A Cosmetic Connection: A Guide for Designing Color Cosmetics to Women that are Emotionally Apealing by Christina Moore A thesis submited to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Industrial Design Auburn, Alabama August 6, 2011 Keywords: emotional design, industrial design, cosmetic design Copyright 2011 by Christina Moore Approved by Randal Bartlet, Chair, Asociate Profesor of Industrial Design Astrid L. Kel, Asistant Profesor of Marketing Shuwen Tzeng, Asistant Profesor of Industrial Design Jerrod Windham, Asistant Profesor of Industrial Design ii Abstract This thesis reports on an interpretive study of women?s views towards cosmetic usage and how this relates to their response to various forms of packaging for these products. The focus of the study is on the communicative functions of a product?s appearance through packaging. This study examines how various package forms (the packaging is the structure that houses the chemical filer that is applied by the user) of the product is related to their motivations and expectations asociated with purchasing cosmetics. Fifty women were studied in a two-part qualitative and quantitative evaluation. The first part of the study examined factors that previous studies have indicated are the primary motivating factors for why women purchase cosmetics. Based on prior studies that identified factors important in product selection by users, the primary factors considered were gender identity (Philips & McQuarrie, 2009), body image (Moschis, 1976), and product interest (Petermans, Clempoel, Nuyts, Vanrie, 2009). Various atempts have been made at capturing the emotional connection betwen consumers and products, but not in the field of cosmetic packaging with respect to psychographic segmentation, the categorization of people with respect to their atitudes, psychology, and behaviors. When purchasing a new cosmetic product, consumers derive their opinions of the filer product based in part upon the packaging. This study evaluates which characteristics women cognitively apply to various forms used for the packaging and presentation of color cosmetic products (any cosmetic product that contains pigment that are used to alter or manipulate the users appearance) and which characteristics motivate women in their cosmetic purchases. iii Acknowledgments This research would not have been possible without the constant support of both my mother and father. They supported me both financialy and emotionaly through what semed at times to be a never-ending endeavor. The entire faculty on my commite for always being available with advice, input, and ideas to how I could make this study more valuable. iv Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. vi List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... ix 1. Introduction to the Problem .................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Problem Statement ................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Ned for Study ......................................................................................................... 3 1.3. Scope and Limit ....................................................................................................... 4 1.4. Anticipated Outcome ............................................................................................... 5 2. Literature Review .................................................................................................................... 6 2.1. Introduction to Cosmetics ........................................................................................ 6 2.1.1. History of Cosmetics ......................................................................................... 6 2.1.2. Cosmetic Industry Today .................................................................................. 7 2.2. Product User Interactions ......................................................................................... 9 2.2.1. Product Relationships ....................................................................................... 9 2.2.2. Purchase Motivation ......................................................................................... 11 2.2.3. Identity and Self-image Relevance to Product Use .......................................... 12 2.2.4. Recreational vs. Functional Users ..................................................................... 15 3. Method .................................................................................................................................. 16 v 3.1. Data Collection ........................................................................................................ 16 3.1.1. Respondent Selection ..................................................................................... 16 3.1.2. Product Sample Selection ............................................................................... 17 3.2. Products Asociations Method ............................................................................... 2 3.3. Method to Analyze Data .................................................................................... 26 4. Data Results .......................................................................................................................... 27 4.1. Psychographic Groups ............................................................................................. 29 4.2. Foundation Results .................................................................................................... 38 4.2.1. Functionality of product in Foundation ............................................................. 47 4.2.2. Foundation Packaging Perceived as Cheap ....................................................... 48 4.2.3. Glas Use in Foundation Packaging .................................................................. 50 4.2.4. Plastic Use in Foundation Packaging ................................................................. 51 4.2.5 Color Use in Foundation Packaging ................................................................... 52 4.2.6. Shape Asumptions in Foundation Packaging ................................................... 53 4.3. Lipstick Results .......................................................................................................... 56 4.3.1. Functional vs. Superfluous Lipstick Packaging ................................................. 62 4.3.2. Transparent Lids ................................................................................................ 