When your vibrator looks like a penis
An empirical analysis of the effect of human resemblance in vibrators on women’s evaluations
Lotte Harenslak (10853405)
Master Thesis
MSc Business Administration – Marketing Track
Supervisor: Andrea Weihrauch
June 23rd, 2017 Statement of originality This document is written by Lotte Harenslak, who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document are original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
2 Abstract
How would women respond if vibrators started looking more like realistic penises? Realistic human-resembling sex robots are starting to disrupt the sex toys industry, so marketers need to investigate whether they should encourage or prevent this trend of human resemblance from catching on to other sex toys, specifically to vibrators. If marketers would sell vibrators that don’t comply to what women currently desire, they could risk aggravating the taboo or even raising the threshold to purchase and use vibrators. Two theories – anthropomorphism and the uncanny valley – predicted contradicting evaluations of women towards the appearance of vibrators. This study followed a 2 (color: blue versus skin-color) x 2 (surface: dots versus veins) between-subjects experimental design. Results of an online questionnaire (N = 233) showed that women significantly preferred artificially colored (blue) vibrators over skin-colored vibrators, but they had no preferences for any surface. Anthropomorphism appeared to negatively affect how women perceived a vibrator, which was in accordance to the uncanny valley. This has raised the expectancy that women will not start demanding realistic vibrators in the near future, as vibrators are used in a very different context (fun, empowerment, therapeutic) than sex robots are (affinity, substitution for partner). In order to minimize the shame associated with sex toys and to reach more consumers, marketers need to focus their efforts on the enjoyment and health benefits of masturbation.
Key words
Vibrators; sex toys; sex robots; masturbation; sexual health; anthropomorphism; uncanny valley; skin-color.
3 Table of contents
Statement of originality ...... 2
Abstract ...... 3
Key words ...... 3
Introduction ...... 9
Academic relevance ...... 10
Managerial relevance ...... 11
Structure of the thesis ...... 11
Literature review ...... 12
The vibrator ...... 12
The image of vibrators ...... 14
History of the vibrator and masturbation ...... 14
Today: autonomy and acceptance ...... 16
The rise of realistic vibrators? ...... 17
Why realistic vibrators might succeed ...... 18
Why realistic vibrators might fail ...... 19
The uncanny valley ...... 20
Dimensions of the uncanny valley ...... 22
Acquaintance ...... 23
The appearance of the vibrator ...... 24
Conceptual model ...... 25
Methodology ...... 26
Research design ...... 26
Sample ...... 26
4 Independent variables ...... 27
Color ...... 27
Surface ...... 28
Dependent variables ...... 30
Likeability ...... 30
Willingness to use ...... 30
Additional dependent variables ...... 31
Control variables ...... 32
Shape ...... 32
Material ...... 33
Gender ...... 33
Age ...... 33
Covariate variables ...... 33
Acquaintance ...... 33
Additional covariates ...... 34
Questionnaire design and ethics ...... 34
Control questions ...... 35
Introduction ...... 35
The experiment ...... 36
Consumer characteristics ...... 36
Debriefing ...... 37
Results ...... 38
Descriptive analyses ...... 38
Reliability ...... 39
Correlations ...... 40
5 Hypotheses testing ...... 42
Evaluations of vibrators (H1, H2 and H3) ...... 42
Consumer characteristics (H4) ...... 48
Additional consumer characteristics ...... 51
Overview of hypotheses ...... 53
Discussion ...... 54
Evaluations of vibrators (H1, H2, H3) ...... 54
Consumer characteristics (H4) ...... 56
Theoretical implications ...... 58
Contribution to anthropomorphism ...... 58
Contribution to the uncanny valley ...... 59
Managerial implications ...... 59
Limitations and future research ...... 61
Reference List ...... 65
Appendix A: Pre-test questionnaire ...... 75
Appendix B: Pre-test results ...... 81
Appendix C: Online questionnaire ...... 83
Appendix D: Gift card questionnaire ...... 89
6 List of figures
Figure 1. Erogenous zones of female genitals...... 13
Figure 2. The uncanny valley...... 20
Figure 3. The uncanny valley with vibrators...... 21
Figure 4. Conceptual framework...... 25
Figure 5. The vibrators as used in the four conditions of the experiment...... 29
Figure 6. General shape of the vibrator used in the questionnaire...... 32
Figure 8. The amount women were willing to pay for different colored vibrators...... 47
Figure 9. Overall evaluations of acquainted versus non-acquainted women towards vibrators.
...... 49
Figure 10. Likeability of acquainted women towards different colored vibrators...... 49
Figure 11. Willingness to use of non-acquainted women towards vibrators with different
levels of human resemblance...... 50
Figure 12. Evaluations of non-acquainted women towards different colored vibrators...... 50
Figure 13. Evaluations of sexually inactive versus sexually active women towards vibrators.
...... 51
Figure 14. Evaluations of skin-colored vibrators by women who were closed versus open to
sexual experimentation...... 53
Figure 15. Where vibrators are situated in the uncanny valley...... 55
7 List of tables
Table 1. Number of Participants in Questionnaire, Assigned to Different Conditions ...... 38
Table 2. Correlations Matrix: Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations and Reliabilities .... 41
Table 3. The Effects of Color and Surface on Evaluations of Vibrators ...... 43
Table 4. The Effects of Color and Surface on Pleasantness, Likeability, Turn-on and
Willingness to Use of Vibrators ...... 44
Table 5. The Effects of Color and Surface on the Amount Women Were Willing to Pay for
Vibrators ...... 47
Table 6. Overview of the Hypotheses ...... 53
8 Introduction
Every woman loves to have fun, so they all spoil themselves every now and then. 89% of all women admit to masturbating, 48% of them masturbate every week and 22% even enjoy this act on a daily basis (Statistic Brain, 2016). Not only is masturbation the ultimate form of joy and pleasure (Fahs & Frank, 2014, p. 241), but scientists have repeatedly proven the many mental and physical health benefits associated with masturbation (Fahs & Swank, 2013, pp.
668 – 669; LoPiccolo & Lobitz, 1972, p. 163).
Marketers have the great responsibility to foster this sexual health, for example by researching how to provide and improve tools such as sex toys. The latest advancement is the highly realistic sex robot (Maines, 2008, p. 10). As these human resembling dolls are disrupting the sex toys industry, marketers need to explore whether women’s demands will change regarding human resemblance in the appearance of sex toys, specifically in the case of the currently much used and well-accepted vibrator.
As 53% of women use vibrators when masturbating, vibrators account for about 20% of all sales in the sex toys industry – more than any other toy (Statistic Brain, 2016). High-tech advancements in vibrators have resulted in optimal stimulation of orgasms, but also in more futuristic and artificial looking vibrators. What happens if vibrators start looking more like realistic penises? This phenomenon, called “anthropomorphism”, in which human-like characteristics are ascribed to non-human objects (Serenko, 2007, p. 482), has been proven to positively affect consumers’ evaluations (Aaker, 1997, pp. 347 – 348). In contrast, Mori (2012) asserts that high levels of anthropomorphism can also have negative effects (p. 98). His theory, called the “uncanny valley”, shows that highly realistic robots are evaluated to be eerie or even repulsive (Geller, 2008, p. 11).
9 By examining the level of human resemblance in the looks of vibrators, marketers can anticipate women’s shifting preferences and, thereby, optimize the experience of masturbating with a vibrator. This thesis seeks to answer the question:
"How does human resemblance of the color and of the surface in the appearance
of vibrators affect female consumers' evaluation?"
Academic relevance
This thesis provides new insights in the understanding of two different theories:
“anthropomorphism” and the “uncanny valley”. Both theories have been researched extensively regarding robots that resemble humans, which mainly focused on resembling full human bodies or human facial features. Although some research has been done on robots resembling different secluded body parts – e.g. hands (Mori, 2012, pp. 98 – 100) or arms (Castro-González, Admoni,
& Scassellati, 2016, p. 28) – research on the applicability of these theories lacks when it comes to sexual body parts.
In particular, while prior research has focused mainly on anthropomorphizing robots in order to elicit positive reactions from consumers, this thesis seeks to find out whether resembling different bodily characteristics can also elicit negative reactions from consumers.
Also, the applicability of the uncanny valley is critically reevaluated: is it reasonable to apply the uncanny valley to all robotic applications, or does the uncanny valley take different shapes for different applications?
Since robots and alike technologies are becoming more and more entrenched in the everyday life (Sabanović, 2010, p. 439; Selwyn, 2003, p. 100), theories like anthropomorphism and the uncanny valley should get optimized and reevaluated extensively in order to get a deeper understanding of their applicability.
10 Managerial relevance
Since this sensitive topic makes it hard to reach many people and to properly educate about sexual health, it is important for managers to understand consumers and understand the current trends. If managers would try to sell sex toys that don’t fit with what consumers actually desire, they could risk to aggravate the taboo and even raise the threshold to buy and use sex toys.
However, consumers don’t express their wants and needs regarding sexual products as much as managers need them to, which makes the task of designing and selling the perfect sex toys even harder.
Not only will the results of this thesis lead to directions for the design of vibrators, but it will also give some guidance to managers on how deal with the taboo on sexual products and how to comply to the current trends in sexuality.
Structure of the thesis
This thesis will be structured as follows. In the literature review, the theoretical background to the research question will be discussed. This section includes an investigation of how women perceive vibrators nowadays and an exploration of the applicability of the relevant theories, leading to the research hypotheses. Next, the research methodology is presented, followed by the results of the experiment. Finally, the discussion provides insights into the results, puts forth the implications for theory and for managers, and discusses the limitations and recommendations for future research.
11 Literature review
This chapter will elaborate on the theoretical background of the research question:
"How does human resemblance of the color and of the surface in the appearance
of vibrators affect female consumers' evaluation?"
The vibrator
A vibrator is a phallic-shaped sex toy (Fahs & Swank, 2013, p. 667), designed to stimulate the body’s erogenous zones (Fulbright, 2007, pp. 179 – 181). Opposed to motionless and non- responding dildos, vibrators contain one or more moving mechanisms (e.g. vibrations, hence their name). Because of these vibrations and other movements, vibrators have the ability to stimulate erogenous zones far more intense than a penis would be able to (Davis, Blank, Lin,
& Bonillas, 1996, p. 313). In addition, vibrators come in many different shapes and sizes, which makes it easier to reach more and different erogenous zones than a penis could reach (E. Laan, personal communication, April 26, 2017; Fulbright, 2007, p. 181). Therefore, vibrators don’t only stimulate the well-known clitoris and G-spot, but also the cervix, M-spot, AFE-zone
(Anterior Fornix Erogenous Zone) and the P-spot (Fulbright, 2007, p. 35), as can be seen in
Figure 1.
12
Figure 1. Erogenous zones of female genitals.
Vibrators are used during solitary or partnered masturbation or during sexual intercourse with a partner (Davis et al., 1996, p. 318; Herbenick, Reece, Sanders, Dodge, Ghassemi, &
Fortenberry, 2010, p. 50). Not only does the usage of vibrators contribute to pleasure
(Herbenick et al., 2010, p. 61), but it has also seriously contributed to overall and sexual health.
The World Health Organization (2010) defined “sexual health” as:
… a state of physical, emotional, mental and social well-being related to sexuality; it is
not merely the absence of disease, dysfunction or infirmity. Sexual health requires a
positive and respectful approach to sexuality and sexual relationships, as well as the
possibility of having pleasurable and safe sexual experiences, free of coercion,
discrimination and violence. For sexual health to be attained and maintained, the sexual
rights of all persons must be respected, protected and fulfilled (p. 3).
13 Women have addressed the use of vibrators to increase sexual desire, arousal and lubrication, decrease sexual pain, intensify orgasms, and generally improve sexual functioning and satisfaction (Fahs & Swank, 2013, p. 668). Vibrators can also serve as an aid for older patients, people with chronic pain or with orgasmic dysfunction (LoPiccolo & Lobitz, 1972, p. 163), people struggling with a poor body image or even sexually abused people (Fahs & Swank,
2013, p. 669).
Since vibrators are mainly directed at stimulation of the female body, especially when it comes to solitary masturbation (Fahs & Swank, 2013, p. 667), the focus of this thesis will be on women. Moreover, because all women react differently to sexual stimulation (King &
Belsky, 2012, p. 1145), this thesis will explore the so called “dual vibrators” which focus on stimulating the clitoris and G-spot simultaneously (Isik, 2010, p. 27).
The image of vibrators
Currently, the vibrator is well accepted and much used in terms of recreation (Attwood, 2005, p. 396). Female masturbation revolves around having fun, empowerment and independence
(Isik, 2010, p. 25). However, this hasn’t always been the case. One important step in understanding women’s current appreciation of the vibrator, is understanding what women don’t want the vibrator to resemble. How has the vibrator transformed throughout history?
