that the home sewer generally follows the sug- gestions given to her by the pattern companies.

If other areas which immediately affect the home sewer changed to the

metric system, there would be some impetus for the home sewing industry to change in order to avoid having two measurement systems in use.

PROJECTED USE OF METRIC SYSTEM IN HOME SEWING

INDUSTRY

If the United States changed to the metric system, the change would be

from yards to meters; inches and fractions of inches to centimeters and mil- limeters.

1. Body measurements of the pattern sizes would be expressed in centimeters. The pattern company's basic sloper would be changed slightly to measurements that are more conveniently used when expressed in the metric

system. Body measurements would be changed slightly from their equivalent

in the English system. The home sewer would probably continue to select her pattern in her accustomed size, but the fit might be slightly different. The same names, such as Misses, Junior, etc. for indicating sizes used in the English system, would be given to the series of body measurements ex- pressed in the metric system which are closest to those previously used in the English system.

426-991 OL - 71 - 7
92 THE CONSUMER

In the past, the three major pattern companies in the industry have agreed on body measurement standards and size names in order to make pattern

size selection as easy as possible for the home sewer. They worked together

to bring about New Sizing 1967 in order to increase the level of standardization in the industry. We can foresee a similar approach in the event a change were made to the metric system.

2. Fabric widths would be expressed in centimeters while lengths would

be measured in meters. We assume we would follow the trend in metric

countries to divide a meter into Vio's, I4's, Ws, expressed in meters and

centimeters as 1.10m, 1.25m, and 1.50m. This procedure would be followed

in listing fabric requirements on the pattern envelopes and in purchasing

fabric. Because of the costly investment in looms and other equipment set for particular widths, fabric widths would probably remain the same and merely

be expressed in centimeters rather than inches.

Knits which have been classified by weight in ounces would be expressed

in the metric equivalents. However, this would not affect the home sewer.

3. Notions:

a. The amount of thread on a spool might be changed to an amount that is conveniently expressed in meters. The amount of thread would

be approximately the same and the home sewer would continue

to buy her thread by the spool. The weights and lengths used to determine "thread number" could be changed to metric

equivalents so that the "thread number" would remain the same

as that now in use today.

b. Seam tapes and binding widths would be expressed in centimeters or mil- limeters and lengths in meters. Prepackaged tapes and binding

would probably undergo conversion to more easily used metric

units. For example, a three-yard package of seam tape might

become a three-meter package.

Tapes purchased by the yard would be measured in meters and fractions

of meters as used in fabric measurements. Widths would remain

the same but be expressed in centimeters or millimeters.

c. Zippers would be labeled in centimeters. The zipper length would be converted to more easily used metric units; for example, a 10-inch

zipper might become a 25-centimeter zipper.

d. The button industry would choose between centimeters and millimeters

to express the size of the button. This choice might be determined by what other metric countries are using, and whether or

not international standards are developed and used.

e. Buckles would be sized similarly to buttons where the choice would be

made between using millimeters or centimeters as determined

by common practice in other metric countries.

f. Trimmings purchased by the yard would be purchased by meters in the same way seam tapes and binding would be. Prepackaged trims

and ribbons would undergo hard conversion to lengths given in meters. Widths would be expressed in centimeters or millimeters.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 93

4. Measuring Equipment: Measuring tools would be changed to lengths more conveniently expressed in metric units. The divisions of space would

be expressed in millimeters, centimeters and meters. For example, a yardstick would be replaced by a meter stick; a 12-inch ruler would perhaps be

replaced by a 25-centimeter ruler; the 60-inch tape measure would become

a 150-centimeter tape; smaller gauges used for such things as marking hem

widths would be replaced by conveniently used lengths marked in centimeters; standing hem marker marked in centimeters.

5. Sewing Equipment: Sewing guides on sewing machines would be

marked in widths measured in millimeters. For example, the widths which

correspond to %", %", and %" would probably be changed to 9 mm,

1 2 mm, 1 5 mm, and 1 8 mm.

The stitch length would be calibrated in centimeters rather than in inches.

The stitch lengths marked on the machine would be chosen so that they

could be represented by a whole number. Convenience in use would be a determining factor in selecting the stitch lengths. For example, a present

stitch length of 10 stitches per inch might be changed to 4 stitches per centimeter, and 1 5 stitches per inch to 5 stitches per centimeter.

Buttonhole templates would be marked in millimeters or centimeters, depending on how the button manufacturers decide to mark buttons.

6. Educational Materials: Previously written educational materials would

need to be revised so that all measurements would be given in the metric

system. This would affect all of the home sewing industry as all segments

have some educational materials. This could be done as the materials are

naturally revised and updated.

EFFECT OF CHANGE TO THE METRIC SYSTEM ON

CONSUMERS

In measuring herself and in comparing her measurements with those for the pattern sizes, the home sewer is dealing with much larger numbers in the

metric system than in the English. Since today's way of thinking is geared

towards thinking young, thinking small, psychologically she may not like the

change.

Her thinking now is in inches and yards and she has developed an idea of

how big these units are. When it comes to small measurements, such as inches and fractions of inches, many home sewers are so oriented as to distinguish between such closely related distances as Vf and %" when these

are not marked. This comprehension seems to have been developed to a fine degree because of her familiarity with the English system.

In beginning to use the metric system, the home sewer would have no

similar concepts of lengths and distances in meters. Learning the metric

system might be compared to learning a new language. A person would have

to translate the new into the old before understanding the new. She would

probably want to know how big something was in inches so that she could

regain this concept. It would take her a while to develop concepts on length.

This time might be influenced by her intelligence, her attitude towards the
94 THE CONSUMER

change, the attitudes of those who are introducing her to it. The salesper- son's attitude and ease in using the new system would be very important.

Our experience with a change in pattern sizing from Former Sizing to New Sizing shows that many women are resistant to change, are slow in learning that there is a change (even though there was extensive educational

promotion on the change), and are often the victims of misinformation from

salespeople and others to whom they talked about the change.

In the case of New Sizing, the home sewer was dealing with familiar concepts and language. In a change to the metric system, she would have to learn new names, measurements, sizes, and completely reorient her concepts of sizes and distances. The industry, however, would be presenting the

home sewer with the information she needs to have. The body measurement

chart would tell her the measurements in centimeters of the various sizes. Her tape measure would be marked in centimeters. Therefore, she would not need to convert any of the measurements. Likewise, the pattern envelope

would inform her of the amounts of fabrics and sizes, lengths, and widths of

notions all in the metric system. This is the way she would see the products

labeled and would purchase them. However, since she would be resistant to change and would not want to trust her own judgment, she would want some

reassurance. She would tend to make matters difficult for herself by wanting

to relate these terms and measurements to her familiar inches and yards.

We have not been able to determine any advantages to the home sewer in using the metric system. The home sewer needs some sort of measurement

system to assist her in sewing, and the English system being used now fills this need. Sewing would not be made any easier for her if she uses the metric

system rather than the English system.

Some of the products the home sewer uses are imported from countries

using the metric system. However, they are presented to her just as our domestic products are. The home sewer comes in contact only with people who talk and think in similar terms. She is not involved in the worldwide aspect of the industry.

Home sewing is basically a creative process rather than a precise engineering one; a system of measurement is not of prime importance to her. She is only involved in a system of measurement insofar as it helps her to make her

garment.

The measurements she uses are guides to help her in purchasing the correct things and then in putting these together to create a garment similar to the illustration of the finished garment she has in mind.

The greatest disadvantage we can see is that she would not understand the reason for a change and would feel confused. For a while, she would feel that

it is difficult to sew due to this change. She would try to continue to use the

familiar concepts as long as possible.

EDUCATIONAL EFFORTS

It has been the tradition of the home sewing industry to provide educational materials. Various manufacturers traditionally supply educational
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 95

materials to stores, schools, and home sewers according to a program which

they feel is mutually beneficial. As a matter of course, they would provide

educational material pertaining to the change to the metric system.

Positive attitudes about the change to the metric system would need to be

developed in the home sewer. This would be conveyed to her by a positive

attitude of the industry. She would need to be told specific advantages that would make it important to change to a different system of measurement.

This would be difficult because she is satisfied with the present system.

When New Sizing for patterns was being developed, there was a joint ef- fort by the three major pattern companies within the industry to present this change to the public. Working together, the pattern companies compiled a booklet which was distributed to stores and schools for consumer use. We can see the possibility of such an association to introduce a change to the metric system. This could be through a joint effort of all segments of the

home sewing industry or through individual efforts of the various segments

of the industry.

There would be a need to develop in the home sewer an attitude that there

will not be much for her to worry about; that the industry has done all the

work for her. Her basic problem would be in relating these new measure- ments to concepts that she can easily understand.

The home sewing industry would need to relate the two measurement

systems in a meaningful way that would be helpful to the home sewers. It would be helpful to her to know that the meter is just a little longer than the

yard; a tenth of a meter is very close to an eighth of a yard; 1.5 centimeters

is close to 3 millimeters is about Vs". She would need to know meaningful

relationships rather than conversion factors since the conversions would be

done for her by the industry.

There is a general feeling that for some specific time after the metric

system is introduced, merchandise should be labeled with the English and

metric systems. Merchandise labeled prior to the effective date for use of the

metric system might cause a problem. In order to prevent the customer from

being involved with that part of the conversion, perhaps it would be possible

to have adhesive labels to put on these older packages similar to the labels used for changing prices. In the case of the change from Former Sizing to New Sizing, it has taken

about 3 years for all Former Sizing patterns to be taken from the pattern

catalogs and replaced by patterns in New Sizing. During that time, patterns

introduced after New Sizing started were marked with special symbols. Pat- tern sizes were selected according to a New Sizing body measurement chart. The sizes for the other patterns were selected according to Former Sizing

body measurement chart. A similar procedure would be followed in changing to the metric system.

There could be two body measurement charts. Store personnel would be

equipped with measuring devices and conversion charts so that the home

sewer could purchase correct amounts and sizes of fabrics and notions.

The education of sales personnel would be extremely important. She

would be the one who would help to reassure the home sewer and to instill in her mind either a positive or negative attitude towards the change.
96 THE CONSUMER

The sales personnel would need motivational material to understand the

change and to develop a positive attitude towards the change. This would

probably be material developed by the industry as a whole or by segments of

the industry. The conversion charts could be provided in the same way with

the particular segments of the industry providing charts which best serve the

needs of their particular products.

For example, the fabric segment would be interested in charts which are

helpful in converting lengths to meters and widths to centimeters. The notions segment would be more concerned with charts dealing with smaller

measurements used for buttons, buckles and zippers. The trimmings seg- ment might be interested in charts dealing with larger measurements in meters for lengths and the smaller measurements in millimeters and centimeters

for widths.

If the segments of the industry do not work together to provide this infor- mation, then these charts would be provided by the individual manufacturers

who have always provided educational materials and consumer information.

Printed information could be distributed in stores. The home sewer could

receive additional information by attending in-store promotional events. This kind of information would be provided by individual manufacturers in the same way in which they provide educational materials now. The teacher would need information which would supply her with the advantages of using the metric system. Here again, she would need to develop

positive attitudes towards the change. She would be interested in the basic

ideas and ways in which she could present these to her students. If the

teacher could interest her students in the metric system and could explain

the advantages, the students could carry these attitudes and willingness to change to their parents, friends, and neighbors. The students have other contacts with the metric system in their science and mathematics classes. An in- terested home economics teacher might work with teachers in science and

mathematics to develop a good approach to teaching the subject. As soon as

it became evident that a change was to be made, education in this subject

should begin at the school level.

COST TO THE CONSUMER IN THE EVENT OF CHANGE TO

THE METRIC SYSTEM

The items that the home sewer would most likely replace would be her

yardstick with a meter stick, her foot ruler with a ruler marked in centimeters, and her tape measure to one marked in centimeters. This should cost a

total of about $2.00.

The yardstick, or meter stick, is essential in measuring lengths of fabric

and trimmings and is used in marking hems. It is also a helpful aid in laying out pattern pieces on fabric and to make certain that the pattern pieces are on the straight of grain of the goods.

The ruler is used in measuring very small areas, to areas of about 12". The tape measure is important in measuring the figure to determine which
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 97

pattern size is the most suitable. It is used in measuring zipper lengths and

openings, trimmings, notions, and buttonholes.

Other sewing aids, such as hem gauges, scallop markers, cutting boards,

hem markers, might be purchased as other aids wore out or to facilitate use

of the metric system. Average cost of these items would be: 35 cents to $1.25 for a hem gauge. 40 cents for a scallop marker. $4.00 for a cutting

board, and $ 1 .50 to $2.50 for a hem marker.

CONCLUSION

My personal experience in the use of the metric system is very limited. While I was in Brazil. I purchased fabric by the meter instead of the yard

without any trouble. But when I read in Women's Wear Daily recently that Mme. Pompidou's wardrobe for her trip to Russia "will be totally longuette

measuring 39 to 40 centimeters from the ground." I had no exact concept as

to where the hemline would be. Was it below calf, mid-calf, below the knee?