63 4.3.3. Texture and Color Execution in Lipstick Packaging ......................................... 67 4.4. Eyeshadow Results .................................................................................................... 70 4.4.1. Colors used in Packaging for Eyeshadow .......................................................... 76 4.4.2. Windows on Eyeshadow Packaging .................................................................. 7 4.4.3. Features to Indicate Quality in Eyeshadow Packaging ...................................... 79 4.5. Results Summary ..................................................................................................... 81 vi 5. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 83 5.1. Design Guides ....................................................................................................... 83 5.2. Implications of Findings ............................................................................................ 89 6. Area of Future Studies ............................................................................................................ 91 References ................................................................................................................................... 92 Appendices .................................................................................................................................. 98 vii List of Figures Figure 1. Lip Gloss Filer Product ................................................................................................ 4 Figure 2. Cosmetic packages void of filer ................................................................................... 4 Figure 3. Foundation Product Samples ....................................................................................... 19 Figure 4. Lipstick Product Samples ............................................................................................ 20 Figure 5. Eyeshadow Product Samples ....................................................................................... 21 Figure 6. Makeup storage ........................................................................................................... 40 Figure 7. Functional products ..................................................................................................... 47 Figure 8. Functional products ..................................................................................................... 47 Figure 9. Products that integrate paper product .......................................................................... 48 Figure 10. Packaging that resembles a cheaper product is perceived as cheap .......................... 49 Figure 11. Material thicknes variations ..................................................................................... 50 Figure 12. Clean streamline treatment of glas ........................................................................... 51 Figure 13. Opaque plastic in foundation packaging. .................................................................. 51 Figure 14. Color asumptions in foundation packaging ............................................................. 52 Figure 15. Bottle shapes for foundation packaging. ................................................................... 5 Figure 16. Material Thicknes in Lipstick Packaging ................................................................ 62 Figure 17. Transparency in lipstick lids ...................................................................................... 63 Figure 18. Plastic application paraleling glas ........................................................................... 64 vii Figure 19. Lipsticks with visualy secure lids consistently have parting lines below the halfway mark ................................................................................................................................... 65 Figure 20. Textured and not textured lipstick casing .................................................................. 67 Figure 21. Lipstick ad from 1950?s ............................................................................................. 67 Figure 22. Max Factor ad 1950s ................................................................................................. 67 Figure 23. Color and depth treatment in lipstick packaging ....................................................... 69 Figure 24. Color in eyeshadow packaging .................................................................................. 76 Figure 25. Eyeshadow packing window shapes ......................................................................... 7 Figure 26. Shadow filer gaps betwen packaging and filer ...................................................... 80 Figure 27. Suggestion to conceal gaps betwen filer and package ............................................ 81 ix List of Tables Table 1. Women grouped based on how cosmetics afect their self image ................................ 28 Table 2. Measuring consumer interest levels for each confidence group ................................... 31 Table 3. Measuring enjoyment levels for each confidence group .............................................. 31 Table 4. Correlation of cosmetic enjoyment and confidence groups .......................................... 36 Table 6. Average scores among personality constructs .............................................................. 37 Table 7. Product choice by confidence level .............................................................................. 42 Table 8. Positive and Negative word selections to describe foundation of HH group. .............. 43 Table 9. Positive and Negative word selections to describe foundation of LL group. ............... 43 Table 10. Positive and Negative word selections to describe foundation of LH group .............. 4 Table 11. Product Summaries for foundation ............................................................................. 45 Table 12. Foundation ranking in function, product preference, and eye-catching ..................... 46 Table 13. Product choice by confidence groups ......................................................................... 57 Table 14. Positive and Negative Word Selections in Lipstick of HH group .............................. 58 Table 15. Positive and Negative Word Selections in Lipstick of LL group ............................... 