I didn't see whether these numbers were statistically significant or not. In research, real research, "the most" doesn't always mean causation. Did they do P Ratios? My guess would be no. Just plain counting, which doesn't prove a thing. P Ratios show how much of the numbers are due to chance and the lower the P Ratio, the less likely the results are due to chance.
I think the results are simply due to either coincidence or like Chili said, Apple paid for the study to further "cool up" their exorbitantly expensive phones. What about people who just have phones
My Man works for a big electronics firm and we "have to" have the phones associated with his company. They don't give them to us, we don't get a discount, no coupon, the employees and his or her families are just "supposed to" use the phones this company makes. Silly. The thing is, this restriction isn't legal, and they were challenged for it, so now they simply say "we prefer you use our phones." My phone has an iPhone like style, but has a heat sensitive touch screen. So, when my face touches it, while I am talking, I often hang up on people, hit Mute by accident, or start doing math problems on the calculator with my eyebrows. *pffffftt* It's too easy to get on the internet by accident, and I really don't want to pay for the internet on my phone. It isn't that important for me to do Facebook updates from the grocery store...."I'm looking at cereal. Damn, cereal is expensive. Where did they put the soy milk, now?" Scintillating.