It was not until I used a meter stick to measure the distance that I realized

how far from the ground 39 centimeters really are. It is this lack of un- derstanding which would confront the home sewer. For the home sewer, there seems no actual reason to change the system of

measurement. A change would bring a long period of confusion and frustration. A very extensive educational program would be imperative. A campaign to "think metric" would be necessary.
98 THE CONSUMER

PURCHASE AND USE OF HOUSEHOLD EQUIPMENT

Mary E. Purchase

Design and Environmental Analysis, New York State College ofHuman

Ecology, Cornell University

INTRODUCTION

This investigation has to do with effects on consumers of a change to tne metric system, in particular the effects related to household equipment other

than kitchen equipment. Specific appliances to be considered include clothes

washers, dryers and irons, vacuum cleaners, heating and cooling equipment

such as furnaces and air conditioners, humidity control equipment, water

heaters, sewing machines, and personal care items (hair dryers, shavers, heat

lamps, etc.). Until very recently practically all household equipment purchased in the

United States was made in this country. Now as manufacturers in other

countries find that they have excess capacity and are expanding their markets, we are receiving more foreign made equipment. Many countries, the

United States and Canada being notable exceptions, operate all of their electric household equipment on 220-240 volts. We use 1 10-120 volts for most

of our plug-in devices. As a consequence, most electric equipment manufactured in countries presently using the metric system must be manufactured

especially for export to the United States or Canada, and it is likely that all the specifications would be stated in equivalent customary units rather than

in metric units. At present, the inconvenience of importing from Europe is more related to the voltage differences than it is to the differences in measuring units. At present Canada and the United States both use customary units and

1 10-120 volts for plug-in devices. As Canada changes to the metric system,

it may be that goods will flow less readily across our northern border unless we also adopt metric units.

UNITS USED WITH HOUSEHOLD EQUIPMENT

The physical dimensions of most of our household equipment are measured in customary units, with inches being the predominant unit. Weight of

the equipment is usually given in pounds.

Either set of units, customary or metric, could be used equally well to ex- press the physical size of equipment. In some cases the dimensions of

present equipment are such that they can be expressed as whole numbers of

inches; in other cases fractions of inches are involved. Except where equipment is built-in, small changes in physical size to change from an integral

number of inches to an integral number of centimeters would not affect con-
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 99

sumers. Most of the equipment outside the kitchen is not built-in; possible

exceptions are washers, dryers, sewing machines, and some water heaters. In most cases where these are more or less built-in, the fit is not so close that a small change would cause difficulty. In some cases equipment used outside the kitchen is built on the same

module as kitchen equipment. If there is a change to metric units, the module

should be changed to an integral number of centimeters, and, where possible,

the same module should be used for equipment outside the kitchen as for

kitchen equipment. The commonly used module at present is 3 inches or, ex- pressed in centimeters and rounded off, 8 centimeters. If an 8-centimeter

module were adopted, small changes in physical size of equipment would be

needed. A 5-centimeter or a 10-centimeter module might have advantages.

These would be nearly equivalent to 2-inch and 4-inch modules in customary

units. After a casual examination of the situation, one might conclude that there was nothing more to be said about household equipment outside the kitchen

in relation to metrication. However, additional units, besides physical

dimensions and weight, are included in specifications and in engineering

standards. Individual consumers are aware of these (table 6). For the clothes washer, the volume of water used and the maximum

weight of clothes for a full load are discussed in consumer literature. Similarly the maximum weight of clothes for a full load in a dryer is of in- terest to consumers. These are presently measured in pounds, but the measurements are not so precise that they would lose by being converted to the

Table 6. Sizes and Units Used in Describing Household

Equipment Outside the Kitchen

Appliance and measurement Customary units Metric units

Size Units Size Units

Washer:

Weight of clothes for maxi- 12 pounds 5.4 kilograms mum load. Volume of water in tub 20 gallons 76 liters Temperature of wash water . . . 140 °F 60 °C Power of the motor 0.5 horsepower 400 watts

Dryer

Weight of clothes for maxi- 12 pounds 5.4 kilograms

mum load. Rate of producing heat

5,000 watts 5,000 watts 20,000 BTU/hour 5,860 watts

1.25 horsepower 200 watts

Water heater: Rate of Heating:

Gas water heater 30,000 BTU/hour 8,790 watts

1,600 watts 1,600 watts 30 gallons/hour 144 liters /hour Thermostat setting 150 °F 65 °C
100 THE CONSUMER

Table 6. Sizes and Units Used in Describing Household Equipment Outside the Kitchen — Continued

Appliance and measurement Customary units Metric units

Size Units Size Units

Heating and cooling equipment: Rate of heating or cooling

5,000 BTU/hour 1,465 watts Gas pressure (for gas 5 inches of water 12.5 newtons /square

equipment) meter Flow of air through the 100 cubic feet 2.7 cubic meters

appliance per minute per minute

100 Tfpt /minntf* -in nicierb /minuie AO decibels decibels Power of the fan motor 0.25 horsepower 200 watts

VVClgUl VW1IIUUW all 100 pounds 45 kilograms

conditioner)

Humid itv control prminmpnt *

IxalC Ul CVapUIallUIl VI gallUIlb / uay 1 .0 liters /day

v. 1 M \»J t- 1 1 'tl l 1 1 ' 1

Volnmp T UIUIH^ 01Ul u/ntpr WdLVl cnntuinf^r l-UIHiHMl I . , , 10 quarts 9.5 liters Vacuum cleaner

inches of water newtons /square meter

18 feet 5.4 meters

Lighting Equipment:

Rate of using electricity 100 w tt 100 I uu watts

Efficiency of conversion '. Flectricitv to Iif?ht so lumens /watt 1 <; I J lumens /watt

T 1 1 1 1 m1 n ct 1 1 t~\rt j\j foot-candles cJ lux

Sewing Machine:

% inch 1.6 centimeters

Stitch length 10 per inch 4 per centimeter Weight (particularly 20 pounds 9.1 kilograms

for portables)

Irons: 30 square inches 195 square

centimeters Weight 4 pounds 1.8 kilograms

Length of cord 8 feet 2.4 meters Rate of heating 1,000 watts 1,000 watts

approximate number of kilograms. A 12-pound load, equal to 5.4 kilograms,

would probably become a 5-kilogram load. The exact amount of water used

is seldom measured by consumers. A 20-gallon tub could easily be referred

to as either a 75-liter or an 80-liter tub. One washer manufacturer has designed the lid of the washer to serve as a

scale. The calibrations, now in pounds, could be marked in kilograms.

Recommended temperatures of wash water for different classifications of

wash loads are given in washer instructions and other consumer literature. These could easily be converted from degrees Fahrenheit to degrees Cel-
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 101

sius. The recommended temperature for a hot wash, 140° Fahrenheit, converts to 60° Celsius. Most other round numbers in degrees Fahrenheit do not convert to round numbers in degrees Celsius.

Most homemakers use qualitative descriptions, such as hot and warm, in- stead of quantitative measurements of water temperature. The few

homemakers who measure wash water temperature would likely be the ones who could also most easily adapt to using metric measurements.

The output power of motors is usually expressed in horsepower in custo- mary units; input, when given, may now be expressed in watts. In metric

units both would be in watts. Because the power factor of motors is less than

one, the input and output are not equal. In metric units it would be helpful to identify whether input or output wattage was quoted. A 0.5 horsepower

motor would have an output of 400 watts. In using washers, some individuals measure the volume of detergent,

bleach, and fabric softener. Recommended amounts are expressed in cups in customary units and could be expressed in cubic centimeters or milliliters in metric units. This measurement is usually not so precise that a homemaker

would detect the difference between the amounts measured in customary or

metric (250 ml.) cups. The rate of drying, or more precisely the rate of moisture removal from the

clothes, is closely tied to the rate of producing heat. Because the homemaker

may be more concerned with the output in terms of dry clothes than the

input of heat, she may be more aware of the number of loads she can dry in an hour than in the wattage of an electric heating element or the BTU rating

of a gas burner. At the time of installation of an electric dryer, an electrician or other trained person must be certain that the capacity of the branch circuit

is sufficient for the combined demand of the heater and the motor. Fortunately, the unit of electric power for the heating element, watts, will not change if there is a conversion from customary to metric units. The rating of a gas burner would be changed from BTU's per hour to watts also. Twenty

thousand BTU's per hour is equal to 5,860 watts or, in round numbers,

6,000 watts. Gas bills might state the number of liters or cubic meters of gas consumed

and electric bills would be in terms ofjoules rather than kilowatt hours.

The usual measure for water heaters is the water volume capacity of the

tank. Now expressed in gallons, the volume could be expressed in the exactly equivalent numbers of liters or in an approximate number of liters. Tank sizes might gradually change to provide sizes in round numbers.

At the time of selection the consumers may also know the rate of heating

the water. In terms of hot water this is the recovery rate in gallons or liters per hour. In terms of energy used, the customary units are watts for electric water heaters and BTU's per hour for gas heaters. A 30.000 BTU per hour

burner is approximately equal to a 9,000 watt burner.

Where numbers rather than words are used, the thermostats are now

marked in degrees Fahrenheit. In the metric system the units would be in degrees Celsius. The common setting of 1 50° F would become 65° C.

For air conditioning equipment the rate of cooling is an important measure

in selecting cooling equipment of the proper size. Since most room air condi-
102 THE CONSUMER

tioners are selected by the consumer himself, he becomes involved in using

the units to express the size of air conditioner needed. In contrast, when central cooling or heating equipment is being purchased, the builder or a heating

expert is usually involved and the consumer may not be particularly con- cerned with the units in which the cooling or heating capacity is expressed.

Air conditioner sizes are designated in round numbers. A so-called 5,000

BTU per hour air conditioner is not likely to be exactly 1,465 watts. New,

round number classification would no doubt be selected. Proper gas pressure must be provided at gas burners for satisfactory

operation of the equipment. As we hear about gas shortages during the heating season, we learn that gas pressures may be reduced because of the high

demand for gas. This is probably the only time a consumer is aware of the

measurement of gas pressure and even then he is not involved in its measurement. Gas pressures in inches of water could be converted to centimeters of

water1 and then would probably be rounded off to an integral number of centimeters.

Fans in heating and cooling equipment are usually rated in terms of the

number of cubic feet of air they can move in a minute. This measurement

could easily be converted to cubic centimeters, cubic meters or even liters per minute. One hundred cubic feet per minute is 2.7 cubic meters per

minute.

Sometimes the velocity of air through a duct or other passage is of interest. The customary units of feet per minute could be converted to meters per

minute, with 1 00 feet per minute equal to approximately 30 meters per minute.

The recent concern for noise in homes has led air conditioner manufacturers to mention sound levels in their consumer literature. Although this is usually expressed in qualitative terms now, manufacturers may begin to ex- press the sound level indecibels. This unit wouldcontinue in the metric system.

The weight of window air conditioners is of concern to the consumer who

carries one home from the store and installs it. Weight in pounds could easily

be converted to weight in kilograms, with actual weights expressed in whole

numbers being used. A 100-pound air conditioner would weigh 45 kilograms.

When marked with temperatures, thermostats for air conditioners or fur- naces are now calibrated in degrees Fahrenheit. We would have to learn that 77° Fahrenheit is the same as 25° Celsius.

For humidity control equipment the rate of change of the physical state of

water is important. For humidifiers this is the rate of evaporation and for dehumidifiers it is the rate of condensation. In either case, the usual measure

in customary units is gallons or quarts per day; in the metric system the rate would be expressed in liters per day. Two gallons per day is equal to 7.6 or approximately 8 liters per day.

Anyone who has let the water container on the dehumidifier run over knows that the capacity of the pan is important. Now expressed in either

quarts or gallons, in the metric system the capacity would be expressed in

liters, with a 1 0-quart capacity equal to a 9.6 liter capacity.

1 Many terms are used to express pressure in the metric system-. The newton per square meter is the only acceptable terminology, however, recognized in the moderized system.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 103

Besides the physical size of the vacuum cleaner, consumers may be con- cerned about the length of the cord. Now expressed in feet, it could easily be

expressed in meters. An 18-foot cord would be 5.4 meters long. Some con- sumer literature or specifications may include a measure of the suction, but

I believe that few consumers are aware of that measurement.

For lighting equipment the wattage of the lamp is practically the only measure with which consumers are concerned. The efficiency or lumens per watt was discussed for a brief period of time in some consumer literature, but con- sumers are not generally aware of that measurement. The units, watts and lu- mens, would be used in the metric system also. Recommended levels of illumination, such as the illumination recom- mended for studying or for casual conversation, etc., is now expressed in footcandles. In the metric system the unit would be the lux. A recommendation for 50 footcandles might become a recommendation for 5 lux. Sewing machines frequently have guides marked to help in maintaining a constant seam allowance during stitching. The guides are now labeled in inches but would be labeled in centimeters in the metric system. A f-inch seam allowance would become a 1.6- or a 1.5-centimeter seam allowance.