History of the vibrator and masturbation
Medical device. Electric vibrators were invented in the nineteenth century to “cure” women from hysteria (Fahs & Swank, 2013, p. 667; Lieberman, 2017, p. 99; Saul, 2006, p. 51). Doctors used this medical instrument in the treatment of hysteria symptoms such as anxiety, irritability, sleeplessness, erotic fantasy and vaginal lubrication (Saul, 2006, p. 52). At the time, female sexual masturbation, as opposed to the medical act, was fiercely condemned because it was
14 believed it could cause menstrual derangements, loss of vaginal fluid, epileptic attacks, and it would facilitate the pathway to homosexuality (Levin, 2007, p. 136). At the beginning of the twentieth century, various women’s magazines started selling vibrators directly to women to treat their hysteria at home. The vibrator became a perfectly respectable household device for medical purposes, which would restore women’s youth and cheerfulness (Saul, 2006, p. 53).
Sexual pleasure. Starting from the 1920’s, female masturbation and the use of vibrators began to shift towards sexual pleasure instead of medical care. Vibrators started appearing in pornographic movies (Saul, 2006, p. 53). Travelling salesmen secretly began selling vibrators to induce sexual pleasures, although sex toys were not yet legal (Bartzell & Bartzell, 2011, p.
258; Lieberman, 2017, p. 103). The 1960’s saw a sexual revolution: sex toys became a visible element of the construction of sexual pleasure as a human right (Bartzell & Bartzell, 2011, p.
258).
Feminism. This sexual revolution resulted in some major changes worth mentioning, e.g. in the USA: the Equal Pay Act (1963), legalization of contraception for married women
(1965) and later for all women (1972), and legalization of abortion (1973) (Lieberman, 2017, p. 117). The 1970’s and 1980’s gave rise to a “sex-positive” feminist movement (Bartzell &
Bartzell, 2011, p. 258, Lieberman, 2017, p. 117). Feminists were advocating sexual freedom, supporting gay, lesbian and alternative sexual lifestyles, and started opening clean, safe, professional, women-owned sex shops (Bartzell & Bartzell, 2011, p. 258). Women felt connected as part of a “sisterhood” of sexual exploration and change (Lieberman, 2017, p. 104).
This sense of community helped tackle the negative image of masturbation and sex toys
(Lieberman, 2017, p. 104).
15 Today: autonomy and acceptance
Currently, vibrators are easily available in countless online- and offline stores, relatively affordable (mostly between €10 and €60 (Ann Summers, 2017; Willie [1], 2017)), and come in all kinds of shapes, sizes, colors and textures (Das, 2013, p. 697). Most vibrators do not resemble a penis: only around 15% of the vibrators look like a penis (Adam&Eve, 2017;
Christine le Duc, n.d.; Willie [1], 2017). Although vibrators account for the biggest share in the sex toys industry (Statistic Brain, 2016), there are numerous other toys available: dildos, anal toys, ben wa balls, cock rings, pocket pussies and the aforementioned sex robots (Ann
Summers, 2017; Adam&Eve, 2017; Christine le Duc, n.d.; Willie [2], 2017). This is all very much in accordance with the general acceptance of sex toys and masturbation nowadays.
Masturbation currently revolves around fun, play and pleasure (Attwood, 2005, p. 396).
Goldey, Posh, Bell, and Anders (2016) found that women masturbate for both emotional and physical pleasures (p. 2139). Emotional motivations for masturbation include autonomy, exploration for self-discovery, compensation for unavailable sexual partners (p. 2144), improvement of self-esteem and self-identity (Coleman, 2002, p. 9), and feeling sexy and empowered (Attwood, 2005, p. 402). Physical pleasures include orgasms, relaxation (“getting outside self”) and relief of stress or pain (Goldey et al., 2016, p. 2139).
In line with this current view of masturbation, women perceive the vibrator as being a toy (Attwood, 2005, p. 396). Vibrators are used in order to experience pleasures that would not be possible without the help of technologies (Ornella, 2009, p. 319). The vibrator still fulfills some form of medical aid, although more in a therapeutic context (Attwood, 2005, p. 396).
What is new and characterizing for this era, is that vibrators started serving as a fashion accessory. Because masturbation should be fun instead of solely functional, the appearance of the vibrator is associated with style, image and self-fashioning more than ever before (Attwood,
2005, p. 396). This is manifested in the rise of “statement” vibrators: e.g. vibrators that serve
16 as furniture (Tucker, 2015) or can be worn on a necklace (Treggiden, 2014). Despite this sex- positive image, women still use vibrators in private in their bedrooms. Feelings of guilt and shame towards friends, family or even a partner remain present (Coleman, 2002, p. 9).
The rise of realistic vibrators?
What does the future bring for the vibrator? One upcoming trend that may have an impact on vibrators is the rise of sex robots. These hyper realistic sex dolls are equipped with fully functioning genitals, movements like a human body, and learning capacities through Artificial
Intelligence (Danaher, 2014; Szczuka & Krämer, 2017, p. 1). No longer are we speaking of science fiction: Roxxxy (female) and Rocky (male) are available for $9.995 (Szczuka &
Krämer, 2017, p. 2; True Companion, 2017), the RealDolls for $5.999 (Parthemore, 2016;
Realdoll, 2017). As people have been using sex toys for a very long time and are already paying for sexual intercourse with strangers (Maines, 2008, p. 11), it comes as no surprise that sex robots are starting to gain ground: they are clean, safe (no sexually transmitted diseases) and handy (Maines, 2008, p. 11).
Because sex robots are looking so much like realistic human beings, they differ from vibrators in terms of usage, context and image. More than vibrators, sex robots are used as a substitute for a partner (Devlin, 2015) or for a real-life relationship (Spangler, 2013, p. 466).
Consumers thus probably show higher affinity and higher commitment or attachment to their sex robot than they would to their vibrator (Sullins, 2012, pp. 400, 405). The first man has already gotten married to his sex robot – although not officially recognized by authorities (Haas,
2017).
The highly realistic sex robots have surely caused a lot of commotion. Irrespective of whether the sex robots will actually catch on or not, the fact that sexual products that perfectly
17 resemble human beings have caused so much commotion, is enough reason to investigate whether marketers should encourage or prevent this trend from catching on to vibrators.
Why realistic vibrators might succeed
The practice of designing products to look like humans is called “anthropomorphism”.
Anthropomorphism is the ascription of human-like characteristics to non-human objects
(Serenko, 2007, p. 482). People anthropomorphize objects because it provides relationships, companionship or intimacy (Vella, 2007) and to make some sense of unfamiliar situations
(Aggarwal & McGill, 2007, p. 469). Epley, Waytz, and Cacioppo (2007) propose that people are more likely to anthropomorphize when they have a high need for affiliation (p. 864).
Comprehensive research has shown the many positive effects of anthropomorphism.
Consumers evaluate anthropomorphized products as more intelligent, responsible, trustworthy
(Koda & Maes, 1996, p. 193), and as having higher chances for long-term success (Aggarwal
& McGill, 2007, p. 470). In the specific case of sexual products, high anthropomorphism may also induce higher sexual arousal.
Because sex robots are more or less used as a substitute for a partner (Devlin, 2015;
Spangler, 2013, p. 466), these robots have very much benefited from a high level of anthropomorphism. It may be assumed that consumers are more aroused by realistic sex robots, can relate to them and feel like they can trust them. Highly anthropomorphized sex robots may therefore be better able to pleasure the consumer sexually.
How anthropomorphism affects sex robots seems fairly obvious: sex robots should look like human beings. However, instead of looking like an entire human body, an anthropomorphized vibrator should be resembling a penis. Just as with sex robots, a highly anthropomorphized vibrator might induce higher levels of sexual arousal. Also, Szczuka and
Krämer (2017) found that humans react more positively towards something that is more familiar
18 to them, because they don’t have the ability to determine whether something unfamiliar is associated with danger (p. 13). A vibrator looking like a penis could thus be more comforting than an artificially looking vibrator, because humans are familiar with the human anatomy but not with complicated technology. Finally, an anthropomorphized vibrator might provoke a more intimate sexual experience (Vella, 2007).
Comparing “artificial vibrators” (only artificial features), “mixed vibrators”
(combination of artificial and realistic features) and “realistic vibrators” (only realistic features), the following hypothesis can be formulated:
- H1 (anthropomorphism): Likeability and willingness-to-use are highest for a realistic
vibrator (compared to an artificial vibrator and a mixed vibrator).
Why realistic vibrators might fail
Although a more realistic appearance may elicit more positive reactions, there is also reason to believe the contrary may occur. In the first place, negative attitudes towards realistic vibrators may be due to sexual and social norms. As people often perceive masturbation with a sex robot as an indication for being lonely or desperate (Szczuka and Kramer, 2017, p. 4), masturbation with vibrators may get the same condemnation. These associations of loneliness and desperation may be very present when a vibrator highly resembles a penis, whereas a highly artificial looking vibrator reminds the consumer less of a missing partner. Also, Eaglin and
Bardzell (2011) state that people react negatively to “graphic sexuality” (highly realistic sex toys) because of the social taboo and strong link to pornography (p. 1840). If a vibrator looks less like a penis, it may become more associated with sexual wellness instead of pornography, which makes it more approachable for a wider audience (p. 1840).
19 The uncanny valley
Negative reactions to realistic vibrators might also be explained by the theory of the “uncanny valley” (Mori, 2012, p. 98), see Figure 2. Mori proposed that highly artificial robots (not containing any human features but solely designed based on functionality), elicit neutral evaluations from consumers (Cabibihan, Carrozza, Dario, Pattofatto, Jomaa, & Benallal, 2007, p. 474) – as can be seen on the left side of the graph in Figure 2. The more realistic features a robot gets (higher anthropomorphism), the more positive consumers respond. This positive correlation between human resemblance and consumers’ reactions continues until a certain point is reached – the peak in the graph (Mori, 2012, p. 98). Beyond this point, higher anthropomorphism leads to the opposite, unwanted response: when a robot appears highly realistic but fails to achieve complete humanness due to restrictions in appearance and/or behavior (Mori, 2012, p. 98; Szczuka & Krämer, 2017, p. 4), consumers’ reactions plummet into feelings such as eeriness, discomfort or even disgust (Groom, Nass, Chen, Nielsen,
Scarborough, & Robles, 2009, p. 843). When this negative response occurs, we speak of the
“uncanny valley”, represented by the valley in the graph. Finally, a real human being is evaluated positively again, seen at the far right of the graph. Moreover, movement of the robot intensifies this effect (Bartneck, Kanda, Ishiguro, & Hagita, 2007, p. 368).
Figure 2. The uncanny valley.
20 Could consumers’ reactions to vibrators also be attributed to Mori’s theory of the uncanny valley? If this would be the case, a highly artificial vibrator (no human features) would be placed on the left of the graph, and a real penis would be placed on the right of the graph, as depicted in Figure 3. As the vibrator gets more and more realistic features, consumers are expected to react more positively. This implies that a combination between artificial and realistic features elicits positive reactions, up until the peak. Consumers are expected to react negatively to vibrators that highly resemble a real penis but fail to completely imitate a penis
(the valley).
There are two factors which cause vibrators to probably never transcend the uncanny valley. In the first place, vibrators are equipped with movements and vibrations that intentionally differ from movements of a penis. As soon as a vibrator starts moving, consumers will know that it is not an actual penis. Secondly, a vibrator resembles a secluded penis: the vibrator is not attached to a body. Not only will this cause vibrators to not surpass the uncanny valley, but this will also have a huge contribution for why consumers react so negatively in the uncanny valley. Finally, in the current economy, vibrators will not bypass this negative valley, as doing so will mean a loss in functionality.
Figure 3. The uncanny valley with vibrators.
21 Why people react so negatively to highly realistic robots, is most likely due to a lack of consistency (Bartneck et al., 2007, p. 368). Mori (2012) proposed that the appearance of robots should be consistent with their behavior, in order to trigger positive reactions (p. 99). When people see a vibrator that looks exactly like a penis, they expect the vibrator to act accordingly.
When this vibrator starts moving like a machine, its behavior turns out to be inconsistent with its appearance, therefore causing disappointment (Mimoun, Poncin, & Garnier, 2012, p. 606).
The appearance of vibrators also has to be consistent with women’s current lifestyle: the vibrator is seen as a source of fun (Attwood, 2005, p. 396) and women use vibrators for optimized orgasms that wouldn’t be possible without such technologies (Ornella, 2009, p. 319).
A vibrator that looks like a penis is inconsistent with its image, and would therefore cause negative reactions.
Dimensions of the uncanny valley
The graph Mori published in 1970 theorized that people react positively or negatively in terms of “familiarity” (Bartneck et al., 2007, p. 368; MacDorman & Ishiguro, 2006, p. 304). However, many researchers have proposed that this dimension was lost in translation. Bartneck et al.
(2007) proved that “affinity” and “likeability” better represented people’s feelings (p. 369), and
Seyama and Nagayama (2007) suggested “pleasantness” as an improvement (p. 337).
Participants in a research on the uncanny valley mentioned numerous negative feelings: fear, sickness (Seyama & Nagayama, 2007, p. 340), disgust, anxiety, distrust (Laue, 2017, p. 1), disturbance, discomfort (Groom et al., 2009, p. 843), eeriness, repulsion and uncertainty whether the object was alive or not (Geller, 2008, p. 11).