58 Table 16. Positive and Negative Word Selections in Lipstick of LH group ............................... 59 Table 17. Lipstick ranking in function, product preference, and eye-catching .......................... 60 Table 18. Positive and Negative word asociations for al women poled .................................. 61 Table 19. Lid height .................................................................................................................... 66 Table 20. Eyeshadow choice by confidence groups ................................................................... 72 x Table 21. Positive and Negative word asociations of women in the HH group describing eyeshadow ........................................................................................................................ 73 Table 22. Positive and Negative word asociations of women in the LL group describing eyeshadow ........................................................................................................................ 73 Table 23. Positive and Negative word asociations of women in the LH group describing eyeshadow ........................................................................................................................ 74 Table 24. Cosmetics relationship groups preferences in eyeshadow .......................................... 74 Table 25. Eyeshadow ranking in function, product preference, and eye-catching ..................... 75 1 1. Introduction to the Problem 1.1 Problem statement Competition in the cosmetic retail market is becoming increasingly dificult due to a combination of the recesion and an overly saturated market. The emotional connection women have with cosmetics is what fuels this industry (Elowitz, 2009). Because of these motivating factors, women are wiling to spend a large amount of money on cosmetics (Kumar, 2005). Customers often determine their perceived value of a product and make judgments within the first few seconds of viewing it (Schoormans & Robben, 1996). This, combined with the fact that 70% of cosmetic purchases are made on impulse (Meyer, 1988), emphasizes the importance for products to be designed in a manner such that a positive connection is quickly established with customers. The current mas production of cosmetic products, because it does not specificaly target separate psychographic segments, results in a disconnect betwen the consumer and the designer (Le & Stappers, 2001; Spilers, 2004). For this reason, discovering the connection betwen these emotions and the product wil help the cosmetics industry beter understand what draws women to specific products. No studies of this nature have been published that specificaly target the cosmetic industry. This study explored the extent to which psychographic segmentation can guide product design in order to create this positive connection with customers. Foundation, eyeshadow, and lipstick were evaluated to learn what asumptions women make about a product acording to how it is packaged. 2 Many cosmetic products are currently designed with similar package forms crossing various brands and product lines. This study examined which emotions were evoked by diferent forms and designs of cosmetic packaging from various categories of women based on their psychographic makeup, and which emotions were determinants in their product preference. While cosmetics have been traditionaly designed for women, in the general field of product design, the concept of designing products specificaly for women is relatively new in the last 30 years and tends to not diferentiate betwen diferent psychographic segments. However, women are individuals and their motivations for purchasing and using cosmetics may be very disimilar. Knowing what features are most aluring to diferent psychographic groups of women wil help ster the design for products that appeal specificaly to each psychographic group. This, combined with demographic correlations, can be used to help guide marketing strategy. Furthermore, enhancing the psychological connection betwen the woman and a product can make a product more succesful by enhancing brand loyalty. The significance of emotion in the user interaction becomes of primary importance due to its sense-making properties (Spilers, 2004). In other words, the emotions created by a product are of primary importance because these emotions are what women use to determine the identity and overal value of the product. Acording to Malhotra (1981), previous research has suggested that customers prefer certain brands when the brand personality (asigning human characteristics or personalities to a brand to identify it from other brands), paralels the consumer?s own identity or the identity they hope to achieve. ?From the consumer?s point of view, buying cosmetics is a proces of matching the atributes of products with the ideal self? (Craik, 1993). 3 1.2. Ned for study The identification of unique consumer behaviors, generated by a variety of needs and desires, alows a diferential segmentation of the market (Wilkie, 1994). The cosmetics industry has not currently developed and implemented design elements based specificaly on diferent psychographic groups of women. Positioning a product in a way that is distinctly atractive to a specific segment that is large enough to have purchasing power wil give a company a marketing edge (Cook, Wayne, Keithly, & Connolly, 2003; Statt, 1997). A study by Fabricant & Gould (1993) categorized women who use cosmetics into four groups based on frequency and quantity of use: a. Avoiders (low frequency, low quantity), who were awkward with makeup and wore very litle. They sought a natural look. b. Creatives (low frequency, high quantity), who wore makeup infrequently, but for social expresivenes. They were comfortable either without makeup or with it. c. Habituals (high frequency, low quantity), were uncomfortable without makeup, and typicaly wanted a natural look. d. Devotes (high frequency, high quantity), nearly always wore makeup with the idea of looking good. The idea of not wearing makeup was absurd to them. (p. 537) This study by Fabricant & Gould (1993) recommended that further studies be done to determine how to beter design products that appeal to these categories of women. Their study consisted of only 12 participants. To get a beter idea of the validity of this study and to make the 4 findings more applicable to cosmetic design, a larger population must be studied along with their atitudes toward various product design features. 