BACHELOR THESIS
University of Groningen
Faculty of Economics and
Business
JUNE 4, 2018
Name teacher: Sumaya Albalooshi
Name student: Martin Kostov
Student number: s2275244
Address: Esdoornlaan 244 kmr 13,
9741 KJ Groningen
Phone number: 0649293123
Email: mkostov992@gmail.com
Contents
1.
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 2
2.
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3
3.
Literature review ............................................................................................................................. 3
3.1 Gender and Consumer behavior ................................................................................................... 3
3.2 Gender and NFT............................................................................................................................. 5
4.
Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 7
5.
Results ............................................................................................................................................. 8
6.
General Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 11
7.
Appendix........................................................................................................................................ 13
8.
References ..................................................................................................................................... 16
1
Gender and Consumer behavior
1. Abstract
The research highlights the distinction in consumer behavior between males and females
using NFT scale. A data sample was collected from 90 individuals from which 50 percent
were females and 50 percent males. Out of twelve results, three were fully supported by the
hypothesis and show that female individuals scored higher on the NFT scale than male
individuals, in respect to the total NFT, autotelic NFT, and instrumental NFT. Males showed
higher scores on the instrumental dimension than the autotelic. The main practical implication
of this paper is that marketers need to recognize their fellow customers, encourage and direct
them towards the product of their liking. For that reason, it is important for marketers to be
aware of the Autotelic and the Instrumental touch dimensions of the Need for Touch (NFT)
scale and to understand gender differences in order to utilize their marketing strategy
properly.
Key words: Consumer behavior, NFT scale, autotelic, instrumental, gender differences
2
2. Introduction
The study of consumer buying behavior is a key to success in the market. Without being able
to recognize the differences, it is hard to establish a logical and precise relationship between
the consumer and the industry. Generally, companies that are able to adjust their goals
correctly, follow their methods and rely on the recognition of their fellow customers, tend to
achieve great success in their future. Decision making is one of the most complicated
mechanisms of the human thinking. Gender is the most influential factor that impacts
consumer behavior. It has been studied that there are physical differences between male and
female brains. Accordingly, women tend to have a thicker bridge of nerve tissue that links the
right and left side of the brain, which allows them to use both sides of their brain to solve
problems faster, while men essentially use the left side of the brain. The left hemisphere
controls the logic computations and processing facts, while the right hemisphere controls the
visual imagery and interprets context. It is common for women to use more of the organized
cerebral cortex for performing tasks, while men use the larger proportion of grey matter in the
left side of the brain. Apparently, this difference in brain structure leads men to be more goaloriented customers and women to be more autotelic and discovery-oriented customers, who
would instantly readjust their initial goals if this would provide them with a more satisfying
result. In this research we want to mainly concentrate on the sense of touch. In order to
understand consumer behavior, marketers should first understand gender differences and how
they apply to the autotelic touch dimension and the instrumental touch dimension. Firstly, this
report begins with a Literature review where it is discussed the relationship between Gender
and Consumer Behavior and the role Gender plays in Need for Touch. Next, is presented the
Conceptual model and the Methodology part. After which, there is a section with the analyzed
Results. The research paper concludes with a General Discussion.
3. Literature review
3.1 Gender and Consumer behavior
One of the major factors that can affect consumer behavior is gender. It all stems from the fact
that men and women are really different in their shopping behavior. They are characterized by
their upbringing and socialization. Men are known to be more goal-oriented when shopping
and women are generally more experiential-orientated. Male customer’s motives for shopping
appear to be more utilitarian, whereas female customers tend to have more hedonic approach
when it comes to shopping. In other words, men follow the conscious pursuit of an intended
3
consequence and they are shopping “to get something done” whereas women follow their
intrinsic and emotional responses so they are shopping because they love it. The approach to a
male customer has to be straight to the point, clear and concise. Men are interested to know
why they should buy your products and why it would make sense for them to purchase it. The
main focus should be on the product, supported by active statements that emphasize its value.
On the other hand, if you want to reach and grab the interest of a female customer you will
have to provide an emotive shopping experience that will resonate with her. Women are
interested in knowing more about you, your brand, the lifestyle you are selling and how your
products are going to make them feel. Important aspects for women are the promotions
emphasize on glamor, beauty and youth, whereas for men important aspects are the quality of
the products, value of ambition and physical strength. Men view the shopping process more
like a mission. It is not the shopping that excites them but to have something bought that is of
their interest and good use. On the other hand, women love to spend their time shopping, it is
more like a journey to them, they strive for interaction and tend to focus on people whereas
men just want quick answers and would prefer to avoid engaging in long talks and semantics.