In the case of vibrators, reactions will be tested on two dimensions: “likeability” and
“willingness to use”, in order to test attitudes which are representative for potential behaviors.
Attitudinal and behavioral measures include four elements: the target, the action, the context,
22 and the time (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977, p. 889). “Likeability” is an attitudinal measure, which only specifies the target (p. 890): the vibrator. “Willingness to use” implies not only the target
(the vibrator), but also triggers people to imagine the action (masturbation) and maybe even the context (e.g. at home, alone) and time (e.g. at night) (p. 890). This second measure is, therefore, used to predict whether someone actually wants to purchase and/or use the vibrator. The following hypotheses are therefore posed:
- H2 (uncanny valley): Likeability and willingness-to-use are highest for a mixed vibrator
(compared to an artificial vibrator and a realistic vibrator).
- H3 (uncanny valley): Likeability and willingness-to-use are lowest for a realistic
vibrator (compared to an artificial vibrator and a mixed vibrator).
Acquaintance
Although assumptions can be made on how women evaluate different levels of human resemblance in vibrators, there will always be differences between these evaluations.
Particularly, it may be assumed that acquaintance with vibrators influences how women perceive certain vibrators. Starzyk, Holden, Fabrigar and MacDonald (2006) describe acquaintance as familiarity with or knowledge about a person (p. 833), which can also be applied to products. Whether a woman has prior experience with vibrators or has knowledge about them might affect her evaluations (Dunning, Anderson, Schlösser, Ehlebracht, &
Fetchenhauer, 2014, p. 131).
Acquainted women have used a vibrator before, and will therefore probably be aware of the added technological possibilities of vibrators, compared to the limited capabilities of a penis (Ornella, 2009, p. 319). Also, women with acquaintance have already gone through the mental process in which they decided to include technology in their sexual experiences. These
23 women know why vibrators are used: to increase the fun and pleasure in the bedroom (Attwood,
2005, p. 396). A realistic vibrator will thus be associated with limited functionality, and will also ruin the fun. Acquainted women will, therefore, most probably evaluate an artificial vibrator higher than a realistic vibrator.
On the other side, women who have never used a vibrator and don’t have much knowledge about them will probably be less aware of the added technological possibilities of vibrators (Ornella, 2009, p. 319). Because of this lack of awareness, it may be assumed that non-acquainted women don’t evaluate artificial vibrators particularly higher than realistic vibrators. It may even be the case that non-acquainted women prefer realistic vibrators over artificial vibrators. Since people have at least some knowledge about the human anatomy, realistic vibrators will appear familiar (Szczuka & Krämer, 2017, p. 13). These vibrators remind women of their knowledge and memories of penises, which will probably be associated to orgasms or memories of sexual intercourse. In the absence of knowledge about technologies, non-acquainted women will probably rely more on these pleasurable associations.
The following hypothesis is posed:
- H4: Women with (without) acquaintance will be more likely to evaluate a realistic
vibrator lower (higher) than an artificial vibrator or a mixed vibrator.
The appearance of the vibrator
Not only the image of the vibrator changed, its functionality also changed. Due to technological developments, the vibrator does not only vibrate anymore: it rotates, thrusts (up and down motion), sucks, warms, and so on (Adam&Eve, 2017). Which of these specific functionalities a vibrator is equipped with, determines how the vibrator is shaped. Although one would expect the general shape of a vibrator to be an appearance-feature, the shape is thus actually a
24 functionality-feature. How well a vibrator functions or performs is not within the scope of this
thesis. Therefore, the general shape of vibrators will not be focused on.
The influence of different materials will also be excluded from this research. People
purchase their vibrators more and more online (Daneback, Mansson, & Ross, 2011, p. 102).
However, materials are hard to judge from a picture on a monitor, so it can be expected that
purchase decisions are not heavily based on material. Testing material would also require a
field or lab experiment, which is not feasible for this thesis.
The features of vibrators’ appearances that will be examined in this thesis are the color
and the surface.
Conceptual model
This thesis seeks to examine in what way the level of human resemblance of the color and of
the surface of vibrators affects how women evaluate those vibrators. The first three hypotheses
state contradicting effects, based on two contradicting theories. It is expected that the level of
human resemblance does affect vibrators, either positively (H1) or negatively (H2 and H3).
This relationship is indicated with the bold arrows and bold boxes in Figure 4. Moreover, the
relationship between women’s acquaintance with vibrators and their evaluations will be
investigated (H4). The conceptual framework is visualized in Figure 4:
Covariate: Acquaintance
H4 Dependent: Color Independent: H1 Likeability Human resemblance of appearance of vibrator H2, H3 Surface Dependent: Willingness to use Control: Control: - Shape - Age - Material - Gender
Figure 4. Conceptual framework.
25 Methodology
In order to test how women evaluate different vibrators, an experiment was conducted. This chapter describes how and why the experiment was constructed. First, the overall design of the research is explained, followed by how the sample was gathered. Next, all variables are discussed. Lastly, the actual design of the questionnaire (considering ethical issues) is set forth.
Research design
The hypotheses were tested by means of a quantitative research. The aim was to test whether the theories of anthropomorphism or the uncanny valley can be applied to vibrators, for which the objectivity of quantitative research was well suited (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004, p. 19).
The research used a 2 x 2 between-subject experimental design. Between-subjects was used to avoid carryover effects between conditions (Charness, Gneezy, & Kuhn, 2012;
Demmers [1], 2017, p. 31). The experiment was conducted in the form of an online questionnaire, a method that was time efficient, affordable and that granted the opportunity to approach many people (Wright, 2005). In addition, an online questionnaire offered high internal validity, due to the high control over variables and random allocation of participants to conditions (Barabas & Jerit, 2010, p. 227; Demmers [1], 2017, p. 18; Demmers [2], 2017, p. 3).
Moreover, an online questionnaire had advantages with respect to the sensitivity of the topic: an online environment gave participants the opportunity to conduct the survey in a place where they felt safe and comfortable, to take as long as they wanted, and to do it whenever they wanted
(Sincero, 2012).
Sample
As randomized sampling was not feasible due to logistical and convenience reasons (O'Leary,
2004, p. 111), nonrandom sampling techniques were used to attract female adults. In the first
26 place, convenience sampling (O'Leary, 2004, p. 111) was used to approach friends and family via WhatsApp, Facebook and email. In addition, these women were asked to forward the questionnaire to their friends and family (snowball sampling (Emerson, 2015)). The questionnaire was also posted on several University Facebook groups to attract voluntary participants (O'Leary, 2004, p. 110). These media granted the opportunity to explain a little about the research in order to lower the threshold for participation, and it gave every woman time to think about if they felt comfortable with participating. Whoever decided to be willing to participate, would do so voluntarily. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions by Qualtrics. In order to acquire a minimum of 50 participants per condition, a sample size of at least 200 participants was aimed for.
Independent variables
The appearance of vibrators was the independent variable. By manipulating this appearance, the vibrator either looked more artificial or more realistic: a vibrator with artificial features represented a robot-like look, while a vibrator with realistic features resembled a penis.
Previous studies used sequences of images in which an artificial face was morphed into a human face (Bartneck et al., 2007; MacDorman, 2006; Seyama & Nagayama, 2007). However, despite the many studies on the manipulations of facial features, research on the manipulations of penile features was lacking. Therefore, two appearance features of the penis were chosen as the focus of this research: color and surface. These two independent variables were pre-tested (see
Appendix A). The results of this pre-test (see Appendix B) will be discussed next.
Color
As skin is the most outer tissue of the human body (Igarashi, Nishino & Nayar, 2007, p. 1), the color of skin is very meaningful for the human body (Jablonski, 2012, p. 1). The most used
27 colors in vibrators were pink, purple, black and blue (Willie [1], 2017; Pabo, 2017), and the color most characteristic for robots was metallic. A pre-test (N = 32) was conducted to explore which color was evaluated most artificial: blue, green, black or metallic. Skin-color was included as a fifth color in the pre-test, which served as a reference for a human color. Pink and purple were excluded from the pre-test because they resembled a certain degree of humanness, but would not be evaluated more human than skin-color. The color green was included, as it was also interesting to evaluate a color that is currently not much used for vibrators. Participants evaluated the five colors on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = non-human, 7 = human). Skin-color was rated the most human (M = 6.25, SD = 1.22), and was therefore used for the realistic conditions in the experiment. However, the pre-test results revealed that blue and green were evaluated most non-human, with the exact same ratings (M = 1.09, SD = .30). Blue and green both get associated with relaxation, serenity and coldness (Labreque, Patrick, & Milne, 2013, p. 190). Green, in addition, gets more associated with nature and trees (Naz & Helen, 2004, p.
32), which might remind people of life and growth. Blue gets more associated with the ocean and the sky (Naz & Helen, 2004, p. 32), which might look less “alive”. Blue was, therefore, used as the artificial color in the experiment.
Surface
Skin texture also plays an important role in appearance evaluations (Fink, Grammar, &
Thornhill, 2001, p. 92). Surface textures that are currently added to the general shape of vibrators can be categorized as veins, continuous shapes (e.g. ridges or dots) or none (smooth)
(Willie [1], 2017; Pabo, 2017). In the pre-test (N = 32), five different surface textures were evaluated on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = non-human, 7 = human). The most human surface was the surface with veins (M = 6.28, SD = 1.02). Veins was therefore used for the realistic
28 conditions in the experiment. The most non-human surface was the surface with dots (M = 1.75,
SD = 1.19). Dots, therefore, functioned as the artificial surface in the experiment.
The two colors and the two surfaces formed four vibrators:
Condition 1: Condition 2:
Condition 3: Condition 4:
Figure 5. The vibrators as used in the four conditions of the experiment.
29 Dependent variables
Manipulating the color and surface of vibrators will affect the evaluation of female consumers.
Considering the intimate interaction consumers have with a vibrator, behavioral measures would be the ideal dependent variable. However, due to feasibility issues, this thesis tested attitudinal measures, which served as a predictor for behaviors (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993 as cited in Stedman, 2002, p. 566).
Previous studies examining consumers’ evaluations of the appearances of vibrators or other sex toys were lacking or unavailable. However, previous studies on anthropomorphized robots and objects in all kinds of different contexts prompted for the choices of the following dependent variables.
Likeability
The first dependent variable was the overall liking of consumers towards the vibrator.
Likeability was measured with a single item, since Bergkvist and Rossiter (2009) found that this single-item measure is as predictively valid as a multiple-item measure (p. 618). As participants have the tendency to avoid extremes on a pre-coded list (Lee, 1993, p. 77), likeability was measured on a seven-point scale Likert scale (1 = I don’t like it, 7 = I like it). A five-point scale would be too limited, because participants might avoid the first and fifth options
(40% of options) (p. 77), but more than seven scales might confuse the participants.
Willingness to use
To better understand whether a participant would decide to try out a vibrator or not, the attitude behind this decision was explored by measuring the “willingness to use” the vibrator.
Willingness to use was also measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = not willing to use, 7 = very willing to use), in accordance with Urala and Lähteenmäki (2004, p. 795) who used this
30 measure for so-called functional foods: a product that also promises health benefits, and also is unfamiliar to the consumer (p. 793). Urala and Lähteenmäki argued that it would be easier for participants to answer questions about their motivation to use a product, than to evaluate their actual intention to buy a product (p. 795).
Additional dependent variables
Four additional questions were asked concerning the evaluation of the vibrator. These questions were asked in order to get a better picture of the overall evaluation of the vibrators, but also to make the survey feel less threatening to participants (Lee, 1993, p. 75).
Bartneck et al. (2007, p. 371) and Castro-González et al. (2016, pp. 31 – 34) tested the pleasantness of functional robots in interaction with consumers. The vibrators in the experiment were therefore also evaluated on “pleasantness”, measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = unpleasant, 7 = pleasant). Next, “excitement” was measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = boring, 7 = exciting), in accordance with previous research on personal involvement (Basfirinci
& Çilingir, 2015, p. 116). In addition, because vibrators are sexual products, it was important to measure how arousing participants thought the vibrator was. “Turn-on” was, again, measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = turns me off, 7 = turns me on). Only one question was measured on a different scale: how much participants were willing to pay for the vibrator
(“price”), which was measured by means of a sliding scale from €0 to €150 (as these are the average prices that vibrators are currently sold for (Willie [1], 2017; Pabo, 2017)). Touré-
Tillery and McGill (2015) pointed out that this question examined the level of trust towards an anthropomorphized object (p. 98).
31 Control variables
Several variables had to be held constant throughout the entire experiment, in order to maximize the internal validity. These so-called “control variables” ruled out the possibility that any unforeseen factors would influence the results (Field & Hole, 2003, pp. 21, 24).
Shape
The general shape of a vibrator is highly dependent on its functionality: whether and how the vibrator stimulates the G-spot and/or the clitoris (E. Laan, personal communication, April 26,
2017). Since the scope of this thesis was to study the appearance of vibrators while not making any compromises on the performance, the general shape of vibrators was controlled. Personal preferences of participants for a vibrator that stimulates the G-spot or one that stimulates the clitoris were avoided by using a shape that stimulates both. The pre-test (N = 32) (Appendix A) determined the most neutral shape (M = 2.94, SD = 1.27), a shape that was not evaluated too artificial nor too realistic (see Appendix B). This general shape is depicted in Figure 6.