1.3. Scope and Limit Acording to Stat (1997), both the media promotion of a product and the physical atributes of the product are used to position it for a targeted segment of the population. This study focuses on the product package, and not the filers (Product filers consist of the liquid, powder, or cream that is put inside of a package. Se Figure 1 & Figure2.). The study involves women betwen 21 and 50 years of age, living in the southeastern United States and focuses on foundation, eyeshadow, and lipstick. These three products were selected because they were, in dollar terms, the top three grossing color cosmetic products in 2001 (Kumar, 2005), and because past studies showed these to be the most recognized products in color cosmetics (color cosmetics are any cosmetic product that include pigment for covering or adding color to ones Figure 1. Lip Stick Filer Product Figure 2. Cosmetic packages devoid of filer. 5 face or body) (Moschis, 1979). My study confirmed the finding of Moschis. 1.4. Anticipated Outcome The final result, derived from women with diferent perceptions and expectations in cosmetic usage, wil be a guide to the diferent cognitive meanings of various product atributes. This wil be established based on how women ases products and themselves. The guides wil be set to determine how to best design emotionaly cognitive products for the mas market, based on psychographic groupings. 6 2. Literature Review 2.1. Introduction to Cosmetics 2.1.1. History of Cosmetics Cosmetics date back thousands of years. People have been using cosmetics for various reasons through the ages. Egyptians first used cosmetics because they felt their ?physical appearance was directly related to their level of spirituality? (Martel, 2008). Many of the ingredients from that time in history are similar to ones used today. Cosmetics were connected to medical purposes as wel. Greeks later adopted cosmetics to enhance their appearance not for the gods, but for their own vanity. The use of cosmetics was then pased on through various ages and cultures, (Martel, 2008). Foundation also known as skin base began with the purpose of lightening someone?s complexion to make him or her appear lighter skinned. The implications of lighter skin were that you did not work outside and were of higher social stature. The definition of beauty is not consistent, or without discrepancies. Foundations have evolved tremendously and the desired benefits have changed. Now, women often use foundations and tanners to darken their skin with the intent that this wil make them more atractive. Cosmetics are directly connected to fashion, and as fashion changes, so do cosmetics. What is in style for one culture or time period may not be in style for another. However, one consistency is our need to fel acepted and to fel comfortable with our appearance. 7 2.1.2. Cosmetics Today In times of economic downturn, people tend to modify their product selections to more cost efective versions (Richardson, 2010, p. 19). Because cosmetics tend to be smaler and les expensive purchases in comparison to shoes or electronics, some women se it as them as their ?litle indulgences?. Lipsticks range in price from $2 to $32. Even though Chanel? costs 16 times as much as Covergirl?, the dollar diference of $30 is relatively smal. A woman can buy a high-end $32 Chanel lipstick even though she may not be able to aford or be wiling to spend $600 for a pair of shoes. In light of a recesion in the economy, women wil reflect on where their priorities lie and save money in other areas. If appearance is higher on their priority levels, they wil stil spend sufficient funds on cosmetic products and save in other areas. In data collected by Choa & Schor (1998) from Consumer Reports, it is stated there are no measurable quality diferences among lipsticks. However, in a study by Choa & Schor (1998) to determine what factors contribute to women spending more for various cosmetic products, the study found that education coincides with buying higher priced cosmetics in regard to socialy visible color cosmetics (most so for lipsticks) because this is the product women use most frequently in public. Choa & Schor (1998) discovered in their study that this link betwen education level and wilingnes to spend does not exist for face cleanser, which are not categorized as color cosmetics. For this reason, it is believed that a ?snob appeal? of higher priced products is relevant as education rises only for color cosmetics visible in public. 8 In consumer choice behavior, there is a distinction betwen the afective and cognitive ways of asesing perceived value (Bagozzi, Mahesh, & Prashanth, 1999; Cacioppo, Pety, & Schumann, 1983; Janiszewski, 1990). The two dimensions of product or brand asociations researchers have focused on utilitarian performance (Batra & Ahtola, 1990; Bhat & Reddy, 1998; Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982; Mano & Oliver, 1993; Mital & Le, 1989; Vos, Spangenberg, & Grohmann, 2003) described as the traditional notion of the ability for a product to perform a useful function (Apaolaza-Ibanez, Hartmann, Diehl, & Terlutter, 2010; Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982), and hedonic (emotional) performance (Adaval, 2001; Dhar & Wertenbroch, 2000) which is the ?emotional experiences that the brand is able to deliver to the consumer? (Apaolaza-Ibanes, et al., 2010, p. 794). Consumers judge these benefits by the appearance of the product, making asumptions on the utilitarian and hedonic benefits they wil get from the purchase and use. Apaolaza-Ibanez, et al., (2010) found that the four emotional experiences related to the use of cosmetics were ?feling social and profesional succes, feling sexualy atractive, feling of sensorial pleasure, and relief from felings of disatisfaction with oneself?. The current study evaluated women to determine which of these four experiences each woman most hopes to achieve from her cosmetics and what features in the products are most succesful in communicating these experiences. 