Another distinguishable feature is that female customers buy products more on impulse or
because certain product is in fashion, whereas men would buy a product for the use of it or
due to pure desire. Furthermore, female customers experience pride in their ability to pick the
best products for the best prices. Consequently, marketers relate to this perception vividly by
placing selective deals to provide a sense of accomplishment for the female customer’s
shopping journey. By contrast, men are likely to buy something out of necessity, rather than
to wait for a promotion or a best deal price.
What is more, sensory marketing involves senses of consumer and affects their perception,
judgment and behavior (Krishna, 2012). The purpose of sensory marketing is to send
messages to the right hemisphere of the brain, stimulation of the consumer senses, and finally
creating a bond between customer and product inducing him to make a purchase (Costa et al.
2012). The essential difference between emotion and reason is that human beings act based on
emotion and conclude based on the reason. (Kotler et al. 2011) Frankly, a consumer visualizes
using the product and evaluates the final emotions. (Hawkins et al. 1996) Sensory approach is
based on a bilateral interaction in real time and immediately causes a sensory experience and
thus looks for a deeper, long-term relationship with the consumer (Smilansy, 2000).
Gender differences is essential to understanding and predicting consumer behavior and this
research aims to explore the role gender plays in “Need for Touch”. Therefore, gender will be
4
the independent variable of this model. The main focus of the paper is concentrated on further
understanding gender differences in relation to one sensory modality and that is “Touch”.
3.2 Gender and NFT
Need for touch will be the dependable variable in this model. The sense of touch is known to
be like a symbol of physical contract through the skin. (Kotler and Lindstrom, 2005) When
you touch a certain product, from the physical contact, nerves get sent to your brain that
create the sense of ownership. By incorporating the sense of touch, consumers shopping
behavior is positively affected, because of the link they are making with the product. In
fashion and furnishings so much decision making is tactile. Shoppers are trying to picture
through touch, the weight of cloth and how it would feel to wear. So touch fuels emotions for
rational decisionmaking. (Soars, 2009, p. 294)
By simply touching the touch-screen of an electronic product, the sense of touch encourages
interaction between the customers and the products. (Peck and Wiggins, 2006) Furthermore,
other factors such as texture, shape, weight and temperature also create positive impact on the
sense of touch and foster customer loyalty. (Rodrigues et al. 2011) Incorporating the sense of
touch to a product marketing strategy is recommended for increasing a customer base because
it brings the customers closer to the products. Getting in touch with a product and creating a
link affects positively the consumer into his or her desire to buy this certain product. Peck and
Childers (2003b) have developed a multidimensional scale called Need for Touch. It
constitutes the individual difference in motivation to acquire and use haptic information (Peck
& Childers, 2003a). The need for touch scale consists of two dimensions, each including six
variables. One of the dimensions is autotelic and it is indirectly connected with the purchase
behavior. It relates to the pleasure and enjoyment a customer feels via direct contact with a
product. The other dimension is instrumental and it reflects on the information gathered from
the physical attributes of the product, the security and confidence derived from touch, whether
referring to geometric variables, such as size or shape, or referring to material attributes, such
as texture, hardness, weight or temperature (Klatzky et al, 1993). In general, female
consumers tend to have high NFT and rely more on their Hedonic motives. Otherwise
described as the individuals pleasure and satisfaction to touch products for the experiential
enjoyment. On the other hand, male consumers tend to have low NFT and rely more on their
Utilitarian motives. Otherwise described as the need to gather information over a product
through tactile inputs in order to make an informed purchase decision. (see figure1)
It is obvious that gender differences are crucial to understanding and predicting consumer
5
behavior. This research aims to extend our understanding of those differences and further
explore the role gender plays in Need for Touch. The practical implication of this work is that
many marketers encourage consumers to touch products and if they understand the gender
differences in relation to the touch dimensions, then it would make sense for marketers to
encourage female customers to touch products that are more relevant to autotelic touch
dimension of the scale and male customers to touch products that are more relevant to
instrumental touch dimension of the scale.