The number of stitches per inch would be counted as stitches per centimeter,

with 10 stitches per inch equal to 4 stitches per centimeter. Sewers using

clothing patterns with directions in customary units and machines marked

with metric units or the reverse would have to convert measurements from

one system to the other. The weight of a portable sewing machine would be of concern to con- sumers. A 20-pound sewing machine would weigh 9. 1 kilograms.

For hand irons two measurements are recognized by consumers: the area of the soleplate and the weight of the iron. In customary units these are measured in square inches and pounds; in the metric system the units would be

square centimeters or square meters and kilograms. An iron with a soleplate

of 30 square inches would have a soleplate area of approximately 200 square

centimeters. A 4-pound iron would weigh less than two kilograms. The

length of the cord is also of interest, the units of measure being feet in custo- mary units and either meters or centimeters in metric units. The unit for ex- pressing the rate of heating, watts, is the same in both sets of units. With regard to personal care items, such as heat lamps, shavers, hair

dryers, and electric toothbrushes, metrication would cause no problems for

individuals. Physical sizes of these appliances are not standard and, just as

at present, there would be no need for the appliances to conform to uniform

dimensions.

Of the units used in the above measurements, watts and hours would

remain the same in a change from customary to metric units. Consumers in general may be unfamiliar with meters, liters, and kilograms. For equipment

outside the kitchen, however, only a limited number of consumers have in the past been concerned with many of the measurements, other than physical dimensions, discussed earlier. Therefore, except for the physical dimensions, the conversion to metric units would have little effect on most con- sumers. The small proportion of consumers who in the past have been con- cerned with other measures than physical dimensions are probably the better
104 THE CONSUMER

educated consumers and they may already have some familiarity with the

metric system.

The problem of service and replacement parts during metrication has the

greatest potential for problems. Some tools such as wrenches are made to fit a particular size or part; these may have to be changed as metrication

progresses. When the standard for parts such as screws is changed, new

parts would have to be stocked. In addition, parts and tools with standards

based on customary units would also have to be stocked until present ap- pliances were discarded. Duplication of tools and some simple parts would

affect home handymen as well as appliance servicemen.

POSSIBLE FUTURE EFFECTS OF METRICATION

A desire on the part of industry to make equipment acceptable in countries

already using the metric system, with a minimum of alteration, is encouraging use of the metric units in engineering standards. For example, the

proposed revision of the American National Standards Institute standard for

electric ranges includes, in parentheses, the metric equivalent for all measurements given in customary units. Without Federal Government encouragement the trend toward metrication would no doubt continue in industry. Whereas industry can clearly see an advantage to increased metrication, I doubt that present consumers see any benefit to themselves. To appease the consumers, manufacturers may

continue to use customary units in consumer literature, unless there is some

outside force urging consumers to accept the new units. Throughout the early part of the paper and in table 6 suggestions were

given for conversion from customary to metric units. Except where a particular module is being followed, no particular size is recommended over

another. As designs change, specifications change; and where measurements

are now expressed in either integral or round numbers in customary units, in the future, where convenient, the size could be such that measurements

would also be expressed in integral or round numbers in the metric units. As stated earlier, except where equipment is built-in or must fit exactly,

the consumer may never be aware of actual changes in sizes to provide in- tegral or round numbers if the change to metric units occurs at the time of

other design changes. Therefore, there would be neither advantage nor dis- advantage in changing sizes as far as the consumer is concerned except for the advantage of using integral or round numbers.

If metrication is increased, no special education will be required for purchasing and using equipment outside the kitchen other than the education

for purchase and use of kitchen equipment or for general use of the metric

system. Education in use of metric units at all levels should begin as soon as

possible. Where needed, workshops should be planned to help teachers un- derstand and use metric units. Workshops for individuals engaged in formal

and informal education would be particularly important. Much of the infor- mal education of consumers would be through mass media.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 105

Conversion charts for length, weight, volume (as for liquid measurement),

and temperature would be most important. Of more limited use would be

conversion charts for heat measurement. Very limited use would be made of

conversion charts for illumination.

Aids for converting one unit to another could be in the form of tables,

graphs, or slide rules, with individuals selecting the form most useful to themselves. Tables and graphs could be published in magazines, newspapers

or other consumer literature. Inexpensive slide rules could be sold or dis- tributed free by consumer groups.

A planned program of metrication over a period of years with a definite

target date for changeover to be completed is encouraged. The ultimate advantages of using the same measuring system as the other major countries

outweigh the disadvantages related to the change.

Also encouraged is hard conversion, with standardization on metric based

modules. Changing the size of modules will cause some problems. It will be

difficult in some cases to put new equipment into the space formerly occupied by equipment built on a module using customary units. Because of the interrelatedness of appliance size, cupboard size, and stan- dard measures in house construction, etc., a well thought-out time table for conversion rather than hit-and-miss, evolutionary change will be necessary.

If consumers and others knew when the change to metric units would occur

in a given segment of industry, they could use this information in their

planning. The time table should be such that the dates for change to modules

based on metric units could be included in long-term as well as short-term

planning by industry. In talking about the possibility of metrication one consumer said, "It may

be hard on the present generation, but think of the benefit to all future

generations."

Another consumer who had just returned to this country after living in Europe for several years said, "The sooner, the better. We have waited too long

already."
L06 THE CONSUMER

HOUSEHOLD FURNISHINGS

Stanley Slom

Home Furnishings Daily

INTRODUCTION

Ask any number of home furnishings retailers, manufacturers and association executives about the advantages of the metric system at the consumer

level, and most will respond with only the problems they run into. They'll

also tell you consumers are perfectly happy with the way manufacturers and

retailers treat them today. Besides, the consumers don't know anything

about the metric system, nor could they care less, if you can believe manufacturers and retailers. Businessmen almost always look at the pessimistic side of anything new. They look only for the problems it will create, and point out that any

blessings will be outweighed by the disadvantages.

For instance, 5 years ago furniture manufacturers were asked how important a role plastics would play in furniture. Practically all of them responded

that theirs was a wood-oriented furniture industry and customers would not accept plastics. Of course, they were thinking of plastics as a cheap substitute for wood and not as an entirely different form and use. Today, practically every major furniture producer in the North CarolinaVirginia area, where more than half the furniture in the United States is made, has either opened his own plastics molding factory or has contracted

with someone else to make a line for him because of the demand for rigid

molded furniture by consumers. When latex foam rubber and subsequently urethane foam came on the

market, furniture manufacturers rejected them because they thought these

products would not be accepted by the quality conscious consumers. Today

it is almost impossible to buy upholstered furniture without either latex or urethane foam.

Another example: 5 years ago the cotton people were very smug about

sheets for bedding. Nothing could dislodge king cotton. Today, we have a predominance of blends for permanent press sheets. Cotton is out.

I mention this information about resistance to product or material innovations because in talking to industry sources I found that many were the same

people who said, "Forget metrication in home furnishings."

METRICATION IN HOME FURNISHINGS

Let's start with floor coverings, which could probably be the major

product to be affected by measurement in home furnishings. Floor coverings

are made and sold by the yard. The looms are either 12- or 15-feet wide and

this is a historic fact. However, consumers measure their rooms by the feet
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 107

and inches. Architects and contractors almost never design or build a room

to measure 1 2- or 1 5-feet to accommodate the floor coverings industry.

Thus, we have a consumer going into a store to buy enough floor covering

for a room 1 3 feet, 2 inches by 1 5 feet, 7 inches, and a salesman shows her a

floor covering made in widths of either 12 feet or 15 feet and sold by the

square yard. To multiply 13 feet, 2 inches by 15 feet, 7 inches to get the

square footage and divide it by 9 to get the square yardage needed is a cum- bersome problem. Then multiply by the price per square yard, and you have

completed the calculations.

The response of one of the major retail executives in the metropolitan

New York area was simple: "Look, how often does a consumer have to go

through this measurement in covering his floor?" Besides, he said, his store usually has available a chart giving some examples of room dimensions in feet and showing consumers how to get an approximation of how many

square yards in a room so that it can be priced. Unfortunately, not too many

stores care enough to do this. As mentioned before, looms are made to produce carpeting in 12- and 15- feet widths. Manufacturers indicated that either we discard the present

looms, or we make carpeting in their present widths and sell them by the meter. This means that we would be selling carpeting in widths of 3.66 or 4.575

meters. Now that the "insurmountable" problems related by the people in the

business have been presented, the positive side of how negligible these

problems really are can be stated. Heugatile Corp., a Dutch firm which manufactures carpet tile for the U.S.

commercial market, makes its tiles in measurements of 50 by 50 centimeters

which the company says approximates 20 x 20 inches (19Vie inches). These

are packed 20 squares to a box, or 5 square meters. This measures exactly 6

square yards. There has been no problem in merchandising the carpet

squares on the metric basis. Let's take another positive example of what can be done!

Back a few years, air conditioners were sold by the ton. They were

referred to by 1-, 2-, or 3-ton units, all of which meant nothing to the con- sumer. The units certainly didn't weigh 1, 2, 3, tons; it takes 12,000 BTU's

to cool 1 ton of water so many degrees. This terminology was not satisfacto- ry even if a unit was 12,000 or 6.000 BTU's. or 18,000 or 24,000 BTU's or anything that was divisible by 12.000 units. But what happened when you

had 7,000, 13,000, or 19,000 BTU's? The manufacturers rated the air conditioner as close as they could to the next ton. In order to make a more accurate rating, it became necessary to use BTU's (British Thermal Unit is the

quantity of heat needed to raise the temperature of one avoirdupois pound of

water one degree Fahrenheit.)

There was much gnashing of teeth and beating of breasts by manufacturers and retailers, but the conversion was done without incident. It is now

an accepted measurement although many people may not know or care how

many units of heat are needed to raise the temperature — especially when all they are interested in is lowering the temperature.

426-991 OL - 71 - 8
108 THE CONSUMER

There are other facets of home furnishings that should be mentioned. Tables, sofas, consoles, and beds are all measured by the inch. If we convert to the metric system, there should be no problems once the consumer has

adapted to the system. Upholstery fabric, much like carpeting, is sold by the

yard and is made in a standard width of 54 inches. This comes to a standard

width of 138 centimeters. Looms could be changed to 140 centimeters.

Curtains and draperies are measured by the inch. Like carpeting and

upholstery, it comes in standard widths, these being 36, 42. 45, and 48

inches, which could necessitate changing the loom widths so that they would come out to an even metric width. These widths, however, are not completely precise and simple conversion and rounding could be satisfactory.

Mattresses, too, are measured in inches as are the sheets and blankets that cover them. The only confusion currently existing here that could be helped

by conversion to the metric system is that we measure ourselves by feet and

inches and we buy mattresses only by the inch. But this is not a major

problem.

In summary, there is a critical need for standardized measurement in floor

coverings because of the problems of manufacturing and selling by the yard,

and making actual floor measurements by feet and inches.

Conversion can be made though there is resistance, just as conversion was made in the air conditioning industry.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 109

REPAIR AND SERVICING OF HOUSEHOLD EQUIPMENT

Henry N. Ostborg

Electro-Mechanical Division, Merchandise Development and Testing

Laboratory, Sears, Roebuck and Co.

INTRODUCTION

The task that the United States Congress has delegated to the National

Bureau of Standards in regard to metrication is one of extreme importance—not only to individuals, or even to companies vital to our national

economy, but to our country and its position as a world power.

Sears, of course, is not a manufacturer. We are in the retailing business—furnishing goods and services to the consuming public. However, we

are intimately concerned with manufacturing problems and needs because

they affect the costs of building our products to our specifications. Thus, our

interests encompass the full spectrum of the American economy. Sears

necessarily would be deeply involved in and concerned with a move as

drastic as that of changing our national measurement system and the in- troduction of a new language.

Our dealings with countries employing the metric system of measurement

represent a small portion of our total business, even though we have stores

in Latin America, Spain and Canada and buying offices throughout Europe

and in the Orient, and even though our foreign purchases of goods often are an important element in that country's economy.

The export of goods to our foreign operations is limited by restrictions

placed on the quantity of imports and by tariffs that place American-made

goods in a noncompetitive position. Here, too, the difference in measure- ment system has little effect. So we work closely with manufacturers in those countries where we have

stores, in order to establish control disciplines that permit us to buy products

built to our specifications; these products necessarily adhere to American

standards married to whatever local requirements are in force. The result? Distinctive Sears goods. And if the country in question employs the metric

system of measurement, then our products are usually specified and built within that system.

Imports of foreign-built consumer goods are dictated by clear-cut business

factors. Perhaps the cost of making an item in the United States is noncompetitive with the landed cost from a foreign manufacturer. Or the item(s) may

be indigenous to a particular country or part of the world, and thus may carry a special appeal for the American consumer. Or, in some cases, the required

engineering and/or technical knowledge may be more readily available el- sewhere than in the United States. When planning a foreign purchase, Sears works closely with the foreign

manufacturer to establish product performance and quality standards

deemed necessary for our domestic market. We buy according to the mea-
110 THE CONSUMER

surement system of the country of origin; and in practically all instances of

note, this would be the metric system. Goods purchased this way include

complex mechanical items like sewing machines, typewriters and adding

machines, as well as less complicated products such as hand tools and

decorative items.