9 2.2. Product User Interactions 2.2.1. Product Relationships When a design that alows a consumer to identify with a product is implemented, the result wil be a co-orientation of that consumer with the product. Moschis (1979) defines co- orientation as a measure of one?s social comparison and the extent to which one person is similar to another through various atributes relevant to the object of orientation. He explains that people reference themselves based upon similarities they fel others have with them. They may, in turn, purchase products asociated with, or used by, these people with whom they co-orient with. Co- orientation of a product is similar to using a personal asociation for example, a celebrity spokes person with certain wel known atributes to atract consumers (Schoormans & Robben, 1994). If products are humanized (given characteristics or features that signify human values or qualities) using emotional design techniques, co-orientation can occur quickly through visual stimuli. With 70% of cosmetics purchases being unplanned (Schoormans & Robben, 1994), the reaction women have to products they se on the shelf is of extremely high importance. The design features that afect the cognitive response of an unplanned in-store purchase are those that show stimuli that have relevance for consumers, producing a faster orientation response (Ratheswar, 1990). Stimulus characteristics that create orienting responses are color, size, motion, the use of complex stimuli and the degree of novelty (Schoormans & Robben, 1994). Each group of women that has a diferent motivation behind its use of cosmetics wil have a diferent set of stimuli that draws its atention to an item. 10 A consumer wil choose a ?typical? product in situations where they are insufficiently motivated to compare brands supports the design of products that have a familiar and typical appearance (Schoormans & Robben, 1996). Thus, if a consumer has no interest in expanding her knowledge of cosmetics or gets no enjoyment from the act of purchasing and use of them, she wil be more drawn to a familiar or typical package that require litle evaluation or time to proces how to use them. Co-orientation is based on the need to asociate oneself to a group (Moschis, 1979). In many purchasing situations, consumers wil find key references in the product and packaging that align with their own values or goals and they wil desire to asociate with this product or product group based upon the co-orientation of these references with their values and or goals. These orientations are based upon comparative appraisal (identification by the consumer with a product due to similarities the consumer finds betwen the product and himself regardles of whether or not the consumer finds these characteristics favorable or not) or reflected appraisal (identification by the consumer of characteristics or traits in the product that she finds favorable and wishes to identify with even though she herself may not posses those characteristics or traits) (Moschis, 1979). Characteristics a consumer considers as being favorable in a product are likely to be influenced by how the consumer fels about their own appearance (Guthrie, et al., 2006). The final choice of product may vary betwen wanting something to reflect their own image or a product that reflects an image of someone or something they find favorable. Craik (1993) explains that ?from the consumers point of view, buying cosmetics is a proces of matching the 11 atributes of products with the ideal self?, (as cited in Guthrie, et al., 2006, p. 162). Other research shows that consumers prefer products when the personality of the brand paralels their own or is one they wish to achieve (Guthrie, et al., 2006). 2.2.2. Purchase Motivation Cosmetics carry social, indulgent, automatic, peer motivated, and sensory motivation factors involved in their use and purchase. Cosmetics are used to fulfil a diverse range of needs. This study examines the emotional response and connection women have with cosmetics, and disects the force behind her perceived need or want for the product. It has become increasingly evident that emotional stimuli play a crucial role in product evaluation pertaining to the social, inspirational, cultural, and emotional needs of consumers; as wel as judgment of physical functionality (McDonagh, Bruseberg, & Haslan, 2002; McDonagh, & Lebbon, 2000; Xue et al., 2007). To what degree a woman uses cosmetics based on her perceived need or want for the product, determines the seriousnes of her purchases. Most cosmetic usage is for social conformance or aceptance. If cosmetics are only used occasionaly depending on the event, it can be asumed this person wants to met the needs of society in only certain occasions. She has tendencies towards being a conditional conformist, and a conditional user. Product categorizations customers make may be made by using goal-oriented distinctions (Schoormans et al., 1996). Judging the needs and expectations a woman has for a product gives insight to the features she looks for most in the product, and the value placed on utilitarian and 12 hedonic functions of the product. Determining what consumer?s value as being important or necesary would be the area to focus on when designing the product (Petermans, et al., 2009). 2.2.3. Identity and Self-image Relevance to Product Use The consumption of cosmetics is the consequence of a complex pursuit of identity. The desire to display identity, such as social status or lifestyles, shapes the decision to buy products that model appearance (Guthrie, Kin, Jung, 2006), as in the case of cosmetics. Gender (Philips, 2009), moral, social and sexual identities are key factors in establishing identity therefore asumed to be comparable because these are al identifiable physical traits that establish identity. Cosmetic consumption must be sen as a performance of identity in order to understand the value of relating product to person, and how influential it can prove to be in increasing the perceived value during initial product evaluation. In this study personality groups were formed primarily based on sexuality, identity, orientation, motivations previously used in psychographic segmentation (Cash & Cash, 1982; McDonagh & Lebbon, 2000; Moschis, 1979; Philips, 2009; Pomerleau & Pomerleau, 1994; Schoormans & Robben, 1994) or traits previously identified to be key factors involved in how one purchases products that afect their physical appearance (Guthrie, M. et al., 2006). Philips? (2009) explains that a woman can either acept the idealized image (of woman) by striving for it, or she can reject the idealized image and define herself in opposition. These gender aceptance variants wil influence a woman?s aceptance and draw her towards cosmetic 13 products that embrace her vision of femininity. In the past women have been sen as les inteligent than men, and prety women have been valued by looks and not inteligence. For this reason, some women try to shy away from embracing feminine qualities because they se them as