Figure 1. – Conceptual framework
Gender
Need for Touch
From the above, the following hypotheses regarding NFT were derived:
Alternative Hypothesis 1: Female individuals score higher on the NFT scale than male
individuals
Alternative Hypothesis 2: Female individuals score higher on autotelic dimension of the NFT
scale.
Alternative Hypothesis 3: Male individuals score higher on instrumental dimension of the
NFT scale.
6
4. Methodology
A questionnaire was distributed to a random sample of 90 students in the Netherlands (50%
Female / 50% Male), age 18-30 years old. The subjects were presented with a Need for Touch
scale. The collected data has been analyzed with an independent t-test on SPSS. The Need for
Touch scale is devised by Peck & Childers (2003b) and is used to help provide information on
the subject of consumer behavior in female and male individuals.
Respondents answered the questions by way of a 6-point Likert scale, where number 1 meant
strong disagreement and number 6 meant strong agreement referred to a total of 6 autotelic
dimensions (A) and 6 instrumental dimensions (I). The variables of the scale are as follows:
Touching products can be fun. (1 A Autotelic)
I place more trust in products that can be touched before purchase (1 I Instrumental)
I like to touch products even if I have no intention of buying them. (2 A)
I feel more comfortable purchasing a product after physically examining it. (2 I)
When browsing in stores, 1 like to touch lots of products. (3 A)
When walking through stores, I can't help touching all kinds of products. (4 A)
I feel more confident making a purchase after touching a product. (3 I)
If I can't touch a product in the store, I am reluctant to purchase the product. (4 I)
The only way to make sure a product is worth buying is to actually touch it. (5 I)
When browsing in stores, it is important to handle all kinds of products. (5 A)
I find myself touching all kinds of products in stores. (6 A)
There are many products I would only buy if I could handle them before purchase. (6 I)
7
5. Results
There were in total 90 subjects, 45 females (50%) and 45 males (50%) all of which students
between the age of 18 and 30. The main hypothesis of this research is the: Female individuals
tend to score higher on the NFT scale than male individuals. The second Alternative
Hypothesis is that: Female individuals score higher on autotelic dimension of the NFT scale.
And last but not least, the third Alternative hypothesis is that: Male individuals score higher
on instrumental dimension than on the autotelic dimension of the NFT scale.
According to the first result from the two-sided independent t-test, it has been found the
significance level (Alpha) 0.05 to be much smaller than the significance value 0.81 displayed
on table 2, which means that the variances of the two groups (males and females) are
approximately equal. The t-statistic appears to be -0.901 with 87 df and a significance value
(2-tailed) of 0.37 which is larger than the significant level (Alpha) 0.05, therefore failing to
reject the Null Hypothesis, which means that there is not enough significant evidence to
support the statement that female individuals score higher on the NFT scale than male
individuals.
Given the second result from the independent t-test, it is obvious that the significance level
(Alpha) 0.05 is found to be smaller than the significance value 0.91 displayed on table 2,
which means that the variances between males and females are approximately equal. The tstatistic is 1.368 with 88 df and a significance value (2-tailed) of 0.175 which is larger than
the Alpha 0.05, therefore once more failing to reject the Null Hypothesis, results in not having
enough significant evidence to support the statement that female individuals score higher on
the NFT scale than male individuals.
The third result from the independent t-test, finds the significance level 0.05 to be smaller
than the significance value 0.187 displayed on (see table 2), which means that the variances of
males and females are almost the same. The t-statistic is -1.81 with 88 df and a significance
value (2-tailed) of 0.74 which is larger than the Alpha 0.05. Consequently, failing to reject the
Null Hypothesis results in not having enough significant evidence to back up the statement
that female individuals tend to score higher on the NFT scale.
The fourth result from the independent t-test, finds the significance level 0.05 to be smaller
than the significance value 0.969 displayed on (see table 2), which means that the variances of
8
the groups are very similar. The t-statistic is 0.704 with 88 df and a significance value (2tailed) of 0.483 which is larger than the Alpha 0.05. Therefore, by failing to reject the Null
Hypothesis it is obvious that there is not enough significant evidence to support the argument
that Female individuals tend to score higher on the NFT scale than male individuals.
According to the fifth result from the independent t-test, the significance level 0.05 is found to
be smaller than the significance value 0.289 displayed on (see table 2), which means that the
variances of the groups are approximately equal. The t-statistic is -2.028 with 87 df and the
significance value (2-tailed) of 0.046 is smaller than the Alpha 0.05. Therefore, the Null
Hypothesis is rejected and it follows that there is enough significant evidence to support the
statement which argues that female individuals score higher on the NFT scale than male
individuals. Consequently, it is safe to say that female customers score higher on the autotelic
dimension of the scale.