Figure 6. General shape of the vibrators used in the questionnaire.
32 Material
Material is also mainly determined by functionality. In addition, people purchase more and more online, but it is difficult to evaluate the material of a vibrator from a digital screen.
Therefore, material was controlled by using silicone, the most used material for vibrators
(Willie [1], 2017; Pabo, 2017).
Gender
The vibrator is designed to stimulate the female body, independent of whether it is used solitary or with a (male or female) partner (Davis et al., 1996, p. 316). Because of this high focus on the female body, only females could participate in the questionnaire.
Age
An age restriction of 18 years and older was maintained, in order to prevent any legal and ethical issues. Moreover, underage females were restricted because it may be assumed that these females have different preferences than adults do regarding vibrators. Adolescents are having their first experiences with sexuality (Finer & Philbin, 2013, p. 889; Kaestle, Halpern, Miller,
& Ford, 2005, p. 777), and, therefore, probably their first experiences with vibrators. Targeting adolescents would therefore be more aimed at sexuality development (e.g. sexual identity formation, sexual decision making, and sexual behaviors and outcomes) (Tolman &
McClelland, 2011, p. 246) than at sexual health.
Covariate variables
Acquaintance
Whether a participant has had prior experiences with vibrators or has knowledge about them, might affect her evaluations (Dunning et al., 2014, p. 131). Acquaintance may thus influence
33 the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variables (Pallant, 2011, p. 297), and was measured with the following questions:
1. Have you ever owned and/or used a vibrator? (Yes / no / I do not want to answer)
2. Do you own (a) vibrator(s) at the moment? (Yes / no / I do not want to answer)
3. How often do you use your vibrator? (Seven-point Likert scale (1 = almost never, 7 =
very frequently))
Additional covariates
Participants were asked about their openness to talk about sexuality and their openness to sexual experimentation, both measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = closed, 7 = open). In addition, participants were asked about their current sexual status: whether they were single or in a relationship/marriage, and whether they were sexually active or inactive.
Questionnaire design and ethics
Because of the sensitive topic, it was important to thoroughly construct what to ask participants and how to ask this. For this exact reason, the questionnaire was kept as short and easily understandable as possible. Adding unnecessary questions or overcomplicating questions would risk reducing respondents’ willingness to participate (Murray, 1999, p. 149). The entire questionnaire can be found in Appendix C.
Dra. Ellen Prins (English literature and linguistics), a University MSc student with
Cambridge Certificate of Advanced English and a MSc student who studied at Brunel
University in London tested the questionnaire before launching, in order to optimize the questionnaire in terms of grammar, phrasing, clarity of instructions and correct functioning.
The construction and ethics of the questionnaire are elaborated next.
34 Control questions
Before starting the questionnaire, respondents were asked if they were 18 years or older (closed question: yes/no) and what their gender was (closed question: male/female). Respondents who indicated to be younger than 18 years old and/or to be male were directed to the end of the questionnaire.
Introduction
The introduction was aimed at creating a comfortable environment for the respondents. This introduction consisted of two parts.
The first part provided information about the procedure of the questionnaire, including a statement of confidentiality and of informed consent. This made respondents fully aware of their rights while participating, including the right to pause or quit the questionnaire at any time.
Respondents were also persuaded to participate by mentioning the opportunity to win a €20 gift card at the end of the questionnaire.
The second part provided information about the subject. Explaining the relevance and importance of the subject was highly important in order to convince women to participate, in which correct phrasing had a huge impact. Emphasizing that the overall context was about the design of sex toys would be perceived as less threatening than a context about personal preferences for vibrators (Sudman & Bradburn (1982, p. 76) as cited in Lee, 1993, pp. 78 – 79).
Specific information was provided about the large amount of women that masturbate and their frequency of masturbation, so respondents would feel less threatened or anomalistic (Lee, 1993, p. 75). Lee (1993) also pointed out that endorsement by experts would elicit more positive responses (p. 76), so scientific research was adduced about the health benefits of masturbation.
35 The experiment
The participants were shown a picture of the concerning vibrator (see Figure 5) alongside some information about the functionality of this vibrator (“This is a dual vibrator, which stimulates the clitoris and G-spot simultaneously through vibrations.”). Six questions were presented. The main questions were whether the participant likes the vibrator and if she would be willing to use it. However, as these questions might be perceived as very sensitive and direct, Cisin and
Miller (1981) advised to work towards those questions gradually through a series of less threatening questions (as cited in Lee, 1993, p. 79). The first five questions were, therefore, to evaluate the vibrator on the following dimensions: boring/exciting, turn off/turn on, unpleasant/pleasant, don’t like/like, not willing to use/very willing to use. In the sixth question, the participants were asked to indicate how much she would be willing to spend on the vibrator, on a scale of €0 to €150.
Consumer characteristics
Personal questions were asked at the end of the questionnaire, because these would probably be perceived as the most threatening, but also to avoid these questions of influencing participants’ evaluations of the vibrators (Murray, 1999, p. 151). Before answering these personal questions, participants were pointed out that they were able to choose to not answer specific questions.
Participants were first asked about how open they were in talking about sexuality and about sexual experimentation. Next followed the most threatening questions: questions about participants’ experiences with vibrators. Cisin and Miller (1981) stated that participants find it easier to admit to past behavior than to current behavior (as cited in Lee, 1993, p. 79). Therefore, participants were first asked whether they owned and/or used vibrators in the past. The follow- up closed question – whether the participant owns a vibrator at the moment – was only shown
36 when answered “yes” to the previous question. Only in case the participant indicated to currently own a vibrator, she was asked about her frequency of usage. The final closed question was aimed at the participants’ current sexual status.
Debriefing
Participants were given the opportunity to ask questions, file complaints or concerns, or to submit suggestions or ideas. In case they wanted to compete in the lottery for a €20 gift card for Bol.com, they were forwarded to a separate questionnaire where they could fill in their email
(see Appendix D). Accompanying text made clear that these emails were saved separately from the questionnaire answers, and could therefore not be linked to one another, maintaining complete anonymity.
37 Results
In the following section, the results of the experiment are reported. The composition of the sample will be described, followed by an analysis of the reliability of the used scales and an analysis of all correlations. Subsequently, the results of the tests of the hypotheses will be addressed.
Descriptive analyses
Out of a total of 399 respondents, 233 participants were eligible for analysis: these were the participants who indicated to be female, 18 years or older, agreed to participate and who completed the entire survey. Of the 166 respondents who were not eligible for analysis, 116 indicated to be female and older than 18, but decided to withdraw from participation after reading the introduction. The 233 participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions depicted in Figure 5 (see Table 1).
Table 1
Number of Participants in Questionnaire
Dots Veins Total
Blue 56 58 114
Skin 57 62 119
Total 113 120 233
The four conditions were dummy coded into the variable “vibrator”. This variable consisted of three values: “artificial vibrator” (blue + dots), “mixed vibrator” (blue + veins, skin-color + dots) and “realistic vibrator” (skin-color + veins). Mixed vibrator thus compiled the two
38 conditions which had a combination of artificial and realistic features, resulting in a much larger group size (n = 115) than the other two vibrators.
Participants indicated to be relatively open to talk about sexuality (M = 4.99, SD = 1.74) and to sexual experimentation (M = 4.75, SD = 1.62). Acquaintance with vibrators was grouped into two categories: “no acquaintance” (never owned and/or used a vibrator) and
“acquaintance” (has used and/or owned a vibrator before). 45.9% of the participants had no acquaintance, 43.8% of the participants did have acquaintance with vibrators. Participants’ current sexual status was divided into two categories: sexually inactive and sexually active.
Most participants (78.1%) indicated to be sexually active, 19.3% were sexually inactive.
The dependent variables were normally distributed, except for two variables: exciting and price. Exciting had a moderate left-skewed distribution (skewness = -.509), which suggests that the vibrators looked relatively exciting (opposed to boring). This skewness was, however, too small for this item to be transformed. On the other hand, the moderate right-skewed distribution of price (skewness = .738) suggests that participants were willing to spend relatively little money on the vibrators. Price was therefore transformed to price_skew
(price_skew = price (Federici, 2017)).
Reliability
A reliability analysis was conducted to see whether participants understood the scales of the five dependent variables measured with corresponding Likert scales (exciting, pleasantness, likeability, turn-on and willingness to use) correctly. The five items together resulted in α =
.896. However, Cronbach’s Alpha If Item Deleted of exciting was higher than the overall α. In order to increase the internal consistency of this scale (Pallant, 2011, p. 97), exciting was deleted, which increased the overall α to .916.
39 Concluding, the reliability checks for the evaluation of the vibrators resulted in an α =
.916 for four items: pleasantness, likeability, turn-on and willingness to use.
Correlations
The correlations matrix (Table 2) provides insights into the relations between variables.
Apparent was that all dependent variables were negatively correlated to the vibrators, colors and surfaces – although pleasantness was the only dependent variable that was not significantly related to the independent variables. Realistic features thus got lower evaluations than artificial features, and skin-colored vibrators got lower evaluations than blue vibrators. Surface, however, was only significantly related to turn-on (r = -.143, p = .029). Veins were thus less arousing than dots, but veins and dots weren’t evaluated significantly differently on any other dependent variable.
All dependent variables were relatively highly correlated to each other. The highest correlation between two dependent variables was between likeability and willingness to use (r
= .798, p < .01). Because none of these correlations exceeded .80 or .90, the assumption of multicollinearity was not violated, implying appropriateness of MANOVA (Pallant, 2011, p.
290). However, because the correlations were dangerously high, the MANOVA analysis had to be conducted with caution. Also apparent was that almost all covariates were positively and significantly related to each other, except for status and openness to talking about sexuality (r
= .121, p = .069).
40 Table 2
Correlations Matrix: Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations and Reliabilities
Variables N M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1. Vibrator 233 1.03 .71 -
2. Color 233 .51 .50 .711** -
3. Surface 233 .52 .50 .711** .012 -
4. Pleasant 233 3.48 1.64 -.118 -.072 -.095 -
5. Likeability 233 3.66 1.67 -.178** -.161* -.092 .704** -
6. Turn-on 233 3.51 1.61 -.230** -.184** -.143* .695** .763** -
7. Willingness to use 233 3.64 1.84 -.203** -.169** -.121 .704** .798** .734** -
8. Price (transformed) 216 5.00 1.89 -.189** -.137* -.130 .371** .464** .454** .478** -
9. Openness to talking 228 4.99 1.74 .113 .114 .048 .053 .064 .021 -.015 -.090 - about sexuality 10. Openness to sexual 228 4.75 1.62 .031 -.001 .046 .184** .163* .121 .131* .097 .477** - experimentation 11. Acquaintance 209 .49 .50 -.012 .015 -.032 .122 .148* .107 .175* .117 .164* .441** -
12. Status 227 .80 .40 .028 -.009 .049 .015 -.077 -.119 -.098 .017 .121 .169* .168* -
*. Correlation is significant at the .05 level (one-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the .01 level (one-tailed).
41 Hypotheses testing
Evaluations of vibrators (H1, H2 and H3)
Hypothesis 1 suggested opposing results to what hypotheses 2 and 3 suggested:
- H1 (anthropomorphism): Likeability and willingness-to-use are highest for a realistic
vibrator (compared to an artificial vibrator and a mixed vibrator).
- H2 (uncanny valley): Likeability and willingness-to-use are highest for a mixed vibrator
(compared to an artificial vibrator and a realistic vibrator).
- H3 (uncanny valley): Likeability and willingness-to-use are lowest for a realistic
vibrator (compared to an artificial vibrator and a mixed vibrator).
A factorial multivariate analysis of covariance (factorial MANCOVA) was conducted to compare the pleasantness, likeability, turn-on and willingness to use between vibrators with different colors and surfaces. Preliminary checks were conducted to check for sample size, univariate and multivariate normality, outliers, linearity, multicollinearity, homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices and homogeneity of regression slopes, with only one violation obtained: a significant interaction between openness to talking about sexuality and the vibrators when testing for willingness to use (p = .045), violating the assumption of homogeneity of regression slopes (Pallant, 2011, p. 305). Openness to talking about sexuality was therefore excluded from this analysis, in order to avoid any discrepancies in the validity of the analyses, especially considering the unequal group sizes (Field, 2013, p. 487; Hamilton, 1977, p. 701).
The analysis confirmed that there was a significant main effect of color on evaluations,
F(4, 198) = 2.975, p = .020. Surface, however, exerted no significant main effect, F(4, 198) =
.648, p = .629. Also, there was no significant interaction effect between color and surface, F(4,
198) = 1.170, p = .325. None of the covariates (openness to sexual experimentation,
42 acquaintance and status) were significantly related to the evaluations, as can be seen in Table
3.