being weak, uninteligent, or inappropriate. Even though women have come far in the past 50 years, we are stil more likely to asume a doctor is a man and a nurse is a woman, or a man is lawyer and a woman is a secretary. Forbes, Has, & Jumg, (2006) found that women who idealize women in a traditional role were more likely to use cosmetics in the pursuit of beauty (as cited in Guthrie, et al., 2006, p. 168). Confidence in gender identity also influences a woman?s body image. The aceptance or rejection of idealized image is too simplistic to fully define consumer tendency, especialy in such an emotional area of self-image (Philips, 2009). This view of feminism is highly influential in the design guides that relate to identity. Much of the research done on cosmetic usage examines body image as one entity (Guthrie, et al., 2006). Body image is the opinion or feling one harbors for one?s own physical appearance regardles of how others evaluate or view them (Guthrie, et al., 2006). Strong positive relationships have been found betwen body image, self-estem, and confidence (Jung & Lebbon, 2003 as cited in Guthrie, et al., 2006, p. 168). Cosmetics are products that alter physical appearance. Individuals may use cosmetics to manage or control their social expresions along with their self-image (Guthrie, et al., 2006). Measuring the amount of social interactions women have along with their body image and self-confidence, alowed this study to se the relationship these factors share with cosmetic use and product choice. Cash & Cash (1982) 14 studied the relationship of women?s cosmetic usage and their body image. The decision to examine the length and routine of cosmetic usage was based on the study by Cash and Cash (1982) finding that women who use cosmetics in a routine patern were more satisfied with their facial features, compared to those who did not have a consistent patern of use, and that women who were more judgmental of their appearance had longer cosmetic application times. Women who were the least satisfied with their facial and body image increased the number of products they applied and the number of situations in which they wore makeup (as cited in Guthrie, et al., 2006, p. 165-168). Guthrie, et al., (2006) concluded that women who are more satisfied with their facial image tend to use more cosmetics, and confidence in cosmetic usage can directly afect a positive facial image and promote usage. This study produced results that are completely diferent than Cash & Cash (1982). In this study al these behavior paterns are examined to se if one is more consistently true than the other, and what the asociation to cosmetic preference is. This study established what diferent women se as their various needs for cosmetics, including the inner need vs. the social need, the various social situations that afect these needs, and to what extent they influence diferent women. 15 2.2.4. Recreational vs. Functional Users Recreational shoppers in general appreciate in store experiences, while functional shoppers generaly just want to get what they need and are not interested in much else (Petermans, Van Clempoel, Nuyts, & Vanrie, J., 2009). The appeal of novelty in a product also plays a role to determine how a woman shops. If she wil be more atracted to a product that connects to a memory and sems familiar, therefore requiring les atention and time in shopping, or a product that stands out from others giving it has a distinct look and sparks interest, this wil then determine how to best atract her to a product. If a woman buys makeup as she would laundry detergent and considers it a chore, she wil not enjoy exploring new product options. This results in her atraction to something that resembles what she knows as a generic type of makeup. In order to sel a product you must gain the atention of a consumer, however this does not always mean they wil purchase the product. The deciding factors and underlying reasons behind a purchase must also be evaluated. Identifying the wilingnes a consumer has for learning about products and her curiosity toward cosmetics determines the recreational nature of her usage. Moschis (1976) cals this the ?information seking? behavior. He describes it as the desire to know more about a product regardles of availability. This study hypothesizes that in the cosmetics industry when new applicators or products are created, some women are atracted to learning something new because they find enjoyment in spending time ?playing? with makeup. Contrastingly other women wil not be atracted to something new if it looks like it wil take extra time and may be 16 dificult to use. This study hypothesizes this wil be more acurate if they are not fully comfortable with their current product knowledge already. This wil be the diference with design focused on new methods and technology in cosmetics, verses something that sems comfortable and easy without requiring any additional explanation. In this way cosmetic use coincides with fashion, some women always want to know the new trend. There is also a belief that new technology wil be beter. There is always the notion that newer is beter. It is part of our culture in a consumer driven material society. 3. Method 3.1. Data Collection 3.1.1. Respondents Selection Respondents were selected randomly from a beauty salon, dance studio, and through snowbal sampling (asking participants to refer someone else, very similar to a domino efect with participants). An initial survey was given to establish cosmetic interest, confidence levels and the relationship each woman shares with makeup. A total of 64 women betwen the age of 25 and 61 participated, with an average age of 41. Fourten of the respondents were omited from the study because they do not wear makeup or did not complete the survey. 