Laboratory researches are the primary used mode by scholars in marketing research from a long time (Gneezy, 2017). In my review of the article Field Experimentation in Market Research, I found that the author encouraged field experiments over the laboratory experiments. I believe the author was successful in showing how field experiments, “given the challenges and potential downsides, researchers should even consider running field experiments” (Gneezy, 2017). Ayelet Gneezy is Associate Professor of Behavioral Science and Marketing in University of California, who have tried to demonstrates the unique value that field experiments can offer. In the article, the author has explained how results from the field experiments are different from those of laboratory experiments. For instance, in a lab experiment participants know that they are being monitored, hence they may manipulate their response consciously and act in a different manner. Whereas, in field experiments participants are unaware of being monitored most of the time, thus, making their actions more genuine. The author further discusses the validity and instrumental usage of field experimentation in marketing research by proposing that it can be applied to previously established theories and then observed to see the extent to which it applies to real life, while also being able to capture long term effect. It is also helpful to recall that experiments conducted in a natural setting instead of a ‘genetically modified lab’ often uniquely explain the occurrence of certain phenomena, while simultaneously reinforcing existing theories and their significance. As the article progresses, it shows several instances wherein firms can identify the best prices based on the demand of a product when sold at varying price points. This further goes to reinforce that a firm is able to make vital economic decisions of establishing a selling price by the response of the person who reacts varyingly to different price levels. An example of a real life situation as mentioned in the article is when Netflix announced its decision to increase its membership plan by 60%, which caused the company’s market value to drop two thirds as a result of outrage from the customer base (Gneezy, 2017). Further on, the author states that researchers have more flexibility in choosing the setting for their experiment which enables them to conduct independent field experiments. However, Field Experimentation also involves a significant loss of control and increased number of variables that should be considered in the design phase as well as during data analysis. In conclusion, the findings suggest that the field experiments are important if the researchers want to understand the true behaviour of the people in the real environment (Gneezy, 2017). It will cost more but the information gathered from it will be more relevant. The article had over complicated concepts and it personally did not meet my expectations in terms of knowledge gained from it.