Table 3
The Effects of Color and Surface on Evaluations of Vibrators
Pillai’s Trace F df Error df Sig. partial η2
Openness to sexual .038 1.946 4 198 .104 .038 experimentation
Acquaintance .038 1.944 4 198 .105 .038
Status .040 2.055 4 198 .088 .040
Color .057 2.975 4 198 .020 .057
Surface .013 .648 4 198 .629 .013
Color x Surface .023 1.170 4 198 .325 .023
Follow-up factorial ANCOVA’s on the dependent variables gave more detailed insights into interrelations. The Levene’s Test showed that variances were not significantly different (p >
.05), satisfying the assumption of homogeneity of variances. As can be seen in Table 4 and
Figure 7, women significantly liked blue vibrators (M = 3.92, SD = 1.68) better than skin- colored vibrators (M = 3.38, SD = 1.66) and were significantly more willing to use blue vibrators (M = 3.99, SD = 1.76) than skin-colored vibrators (M = 3.33, SD = 1.86).
These factorial ANCOVA’s also showed that the covariates did affect some of women’s evaluations. Most importantly, status appeared to be significantly related to likeability (p =
.034), turn-on (p = .032) and willingness to use (p = .034). Since the relationships between status and these dependent variables were negative in the correlations matrix (Table 2), it appeared that a higher status (becoming sexually active) resulted in lower evaluations of the
43 vibrators. Noteworthy was that acquaintance was significantly related to willingness to use (p
= .023). Acquaintance and willingness to use were positively related in the correlations matrix
(Table 2), meaning that more experience with and knowledge of vibrators resulted in a higher willingness to use vibrators.
Table 4
The Effects of Color and Surface on Pleasantness, Likeability, Turn-on and Willingness to
Use of Vibrators
Dependent variable df F Sig. partial η2
Openness to sexual Pleasantness 1 4.893 .028 .024
experimentation Likeability 1 1.874 .173 .009
Turn-on 1 1.499 .222 .007
Willingness to use 1 .216 .643 .001
Acquaintance Pleasantness 1 .257 .613 .001
Likeability 1 2.231 .137 .011
Turn-on 1 .884 .348 .004
Willingness to use 1 5.263 .023 .026
Status Pleasantness 1 .492 .484 .002
Likeability 1 4.575 .034 .022
Turn-on 1 4.652 .032 .023
Willingness to use 1 4.567 .034 .022
Color Pleasantness 1 .477 .491 .002
Likeability 1 5.405 .021 .026
Turn-on 1 5.616 .019 .027
Willingness to use 1 7.139 .008 .034
44 Surface Pleasantness 1 .677 .412 .003
Likeability 1 .539 .464 .003
Turn-on 1 2.241 .136 .011
Willingness to use 1 .811 .369 .004
Color x Surface Pleasantness 1 3.023 .084 .015
Likeability 1 1.922 .167 .009
Turn-on 1 2.862 .092 .014
Willingness to use 1 .587 .444 .003
Error Pleasantness 201
Likeability 201
Turn-on 201
Willingness to use 201
Total Pleasantness 208
Likeability 208
Turn-on 208
Willingness to use 208
4,2 Likeability Turn-on 4 Willingness to use
3,8
3,6 Score
3,4
3,2
3 Blue Skin Color Figure 7. Women's evaluations of different colored vibrators.
45 Next, a factorial analysis of covariance (factorial ANCOVA) was conducted to compare the prices women were willing to pay for vibrators with different colors and surfaces, as can be seen in Table 5. Levene’s Test for equality of variances was non-significant (p = .528), so the assumption of homogeneity of variance was satisfied. Colors had a significant effect on price,
F(1, 186) = 5.78, p = .017. Women were willing to pay significantly less for the skin-colored vibrators (M = 4.76, SD = 1.99) than for the blue vibrators (M = 5.39, SD = 1.70). However, as these are the data for the transformed price, they needed to be transformed back:
!"#$%_'(%) = !"#$%
!"#$% = !"#$%_'(%),
Thus, people were actually willing to pay €22.66 for skin-colored vibrators (SD = 3.96) and
€29.05 for blue vibrators (SD = 2.89), see Figure 8.
Again, surface had no significant main effect (p = .224), and the interaction between color and surface was also non-significant (p = .068). None of the covariates (openness to sexual experimentation, acquaintance and status) seemed to significantly affect the price, see Table 5.
46 Table 5
The Effects of Color and Surface on the Amount Women Were Willing to Pay
for Vibrators
df F Sig. Partial η2
Openness to sexual 1 .004 .950 .000 experimentation
Acquaintance 1 1.663 .199 .009
Status 1 .051 .822 .000
Color 1 5.784 .017 .030
Surface 1 1.486 .224 .008
Color * Surface 1 3.378 .068 .018
Error 186
Total 193
30 Price (€) 27
24 ) € 21 Price ( Price 18
15 Blue Skin-color Color
Figure 8. The amount women were willing to pay for different colored vibrators.
47 Concluding, women evaluated realistically colored (skin-colored) vibrators significantly lower than artificially colored (blue) vibrators, but surface did not affect evaluations – not as a main effect and not in interaction with color. Likeability and willingness to use were thus not in line with the theory of anthropomorphism, therefore rejecting H1. The fact that vibrators featured both realistic and artificial dimensions did not result in a significantly higher evaluation, therefore also rejecting H2. Although no significant difference was established between realistic vibrators and mixed vibrators, likeability and willingness to use for realistic vibrators was indeed significantly lower than that for artificial vibrators based on their colors, which partly supports H3. A peak in the graph of the uncanny valley was thus not ascertained, but the results did deliver prove for a valley in the graph.
Consumer characteristics (H4)
Hypothesis 4 looks at the difference in evaluations of women with and without acquaintance with vibrators.
- H4: Women with (without) acquaintance will be more likely to evaluate a realistic
vibrator lower (higher) than an artificial vibrator or a mixed vibrator.
Multiple independent-samples t-tests were conducted to compare these evaluations. Overall, women with acquaintance gave higher evaluations than women without acquaintance did (see
Figure 9). These acquainted women significantly liked (p = .032) vibrators better (M = 3.89,
SD = 1.65) than women without acquaintance did (M = 3.39, SD = 1.70). Women with acquaintance were also significantly more willing to use (p = .011) any vibrator (M = 3.97,
SD = 1.81) than women without acquaintance were (M = 3.33, SD = 1.83).
48 4,2 Likeability Willingness to use 4
3,8
3,6 Score 3,4
3,2
3 Without acquaintance With acquaintance Acquaintance
Figure 9. Overall evaluations of acquainted versus non-acquainted women towards vibrators.
Looking solely at women with acquaintance, they did not have a significant preference for artificial, mixed or realistic vibrators, or for any surface. They did show a significant preference in terms of likeability (p = .049) for blue vibrators (M = 4.22, SD = 1.70) over skin-colored vibrators (M = 3.58, SD = 1.55), see Figure 10.
4,4 Likeability 4,2
4
3,8 Score 3,6
3,4
3,2 Blue Skin-color Color
Figure 10. Likeability of acquainted women towards different colored vibrators.
49 Women without acquaintance evaluated realistic vibrators significantly lower than artificial or mixed vibrators. They were significantly more willing to use artificial vibrators (M = 3.71, SD
= 1.82, p = .013) or mixed vibrators (M = 3.63, SD = 1.82, p = .010) than realistic vibrators (M
= 2.58, SD = 1.66), but there was no significant difference between the willingness to use artificial and mixed vibrators (p = .848), see Figure 11. Also, women without acquaintance were significantly more willing to use (p = .012) blue vibrators (M = 3.77, SD = 1.80) than skin- colored vibrators (M = 2.89, SD = 1.76), as can be seen in Figure 12. These women had no preference for any surface.
4 Willingness to use 3,6
3,2
Score 2,8
2,4
2 Artificial vibrators Mixed vibrators Realistic vibrators Vibrators
Figure 11. Willingness to use of non-acquainted women towards vibrators with different levels of human resemblance.
4 Turn-on 3,75 Willlingness to use
3,5
Score 3,25
3
2,75 Blue Skin-color Color
Figure 12. Evaluations of non-acquainted women towards different colored vibrators.
50 Concluding, hypothesis 4 was rejected. Contrary to what was proposed, acquainted and non-
acquainted women showed the same tendency: they evaluated realistically colored (skin-
colored) vibrators lower than artificially colored (blue) vibrators. Also, although it was
expected that acquainted women would evaluate realistic vibrators lower than artificial or
mixed vibrators, the results actually showed that it were women without acquaintance who
showed this tendency. Acquainted women did not evaluate realistic vibrators significantly
different from artificial or mixed vibrators.
Additional consumer characteristics
Additional independent-samples t-tests were conducted to compare the evaluations of women
being sexually (in)active, open (closed) to talking about sexuality, and open (closed) to sexual
experimentation. Sexually inactive women indicated to be significantly more turned-on (p =
.038) by the vibrators (M = 3.91, SD = 1.43) than sexually active women were (M = 3.43, SD =
1.66). Sexually active and inactive women did not give significantly different evaluations for
blue vibrators or for any of the surfaces, but they did differ in their opinions on skin-colored
vibrators: skin-colored vibrators were evaluated to be a bigger turn-on (p = .013) for sexually
inactive women (M = 3.91, SD = 1.24) than for sexually active women (M = 3.10, SD = 1.71),
as shown in Figure 13.
4
3,8
3,6
3,4 Score
3,2 Vibrators in general Blue vibrators Skin-colored vibrators 3 Inactive Active Sexual status
Figure 13. Evaluations of sexually inactive versus sexually active women towards vibrators.
51 Openness to talking about sexuality and openness to sexual experimentation had to be transformed for the purpose of this analysis. Although the seven-point Likert scale on which openness was measured was of high value, the data had to be split into two groups. A median split was not appropriate, because the data did not range from low to high (Pallant, 2011, pp.
88 – 89) but from negative to positive. The data was therefore split into “closed” (scores 1, 2 and 3) and “open” (scores 5, 6 and 7). Women who scored a 4 were excluded from this analysis, because a 4 indicated a neutral score in this case: these women did not consider themselves as either closed or open, or did not want to answer the question.
Openness to talking about sexuality did not significantly affect evaluations, but openness to sexual experimentation did. Women who indicated to be relatively open to sexual experimentation showed significantly higher likeability (p = .015) towards the vibrators (M =
3.86, SD = 1.63) than women who indicated to be relatively closed (M = 3.18, SD = 1.76), and these open women were significantly more willing to use (p = .018) the vibrators (M = 3.86,
SD = 1.81) than closed women were (M = 3.14, SD = 1.92). Highly remarkable was how openness to sexual experimentation affected the evaluations of blue and of skin-colored vibrators so differently. Whether women were closed or open did not affect their evaluations of blue vibrators at all, but when presented with skin-colored vibrators, closed women were very clear that they did not appreciate them which created a huge dissent from evaluations by open women (see Figure 14).
52 4
3,5
3 Score
Pleasantness 2,5 Likeability Turn-on Willingness to use 2 Closed Open Openness to sexual experimentation
Figure 14. Evaluations of skin-colored vibrators by women who were closed versus open to sexual experimentation.
Overview of hypotheses
Table 6
Overview of the Hypotheses
Hypotheses Results
Hypothesis 1 Rejected
Hypothesis 2 Rejected
Hypothesis 3 Partly supported
Hypothesis 4 Rejected
53 Discussion
The goal of this thesis was to find out if differences in the degree of human resemblance (of the color and of the surface) in the appearance of vibrators affected female consumers’ evaluations towards those vibrators. Three contradicting hypotheses were formulated to test the theory of anthropomorphism (H1) against the theory of the uncanny valley (H2 and H3). These hypotheses examined whether women mostly liked and were most willing to use vibrators with solely realistic features (H1), or whether they gave this preference to vibrators containing a combination of realistic and artificial features (H2) while least preferring vibrators with solely realistic features (H3). In addition, the thesis examined whether consumer characteristics such as acquaintance affected women to evaluate realistic vibrators lower than artificial vibrators or than vibrators with a combination of realistic and artificial features (H4).
The most important and interesting results are discussed below, followed by their contribution to existing theory and knowledge and their impact on management practice.
Finally, the most prominent limitations of this thesis are outlined, alongside suggestions for future research.
Evaluations of vibrators (H1, H2, H3)
Women evaluated the realistically colored vibrators significantly lower than the artificially colored vibrators, both on likeability and on willingness to use. Surprisingly, surface had no significant effect on women’s evaluations at all; not when evaluated on its own and not when evaluated in combination with color. The color is thus much more important for the overall evaluation of vibrators than the surface is. Grossman and Wisenblit (1999) acknowledge that a product’s color plays a highly important role in consumers’ purchase decisions (p. 78). Such decisions are determined in the first 90 seconds of interaction with a product, of which 62 –
90% of the evaluation is based solely on color (Singh, 2006, p. 783). The high importance of
54 color on female consumers’ evaluations is thus no surprise. The fact that surface, on the other hand, did not affect evaluations at all, might imply that surface is mainly seen as a functional feature instead of as an appearance feature. While the surface is something women can feel during masturbation, they cannot feel the color of the vibrator. This might explain why different surfaces were not evaluated significantly different: women were not able to properly evaluate the functionality of the surface in the online questionnaire. Conducting a field experiment may increase insights about preferred surface details. Also, the dotted surface was evaluated the most non-human in the pre-test, but a wavy surface was a very close second (see Appendix B).