The metric dimensions of these purchases have produced few problems

within our selling and servicing function, and, to our knowledge, they have

had no impact on our customers.

SEARS' ATTITUDE

Our country has been moving steadily into a metric environment. Some

companies, notably in the pharmaceutical industry, are already using the

metric system almost exclusively. A growing number of others — among

them Sears — are using it in some phases of their operations.

We believe the near-total adoption of the metric system by the United

States is inevitable. It is only a question of how long it should take and deciding how the transition is to be implemented — recognizing full well that certain areas may never change.

The question of the importance of such a move to a company like Sears can be answered affirmatively only if the view is long range. In those areas where it is best for Sears to carry goods built to metric specifications, we

have assimilated them into our system with a minimum of difficulty. If the

demand for these and additional items increases, we are confident — based on

our experience — that these new products also could be sold, serviced and

maintained with relative ease. On the other hand, in order for the United States to continue to be an important factor in the world markets and to maintain a favorable balance of

trade, it would appear imperative that metrication be adopted. If this were to have the anticipated favorable influence on our national economy, then

Sears' economic position would also be favorably affected. Where there is an economic motive to learn a new measurement language

and use dual dimensioning, we foresee no unusual problems. But from those

who have no readily visible and easily defined economic motivation — such

as the American consumer — we would expect considerable negative reaction. To us, this merely stresses the overwhelming need for a well organized,

carefully implemented educational program. Such a program would require

input from all branches of industry, our schools, and all levels of government — local, state and federal.

REPAIR AND SERVICE

The effects that changing our national measurement language would have

on the repair and service of consumer products depends on the areas in- volved. Sears experience indicates that these areas would include the instal- lation of products at new locations, the replacement of existing equipment,
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 111

the repair and service of any and all products in use, and the furnishing of

parts for repair and normal maintenance by the customer.

The problems that Sears would face are largely contingent upon the rate

at which the language change would take place, and upon the effectiveness

of the educational programs conducted for both the customer and the service

personnel.

If the time for the change to metric were suddenly decreed to be tomorrow, allowing time only for a crash educational program, there would be

utter chaos. Customers and service people alike would be unable to cope

with the resultant problems. On the other hand, if the program were to be

formulated on the indefinite basis of "let nature take its course," confusion

would still occur in many areas, resulting in unwarranted duplication of ef- fort, repair parts and tools, and ultimately, higher costs. Thus, it is necessary

to plan a reasonable rate of change.

If this rate of conversion were made to fit the changes brought about by

normal product design innovations and improvements and/or the improvement or replacement of manufacturing equipment or methods, then the

duplication of repair parts inventory could be held to a minimum. Further,

the training of sales and service personnel could be accomplished as a part

of the normal training necessary on any product change, minimizing confusion and total cost.

THE PROBLEM WE'D FACE

Let's take a look at the magnitude of the assignment that a company like Sears would face. Then we can more realistically measure the problem areas and draw some conclusions with regard to the time factor involved.

Sears employs more than 18,000 service men, based at 2,000 locations.

These people receive their training at five centers located around the

country; last year, 1 3,000 Sears employees were enrolled at these centers. In addition, 8,000 home study courses were conducted, plus the on-job

training that is received at our retail store and parts depot levels. We stock more than 600,000 repair parts. This permits handling the major

portion of service needs at the store level. Back-up stocks in the supply

depots and at the factory allow full coverage of parts needs. Our service men

use 12,000 trucks carrying a stock of replacement parts that cover the major

portion of routine service calls. This tailored truck inventory has served to cut repeat calls drastically, and consequently, to increase customer satisfaction. In addition, the trucks are equipped with all the standard tools, plus some

sophisticated equipment needed to assure correct diagnosis of malfunction.

(For example, the instrumentation for radiation measurement of microwave

ovens is currently under study. If we are going to be in this business, we

must know how our merchandise is functioning and what level of safety it is providing the user.)

Obviously, considerable time and money must be spent by any company
112 THE CONSUMER

providing services to the consumer, in order to be sure that such services

will be rendered meaningfully.

What impact would the change to the metric system have on our service costs? If the additional tools needed — wrenches, gauges and measuring

tools — were to cost as little as $100.00 per man, this alone would represent

a cash outlay of almost $2,000,000, without taking into account the cost of

revising service manuals and other educational materials that would be

required.

REPAIR PARTS INVENTORY

Let's look at another facet of the total repair and service function — that of

repair parts inventory. Simply stated, Sears policy is that repair parts are

available as long as a reasonable demand exists. The demand element is pre- dictable—based on the history of similar items and the estimated life of the

product.

The average product life estimates for mechanical items can vary from 5 years for a power lawn mower, to 15 years for a refrigerator or a range, and

up to 30 years for a sewing machine. The "life" factor is influenced by the

environment in which the product has to live and the duty it must perform.

Thus, the lawn mower exposed to rough usage and adverse storage facilities

is bound to have a far shorter life than is a well-cared-for sewing machine

that is used only occasionally.

Having committed ourselves to providing service for what we sell, and for a reasonable product life, how does this influence our views on metrication?

Although it is not Sears' prerogative to establish a fixed time period for conversion, we do recommend that consideration be given to avoiding a crash

program and allowing sufficient time for all concerned to adjust easily. We

believe that even 20 years is not unrealistic, though some phases of conversion could be accomplished quickly. This would permit an orderly control of

repair parts inventory, with the major impact absorbed into normal model

changes, allowing us to go with minimum confusion from a change of lan- guage to a true design usage of metric measurements. In like fashion, training

of personnel could be carried out as part of the normal routine.

But let's get down to specifics.

Since our replacement parts are identified by name and number, we do not

anticipate extreme confusion in measurement language. In other words, someone requiring a side panel for a gas range, part number 10076, would

not care whether the dimensions were standard or metric, only that the part

fit easily and quickly into place.

Expected problem areas include fasteners where the intermixing of two

systems would be wrong — screws, nuts and bolts — and parts where fit and

tolerance are critical, requiring new tools and gauges.

The home mechanic, unless he were only a hammer and screwdriver man,

would have to add to his tool chest to be equipped to handle the old as well

as new equipment.

Some items have long life, such as a home well water system. The replace-
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 113

ment of a component (pump or motor) would necessitate long-range planning

for the provision of suitable adaptors and/or the continuance of compatible

designs.

EDUCATING COMPANY PERSONNEL

In the advent of a formal metrication program, the task of internal company education alone would be immense. Sears employs more than 400,000

people during peak selling periods. Reaching these people with just the bare

essentials of the new measurement language — considering the printing of in- formational pieces and the man hours involved in communications — would

impose a heavy cost. People in all areas of operations would need some in- put.

Salesmen would have to be able to assure the customer that a 762 mm

range will fit the space in her kitchen vacated by her old 30-inch model.

Service technicians would need dual language knowledge where fit and

tolerance specifications are important for correct product functioning, and

would have to be able to identify both metric and standard fasteners. Space planners would have to lay out store selling areas — including counters, fixtures, selling aids and lighting — as well as order and purchase in the

new language.

Advertising staff would have to describe products in the new language as a part of the general public educational program.

Management at all levels would have to know the new vocabulary and its significance in order to maintain good communications and effective control. Product planners, from an engineering design standpoint, probably would

have one of the easiest transition areas. However, when the marketing and

manufacturing inputs necessary for successful introduction of a new product

are considered, the lines of communication and understanding can become

tenuous. Only a few groups have been discussed here, and the coverage of each was

brief, but perhaps it serves to demonstrate the magnitude of the problem.

There is no way to measure the potential cost of conversion. We can conjecture with reasonable assurance that it would be high if the entire program

had to be accomplished on a tight schedule. Spread over many years, the cost could be absorbed gradually, and each new phase would become

progressively easier. CONSUMER EDUCATION

However, the external phase of education, that of communicating with the

customer, is a problem of far greater magnitude. Sears has throughout its his- tory maintained a dialogue with its customers, wherein it has conscientiously

attempted to make them knowledgeable consumers in the areas of value,

performance, service and repair, and safety.

There is no economic incentive for the customer to learn a new measure- ment language, and we would expect to face attitudes of apathy and even
114 THE CONSUMER

resentment. We, as any other American business that is in direct communication with its customers, would need supporting aid from many quar- ters—with particular emphasis on a federal program. This cannot be accomplished overnight. The resistance to change will be high, especially in people

who have completed their educations and face daily the problem of earning

a living.

Consider the elements of communications with the customer, and you

recognize that all these will have to be expanded to present the case of the new measurement system and the understanding of the dual language.

Customer literature of all kinds — sales promotional pieces, fact tags, instructions covering operation, maintenance and/or assembly, recipe books, repair

parts lists, and advertising copy, to name only a few — would have to carry

specific educational information over and above what is included today

under the standard system of measurements.

We mail millions of catalogs annually. Anyone who has thumbed through

a Sears catalog cannot help but appreciate the magnitude of the task of using

the dual language, and the added copy that would be required. We do recognize, however, that such media can play a major role in consumer education.

The adoption of an extended period of transition to the metric system

would permit coping with this and allied problems in a gradual, easily assimilated fashion and consequent spreading of the costs over a more equitable

time period.

We don't generally think of the consumer as responsible for service or

repairs of a product, other than arranging for, waiting for and paying for the

call of a service man, although we frequently describe in detail how the "handyman" can effect some repairs and provide routine maintenance. The

customer, or ultimate user, however, is responsible for recognizing the existence of a problem and describing the problem when requesting service.

Service requests can be as uninformative as. "My machine won't run" or

as explicit as, "My model 3600 automatic washer fails to fill with water

when set for white clothes." Attention to the latter request could be fast and

efficient, while the former could require two or more service calls. Customers need adequate information to handle their service responsibility and needs, and to help them, virtually millions of communications efforts are produced annually by Sears to provide the consumer with information.

But our customer profile parallels very closely that of the United States population; the education level varies from less than eighth grade to advanced degrees, income levels range from less than $3,000 to more than

$15,000. and occupations vary from teenage students through tradesmen

and management and executive personnel.

And one language must be understandable to all. How?

First, dimensional terms of the standard system of measurements used

today have universal understanding to consumers of all educational levels. That is. refrigerator and cooking temperatures are expressed in degrees

Fahrenheit — a 350°F oven and a 0°F freezer— and understood by all. And everyone uses the same linear dimensions — XA inch of frost accumulation in the freezer, 8-foot extension cords and 6 yards of fabric.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 115

We all know what a mass measurement like 10 pounds of laundry means,

or 6 ounces of meat per serving.

It is the same with volume measurements. We all understand ounces or cups of laundry additive, pints or quarts of cookware capacity, and gallons

of laundry fill capacity.

Since the introduction of a new dimensional language appears to have no

obvious advantage for either the consumer or the communicator, several

problems become apparent. Some of these will be of short duration and are

related to the actual conversion. Others are of long duration and are related

to the actual use of the new language.

An easy transfer from the standard to the metric system could probably be

accomplished in temperature and mass dimensions. Other than the initial confusion of change, the conversion is straightforward and easily rounded

off, requiring only familiarization with the new terminology and religious

labeling of the system.

Linear dimensions present slightly greater adjustment in making the conversion and in use. as the foot has no direct corresponding dimension in the

metric system and would result in decimal equivalents.

Volume dimensions would appear to be the greatest challenge for both consumer and communicator. The relationship between lA and Vicup (using an 8-ounce cup) is more quickly grasped than that between 0.059 and 0.1 18

liters. So the problem in the educational area becomes one of determining all the

problem areas of dual dimensioning; determining the problems of ac- ceptance, rejection and confusion of the consumer; and programming for as long an evolutionary stage as necessary.

Sears stands willing to help the National Bureau of Standards and the

Congress of the United States in any way it can in the planning of a metrication program from a retailer's viewpoint, and to work in all facets of our own

business to provide a smooth and orderly transition. But we hope that the needs of the consumer would determine the pace, and that all would be alert for those industries that dig pits for themselves.

Above all. let's not be stampeded by a "now is the time — let's go!" at- titude.
116 THE CONSUMER

AUTOMOBILE PURCHASING AND USE

Harry Murphy

Department ofMarketing, University ofDayton

INTRODUCTION

This paper will explore some of the implications of metrication for con- sumers in their purchase and use of automobiles. It is in the role as a con- sumer, not as a professional in education or marketing, that these thoughts

are offered. There seems to be little more than varied opinions (or speculation) by way

of data available which can be brought to bear. The literature is quite sparse,

quite opinionated, and very redundant. The remarks made here are based on

personal experience as a consumer, observations of consumers, some inter- views with automobile users and dealers, and a review of recent periodical

literature.

MARKETPLACE PRACTICES

It appears that the rapid increase in the number of automobiles imported

from countries using the metric system has presented relatively few measurement type problems for consumers. The producer-seller provides

purchase and use information converted into the customary (inch-pound)

system. When metric measurements are used, they seem to represent a sort of elitist approach for a group of "afficionados

,, — hence a means of communicating among a small group with specialized interests. Any chain reaction

type of behavior by which this group would beget other such groups, and

eventually result in understanding or adoption of the metric system by the

bulk of auto purchasers and users is not foreseen.

