This isn't very good science. There are plenty of alternative conclusions the data supports just as well as the one they chose. So saying they did science to support their conclusion is false.

For example, they didn't even bother to try a control: do the same thing but fill the booths with non-food. Maybe the food was irrelevant.

Or maybe the men were just more bored while doing the experiment, perhaps for cultural reasons. They didn't test for that either.

etc