Future research should thus explore whether a wavy surface does lead to a main effect and an interaction effect.
The results thus lend some support to the theory of the uncanny valley by Mori (2012, p. 98) – maybe not regarding the peak in the graph, but certainly regarding the valley. Vibrators with skin-color were evaluated much lower than blue vibrators, implying that more realistic looking vibrators are situated in the uncanny valley. However, it was clear at first sight that the depicted vibrators in the questionnaire were not real penises. Looking at the graph of the uncanny valley, an artificial vibrator should thus be placed on the left side of the peak, while a realistic vibrator should be place inside the range of the valley (see Figure 15).
Figure 15. Where vibrators are situated in the uncanny valley.
55 On the other hand, the results disagree with the theory of anthropomorphism. The main reason why anthropomorphism was argued to elicit positive reactions, was because it adds familiarity to the vibrators. Although familiarity might work positively for many user products, it apparently works contradictive for vibrators. Women use vibrators in order to experience pleasures that would not be possible without the help of technologies (Ornella, 2009, p. 319).
Seeing a vibrator with familiar human-like characteristics, thus, probably only reminds women of the limited capabilities of a penis. An artificial vibrator is much less familiar, but may therefore signal that is has superior capabilities. This is in accordance with the suggestion by
DiSalvo, Gemperle, Forlizzi and Kiesler that the inclusion of robot-looking features are important in order to prevent false expectations about the abilities of the robot (2002, p. 325).
The claim that anthropomorphism would elicit arousal also doesn’t comply with the results. People would be more likely to anthropomorphize when they had a high need for affiliation, according to Epley et al. (2007, p. 864). However, vibrators are not associated with affiliation (Attwood, 2005, p. 396), so women actually don’t want to see a penis and do not get aroused by an anthropomorphized vibrator. It might be the case that the idea of a penis is arousing (because it refers to sexual intercourse or orgasms), but the looks of a penis are not arousing. Future research should explore whether the looks of a penis are arousing in itself, or the looks of a penis are only arousing because they are associated with sex.
Consumer characteristics (H4)
Women with acquaintance gave higher evaluations to the vibrators in general than women without acquaintance. This tendency may be ascribed to the fact that women are ashamed or feel guilty about sex toys and masturbation (Coleman, 2002, p. 9). Guilt or shame probably play a bigger role for women without acquaintance. Women who indicated to have used or bought a vibrator before, have already gone through their first uncomfortable experience with
56 the product. Women without acquaintance, however, have not used or bought a vibrator ever before, and answering questions about vibrators is therefore more outside their comfort zone.
Prior experience might not make a woman more positive about vibrators, but it may be assumed that a lack of experience does make a woman more ashamed (Blackledge & Hayes, 2001, p.
249) and therefore more negative about vibrators.
Highly remarkable was the result that sexually inactive women were significantly more aroused by skin-colored vibrators than sexually active women were. Sexually active women will probably use a vibrator during intercourse (Fahs, 2014, p. 982; Rye & Meaney, 2007, p.
39). In this case, they are already turned on by their partner, and don’t have the need to get turned on by the vibrator. These women might also use a vibrator during solitary masturbation, but this usually has mainly functional motivations – e.g. stress relief, relaxation or their partner is abroad (Goldey et al., 2016, p. 2139). Meanwhile, sexually inactive women don’t have a partner who turns them on. These women will therefore rely much more on the vibrator to arouse them. So, active and inactive women get evenly turned on by blue vibrators because of their functionality, but a skin-colored vibrator provides an extra source of arousal (namely; reference to penis) which sexually active women are not susceptible for, but which does affect sexually inactive women.
Conclusion
To sum up, it can be stated that higher human resemblance (more human features) leads to lower evaluations. In this evaluation, color appeared to be much more important than surface.
A vibrator with a human resembling color (skin-color) leads to significantly lower evaluations than a vibrator with a color that does not resemble any humanity. Manipulating the surface to look more human (veins) did not specifically lead to any differences in evaluation. It, however, depends slightly which women evaluate the vibrator. Higher human resemblance affects the
57 evaluations of non-acquainted women more negatively than it affects the evaluations of acquainted women, but can expect higher evaluations from sexually inactive women.
Theoretical implications
This thesis contributes to the existing literature by examining two opposing theories, anthropomorphism versus the uncanny valley, on their applicability to sexual products.
Contribution to anthropomorphism
This thesis adds to the literature on anthropomorphism, by showing that the ascription of human-like characteristics to non-human objects is not always beneficial.
Previous research has mainly focused on the ascription of facial characteristics to products. This thesis expands the knowledge on anthropomorphism by studying the effects of different human characteristics (skin-color and veins) on different products (vibrators). Even though applying skin-color to a sex robot might elicit positive reactions, applying skin-color to a vibrator elicits more negative reactions. This shows that anthropomorphism should be used with care: not all human features can be used to anthropomorphize a product, and the effectiveness of specific human features varies depending on the product it is applied to.
Moreover, this research adds to the knowledge of anthropomorphism by identifying additional factors that influence the effectiveness of employing anthropomorphism in marketing. Different target groups might react differently to specific human-like characteristics: in the case of vibrators, effectiveness depends on consumers’ prior experiences with the product and the context in which they would use the product (i.e. together with a partner or solitary).
58 Contribution to the uncanny valley
This thesis expands the theory of the uncanny valley to additional, unexplored applications.
Prior research on the uncanny valley has mainly focused on entire bodies and on heads and faces. However, the theory of the uncanny valley is very interesting when it comes to separate body parts. What do consumers think of technological substitutions of specific body parts? This study proved the applicability of the theory of the uncanny valley to a new secluded body part: the penis.
The results have provided additional prove for the relationship between high human resemblance and negative evaluations from consumers. However, there was no proof that a combination of artificial and realistic features elicits the most positive evaluations. Thus, Mori’s graph would take on a very different shape when it comes to vibrators. The shape of the graph as Mori suggested should thus not be generalized to different products or different body parts.
Also, the graph may be able to display whether certain products or body parts are evaluated positively or negatively compared to each other, but the reasons behind those certain positions on the graph vary enormously and are not illustrated: two products may thus be placed on the same place on the graph, but for very different reasons. Different versions of one automated body part (such as an artificial vibrator and a realistic vibrator) can be compared by means of this graph, but totally different artificial body parts (e.g. a vibrator and a sex robot) should not be compared on the graph.
Managerial implications
The benefits of sexual health have become more and more evident through time. However, there is still a big taboo on the topic. It may be hard for doctors and specialists to tackle this taboo and educate more people, but marketers have the possibilities to reach huge amounts of people in a very wide range. With the outcomes of this study, marketers’ can advance their
59 contribution to sexual health by promoting sexual tools that actually fit with current consumer demands and therefore attract more consumers.
The first and foremost advice based on the data would be that marketers need to focus their efforts on the enjoyment and health benefits of masturbation. By marketing tools like sex toys that look predominantly fun and functional and don’t remind the consumer of a penis or a partner, marketers may be better able to reach more consumers. Such functional looks are also important in order to minimize the shame that is associated with sex toys.
Marketers need to keep track of any trends in sexuality such as in the fields of femininity, masturbation, sex education, robotics, and so on. Sex toys have already gone through major changes in functionality, usage, appearance and image. As sexuality is such a sensitive topic, it is highly important that sex toys keep conforming to the demands of consumers, in order to keep the threshold of buying and/or using sex toys as low as possible.
In this respect, the results of this thesis have validated the current trends in sex toys as outlined in the literature review, and, therefore, form some proper guidance for managers. First, using a vibrator is much more appreciated today than ever before because of the increased knowledge about the opportunities and benefits of vibrators (Fahs & Swank, 2013; LoPiccolo
& Lobitz, 1972). Exactly for that reason, women want to use fun and functional vibrators; not vibrators that remind us of a missing partner by resembling a penis. Because vibrators are used as “therapeutic medical devices” (Attwood, 2005, p. 396), vibrators that resemble a penis would even be inappropriate. A realistic looking vibrator does not fit with the emphasis on functionality of today, and it also doesn’t fit with the required fashion-aspect. Like Attwood pointed out, the appearance of the vibrator is associated with style, image and self-fashioning
(2005, p. 396). A realistic vibrator doesn’t look fun. Second, although vibrators are much more accepted nowadays than ever before, they are still associated to emotions of guilt and shame
(Coleman, 2002, p. 9). The negative results from this study towards realistic vibrators might be
60 explained by the fact that “graphic sexuality” has such a strong link to pornography and because of the social taboo (Eaglin & Bardzell, 2011, p. 1840). Artificial vibrators were evaluated more positive, because they get associated with sexual wellness instead of pornography (p. 1840).
Third, managers of sex toys should not be blinded by the success of realistic sex robots and follow just like that. They need to understand that vibrators are used for very different reasons than sex robots, and will therefore not follow the same trends.
As should be clear by now, marketers are strongly advised to choose a non-human color for vibrators. However, this advice is not uniform for all target groups. If the target group consists of acquainted women and/or of sexually active women, it is fine to combine this non- human color with human features, as long as the vibrator is a non-human color. However, if the target group are non-acquainted women, marketers should try to include as many non-human features as possible – keeping in mind that at least the color should be non-human. These women without acquaintance don’t specifically have a preference for any surface, but they do prefer vibrator with more artificial features. Launching skin-colored vibrators was thus strongly discouraged, but if you have to sell skin-colored vibrators, do it to sexually inactive women: they were significantly more turned on by skin-colored vibrators than sexually active women were.
Limitations and future research
This study had several limitations that need to be taken into account, and which create the opportunity for future research.
Some limitations in the research sample should be considered when interpreting the results. First, ethical issues as a result of the sensitivity of the subject limited the opportunity to explore demographic data in the questionnaire. To ensure the utmost anonymity, the questionnaire contained as little demographic questions as possible. Future research should
61 explore whether demographics have an impact on the evaluations of vibrators. It might be of interest to study whether younger people are interested in different sex toys than older people, whether highly educated people use vibrators in different contexts than lower educated people
(e.g. with a partner or solitary), or whether the family structure affects the degree of shame people feel about using vibrators. Second, it should be taken into consideration that participants were biased in how open they were to the subject. The survey was mostly distributed among students via social media for practical reasons, and (much less) elderly were approached by email. It may be assumed that students are already more open about and towards sexuality than elderly are. Also, 116 women have withdrawn from participation after reading the introduction.
It may be assumed that those 116 women did not want to participate because they were relatively closed about sexuality, while the 233 women who did participate were relatively open about the topic. This could also be the reason that openness to talking about sexuality had so little influence on the results. Because sexual health is important for every person, future research should examine how to approach and educate people who are less open about sexuality, and how to design sex toys in a way that such people become more willing to buy and/or use them. This limitation might be overcome in future research by conducting a field experiment. It is easy to close the internet window of an online experiment, but it might be harder to refuse participation when you are having a face-to-face conversation.
Moreover, it should be noted that this thesis only tested with two variables (color and surface). Therefore, this conclusion cannot be generalized to other disciplines or even different sex toys. For the vibrator-industry, however, this insight is very useful. There are only so many features that can be manipulated for marketing purposes without diminishing functionality, of which color and surface are very prominent features. Marketers should keep in mind that solely human features can be detrimental. Also, while many studies tested consumers’ evaluations by means of a number of morphed images between a robot and a human being (e.g. MacDorman
62 & Ishiguro, 2006; Seyama & Nagayama, 2007), this study only tested the evaluations of the two extremes of both variables (blue/skin, dots/veins). Unfortunately, the use of consecutive morphed images was beyond the scope of this research. Future research could test consumers’ evaluations of vibrators by using morphed images between an artificial vibrator and a penis, in order to test whether the graph of the uncanny valley maintains its shape when it comes to vibrators. In addition, since the color proved to be of high importance, future research should experiment with different colors. The skin-color in this research was a Caucasian skin-color.
This color was chosen because the great majority of women approached to participate in the questionnaire were Caucasian. Future research should experiment with different skin-colors
(e.g. Asian or African), evaluated by women with the same or with a different skin-color.
Because of the ethnic stereotype that black men have the largest penises (Davis & Cross, 1979, p. 275; Wilson, Valera, Ventuneac, Balan, Rowe, & Carballo-Diéguez, 2009, p. 404), women’s evaluations of vibrators with an African skin-color compared to an artificial color may show totally different trends, maybe even inversed from the results of this study. This shows the importance of future research on the different effects of different skin-colors in different parts of the world. Future research is also highly recommended for different artificial colors. For this study, the color blue was used for the artificial condition, but – as mentioned before – the pre- test concluded that blue and green were seen as equally non-human. Exploring what women think of different artificially colored vibrators (blue, green, pink, see-through, etc.) is important for the improvement of knowledge on vibrators.