The sixth result from the independent t-test, finds the significance level 0.05 to be smaller
than the significance value 0.928 displayed on (see table 2), which means that the variances of
males and females are closely alike. The t-statistic is -3.156 with 88 df and the significance
value (2-tailed) of 0.002 is smaller than the Alpha 0.05. Therefore, the Null Hypothesis is
rejected and accordingly it turns out that there is enough significant evidence to support the
theory that female individuals score higher on the NFT scale than male individuals. Also, the
result provides significant evidence on the base that female customers tend to be more haptic
orientated and more closely aligned with the Autotelic dimension of the NFT scale.
The seventh result from the independent t-test, exhibits the significance level 0.05 to be
smaller than the significance value 0.605 displayed on (see table 2), which suggests that the
variances of the groups are approximately equal. The t-statistic is 0.532 with 87 df and the
significance value (2-tailed) 0.596 is larger than the significance level Alpha 0.05.
Accordingly, by failing to reject the Null Hypothesis it appears that there is not enough
significant evidence to support the theory that female individuals score higher on the NFT
scale than male individuals.
The eighth result from the independent t-test, finds the significance level 0.05 to be smaller
than the significance value 0.799 displayed on (see table 2), which infers that the variances of
the two groups are very similar. The t-statistic is -0.344 with 88 df and the significance value
9
(2-tailed) 0.732, appears to be much larger than the significance level Alpha 0.05. Hence, by
failing to reject the Null Hypotheses it follows that there is not enough significant evidence to
support the statement that female individuals tend to score more on the NFT scale than male
individuals.
The ninth result from the independent t-test, finds the significance level 0.05 to be smaller
than the significance value 0.66 taken from (see table 2), which implies that the variances of
the groups are approximately equal. The t-statistic is -0.878 with 88 df and the significance
value (2-tailed) 0.383, which is bigger than the significance level Alpha 0.05. Thus, by failing
to reject the Null Hypothesis it is evident that there is not enough significant evidence to
support the statement that female individuals tend to score higher on the NFT scale than male
individuals.
In consonance, with result ten from the independent t-test, its noticeable that the significance
level 0.05 is smaller than the significance value 0.883 displayed on (see table 2), which
suggests that the variances of both groups are very similar. The t-statistic is -1.226 with 88 df
and the significance value (2-tailed) 0.223, which is larger than the significance level Alpha
0.05. Therefore, failing to reject the Null Hypothesis it follows that there is not enough
evidence to support the argument that female individuals score more on the NFT scale than
male individuals.
Result eleven from the independent t-test, exhibits the significance level 0.05 to be smaller
than the significance value 0.899 portrayed on (see table 2), which implies that the variances
of the two groups are approximately the same. The t-statistic is -2.331 with 87 df the
significance value (2-tailed) of 0.022, which is smaller than the significance level Alpha 0.05.
Therefore, by rejecting the Null Hypothesis it follows that there is enough significant
evidence to support the statement that female individuals score higher on the NFT scale than
male individuals. What is more, the result also provides enough significant evidence to the
theory that female individuals tend to be more haptic orientated and more closely aligned with
the Autotelic dimension of the NFT scale.
Result twelve from the independent t-test, exhibits the significance level 0.05 to be smaller
than the significance value 0.448 displayed on (see table 2), which suggests that the variances
of the two groups are very similar. The t-statistic is -1.889 with 88 df and the significance
10
value (2-tailed) 0.062, which is slightly larger than the significance level Alpha 0.05. Hence,
failing to reject the Null Hypothesis implies that there is not enough significant evidence to
support the argument that female individuals tend to score higher on the NFT scale than male
individuals. However, if the significance level Alpha is set to be 0.1 or 10%, in that case it
turns out that the p-value 0.062 is smaller than the Alpha, which allows to reject the Null
Hypothesis and state that indeed there is enough significant evidence to support the statement
that female individuals tend to score higher on the NFT scale than male individuals. Having in
mind that, testing for a higher level of Alpha increases the chances of a type 1 error, or in
other words, incorrectly rejecting the Null hypothesis.