Competition in the marketplace seems to mandate that metric information

be converted into the customary system — at least that information must be

converted which the seller perceives as useful in bringing about a favorable

buying decision.

ADAPTATION AND CONVERSION

If customary engineering standards are retained as they would be in a modified approach, it would be necessary to convert our customary system

of measurements into metrics. Taylor [1] called this the metric unit ap- proach and Odom [2] seems to have this in mind under his term of adaptation. That there would be problems of understanding, communication, and

education for consumers can be illustrated by recognizing the consumer's

problems in converting the simple and frequent question "How many miles
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 117

per gallon? into "How many kilometers per liter?" The gallon becomes 3.8

liters and the mile becomes 1.6 kilometers.

A study reported last year in Science News [3] is germane in revealing

liiat gradual replacement and redesign generally result in complete replacement of parts in an automobile in about 12 years. In other words, a 1971

model automobile is not likely to have any of the parts used in a 1 958 model.

William K. Burton of Ford Motor Co.. Chairman of the Industry Subcommittee of the Metric Advisory Committee of the American National Stan- dards Institute, reflects this in his estimate [4] that the automobile industry

would require 1 5 to 20 years for a changeover to metric standards.

If a dual system of measurements were used during this changeover

period to the extent that customary engineering standards were retained, it

is clear that the customary system expressions would be both simpler and more familiar. Hence the dual system of including the measurement expression in both

customary and metric terms if customary standards were retained would

probably effectively result in continued usage of the present customary

system. This would seem to be true until the withdrawal from the dual

system to a use of only metric expressions.

The metric expression in such a dual system would presumably be little used by consumers; yet would engender much confusion. One may question

if such a modified approach in which metric expressions are used but custo- mary system engineering standards are retained would achieve the benefits

claimed for metrication. Increased selling power in world markets and the

consequent reduction in gold outflow as well as increased efficiency in production would seem to assume the adoption of metric engineering stan- dards as well as metric measurements. Odom [5] refers to this as conversion. The new engineering standard would be expressible in round numbers

in metric measurements. For example, the 1 10 in. wheelbase with a metric

equivalent of 279 centimeters might become 280 centimeters. Taylor [6] is of the opinion that the change in engineering standards (module size in his term) would make the transition easier for the consumer from the standpoint

of simple numbers on sizes and quantities.

Most of the foregoing discussion dealt primarily with quantitative aspects

of purchasing specifications and problems. It seems that a high level of con- sumer confusion could be anticipated. Such confusion could safely be pre- dicted as leading to consumer resistance. The question as to the success or

failure of an educational campaign which would reach all segments of

society during the time available for conversion cannot be answered. But

the outlook based on attempts at education of the public in much more

general issues such as traffic safety, fire prevention, use of grading standards, etc., in the past is certainly not favorable. In the actual use of the automobile the question of a modified approach vs. a complete approach remains a difficult one. There would be problems in the

purchase of gasoline and oil and in the inflation of tires and other routine ser- vicing, but because these activities occur quite frequently and because the consumer has time to convert his thinking from the customary system to the
118 THE CONSUMER

metric system, he would learn the new system quite readily and safely. The

situation would be quite different, however, if the driver were behind the

wheel of his moving automobile faced with a problem of conversion which

he has seldom or never met before and for which he has little time to calculate. The situation could prove to be hazardous.

Considering the number and frequency of informational inputs into the

process of driving and the amount of time within which a driver must assimilate the information and incorporate it into some changed behavior under

stress conditions, it is likely that the dual system of expression would offer some hazard. And. as a motorist, one hesitates to visualize the consequence

of some other driver consulting a dual measurement system road map at turnpike speeds.

When the problems of reeducating the populace are considered one must

again consider whether we are talking about a metric system of measurement

alone or whether new metric engineering standards are included.

In either case, a process of reeducating rather than starting from scratch

is required. This fact is frequently ignored when our situation is compared to other countries which use a metric system. In most European countries the

metric system was established before a highly technical society was

developed. Their problems were in educating, not reeducating. In our own

situation, the problems involved with educating young people still engaged

in formal education are probably better understood and susceptible to research and effective instructions than with those people who have

completed formal schooling. The questions of resources, media available,

and methods are much less well defined when the target audience is virtually an entire populace highly reliant on the use of the automobile. Again based on experience one would speculate that the problem of reeducating in the

face of various mental and emotional blocks would be especially difficult with such groups as older people, low income groups, ethnic minorities,

those with little formal education, etc. From an educational viewpoint one might speculate that proficiency in using any expression of measurement is closely related to frequency of use. In a hastily conceived and executed attempt at investigating the degree of

familiarity with some of the customary system measurements, one hundred

college students were asked to respond to 70 items which tested their knowledge of some of the more familiar and some of the less familiar rela- tionships involved in the customary system (table 7). The percentage of correct responses for a few frequently used measure- ments of 100% may seem comforting. However, the percentage of correct responses for some of the measurements which have presumably been

taught, for some that are very useful to consumers, and for some that are heavily used in some fields are far from comforting. One colleague's in- terpretation of this data was "We don't know our present system, so why not

substitute another?" This writer, however, prefers the interpretation that frequency of usage is a most effective learning device.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN H9

Table 7. Weights and Measures Test

Percent correct answers

1 minute = 60 seconds 100

1 hour = 60 minutes 1 00

1 day = 24 hours 100

1 week = 7 days 100

1 foot = 12 inches 97

1 yard = 3 feet 97

1 gallon =4 quarts 97

1 year = 365 days 97

1 pound=16 ounces 92

1 leap year = 366 days 91

1 quart (liquid measure) =2 pints 85

1 quart (dry measure) = 2 pints 66

1 square foot = 144 square inches 55

1 compound interest month = 30 days 55

1 square yard =9 square feet 53

1 yard = 36 inches 47

1 statute mile = 5280 feet 26

1 short ton = 2000 pounds 26

1 bushel =4 pecks 25

1 cubic yard = 27 cubic feet 21

1 cubic foot = 1728 cubic inches 17

1 league = 3 miles 14

1 fathom = 6 feet 14

1 cwt. = 4 quarters 14

1 military pace =21/2 feet 10

1 rod = 51/2 yards 9

1 peck = 8 quarts 8

1 calendar month = 28, 29, 30, 31 days 8

1 quarter = 25 pounds 7

1 pint =4 gills 6

1 yard =4 quarters 4

1 square rod = 30^4 square yards 4

1 palm = 3 inches 3

1 ounce = 16 drams 3

1 barrel = 31 V2 gallons 3

1 hogshead = 2 barrels 3

1 long ton =2240 pounds 2

1 mile = 8 furlongs 2

1 cord (wood) = 128 cubic feet 2

1 acre =4 roods 1

1 square mile = 640 acres 1

1 hand = 4 inches 1

1 furlong =40 rods 1

1 cubit = 1 8 inches 1

1 dram = 27 1 /^2 grains 0

1 chaldron = 36 bushels 0

1 rick (wood) regional and variable = 64 cubic feet 0

1 ton shipping =40 cubic feet 0

1 U.S. standard gallon = 231 cubic inches 0

1 cubic foot = % of a bushel 0

1 nail = 214 inches 0

1 quarter = 4 nails 0

1 cable length = 1 20 fathoms 0

1 mile = 714 cable lengths 0

1 nautical mile = 6,080.2 feet 0

1 rood = 40 square rods 0

1 span = 6 inches 0

1 Bible cubit = 21. 8 inches 0
120 THE CONSUMER

CONCLUSION

In attempting a conclusion it can be asserted that often producer and con- sumer groups recognize a mutuality of interests as they come together in discussion. Added illumination frequently results in clearer perception of

common goals. At this early juncture in our search for understanding of the

impact of metrication, however, there does appear to be some divergency of

interests. Consumers may be asked to undergo certain direct added costs by way of

frustration and hazards in exchange for indirect benefits which are hoped to

result from increased exports, reduced gold outflow, and increased productive efficiency, all of which have varying degrees of uncertainty.

Some divergence of interest also appears in relation to the timing of metrication. It would then seem that the more quickly industry converts the less costly it would be. On the other hand, if one assumes an increasing proportion of our population is undergoing what is hopefully more effective education, it would then seem that the later the conversion the better it would be

for consumers. In one recent book, Making the Most of Metrication, re- viewing British experience, the single reference to consumers conceded that "the new units of measurement may be unfamiliar to consumers for a time"

but dismissed the matter with the observation that "most judgments of

whether a measured quantity is likely to meet requirements are made by

eye" and the conclusion that "the error will be corrected before the sale is completed [7]."

The National Metric Study Conference devoted to consumer affairs sponsored by the National Bureau of Standards in cooperation with the

American Home Economics Association conducted at Gaithersburg,

Maryland in October 1970, indicated the need for a somewhat less cavalier

attitude toward consumers and the need for a good deal more research.

On a more optimistic note, one might suggest that the changes required by

metrication might be used to open the door to bring about other desirable

changes considered to be in the interest of consumers. For example, if road

signs must be changed, might not the planning include both provision for uniformity throughout the country and some consideration of aesthetic

values as well? As another example, legislation which would effectively

prohibit resetting odometers might be adopted at the same time that metric

readings are required on automotive instrument panels.

It seems that a consumer's view of metrication must consider what priority such action might have as compared to a wide range of other potential

changes. This brings into purview a whole host of matters such as quality

of environment, resource development and depletion, lack of availability of

information regarding quality and performance, etc. which, of course, are not

susceptible to discussion here.

REFERENCES

[ 1 ] Kenneth H. Taylor. "The Impact of Converting to the Metric System."

MSU Business Topics, (Autumn 1969).
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN

[2] J. V. Odom, "Problems of Metric Conversion." ASTME Vectors.

1969/4 Issue, p. 17. [3] "Metrics: A Preliminary Report." Science News, p. 297 (October 4. 1969).

[4] Quoted in Science News, p. 298 (October 4. 1 969).

[5] Odom. ASTME Vectors, 1969/4 Issue, p. 18. [6] Taylor, MSU Business Topics, p. 55 (Autumn 1969).

[7] J. S. Vickers. Making the Most ofMetrication, p. 91 (Gower Press. London. 1969).
122 THE CONSUMER

AUTOMOBILE REPAIRS AND SERVICING

Herbert Ellinger

College ofApplied Sciences, Western Michigan University

UNITS CURRENTLY IN USE

Customary usage units are primarily used in automotive service. Inches

are divided into decimal segments. The serviceman works with whole inches

plus decimal subdivisions down to .0001". His measuring tools and specifications are given in inch decimal subdivisions. In most garages, even the hour

is divided into tenths for easy use of the flat rate schedules that are used to charge customer labor cost and for keeping track of labor time. The automotive service trade has recognized the advantage of working with the decimal

system and has adapted the customary units for use in division by 10. just as

in the metric system.

In capacity measure, the automotive consumer works with gallons, quarts,

pints and ounces. Normally, smaller capacity units are not required. Volume

is generally used in whole cubic inches, with some reference to cubic centimeters on small volumes. Force is measured in pounds per square-inch and

torque in pound-foot, pound-inch and ounce-inch. Power is given as horsepower and speed in miles per hour. Electrical measurements in automotive

service are in the metric system: the volt, ampere and ohm; but the con- sumer seldom realizes that these are common metric system units. The average automotive consumer in the United States received his first knowledge about the metric system when imported cars started to come into

the country after World War II. The volume of imported cars has steadily in- creased until it has become an important segment of the domestic automobile market. The majority of these cars are purchased by economy and

sports minded individuals, many of whom do their own service work. Imported cars require few wrench sizes for most routine maintenance work, so

the tool cost for this type of work is low. Inexpensive type metric tools for occasional routine maintenance can be purchased for less than $25.00. Metric tools are handled by most tool companies and so they are readily availa- ble in the retail market.

As more imported cars enter the domestic market, the consumer becomes

acquainted with a few metric terms. Some metric terms have begun to be

used to identify specific domestic automobiles and engines. One manufacturer advertises a 7-liter engine and another maker advertises his engine as

1 600 cc. One manufacturer identifies his car as a 2300 because its engine has

a 2300 cc displacement. The average consumer recognizes these terms as identifying names and does not relate them to metric units.

PRESENT METRIC IMPACT

Most automobile consumers do not know if customary units or metric

units have been used to manufacture their car. They usually buy a car for its appearance, its size to fit their needs, its economy, or its performance.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 123

Most metric standard automobile parts are found on imported cars. However, a few stock metric items have been used in domestic cars for a number

of years. All domestic spark plugs have metric threads and all high quality

ball and roller bearings have metric dimensions. Most service mechanics and

technicians do not realize this because the size dimension is not given in their service manuals. The part is replaced using a part number so size measurement is seldom required.