Finally, an important limitation was the lack of available prior research about the design of sex toys. Research regarding sex toys mainly focuses on history and ethics, but research on the design of sex toys either lacks or is not publicly available. Results of this study can therefore not thoroughly be compared to other studies. More research is required to gain more knowledge on how to improve sex toys, but also to improve methods of research on this topic. In order to
63 enthuse and motivate others to add knowledge to the subject, some additional suggestions for future research are the following: feminine versus masculine looking vibrators, vibrators with a warm versus cold color, how men evaluate vibrators when they want to buy one for their female partners, the influence of the design of the webshop where sex toys are bought, the lay- out of physical sex stores, how sex toys can contribute to the mental or physical wellbeing of people who are temporarily ill (e.g. during chemotherapy), the influence of the interviewer telling his/her own sexual experiences on the level of disclosure from the interviewee.
64 Reference List
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34
(August), 347–56.
Adam&Eve. (2017). Retrieved March 26, 2017, from http://www.adameve.com/
Aggarwal, P., & McGill, A. L. (2007). Is that car smiling at me? Schema congruity as a basis
for evaluating anthropomorphized products. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 468 –
479.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: a theoretical analysis and review
of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84(5), 888 – 918.
Ann Summers. (2017). Sex Toys. Retrieved March 26, 2017, from
http://global.annsummers.com/sex-toys/
Attwood, F. (2005). Fashion and passion: marketing sex to women. Sexualities, 8(4), 392 – 406.
Barabas, J., & Jerit, J. (2010). Are survey experiments externally valid? American Political
Science Review, 104(2), 226 – 242.
Bartneck, C., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N. (2007). Is the uncanny valley an uncanny
cliff? Paper presented at the 16th IEEE International Conference on Robot & Human
Interactive Communication, Jeju, Korea.
Bardzell, J., & Bardzell, S. (2011). “Pleasure is your birthright”: digitally enabled designer sex
toys as a case of third-wave HCI. CHI, 257 – 266.
Basfirinci, Ç., & Çilingir, Z. (2015). Anthropomorphism and advertising effectiveness:
moderating roles of product involvement and the type of consumer need. Journal of
Social and Administrative Sciences, 2(3), 108 – 131.
Bergkvist, L., & Rossiter, J. R. (2009). Tailor-made single-item measures of doubly concrete
constructs. International Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 607 – 621.
Blackledge, J. T., & Hayes, S. C. (2001). Emotion regulation in acceptance and commitment
65 therapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology/In Session: Psychotherapy in Practice, 57(2),
243 – 255.
Cabibihan, J., Carrozza, M. C., Dario, P., Pattofatto, S., Jomaa, M., & Benallal, A. (2007). The
uncanny valley and the search for human skin-like materials for a prosthetic fingertip.
2006 6th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots, 474 – 477.
Castro-González, A., Admoni, H., & Scassellati, B. (2016). Effects of form and motion on
judgments of social robots' animacy, likability, trustworthiness and unpleasantness.
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 90, 27 – 38.
Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Kuhn, M. A. (2012). Experimental methods: between-subject and
within-subject design. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 81, 1 – 8.
Christine le Duc. (2017). Love toys. Retrieved March 26, 2017, from
https://www.christineleduc.nl/sex-toys
Coleman, E. (2002). Masturbation as a means of achieving sexual health. Journal of Psychology
& Human Sexuality, 14(2/3), 5 – 16.
Danaher, J. (2014). Sex work, technological unemployment and the basic income guarantee.
Journal of Evolution and Technology, 24(1), 113 – 130.
Daneback, K., Mansson, S. V., & Ross, M. W. (2011). Online sex shops: purchasing sexual
merchandise on the internet. International Journal of Sexual Health, 23, 102 – 110.
Das, A. (2013). The dildo as a transformative political tool: feminist and queer perspectives.
Sexuality & Culture, 18, 688 – 703.
Davis, C. M., Blank, J., Lin, H. Y., & Bonillas, C. (1996). Characteristics of vibrator use among
women. The Journal of Sex Research, 33(4), 313 – 320.
Davis, G. L., & Cross, H. J. (1979). Sexual stereotyping of black males in interracial sex.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 8(3), 269 – 279.
Demmers, J. [1] (2017). Thesis workshop experiment design. Retrieved from University of
66 Amsterdam Blackboard website:
https://blackboard.uva.nl/webapps/blackboard/execute/content/file?cmd=view&conten
t_id=_6531648_1&course_id=_210933_1
Demmers, J. [2] (2017). Thesis workshop experiment design: seminar 1. Retrieved from
University of Amsterdam Blackboard website:
https://blackboard.uva.nl/webapps/blackboard/execute/content/file?cmd=view&conten
t_id=_6541837_1&course_id=_210933_1
Devlin, K. (2015). In defence of sex machines: why trying to ban sex robots is wrong. Retrieved
June 14, 2017, from https://theconversation.com/in-defence-of-sex-machines-why-
trying-to-ban-sex-robots-is-wrong-47641
DiSalvo, C. F., Gemperle, F., Forlizzi, J. & Kiesler, S. (2002). All robots are not created equal:
the design and perception of humanoid robot heads. Proceedings of the 4th conference
on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques, 321 –
326.
Dunning, D., Anderson, J. E., Schlösser, T., Ehlebracht, D., & Fetchenhauer, E. (2014). Trust
at zero acquaintance: more a matter of respect than expectation of reward. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 107(1), 122 – 141.
Eaglin, A., & Bardzell, S. (2011). Sex toys and designing for sexual wellness. CHI, 1837 –
1842.
Emerson, R. W. (2015). Convenience sampling, random sampling, and snowball sampling: how
does sampling affect the validity of research? Journal of Visual Impairment &
Blindness, 164 – 167.
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: a three-factor theory of
anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864 – 886.
Fahs, B. (2014). Coming to power: women's fake orgasms and best orgasm experiences
67 illuminate the failures of (hetero)sex and the pleasures of connection. Culture, Health
& Sexuality, 16(8), 974 – 988.
Fahs, B., & Frank, E. (2014). Notes from the back room: gender, power, and (in)visibility in
women’s experiences of masturbation. Journal of Sex Research, 51(3), 241 – 252.
Fahs, B., & Swank, E. (2013). Adventures with the ‘‘plastic man’’: sex toys, compulsory
heterosexuality, and the politics of women’s sexual pleasure. Sexuality & Culture, 17,
666 – 685.
Federici, E. (2017). Thesis workshop quantitative data analysis. Retrieved from University of
Amsterdam Blackboard website:
https://blackboard.uva.nl/webapps/blackboard/execute/content/file?cmd=view&conten
t_id=_6569928_1&course_id=_211010_1
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. London, Great Britain:
SAGE Publication Ltd.
Field, A., & Hole, G. (2003). How to design and report experiments. London, Great Britain:
SAGE Publications Ltd.
Finer, L. B., & Philbin, J. M. (2013). Sexual initiation, contraceptive use, and pregnancy among
young adolescents. Pediatrics, 131(5), 886 – 891.
Fink, B., Grammar, K., & Thornhill, R. (2001). Human (homo sapiens) facial attractiveness in
relation to skin texture and color. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 115(1), 92 – 99.
Fulbright, Y. K. (2007). Touch me there!: a hands-on guide to your orgasmic hot spots (1st ed.).
Alameda, CA: Hunter House Inc., Publishers.
Gaines, B. J., Kuklinski, J. H., & Quirk, P. J. (2007). The logic of the survey experiment
reexamined. Political Analysis, 15(1), 1 – 20.
Geller, T. (2008). Overcoming the uncanny valley. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications,
11 – 17.
68 Goldey, K. L., Posh, A. R., Bell, S. N., & van Anders, S. N. (2016). Defining pleasure: a focus
group study of solitary and partnered sexual pleasure in queer and heterosexual women.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 2137 – 2154.
Groom, V., Nass, C., Chen, T., Nielsen, A., Scarborough, J. K., & Robles, E. (2009). Evaluating
the effects of behavioral realism in embodied agents. International Journal of Human-
Computer Studies, 67, 842 – 849.
Grossman, R. P., & Wisenblit, J. Z. (1999). What we know about consumers’ color choices.
Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science, 5(3), 78 – 88.
Haas, B. (2017). Chinese man 'marries' robot he built himself. Retrieved June 14, 2017, from
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/04/chinese-man-marries-robot-built-
himself
Herbenick, D., Reece, M., Sanders, S. A., Dodge, B., Ghassemi, A., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2010).
Women’s vibrator use in sexual partnerships: results from a nationally representative
survey in the United States. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 36(1), 49 – 65.
Igarashi, T., Nishino, K., & Nayar, S. K. (2007). The appearance of human skin: a survey.
Foundations and Trends in Computer Graphics and Vision, 3(1), 1 – 95.
Isik, E. (2010). Master of her domain: is she? Emotional design of an autoerotic stimulator
(Unpublished master’s thesis). Technical University Delft, Delft, The Netherlands.
Jablonksi, N. G. (2012). The biological and social meaning of skin color. California: University
of California Press.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: a research paradigm
whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14 – 26.
Kaestle, C. E., Halpern, C. T., Miller, W. C., & Ford, C. A. (2005). Young age at first sexual
intercourse and sexually transmitted infections in adolescents and young adults.
American Journal of Epidemiology, 161(8), 774 – 780.
69 King, R., & Belsky, J. (2012). A typological approach to testing the evolutionary functions of
human female orgasm. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 1145 – 1160.
Kirk, R. E. (2003). Experimental Design. Handbook of Psychology, 1, 24 – 45.
Koda, T., & Maes, P. (1996). Agents with faces: the effect of personification. Proceedings of
IEEE Workshop on Robot and Human Communication, Cambridge: Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, 5, 189–94.
Labreque, L. I., Patrick, V. M., & Milne, G. R. (2013). The marketers’ prismatic palette: a
review of color research and future directions. Psychology and Marketing, 30(2), 187 –
202.
Laue, C. (2017). Familiar and strange: gender, sex, and love in the uncanny valley. Multimodal
Technologies and Interact, 1(1), 2, 1 – 11.
Lee, R. M. (1993). Doing research on sensitive topics. London, Great Britain: SAGE
Publications Ltd.
Levin, R. J. (2007). Sexual activity, health and well-being – the beneficial roles of coitus and
masturbation. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 22(1), 135 – 148.
Lieberman, H. (2017). Intimate transactions: sex toys and the sexual discourse of second-wave
feminism. Sexuality & Culture, 21, 96 – 120.
LoPiccolo, J., & Lobitz, W. C. (1972). The role of masturbation in the treatment of orgasmic
dysfunction. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 2(2), 163 – 171.
MacDorman, K. F. (2006). Subjective ratings of robot video clips for human likeness,
familiarity, and eeriness: an exploration of the uncanny valley. Toward Social
Mechanisms of Android Science: An ICCS/CogSci-2006 Long Symposium, 26 July 2006
in Vancouver, Canada, 26 – 29.
MacDorman, K. F., & Ishiguro, H. (2006). The uncanny advantage of using androids in
cognitive and social science research. Interaction Studies, 7(3), 297 – 337.
70 Maines, R. (2008). Love + sex with robots: the evolution of human-robot relationships [Review
of the book Love + sex with robots, by Levy, D]. IEEE Technology and Society
Magazine, 10 – 12.
Mimoun, M. S. B., Poncin, I., & Garnier, M. (2012). Case study—embodied virtual agents: an
analysis on reasons for failure. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19, 605 –
612.
Mori, M. (2012). The uncanny valley (MacDorman, K. F. & Kageki, N., Trans.). IEEE Robotics
& Automation Magazine, 9(2), 98 – 100.
Murray, P. (1999). Fundamental issues in questionnaire design. Accident & Emergency
Nursing, 7, 148 – 153.
Naz, K. A. Y. A., & Helen, H. (2004). Color-emotion associations: past experience and personal
preference. In J. L. Caivano (Ed.), AIC 2004 Color and Paints, Interim Meeting of the
International Color Association (31 – 34). Porto Alegre, Brazil.
O'Leary, Z. (2004). The essential guide to doing research. London: Sage.
Ornella, A. D. (2009). Posthuman pleasures: transcending the human-machine boundary.
Theology & Sexuality, 15(3), 311 – 328.
Pabo. (2017). Vibrators. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from
https://www.pabo.nl/sex- toys/vibrators
Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS survival manual, a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (4th
ed.). Allen&Unwin.
Parthemore, J. (2016). Beyond objectification: from robots as sex toys to a new theory of
personhood. Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour,
At Sheffield, UK.
Realdoll. (2017). Realdoll 2 Male. Retrieved March 30, 2017, from
https://secure.realdoll.com/realdoll-2-male/?sortby=title&sort=ASC
71 Rye, B. J., & Meaney, G. J. (2007). The pursuit of sexual pleasure. Sexuality & Culture, 11(1),
28 – 51.
Sabanović, S. (2010). Robots in society, society in robots: mutual shaping of society and
technology as a framework for social robot design. International Journal of Social
Robotics, 2(4), 439 – 450.
Saul, J. M. (2006). On treating things as people: objectification, pornography, and the history
of the vibrator. Hypatia, 21(2), 45 – 61.
Selwyn, N. (2003). Apart from technology: understanding people’s non-use of information
and communication technologies in everyday life. Technology in Society, 25, 99 – 116.