17 3.1.2. Product Sample Selection Color cosmetics can be categorized into two groups, background makeup (anything used to hide or conceal a complexion, ex. foundation, concealer) and acent makeup (anything that acentuates features, ex. eyeshadow, blush, eyeliner). These products al generate very diferent usage paterns and customer expectations, and for this reason, they were studied separately. The cosmetic products focused on in this study were foundation, lipstick, and eye shadow. Foundation is considered background makeup. Eyeshadow is considered acent makeup, and lipstick is the product women are most likely to carry with them, giving it more social implications because of its visibility. Having a strong brand image in lipstick would be more noticed in public because women constantly reapply or touch up lipstick in public. This product also requires the least amount of efort and knowledge in application technique. Al products selected show discernible diferences in their package design, so there would be enough variety to alow for the participants to indicate a clear choice (Xue & Yen, 2007). Eyeshadow products with no viewable filer (sometimes referred to as the mas) were omited from the study. This excluded al prestige eyeshadow packaging from the testing. The reason for this is because upon the initial 17 surveys 15 of the women chose these eyeshadows to be the least functional based on the fact they could not se the product. In al the foundation packages, the color of the filer product was the lightest that could be found. In al the lipsticks the color of the filer (sometimes referred to as the bullet) was the 18 nudest and least saturated shade. In al the eyeshadows, the color was the nudest and least saturated shade. So the participant would not be influenced by brand, the brand names were al covered except in cases when it would distract from the design of the container more by having it covered. This was the case when the brand name was large and on a transparent covering. Participants were told to evaluate products asuming that al the filer colors were the same and a match for them. While the products were al made brand ambiguous by covering the brand name, sub branding and product descriptions were left visible. By having the brand name excluded and the filer color variety minimized, a true appraisal could be made. 19 Figure 3. Foundation Product Samples: Top row, left to right, choices 1 to 5: 1.Almay! Pure Blends!, 2. Covergirl! Aqua!, 3. Covergirl! Clean!, 4. Hard Candy!, 5. Maybelline! Fit! Midle row, left to right, choices 6 to 10: 6. Lancome!, 7. Physicians Formula! Organic Wear!, 8. Neutrogena! Mineral Shers!, 9. Neutrogena! Glow Shers!, 10. Maybelline! Age Rewind!. Bottom row, left to right, choices 11-14: 11. Neutrogena! Healthy Skin!, 12. L?Oreal! Magic Smoth!, 13. L?Oreal! Visible Lift!, 14. Maybelline! Mineral Powder!. 20 Figure 4. Lipstick Product Samples: Top row, left to right, choices 1 to 7: 1. Wet n wild! Wild Shine!, 2. Estee Lauder! Double Wear, 3. Neutrogena! MoistureShine!, 4. Covergil! Nature Luxe", 5. Rimmel! Lasting Finish, 6. Maybeline! ColorSensational", 7. L?Oreal! infallible. Bottom row, left to right, choices 8-13: 8. Covergirl! Lip Perfection!, 9. Clinique! Long Last, 10. Revlon! Colorburst?, 1. Rimel! Moisture Renue, 12. L?Oreal? Colour Rich?, 13. Neutrogena? Moistureshine? Soothing Lips. 21 Figure 5. Eyeshadow Product Samples: Top row, left to right, choices 1 to 4: 1.Maybeline? Expert Wear!, 2. Physicians Formula! Baked Colection !, 3. Almay? intense i-color" smoky-i", 4. Almay? intense i-color". Midle row, left to right, choices 5 to 10: 5. Covergir?l exact eyelights", 6. Rimmel! Glam? Eyes, 7. Neutrogena! Nourishing eye quad, 8. Revlon? CustomEyes", 9. Revlon? Illuminance". Bottom row, left to right, choices 10-13: 10. Eyestudio by Maybeline!, 11. Covergirl! Eye Enhancers, 12. L?Oreal! Wear Infinite!, 13. L?Oreal! Wear Infinite Studio Secrets". 22 3.2. Products Asociations Method This study determined and evaluated the responses evoked by diferent features of diferent products upon their initial visual presentation to female cosmetic users. This initial visual interaction betwen the product and the consumer is referred to by Desmet (2001) as the ?premo?, or initial pleasant moments prior to actual possesion of a product and its possible efect on the purchase decision. Foundations, eyeshadows and lipsticks were al evaluated based upon their packaging as it would appear in the store. Participants were not permited to open the products or to use them. Survey questions focused on perceived functionality, aesthetics, social implications and intended purchase. These questions were chosen based upon a study by Rafaeli & Vilnai-Yavetz (2004) that found that sense-making (the proces by which people give meaning to experience) of an artifact involves emotion in three ways. The first is Instrumentality (tasks the artifact helps acomplish), the second is Aesthetics (sensory reaction to the artifact), and finaly Symbolism (asociation the artifacts elicits). This is comparable to the utilitarian and hedonic functions referred to earlier (Adaval, 2001; Dhar & Wertenbroch, 2000; Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982 ). To make surveys easier for participants to understand questions were worded using the word functionality in place of instrumentality. The participants did not come in contact with the filer product (liquid, powder, or cream substance inside package Figure 1). Women judged the anticipated function based completely on the products appearance. Functional quality of a product refers to the cosmetic container?s ability to hold, display or dispense the filer product. 23 Symbolism products carried was determined by the words they chose to describe their favorite and least favorite products. In Xue & Yen?s (2007) pilot study, Towards Female Preferences in Design, the products were grouped acording to key words the participants used to describe each of the products (perfume and cel phones). Having this similarity in groupings when designing for emotion leads me to believe these same groupings wil also prove beneficial in my study. Products were judged based on presumed efectivenes based on visual evaluation of design on past experiences. The amount of atention or importance participants gave to function defined them as being a recreational or functional shopper. By asking why a design is the favorite or least favorite, we determine what ?pleasure category? (Demir 2008) the perceived value of the product is from. Demir (2008) cites Desmet & Hekkert (2007) in saying that the methods to measure afective influences of products can be grouped in three pleasure categories . physio-pleasure (sensory): those received through sensory organs social-pleasure (meaning): pleasure from social contact psycho-pleasure (emotional): pleasure gained from acomplishing a task Another method used in my study was the kansei engineering method. This method disects the influence of physical qualities products carry, such as ?luxurious?, elegant?, ?cheap?, and ?fun?. Buy requesting participants to supply a one word description for their favorite and least favorite product, they are forced to give their asesment using one word, making it easier 24 to categorize product pleasing descriptors. This is the most common method of these groupings (Demir, 2008). A full scale of favorite to least favorite was not conducted because of time constraints, and the importance of the favorite and least favorite are the impulses that carry the most ?color emotions?