Almost every mechanic has replaced a generator bearing at some time. He

is seldom aware that the common 203 bearing is made metric: 1 7 mm ID x 40

mm OD x 12 mm wide. His specifications are given in equivalent inches of

.6693" ID x 1 .5748" OD x .4724" wide. The fact that the bearing has a metric

size was neither an advantage nor a disadvantage to him. He merely replaced

the bearing with a bearing of the correct part number. Metric sparkplugs and

bearings are manufactured in the United States and are readily available at standard prices.

The original imported car dealer has all of the tools and trained personnel

to give proper service to the new car he sells. The consumer may have

difficulty getting satisfactory service when he takes the imported car to his independent repair shop or service station. Many repair shops will not work

on imported cars, no matter what standard was used to build it. Their main

objection is to poor availability of replacement parts and not the fact that metric standards were used to manufacture the part. Poor availability of

parts is often an inconvenience to the consumer because his car must be

laid up until the serviceman is able to get the required parts to complete the

repair. This is also inconvenient for the serviceman because the disabled

car takes valuable space in the repair shop. Many repairmen equate the

imported part problem with metric standards when there is actually no

relationship.

While import service manuals are available to the import dealership ser- vicemen, it is often inconvenient for the general repair mechanic or service

station operator to get detailed service instructions. This tends to further

pressure the consumer into returning to his new car dealer for proper service on his imported car. This policy also discourages non-dealer mechanics from

working on imported vehicles.

Some imported car sales are handled by domestic new car dealers. In most of these dealerships, one or two men do the service on imported cars, so they are the only servicemen that are required to have metric tools. The

consumer service cost is, therefore, comparable to service costs on domestic

cars. Automobiles built to metric standards operate in exactly the same manner

as automobiles built to customary standards, the only change being a slight

difference in the physical proportions of the parts. The serviceman can diag- nose a consumer's malfunctioning metric dimensioned car in exactly the same way that it is done on a car built to customary standards. His only

problem occurs when he needs to use tools to remove, service, install and

adjust a part held with a metric size fastener. This is a minor problem if he

has metric tools. Initially, it requires selecting a wrench size by trial and

error until he becomes acquainted with the part sizes. This may take more

426-991 OL - 71 - 9
124 THE CONSUMER

time, so he often charges the customer for added labor cost which increases

the repair bill. In actual hands-on service, the mechanic becomes accustomed to judging

wrench and thread sizes. This is his first concern. As he works with the

tools, he gradually learns to think in terms of metric units rather than custo- mary units as he obtains equipment and tools with metric markings and

sizes. Those who regularly work with metric sizes claim that metric sizes are simpler to work with than the customary system units. This seems to be the

only possible advantage to the automotive serviceman or to his customer

and then only if he is able to do the service more rapidly and lower the labor

cost. In actuality, it may be that it is said to be simple only because the ser- viceman is familiar with the sizes, rather than being a simpler system to use. In talking to a number of servicemen, it was surprising to learn that they

thought the nut and bolt head sizes with metric threads were the only parts

of the car built to metric standard units. Service information they use has

been converted and the specifications they are required to use are in custo- mary units.

METRICATION IN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE

Metrication has begun in ASTM and SAE engineering standards. These

will most likely affect engineering and manufacturing of automobiles in the

future. The large volume of imported vehicles and imported parts that are now

being used on domestic cars which are built to metric specifications will un- doubtedly bring many metric units into common usage by the automotive consumer. Mechanics are acquainted with decimal equivalents. Many equate 5/i« inch

to .3 1 25 inch without the use of a decimal equivalent chart. Most mechanics

have a decimal equivalent chart in their toolbox, so they can look up any

decimal equivalent that they are not thoroughly familiar with. A number of

these decimal equivalent charts also include the millimeter equivalent, so

metric charts are already available to these servicemen.

Cars imported into the United States have instrument readings in custo- mary units so the driver does not have to convert metric volume, pressure, temperature and speed units into customary units. If total conversion to metric units were to take place, it would require replacement of all of the road

speed limit signs. It would most likely require speed limit signs in both custo- mary and metric units for some time. This would surely lead to confusion of

the general motoring public.

Metrication would apparently cause no serious problem at the consumer

level in automotive service. As far as the consumer is concerned, planned

metrication must start with manufacturing. When it arrives at the consumer

level for automotive service, the serviceman, with some training and suitable

tools, should have no trouble servicing these cars. Automobile manufacturers currently provide training programs at their training centers for both their dealers' mechanics and for independent
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 125

mechanics. They find it difficult to get enough mechanics interested to hold

classes. Mechanics show little tendency to take advantage of available ser- vice training to help them advance their technical knowledge. Generally

speaking, it is the most progressive and sharpest mechanics that need train- ing the least who are the ones that take training. The mechanic that needs

training the most is the one who shows little tendency to take advantage of

available service training. It could be that metrication would further reduce

the quality of automobile service because these servicemen would try to "cut corners" even more than they do now. The consumer in this case would

be the loser.

If a planned change to metric units were made, it would be necessary to initially write all of the vehicle specifications in both systems so the ser- viceman could use his present measuring tools or his new metric tools. This

dual system would have to be carried on for a number of years until both the

vehicle built with customary units is scrapped or the present tools are worn

out and replaced with metric tools. In automotive service, the mechanic or technician is more concerned with

operating clearances than with the actual size of a part. Most service specifications are given as a clearance tolerance rather than a size. It would seem

practical and convenient to use metric tolerance sizes to the nearest .0002

inch by using .005 mm as the equivalent. This would hold clearances to

slightly closer tolerances than using customary units. An example would be

using 25 mm per inch instead of 25.4 mm. the actual equivalent to one inch.

The error would be only 1 .6 percent, which is well within service tolerances.

The serviceman would need metric sized wrenches to fit metric nut and

bolt heads. He would also occasionally need metric taps and dies to repair

damaged threads. A basic professional quality wrench set that could be added

to a serviceman's present tool set would cost about $ 1 00.00. This could be ex- panded to a very complete set for $300.00. If a tap and die threading set is required, it would cost another $ 1 00.00. These prices assume the serviceman

already has socket handles in fractional drive sizes, pliers, screwdrivers,

etc.. which do not affect his work on metric size fasteners. Present test and measuring instruments could be used by making use of

conversion charts. This, of course, would take a little longer than having

them read directly in the units specified. The extra labor time would be

passed along to the consumer as increased labor cost. To the serviceman, metrication changes would be similar to learning a new

product. For example, when alternators replaced generators, the serviceman

had to learn to test, inspect and service alternators instead of generators.

The same is now true as disc brakes are being installed on domestic cars. Brake manufacturers and tool companies are providing clinics to help train servicemen in the correct use of tools for proper service. Most servicemen

have no trouble learning alternators or disc brakes. These same men would

have no trouble with metrication. Some of the old-time mechanics would not

learn alternators or disc brakes and. therefore, refuse to work on them.

These same men would most likely, at first, refuse to learn to work on cars

built to metric standards. This may inconvenience some consumers who

have been steady customers of these servicemen.
126 THE CONSUMER

Most people resist change. They will avoid change as long as possible. If change is necessary for their livelihood, they will make the change. It would

be easier for the younger people to learn a new measurement system than

for the older people. New metric units for weight, force, pressure, capacity,

velocity and power would be the most confusing while learning the new

system.

The one big problem brought to the author's attention was parts availability. Most present metric parts are imported. Parts are warehoused at several

central locations, but it takes a comparatively long time to get them shipped

into other locations. If domestic metric parts were produced, domestic

dealer's parts departments and wholesale warehouses would have to duplicate much of their stock so they would have a larger investment in in- ventory and space that these additional parts require. This would be more of

a hardship than an advantage during the changeover period. Current parts

would have to be held in stock until present automobiles are no longer

operating.

SUMMARY

Metric sized domestic automotive parts have no apparent advantage to the consumer and in the present domestic automobile market there is no need

for metrication. It would impose a financial hardship on many servicemen.

During a changeover, added costs would most likely be passed along to the consumer as higher service costs. Any increase in cost would probably be

resisted by the consumer unless it were required by law or gives him added

value. Once the serviceman has metric tools and some training, there should be no serious problem at the consumer level in automotive service.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 127

METRICATION, THE CONSUMER AND ADVERTISING

Theodore F. Dunn

Benton and Bowles

Should the United States decide to eventually adopt the metric system, it might well fall to the advertising industry to help educate the country about

these measurements as well as to help motivate consumers to use them.

Precisely because of this eventuality, the American Association of Advertising Agencies was asked for their support in the current investigation and appraisal of increasing worldwide metrication. Since it has been part of the advertising industry's function to appraise the needs of consumers and through

education and motivation to sell products and services, the "Four A's" felt that it could indeed be of some service in, if you will, the marketing and advertising of metrication.

It was the writer's good fortune and pleasure to be appointed chairman of a 4A's committee to assist in the study of the implications of increasing

worldwide metrication on the United States. The 4A's represents some 365

advertising agencies which account for about three quarters of all agency

placed advertising in the United States. The Research Directors of six of the

largest advertising agencies — Benton & Bowles; Ogilvy and Mather; Norman, Craig & Kummel; Doyle, Dane Bernbach; BBD&O; and Grey Advertising—formed the committee.

The committee's goal was to provide some understanding of three major

issues. First, the education of Americans concerning the metric system;

second, the motivation of consumers to use this system; and third, the cost of educating consumers, with particular emphasis on who should do it and

who would pay for it. Answers to all of these questions cannot be provided

at this time, but how the advertising profession would go about getting the answers can be elucidated.

As a first step, an advertising agency seeks to find out everything it can

about who are the best customers for a brand or service; what they are like; what they want from the products or services; what they think about the advertised brand; and what they think about competitive brands. In addition, a great deal of information about market activity; both about the brand advertised and competitive brands is uncovered. The reason for obtaining all of this information is to help decide how to position the advertised brand as uniquely and desirably as possible against competition.

Or to put it another way, it must be decided which of the many characteristics of a brand is most important to emphasize or sell. In this sense, and

this is not too well understood, advertising is most consumer oriented. It seeks to find out what consumers need and want and then to match what the

brands being sold have to offer against these needs. To put it in its simplest

form, advertisers have learned a long time ago that it is a lot easier to sell people something they want than to try to sell them something they don't want.

426-991 OL - 71 - 10
128 THE CONSUMER

Once the strategy for selling a particular brand is clearly understood, creative people develop advertising to accomplish what it calls for. A good deal

of effort is spent to assure that the advertising is on target against the strate- gy and later to measure whether the advertising has paid off. So advertising

works first to develop a strategy, second to execute it and third to check

whether or not it has accomplished its objectives.

Some of these principles can be applied to the introduction of the metric

system.

Some of the problems consumers would face in adapting to changes in measurement from the English to the metric system include the purchase of

clothing, food, home products and transportation. Without going into them,

the problems are indeed staggering. Fortunately, there is a commonness

about the problems that consumers might face. This is, that knowledge of the

metric system and the motivation to use it would alleviate many if not all of the difficulties. In order to be able to educate consumers and to motivate them with

respect to the system, a comprehensive understanding is needed of their cur- rent knowledge or lack of knowledge of the metric system as well as of the

English system. In addition, good understanding is required of the kinds of

advantages and disadvantages they see in a new system — whether these be

real or imagined.

In order to do this, our committee has recommended a comprehensive

study of consumers' knowledge of the metric system and of their attitudes

toward the use of this measurement.

In fact, the Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan has al- ready begun work on an initial study of this kind for the National Bureau of

Standards (ch. III). This study which is being conducted among heads of

U.S. households, will provide some valuable insights into the knowledge

consumers currently have about the metric system and about their

willingness or resistance to change.

It begins by finding out whether or not respondents ever heard of the

system, and if they did, goes on to probe their knowledge of the names of measures used and equivalences with our present system. In addition, it inquires about people's experience with the metric system in foreign countries and problems encountered in its use. On the attitude side, it tries to measure how much difficulty people think

they would have adjusting to such things as "speed limits posted as 80

kilometers an hour instead of 50 miles an hour," or "using recipes that call for nine-tenths of a kilogram instead of two pounds"; whether people think

a change to the metric system is good or bad; whether they would be willing

to attend lectures to learn the new measures; and finally, how much they

agree or disagree with such statements as: "Shopping and price comparisons would be so much easier because the metric system is decimal."

"The rest of the world uses the metric system or is changing over so the U.S.

should too." "The metric system would be much easier for our children to learn."
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 129

"It would be too costly to change over all our household devices."

"Life would just be more complicated; we would have to use conversion ta- bles and people would never adjust.

"It would be expensive for business to change their measuring equipment so they would raise prices."

This study was not designed to be comprehensive in covering all types of

U.S. consumers nor in questioning all areas of potential problems associated

with consumers' knowledge of and attitudes toward metrication. But the

kind of information that can be derived from it can begin to clarify the nature and size of the educational problem and the kinds of positive and negative

feelings about the new measurement that would have to be worked with and

against.

