When your vibrator looks like a penis : an empirical analysis of the effect of human resemblance in vibrators on women's evaluations

(1)

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

(2)

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.

(3)

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.

(4)

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

(8)

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

(9)

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).

(10)

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.

(11)

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.

(12)

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.

(13)

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).

(14)

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

(15)

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).

(16)

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

(17)

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

(18)

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

(19)

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).

(20)

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).

(21)

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.

(22)

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,

(23)

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

(24)

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

(25)

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:

Figure 4. Conceptual framework.

Control: - Shape - Material Independent: Human resemblance of appearance of vibrator Color Surface Covariate: Acquaintance Dependent: Willingness to use Control: - Age - Gender Dependent: Likeability H1 H2, H3 H4

(26)

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

(27)

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

(28)

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

(29)

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:

(30)

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

(31)

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).

(32)

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.

(33)

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

(34)

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.

(35)

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.

(36)

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

(37)

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.

(38)

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

(39)

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.

(40)

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).

(41)

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 about sexuality 228 4.99 1.74 .113 .114 .048 .053 .064 .021 -.015 -.090 - 10. Openness to sexual experimentation 228 4.75 1.62 .031 -.001 .046 .184** .163* .121 .131* .097 .477** - 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).

(42)

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,

(43)

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 experimentation .038 1.946 4 198 .104 .038 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

(44)

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 experimentation Pleasantness 1 4.893 .028 .024 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

(45)

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

Figure 7. Women's evaluations of different colored vibrators. 3 3,2 3,4 3,6 3,8 4 4,2 Blue Skin S cor e Color Likeability Turn-on Willingness to use

(46)

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.

(47)

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 experimentation 1 .004 .950 .000 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

Figure 8. The amount women were willing to pay for different colored vibrators.

15 18 21 24 27 30 Blue Skin-color Pr ic e (€ ) Color Price (€)

(48)

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,

When your vibrator looks like a penis : an empirical analysis of the effect of human resemblance in vibrators on women's evaluations