To sum up, result 5,6 and 11 appear to have lower p-values than the significance level Alpha
0.05, which allows to reject the Null hypothesis and state that female individuals tend to score
higher on the NFT scale than male individuals. Furthermore, these results support the belief
that female individuals exhibit a higher need for haptic information, following that their
intrinsic and emotional responses and are more well-adjusted to the Autotelic dimension of
the NFT scale. However, the rest of the results have p-values larger than the significance level
Alpha 0.05, therefore do not provide enough significant evidence that female individuals
score higher on the NFT scale than male individuals. There is a lack of robustness in the
findings, which may be due to the small size of the sample. The data weakly supports the
main implication of the paper, therefore for future research it would be recommended to be
gathered a larger sample of data to ensure more robust results. A wider sample of population
is definitely required in order for a more obscure research to be conducted on the subject.
6. General Discussion
Overall, this paper is concentrated on establishing a better sense of gender differences and
understanding Consumer Behavior. It is important to be aware with what kind of customers
you are dealing with, how they reason and decide between different alternatives, and the
behavior they portray while researching and shopping. Those are all vital aspects of marketing
that one needs to recognize in order to broaden their awareness of the customer and increase
selling probability. The analysis evaluates the different behavior in female and male
individuals by presenting each individual with a Need for Touch scale designed by Peck &
Childers (2003). The research shows that results 5,6 and 11 exhibited on (see table 2), have
statistical significance and support the findings that female individuals score higher on the
11
NFT scale than male individuals. However, the rest of the results show that there is not
enough significant evidence to claim that female individuals score higher on the NFT scale
than male individuals. Evidently, a limitation of the study is that the data weakly supports the
theory in question, which appears to be due to the small sample size gathered for the analysis.
Therefore, for future references it is important to stress that a larger sample is required for the
results to be more conclusive and robust. Additionally, expanding the conceptual framework
and making it more thorough would be another recommendation for future work on the
subject. In conclusion, the paper provides a closer look into Consumer Behavior and describes
in a way the role gender plays in the multidimensional Need for Touch scale. Furthermore, it
builds on certain aspects and factors that influence purchasing behavior and mainly reflects on
the idea that consumer behavior is a controllable variable in the market place given the right
set of tools.
12
7. Appendix
Table 1
13
Table 2
14
Figure 1
15
8. References
Abhishek, S., Sinha, P. K. & Vohra, N. (2013) Role of haptic touch in shopping. Journal of
human rights and Social Work, Vol 40(issue 3): 153-163
Avello M., Abril C, Gavilan D, Ferran M, Mazano R. (2016) The Influence of Need for
Touch in Multichannel Purchasing Behaviour. An approach based on its instrumental and
autotelic dimensions and consumer´s shopping task. International Journal of Marketing,
Communication and New Media, Vol 4(6)
Gallace, A & Spence, C. (2011) Multisensory design: Reaching out to touch the consumer.
Psychology & Marketing, Vol.28(3):267–308
Grayson, K., & Shulman, D. (2000) Indexicality and the Verification Function of
Irreplaceable Possessions: A Semiotic Analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol 27(1):
17-30
Grebosz, M. & Wronska, B. (2005) Sensory impact on consumer behavior. Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 49(4), p. 48 - 64.
Janiszewski, C & King, D. (2011) Affect-Gating. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.
38(4): 697-711
Krishna, A., Elder, R. S. & Caldara, C. (2010) Feminine to smell but masculine to touch?
Multisensory congruence and its effect on the aesthetic experience. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, Vol 20(issue 4): 410-418
Lakshmi V., Lahari G. & Niharika D. Impact of Gender on Consumer Purchasing Behaviour.
Journal of Business and Management, Vol 19 (Issue 8) 33-36
Shabgou, M. & Daryani, S. M. (2014) Towards the sensory marketing: Stimulating the five
senses (sight, hearing, smell and taste) and its impact on consumer behavior. Indian Journal
of Fundamental and Applied Life Siences, Vol 4: 573-581
Yazdanparast, A., & Spears, N. (2012) Can consumers forgo the need to touch products? An
investigation of nonhaptic situational factors in an online context. Psychology and Marketing,
Vol 30(1): 46-61
16
A.van Aswegen (2015, October 29) Women vs. Men – Gender Differences in Purchase
Decision Making
Rertreived from:
https://www.guided-selling.org/women-vs-men-gender-differences-in-purchase-decisionmaking/
17