A more comprehensive study would probe into a broad range of the possible consumer problems among a more representative sample of U.S.

citizens. It may find that the resistance to change is so overwhelming and the

opportunities for motivating most consumers to accept and use the new

system are so few that this information alone would have an important bearing on recommendations to Congress concerning whether or not to embrace

the new measurements for the United States. The first part of this paper has considered primarily, a static kind of a stu- dy, that is a study which tells a good deal about how people currently feel. It has not gone into how they may react to social pressure to use a new system,

to more information about it, or to compelling reasons to use it. Therefore,

a more dynamic study approach to understanding consumers' reactions to metrication is recommended as well. One other point which is important to note is that there may be very little inherent value to the consumer from a change to the metric system. If this is so, perhaps additional motivation would be necessary to interest people in the new measurements.

For example, consumers might like better standards for their clothing

sizes — new standard measurements that might indicate something of the

dimensions of the clothing might be desirable. While it is not necessary that

this type of standardization accompany the adaption of the metric system, it could very well provide the necessary motivation. Another example of borrowed motivation would involve relating metrication to unit pricing. The

metric system being basically a "tens" type of measurement, could make

unit pricing much simpler to understand. Again, while it is not necessary that unit pricing accompany metrication, it could provide some extra motivation.

It would appear, however, that a great deal of resistance would not be

found, but rather apathy and indifference born of lack of knowledge of the

values of the new system and of reasonable satisfaction with the old. At the same time, opportunities would be found to awaken interest in the new sys- tem, to provide good and motivating reasons for its use and generally help

to develop positive feelings toward a change. At this point, advertising

could be of some help.

Before going into the kinds of contributions advertising could make, it should be pointed out that this paper has been talking about studying
130 THE CONSUMER

Consumers and not about The Consumer. This distinction is made because

there is no such thing as the average consumer. What we have are many different kinds of consumers all of whom want

and need different things from products and services. And so it would be

with consumers' involvement with and their reaction to changes in their

measurement system. Some few would be most knowledgeable about botI x our system and the metric system; others would be much less so — probably

the bulk of the population would fall in this category — but rest assured they

would vary in their knowledge and ability to use both systems. Many

would be resistant to change; others would not. But again, rest assured

that the reasons for resistance would vary. Some simply would be apathetic —

"Why should we change?" "What's in it for me?" Others would have

genuine concern about the confusion that may develop while purchasing; or negative reactions to a "foreign" system; or simply may not wish to

relearn. Each of these kinds of people would have to be treated differently.

They would have to be educated differently and motivated differently. In recommending a proper program of education and motivation, we must

not strive to aim it at the average consumer, because in so doing we might

be talking to no one. Advertising would only be one of the many ways with which the country

would attempt education and motivation of consumers relevant to metrication.

On the education side, we have our regular educational system to rely

upon. In addition, we could employ such methods as TV lectures, mail-study

courses, adult education programs and instructional leaflets. But to get people aware of the change and to move them to want to learn the system and to actually use it is something advertising is peculiarly qualified to do. This is where the understanding gained about consumers' feelings concerning the

change to a new system could be used to create the proper receptivity to and involvement with the use of the metric system.

Through the use of TV commercials and print advertisements, virtually

every consumer in the country could be reached frequently enough to have

considerable impact. By the same token, advertising could be written to

treat the different kinds of problems faced by the many different consumers. How the industry would actually function to accomplish this job cannot be

said now. But in the past on matters of public interest, such as advertising for the American Cancer Society, the Peace Corps and other social action pro- grams of value to the country, advertising has worked in the following way.

The advertising media have donated time on TV and radio and space in magazines. Advertising agencies have donated their staff and time to the

creation of advertising copy — commercials and print advertisements. The

only thing that the sponsoring societies or the government have paid for was

the actual production of print advertisements and of commercials. It is possible this system could apply to the metrication program.

By way of summary, this paper has tried to emphasize the necessity for understanding consumers' reactions to any implementation of the metric

system in the United States. It tries to indicate the role of advertising in educating and motivating consumers with respect to new metric measurements.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 131

It is particularly pleasing that our government has taken the time and the

effort to find out a great deal about the implications of the use of the metric

system for our industries and our consumers. It is hoped that we in advertising could be of some service to the government in helping the country to adapt to the metric system should it become a reality in the near future.
132 THE CONSUMER

CONSUMER ATTITUDES TOWARD METRICATION CHANGEOVER

FOR U.S.

Margaret Dana

Consultant, Consumer Attitudes and Author ofSyndicated Consumer

Information Columns, "Before You Buy," and "Consumer's

Question-Box"

For several years letters from consumers from time to time have asked,

"When will this country start toward the metric system? What can we do to

start it moving? What holds us back?"

The letters began to come in, and are still coming. Many of the comments

were part of long letters discussing several subjects. But 219 of them dealt exclusively with one thing: the metric system and possible change to it in this country. This is not a definitive or conclusive sample but in accord with the

laws of probability I would say it represents some dependable clues to what

people, generally, think. Let me give you a quick picture of what kinds of

people, living where, wrote these letters. First, they come from all our regions: New England, Middle Atlantic,

Middle South and Deep South, Middle West, Far West, West Coast,

and Hawaii. They come from farms, small towns, cities, suburbs and ghettos.

The proportions of each are fairly steady, with perhaps more from towns

around big cities than from any one other section. There is clearly an

almost equal interest in the subject from each type of background.

Who are they? How old are they, and what do they do? Again there is al- most equal division of age levels. Often the writers mention their ages, or imply them, or give details which place them in their age grouping. If there is any edge in the number, it is for the middle, average ages and occupations— homemakers, secretaries, clerical personnel, medical technicians, nurses, men and women in factories and sales jobs. Next largest section is the rather better educated — university and college faculties, school teachers,

industry management heads, economists, college students, etc. Their ages

run from teens to the ranks of the elderly.

Interestingly enough, many letters came from the supposedly lower educational levels. Some were from isolated old-timers, some from minority

group members, the underprivileged, and so on. In addition I checked by transatlantic telephone with two key points in Great Britain — the British Consumer Council and the Retail-Trading Stan- dards Association. Their comments on metrication are stimulating.

As I studied the sampling of 219 letters, I first separated the "fors" from

the "againsts." To my surprise, I found the figures running almost 10 to 1 in favor of a metric changeover.

Then I sorted the letters according to the primary thought theme each ex- pressed. The subject headings read like this: "Easy to Use . . .," "Students find it simple," "Not too old to learn," "International goodwill aided," "National 'Help Each Other'
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 133

result," "Professional People tell why," "Many with Experience Abroad with Metric," "Actual Consumer Petitions for

Metric," "Suggestions on 'How-to-do-it,' " "Those Against

Metric and why," "Spokesmen for Great Britain."

All these letters are interesting and informative, for they give a very clear

psychological picture of widespread attitudes and opinions. Let me select some significant samples for you to read. Under the heading "Metric's so easy to use," a woman in Massachusetts

says, "Having been in Europe and Israel for some time, I know that once one gets used to the terms it becomes very easy to use — especially when it comes to converting into large or small quantities. In fact after using the metric system for a year, and coming back to the U.S. I found it much more dif- ficult to use ounces, pounds, pints, feet, yards, miles, etc." A San Francisco consumer says: "It is much easier to use than our

present system and would prevent lots of mistakes." A Cleveland woman

wrote: "Metric System is simple and much easier to use, although we all might need new measuring cups and spoons, but would get used to it easily."

Another Californian says: "I will be surprised if your mail indicates the

average consumer is in favor of the change; because it's new, it's confusing,

but I am sure it will be easier to use, the relationships are so simple, once the

terminology is learned."

Another West Coast consumer said: "Through experience I have found

the metric system to be easy, fast and efficient, once learned. It makes

shopping and cooking easier. Women may not realize it now, but it is a

blessing to the homemaker." Still another makes this point: "I am sure it would make marketing easier for those housewives who need to know in- stantly the unit cost of each item in their shopping baskets."

A reader in Arizona wrote: "After reading your column on the metric

system I looked up the subject in one of my husband's mathematics

reference books, and now believe it really would simplify things." A letter from the State of Washington I especially enjoyed, for I have a fellow-feeling. She said: "I am in favor of metrication primarily because it is so much

simpler and also because I have never been able to learn how many feet are

in a mile."

That's a sample, but you see the emphasis on "easy to use," for women,

homemakers. (The assumption has been that it would be very difficult.)

The next category is "Students — They Find It Simple." From Fresno,

California, a letter writer said: "Every year students in this country taking

high school or college chemistry use the metric system, and with a minimum

degree of difficulty for most. They adjust because they have to, it is a required course." A woman in Virginia says: "The accuracy, practicality

and simplicity immediately place the metric system above all others. From

personal experience I know how readily young schoolchildren in Europe

grasp the fundamentals and how easily they manipulate the figures." From

Oregon comes this statement: "In checking around our group of friends and

relatives, every one under 30 has had the metric system in grade school and

high school. All who work in scientific or engineering related fields must

work with both systems."
134 THE CONSUMER

Two letters from Sacramento. California, mention that in the state with its median education of a least 13 years, the metric system must be familiar to most young people there. Its introduction generally would also "reduce the

number of measurement systems which nursing, medical and science stu- dents must learn and use." A man in Milwaukee says he feels the country

could begin adopting the system now. with the complete changeover date some time in the future. 5 to 10 years. "The system could be taught immediately in schools everywhere and the generations coming up could learn two systems, just as European children learn their own language as well as English."

An Oregonian's letter said: "When I was in the 8th grade the teacher told us how much simpler the metric system is. We all learned it and planned on

using it in everyday life in the near future. That was in 1 926."

Nearly everyone I've talked to about the problems involved with changing

to the metric system has felt that however younger people might adapt, the

real trouble would be with the elderly consumer who couldn't or wouldn't

learn new ways. To an extent this probably is true, but don't take if for granted. Many women in their seventies and eighties are proud of being able

to learn and adapt. One woman in Arizona wrote that although it had been

30 years since she graduated from school she was ready for the change, but

the "die-hard older generation would have to be schooled to it in some special way." Another woman wrote that though she was in the older years, she

felt never too old to learn. From Iowa a consumer writes that she studied

high school physics forty years ago. and has always been ready to accept

metrication.

A Portland. Maine grandmother of 67 says. "Here is one hearty approval

of the change to metric weights and measures (My B.A. in 1924)." A pair of

elderly readers said: "It will no doubt be difficult for those of our age to adjust to metrication, but we think for the future it is a step in the right

direction." And a Seattle reader suggests. "If this country, and perhaps the

world, is to be ruled by young people, they would adapt to it quickly and we

oldsters would soon die off anyway. I'm for metrication.' " A number of people brought up the point that for the U.S. not to change as almost all major countries have changed to the metric system, or are planning to. would set up a barrier between us and others. One says: "If we

are not to be isolated from the rest of the world, the sooner the better we

change to the metric system." Another letter asks: "Why hold ourselves

aloof from the rest of the world? The changeover could also perhaps help our

export system urgently needed for our economic progress."

A California woman sent a most thoughtful letter. Her point is: "In this age of communication gaps between peoples, it seems to me we should try to minimize all areas of friction or lack of understanding and here is an area where we can adopt the best and do ourselves and everyone else tremendous

good." A rather remarkable letter came from a homemaker in Connecticut.

"There might be an extra 'spin-off,' " she says, "an advantage that is not so obvious." Whenever there is a crisis or need for help anywhere we help each

other. We rally round. So visualize this scene: everyone with a handy-instant

converter in his hand. Everyone feeling just a little stupid; no one really in a
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 135

position to feel superior to anyone. There we are. standing at a counter in the

store wondering how many decimeters of cloth we need, or kilograms of sugar. So we smile, looking a little foolish, and someone else smiles, sees you

need help and comes over to help. People are beginning to relate to each

other. Converting to the metric system might be just the thing to 'bring us

together.'

As you would expect, the collection of letters from various professionals

such as teachers, lawyers, doctors, etc. were particularly informed and to the

point. A man in Virginia who works for an engraver and stationer, also had

a good angle. He wrote that the metric system would help greatly with their

everyday problems which grow huge at inventory time. "Counting merchandise in dozens, grosses, pounds, means a lot of lost time and frustrations ar- riving at the proper count for inventory." A Junior High teacher in New Jer- sey reports: "My eighth graders conducted a debate on the English versus

the metric system. Even though they groaned at the mention of studying the

metric system, a large majority in each class (total of 57 students) voted for the use of the metric system after the debates."

A teacher on the West Coast said: "I am annually faced with the impossible task of teaching and reteaching our present system of measurement.

Children just do not understand it. I wholeheartedly support the adoption of

the metric system." A moderator of a 'talk show' on the radio in Illinois,

writes "In this very conservative area of NW Illinois, this is one change

which a majority of our listeners seem to be for." The Chairman of a department of fashion design in a southern university tells how she has believed for long that pattern makers must shift to the metric system. "An international

method is essential and the metric system is most practical and the easiest to learn because of its logical decimal system."

A spokesman for the Women's Lib movement also got into the act. Her

letter urges me to make sure the Secretary of Commerce doesn't let the National Bureau of Standards use the measurements of a pin-up girl to effect the change, or exploit a woman's body to get the attention of people learning

the metric system.