Serenko, A. (2007). The development of an instrument to measure the degree of animation
predisposition of agent users. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 478 – 495.
Seyama, J., & Nagayama, R. S. (2007). The uncanny valley: effect of realism on the impression
of artificial human faces. Presence, 16, 337 – 351.
Sincero, S. M. (2012). Online surveys. Retrieved May 29, 2017, from
https://explorable.com/online-surveys
Singh, S. (2006). Impact of color on marketing. Management Decision, 44(6), 783 – 789.
Spangler, M. (2013). A review of “Alone together: why we expect more from technology and
less from each other” [Review of the book Alone together: why we expect more from
technology and less from each other, by S. Turkle]. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy,
39(5), 466 – 473.
Starzyk, K. B., Holden, R. R., Fabrigar, L. R., & MacDonald, T. K. (2006). The personal
acquaintance measure: a tool for appraising one’s acquaintance with any person.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 833 – 847.
Statistic Brain. (2016). Sex toy industry statistics. Retrieved March 9, 2017, from
http://www.statisticbrain.com/sex-toy-statistics/
72 Stedman, R. C. (2002). Toward a social psychology of place: predicting behavior from place-
based cognitions, attitude, and identity. Environment and Behavior, 34(5), 561 – 581.
Sullins, J. P. (2012). Robots, love, and sex: the ethics of building a love machine. IEEE
Transactions on Affective Computing, 3(4), 398 – 409.
Szczuka, J. M., & Krämer, N. C. (2017). Not only the lonely—how men explicitly and
implicitly evaluate the attractiveness of sex robots in comparison to the attractiveness
of women, and personal characteristics influencing this evaluation. Multimodal
Technologies and Interact, 1, 3, 1 – 18.
Tolman, D. L., & McClelland, S. I. (2011). Normative sexuality development in adolescence:
a decade in review, 2000 – 2009. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 242 – 255.
Touré-Tillery, M., & McGill, A. L. (2015). Who or what to believe: trust and the differential
persuasiveness of human and anthropomorphized messengers. Journal of Marketing,
79, 94 – 110.
Treggiden, K. (2014). Crave’s USB-chargeable vibrator doubles as a pendant necklace.
Retrieved Februari 3, 2017, from https://www.dezeen.com/2014/08/10/vesper-by-
crave-is-a-usb-chargeable-vibrator-doubles-up-as-a-necklace/
True Companion. (2017). Roxxxy. Retrieved March 30, 2017, from
http://www.truecompanion.com/shop/roxxxy-truecompanion-sex-robot/roxxxy/
Tucker, E. (2015). Richard Yasmine’s glory holes table has brass dildos for legs. Retrieved
Februari 9, 2017, from https://www.dezeen.com/2015/12/16/richard-yasmine-glory-
holes-tables-brass-dildos-for-legs-furniture/
Urala, N., & Lähteenmäki, L. (2004). Attitudes behind consumers’ willingness to use functional
foods. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 793 – 803.
Vella, H. (2017). From sex robot to lifelong companion: will we marry robots by 2020?
73 Retrieved February 9, 2017, from http://factor-tech.com/feature/from-sex-robot-to-
lifelong-companion-will-we-marry-robots-by-2050/
Willie [1]. (2017). Duo vibrators. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from
https://www.willie.nl/vibrator/duo-vibrator/
Willie [2]. (2017). Sextoys. Retrieved March 26, 2017, from https://www.willie.nl/sextoys/
Wilson, P. A., Valera, P., Ventuneac, A., Balan, I., Rowe, M., & Carballo-Diéguez, A. (2009).
Race-based sexual stereotyping and sexual partnering among men who use the internet
to identify other men for bareback sex. Journal of Sex Research, 46(5), 399 – 413.
World Health Organization. (2010). Developing sexual health programmes: a framework for
action. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
Wright, K. B. (2005). Researching internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages
of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web
survey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3), 00 – 00.
74 Appendix A: Pre-test questionnaire *
* This questionnaire was available in English and Dutch. Dutch questions can be viewed in the web appendix folder: web appendix A.
Question 1
What is your age?
Question 2
What is your gender?
O Male
O Female
Question 3
In the following questions, you will be asked to rate three appearance-aspects of vibrators on the level of human resemblance. The entire study will take about three minutes.
As I am committed to protecting your privacy, I will not ask for any personal information, data will only be looked at by me and my thesis supervisor, and all data will be treated strictly confidential. Your participation is voluntary and you have the right to pause and/or withdraw from the survey at any time. Please only participate if you feel comfortable with sexual related questions. If you have any questions, concerns or complaints, you can email me
([email protected]) or use the textbox at the end of this survey.
If you have read the information above and would like to participate in this survey, please
75 click “I agree”. If you do not want to participate, please click “I do not agree” and you will be directed to the end of the survey.
O I agree
O I do not agree
Descriptive Text 4
Design of sex toys
Every woman loves to have fun, so we all spoil ourselves every now and then. As 89% of all women admit to masturbating, 48% of us masturbate every week and 22% even enjoy this act on a daily basis (Statistic Brain, 2016). Not only is masturbation the ultimate form of joy and pleasure, but scientists have repeatedly proven the many mental and physical health benefits associated: e.g. stress relief, positive impact on sleep, enhanced immune system and improved self-esteem (Coleman, 2002).
Marketers have the great responsibility to foster this sexual health, for example by providing and improving tools such as sex toys. The latest advancement is the highly realistic sex robot.
As these humanlike dolls are disrupting the sex toys industry, marketers will need to anticipate on the trend of human-looking sex toys, specifically in the case of the currently much used and well-accepted vibrator.
As 53% of women use vibrators when masturbating, vibrators account for about 20% of all sales in the sex toys industry – more than any other toy (Statistic Brain, 2016). High advancements in vibrators have resulted in optimal stimulation of orgasms, but also in more futuristic and mechanical looking vibrators. Because of the intimate level of interaction, women have to feel comfortable with using a vibrator. By examining the level of human
76 resemblance in the looks of vibrators, marketers can anticipate on women’s shifting mentality and therefore optimize the experience of masturbating with a vibrator.
Coleman, E. (2002). Masturbation as a means of achieving sexual health. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 14(2/3), p. 5 – 16.
Statistic Brain. (2016). Sex toy industry statistics. Retrieved March 9, 2017, from http://www.statisticbrain.com/sex-toy- statistics/
Question 5
To what extent do you think these vibrators look human (i.e. resembling a penis)?
1 (Non- 7 2 3 4 5 6 human) (Human)
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
77 Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Question 6
These colors might be used in the design of a vibrator. To what extent do you think these colors look human (i.e. resembling the color of a penis)?
1 (Non- 7 2 3 4 5 6 human) (Human)
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
78 Question 7
To what extent do you think these surfaces look human (i.e. resembling a penis)?
1 (Non- 7 2 3 4 5 6 human) (Human)
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο
79 Descriptive Text 8
Thank you for your time and participation.
Do you have any questions, concerns or complaints? Or do you have recommendations or ideas? Please fill in this textbox, or email me at [email protected].
Please make sure to click the orange ">>" button, in order to complete the survey.
80 Appendix B: Pre-test results
Table 7
Perceived Humanness of Different Vibrator Shapes
M SD Mode
Shape 1 2.69 1.45 2
Shape 2 2.81 1.33 2
Shape 3 2.28 1.14 2
Shape 4 2.94 1.27 3
Shape 5 5.19 1.62 5a
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown.
Table 8
Perceived Humanness of Different Colors
M SD Mode
Color 1 (blue) 1.09 .30 1
Color 2 (green) 1.09 .30 1
Color 3 (black) 2.09 1.45 1
Color 4 (metallic) 1.66 1.29 1
Color 5 (skin) 6.25 1.22 7
81 Table 9
Perceived Humanness of Different Surfaces
M SD Mode
Surface 1 (dots) 1.75 1.19 1
Surface 2 (ribbles) 4.06 1.63 6
Surface 3 (wavy) 1.81 1.06 1
Surface 4 (no surface) 2.78 1.48 1
Surface 5 (veins) 6.28 1.02 7
82 Appendix C: Online questionnaire *
* This questionnaire was available in English and Dutch. Dutch questions can be viewed in the web appendix folder: web appendix B.
Question 1.1
Are you 18 years or older?
O Yes
O No
Question 1.2
What is your gender?
O Male
O Female
Question 2.1
This survey is part of my Master Thesis at the University of Amsterdam, and is supervised by
Dr. Andrea Weihrauch. The entire survey will take about five minutes.
In the following questions, you will be asked to rate the appearance of a vibrator and to answer some questions about your sexual behavior. I understand that this is a sensitive topic, so please only participate if you feel comfortable answering such questions. Your participation is voluntary, and you have the right to pause and/or withdraw from the survey at any time. You will also be able to choose not to answer specific questions.
83 I am committed to protecting your privacy. Therefore, I will not ask for any personal information, data will only be looked at by me and my thesis supervisor, and all data will be treated strictly confidential. If you have any questions, concerns or complaints, you can email me ([email protected]) or use the textbox at the end of this survey.
To thank you for your participation, I will draw a lottery for a €20 gift card for Bol.com at the end of this survey.
If you have read the information above and would like to participate in this survey, please click “I agree”. If you do not want to participate, please click “I do not agree” and you will be directed to the end of the survey.
O I agree
O I do not agree
Descriptive Text 2.2
Design of sex toys
Every woman loves to have fun, so we all spoil ourselves every now and then. 89% of all women admit to masturbating, 48% of us masturbate every week and 22% even enjoy this act on a daily basis (Statistic Brain, 2016). Not only is masturbation the ultimate form of joy and pleasure, but scientists have repeatedly proven the many mental and physical health benefits associated: e.g. stress relief, positive impact on sleep, enhanced immune system and improved self-esteem (Coleman, 2002). Marketers have the great responsibility to foster this sexual health, for example by researching how to provide and improve tools such as the vibrator.
84 As 53% of women use vibrators while masturbating, vibrators account for about 20% of all sales in the sex toys industry – more than any other toy (Statistic Brain, 2016). High-tech advancements in vibrators have resulted in optimal stimulation of orgasms, but also in more futuristic and mechanical looking vibrators. By examining the looks of vibrators, marketers can anticipate women’s shifting preferences and, thereby, optimize the experience of masturbating with a vibrator.
Coleman, E. (2002). Masturbation as a means of achieving sexual health. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 14(2/3),
5 – 16.
Statistic Brain. (2016). Sex toy industry statistics. Retrieved March 9, 2017, from http://www.statisticbrain.com/sex-toy- statistics/
Descriptive Text 3.1
This is a dual vibrator, which stimulates the clitoris and G-spot simultaneously through vibrations.
85 Question 3.2
Please evaluate this vibrator on the following dimensions:
Boring Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Exciting
Turns me off Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Turns me on
Unpleasant Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Pleasant
I don’t like it Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο I like it
Not willing to use Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Very willing to use
Question 3.3
How much would you be willing to spend on this vibrator?
Descriptive Text 4.1
The following questions are related to your sexual behavior.
I understand that some of the questions are rather personal. Yet I ask you to answer honestly, as these questions are important for my research objective. Your answers are completely anonymous. You will also be able to choose not to answer specific questions.
Question 4.2
How open are you in talking about sexuality?
E.g. do you talk with friends about sex, masturbation and/or sex toys?
Closed Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Open
86 Question 4.3
How open are you to sexual experimentation?
E.g. do you try out different sexual practices, sex toys, etc.?
Closed Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Open
Question 4.4
Have you ever owned and/or used a vibrator?
O Yes
O No
O I do not want to answer
Question 4.5 (only displayed if: Question 4.4 answered with “Yes”)
Do you own (a) vibrator(s) at the moment?
O Yes
O No
O I do not want to answer
Question 4.6 (only displayed if: Question 4.5 answered with “Yes”)
How often do you use your vibrator(s)?
Almost never Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Very frequently
Question 4.7
What best describes your current status?
O In a committed relationship or marriage (one sexual partner, sexually active)
O In a committed relationship or marriage (one sexual partner, sexually inactive)
87 O In a committed relationship or marriage (multiple sexual partners without each other’s
consent / “cheating”)
O In an open relationship or marriage (mutual agreement to have multiple sexual
partners)
O Single (sexually active with one partner)
O Single (sexually active with multiple partners)
O Single (sexually inactive)
Descriptive Text 5.1
Thank you for your time and participation.
Do you have any questions, concerns or complaints? Or do you have recommendations or ideas? Please fill in the textbox below, or email me at [email protected].
I will draw a lottery for a €20 giftcard for Bol.com. If you want to win this giftcard, you can enter your email in this link: https://uvacommscience.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9tX9pn76XujDgON. Your email will be saved separately, so I will not be able to link your email to any of your given answers in this survey.
Please make sure to click the orange ">>" button, in order to complete the survey.
88 Appendix D: Gift card questionnaire *
* This questionnaire was available in English and Dutch. Dutch questions can be viewed in the web appendix folder: web appendix C.
Question 1
If you want to win a €20 giftcard for Bol.com, enter your email. Your email will be saved separately, so I will not be able to link your email to any of your given answers in the survey.
89