One thing which has been quite often overlooked when appraising the dif- ficulties that may lie ahead for us in a metric changeover, is the fact that today there is a solid core of thousands of people, men and women, who

have lived in a country which uses the metric system, and then come home

to the U.S. wishing we had it here. These are army people, usually, or

foreign business management families who have had tours of duty abroad.

They are missionaries in their own communities, urging the metric system.

One such woman wrote: "As an unmathematical type of female I can heartily vouch for the metric system. It's much easier to learn than pounds,

ounces, etc. I spent some years in Europe and found their system a snap to learn." A Seattle reader says: "I don't need to think twice about voting for the

metric system. I am all for it. I have lived in different countries that use the

metric system and believe me. it's a lot easier to keep an eye on your money

that way. especially if you're on a limited income." Another tells me. "As a

military wife I've had the pleasure of living in Germany 5Vz years. The metric
136 THE CONSUMER

system is the greatest! I have kitchen scales, measuring cups, thermometers

in the metric system, as well as a conversion chart. I think it would be a great

service to consumers if the U.S. went metric."

There are many more like this, and they are to be reckoned with. Ten

years have produced some sophisticated attitudes among many young

women, and many others have traveled extensively in these days of easy

tours by plane. It was interesting, too. to receive literal petitions signed by

many people asking help in getting the metric system under way. One card

says "We cast seven votes for the metric system. Postcards to our senators and representatives already sent." And from Milwaukee came an honest-togoodness petition signed by 23 men and women, who as consumers want the

metric system.

Now we come to some practical suggestions from people as to how they

think we could begin the changeover. An Oregon consumer says he thinks

volume and weight would be fairly easy — could be begun at once, but length

will take more time and work. A Pennsylvania consumer says she believes

with the extensive use of TV today, people could be taught through that medium very quickly — seeing how it works. This agrees with the study made

recently by the University of Vermont which found that generally the many

women they contacted were not antagonistic to the change, but persistently

suggested it be implemented by use of actual measuring tools: cups, spoons,

pans, "yard-sticks." etc. instead of using charts, books or printed matter. A San Francisco woman says her neighbors and friends have talked this over with her. and there is agreement that even hesitant or disapproving people could be convinced with careful, clear and repeated explanations using

everyday situations familiar to them. Another suggestion that came in was

for the change to come gradually, a 3- to 5-year interval, she thinks, with

both systems printed on labels for a time, and getting the medical and scientific people to help as missionaries. A reader in Roanoke thinks 10 years is a better period to allow. He believes a thorough system of education worked

out by the NBS with a consumer advisory committee would do the job

without trouble. An Assistant Professor at the University of Iowa agrees, and suggests ways of getting the public used to metric terms and meanings.

A doctor in Oregon suggests industry be persuaded to help with giveaways providing metric measuring tools, like "meter sticks." It would

soon become common knowledge. Two letter writers felt a better system

than the metric system based on tens, would be the Basic 1 2. They felt it was

not really necessary to make use of the count of our fingers in creating a

better system. Their arguments are interesting, but seem not to get con- sumers interested.

All of the letters offering ideas on "how to do it" underline one very good

thought: make use of those who support the changeover to become community aides in bringing understanding and effective use into play, once the

changeover is decided upon. Neighborhood committees could help at stores or wherever people need a little information at the point of sale. These letters that have come to me show that the majority would willingly take part in this. So we would have a national network ofvolunteers for the metric system.

Finally, in fairness, let's look at the letters against the metric changeover.
SELECTED AREAS OF CONSUMER CONCERN 137

They are all very much alike. Some just say, "Forget it!" others. "What was

good enough for my father and mother is good enough for me and my chil- dren." Others just shudder and run. verbally. One letter cited a book.

"Methods of Machine Shop Work." with a chapter entitled "Metric Falla- cy" by F. A. Halsey. published by McGraw-Hill. He says this chapter will cure anyone of the desire for the metric system.

There are letters saying it's fine for the U.S. to stand alone with a different

system. Other letters say. "I'm too old to learn." And a real estate lawyer

describes as terrible, the confusion that would result if the metric system were applied to the measurements of lands, and deeds on file. In two overseas phone calls to London I collected two different points of

view. I'll give the decidedly violent opposition first. This from Rodger

Diplock. Director of the Retail Trading-Standards Association of Great

Britain, and an old friend of mine, which explains his informal language. He

says. "As regards 'going metric,' everybody here hates the guts of every per- son who thought it was a good idea to change from miles to kilometers. I suppose we are prepared to accept decimalization next February, on the basis we shall be going into the Common Market (which Heaven Forbid). As to metrication, the cost to this country will be absolutely staggering and I wish

to know nothing of it. In any case I shall still go on walking a mile to my local pub instead of working it out in kilometers."

But Miss Sheila Kemp, an executive with the British Consumer Council,

feels people are being prepared for the change, and will gradually accept it if enough clear explanations are made when metrication actually starts. Some

British consumers, she says, feel that the change to the decimal money

system due in February, 1971. is a chance to let industry raise prices. They

also feel the new measurements of the metric system would let industry use

"tricks" to raise prices and cut amounts of goods received. Miss Kemp feels strongly that this is the result of not getting the right words and the right facts

into the general communication channel, to help people understand how the

old and new systems compare.

That the costs of change will be at least in part handed on to consumers is a fact. But that it can save money for them later on. is also a fact. It is going

to take skillful art and highly competent word masters to bridge the communication gap in our own country, if the metric system is not to divide us

further and create ill will at the grass roots. But I believe it is psychologically

possible and has greater consumer support than is usually realized.
Appendix 1

Public Law 90-472 3Ul 2Ut B 2 stat. 693 To authorize the Secretary of Commerce to make a study to determine the advantages and disadvantages of increased use of the metric system in the United

States. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of Metric system. Commerce is hereby authorized to conduct a program of investigation, Study, research, and survey to determine the impact of increasing worldwide

use of the metric system on the United States; to appraise the desir- ability and practicability of increasing the use of metric weights and

measures in the United States; to study the feasibility of retaining and promoting by international use of dimensional and other engi- neering standards based on the customary measurement units of the

I "nited States; and to evaluate the costs and benefits of alternative courses of action which may be feasible for the United States. Sec. 2. In carrying out the program described in the first section of Investigation

this Act, the Secretary, among other things, shall— and appraisal

(1) investigate and appraise the advantages and disadvantages requirements,

to the United States in international trade and commerce, and in military and other areas of international relations, of the increased use of an internationally standardized system of weights and

measures

(2) appraise economic and military advantages and disad- vantages of the increased use of the metric system in the United

States or of the increased use of such system in specific fields and

the impact of such increased use upon those affected

(3) conduct extensive comparative studies of the systems of weights and measures used in educational, engineering, manufacturing, commercial, public, and scientific areas, and the rela- tive advantages and disadvantages, and degree of standardization

of each in its respective field

(4) investigate and appraise the possible practical difficulties which might T>e encountered in accomplishing the increased use of the metric system of weights and measures generally or in

specific fields or areas in the United States

(5) permit appropriate participation by representatives of United States industry, science, engineering, and labor, and their

associations, in the planning and conduct of the program authorized by the first section of this Act, and in the evaluation of the information secured under such program; and

(6) consult and cooperate with other government agencies, Federal, State, and local, and, to the extent practicable, with

foreign governments and international organizations. Sec. 3. In conducting the studies and developing the recommenda- Results of tions required in this Act, the Secretary shall give full consideration to changes in the advantages, disadvantages, and problems associated with possible measurement changes in either the system of measurement units or the related di- 8yst(nl - mensional and engineering standards currently used in the United

States, and specifically shall

(1) investigate the extent to which substantial changes in the

size, shape, and design of important industrial products would be

necessary to realize the benefits which might result from general use of metric unite of measurement in the United States;

(2) investigate the extent to which uniform and accepted engi- neering standards based on the metric system of measurement

un'ts are in use in each of the fields under study and compare the extent to such use and the utility and degree of sophistication of such metric standards with those in use in the United States; and

(3) recommend specific means of meeting the practical diffi- culties and costs in those areas of the economy where any recom- mended change in the system of measurement units and related dimensional and engineering standards would raise significant practical difficulties or entail significant costs of conversion. Sec. 4. The Secretary shall submit to the Congress such interim Report to reports as lie deems desirable, and within three years after the date of Congress, the enactment of this Act, a full and complete report of the findings made under the program authorized by this Act, together with such recommendations as he considers to be appropriate and in the best interests of the United States. Sec. 5. From funds previously appropriated to the Department of funds. Commerce, the Secretary is authorized to utilize such appropriated sums as are necessary, but not to exceed $500,000, to carry out the purposes of this Act for the first year of the program.

Sec. 6. This Act shall expire thirty days after the submission of the Expiration

final report pursuant to sect ion 3. date. Approved August 9, 1968.

138
Appendix 2

GLOSSARY

1. Customary System: the system of measurement units (yard, pound,

second, degree Fahrenheit, and units derived from these) most commonly

used in the United States. Often referred to as the "English system" or the

"U.S. system." Our customary system is derived from, but not identical

to, the "Imperial system," the latter has been used in the United Kingdom

and other English-speaking countries, but is being abandoned in favor of the

metric system.

2. Metric System: the measurement system that commonly uses the meter

for length, the kilogram for mass, the second for time, the degree Celsius

(same as "Centigrade") for temperature, and units derived from these. This

system has evolved over the years and the modernized version today is identified as the "International System of Units," which is abbreviated "SI."

3. International System of Units (SI ): popularly known as the modernized

metric system, it is the coherent system of units based upon and including

the meter (length), kilogram (mass), second (time), kelvin (temperature), ampere (electric current), and candela (luminous intensity), as established by

the General Conference on Weights and Measures in 1 960. under the Treaty

of the Meter. A seventh base unit, the mole (for amount of substance) is being considered as another SI base unit. The radian (plane angle) and the

steradian (solid angle) are supplemental units of the system.

4. Metrication: any act tending to increase the use of the metric system

(SI), whether it be increased use of metric units or of engineering standards

that are based on such units.

5. Planned Metrication: metrication following a coordinated national plan

to bring about the increased use of the metric system in appropriate areas of

the economy and at appropriate times. The inherent aim of such a plan

would be to change a nation's measurement system and practices from

primarily customary to primarily metric.

6. Cost of Metrication: that increment of cost, monetary or otherwise,

directly attributable to metrication over and above any costs that would have

been incurred without metrication.

7. Benefits of Metrication: monetary and other advantages accruing as a

result of increased use of the metric system.

8. Measurement Standard: a device or physical phenomenon that is used

to define or determine a characteristic of a thing in terms of a unit of measurement established by authority. Examples are gage blocks, weights, ther- mometers, and mean solar day.

9. Engineering Standard: a practice established by authority or mutual

agreement and described in a document to assure dimensional compatibility,

quality of product, uniformity of evaluation procedure, or uniformity of en- gineering language. Examples are documents prescribing screw thread

dimensions, chemical composition and mechanical properties of steel, dress

sizes, safety standards for motor vehicles, methods of test for sulphur in oil. and codes for highway signs. Engineering standards are often designated in terms of the level of coordination by which they were established (e.g.. company standards, industry standards, national standards).

139

FORM NBS-114A (1-71) U.S. DEPT. OF C OM M

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

ru DL1LA I iUIN UK KtrUKl INU. 2. Gov't Accession No.3. Recipient's Accession No.

4*« TITI 111 LCF A.AMHIN L-< OU'sIIRTTTl Dill LLF

The Consumer

5. Publication Date Jaiy 19 71

6. Performing Organization Code

7. author(s) Survey Research Center et al

Editor: Bruce D. Rothrock

8. Performing Organization

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20234

10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. 4063129

11. Contract/Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report & Period Covered Interim

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

16. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.)

This report, one of a series prepared pursuant to the U.S. Metric Study

Act, presents information on U.S. consumers' knowledge of the metric

system and attitudes and opinions regarding metrication in the U.S.,

and discusses the effects of increasing worldwide metric usage on selected areas of consumer concern. This study is based on (1) an

extensive survey conducted by the Survey Research Center of the

University of Michigan and (2) prepared expert papers on selected areas of consumer interest. The survey data permitted an analysis

of the receptivity of consumers to metrication, and of the need

and possible effectiveness of a program to educate citizens should

planned metrication be undertaken.

17. key words (Alphabetical order, separated by semicolons) Consumers; International System of Units;

metric conversion; metric system; metric usage; metrication; metrication, attitudes

toward; metrication, costs and benefits of; metrication, impact of; National Metric Study

Conferences; SI; U.S. Metric Study

18. aV AILA B ILfTY Sf ATE M ENT

1X1 UNLIMITED.

I I FOR OFFICIAL DISTRIBUTION. DO NOT RELEASE

TO NTIS.

19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

UNCL ASSIFIED

20. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS PAGE)

UNCLASSIFIED

21. NO. OF PAGES

152

22. Price

$1.25

USCOMM-DC 66244-P71

U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1971 OL - 426-991