(Ou and Luo, 2009). Ou and Luo (2009) explain color emotions to be diferent from other emotions typicaly referred to in psychological studies. These color emotions can be used by someone to describe something, while they carry no emotional arousal or disappointment at al. However, by only using ?favorite? and ?least favorite? product, it was highly more likely that these products carried an emotion or concern. Having one word as the descriptor for the ?color emotion? of each participant can then be asumed to be linked to actual emotion. A product wil only elicit an emotion if it matches or mismatches a concern (Desmet, et al., 2001). The products not choosen as favorite or least favorite carried les or no emotional responses or connection. The quantitative measure of each participant?s self-estem was established by having each participant score her physical appearance on a 10-point scale with makeup, and without makeup. The diference betwen the scores signifies the extent to which the participant fels her appearance depends on cosmetics to be favorable. The importance of cosmetics on the participants? appearance suggested she wil invest more time in learning about new products. Cosmetic application is increasingly rewarding if appearance is important in the way a women evaluates herself and others (Guthrie, et al., 2006). Having participants rank the importance of men, women, self, colleagues, and employer?s evaluation of their appearance 25 showed how much they value the judgment of others. Questions from Moschis? idea of ?reflected appraisal? were used as a construct of motivations on the part of the consumer to obtain responses from ?co-oriented peer? for self-evaluation (Moschis 1979, p. 239). This was used to determine if participants identify with their own image or an image they find favorable. An example of this question used by Moschis is ?I often talk about cosmetics I use just to let others know the kind of person I am? (Moschis 1979 p. 242). These questions were scaled, similar to my questions. The results of scoring highly on these types of questions indicated the power this type of woman gives her cosmetics in identifying her, therefore increasing the incentive of a more expensive product because it directly reflects who she is. Measuring the importance a participant gives to others regarding her appearance and the extent to which they influence her indicates the degree to which the subject considers the opinions of others in her own appearance and product selection. Determining how she makes her product selections influences how to design a product, in that we can focus the design for women who make their decisions based on their own inferences and not the opinions of others. Determining values identifies where appearances lay in their perceived needs (Desmet, et al., 2001). Knowing were appearance lays in a person?s hierarchy of needs is part of a woman?s cosmetic personality. These ideals are measured by their standards on physical appearance, and the extent to which they value beauty. Questions relating to how far a participant would go for beauty and what sacrifices she would make to achieve it. Measuring the degree to which a subject spends on cosmetics shows the importance she puts on them. Values were also determined by asking questions relating to a subject?s life, such as how much religion plays in her appearance, how she spends her time, and what magazines she reads. The results of these 26 questions wil be helpful in further marketing, determining what channels wil be most influential in reaching various groups of women. 3.3. Method to Analyze Data Questions related to products were analyzed in part through a point of view caled ?empathic design?, these tools are used to understand user needs, aspirations, felings, and as the name implies to design in empathy with intended users (McDonagh-Philip & Lebbon, 2000). Empathic design is generaly presented as a user-centered design approach that puts emphasis on the emotional aspects of user-product relationships (Crossley 2003; Demir, 2008; Fulton-Sur, 2003; McDonagh-Philip & Lebbon, 2000). As stated by Demir (2008), the terminology used to describe information gathering in empathic design includes terms such as felings, aspirations, and emotional needs of users. Theoreticaly these concepts are user concerns and atitudes for which conformance or violation may evoke afective and emotional responses towards products (Demir, 2008). Using past studies concerning people?s psychological state and its efect on their product use, the participants in this study were grouped by similarities they shared in how they relate themselves with cosmetics. 27 4. Data Results Al venues for determining similarities betwen the psychological similarities in women and the design asumptions for cosmetics were investigated. Participants were grouped based on their confidence levels, how much credit they gave cosmetics in making them atractive, and their overal enjoyment of cosmetics. Women were asked how atractive they were with and without makeup, scored on a scale of 1-10. In some cases women felt they were atractive with makeup and without makeup, this group is the high without makeup and high with makeup group (HH). The second group of women is the low without and high with group (LH). This group has conditional confidence (confidence only when certain criteria are made, or particular measures are taken). These are the women who believe they are unatractive without makeup and become atractive when they apply their makeup. The final category of women is those who believe themselves to be unatractive regardles of their use of makeup. They are the low without and low with group (LL). No woman believed herself to be atractive without makeup, and unatractive only with the use of makeup. 28 Table 1. Women grouped based on how cosmetics afect their self image The largest group of the women interviewed believed they were only atractive with makeup (LH). To further understand and segment the market, this study compared the interest levels al three groups had and their enjoyment towards cosmetic products. This was established by the quantitative scores each participant gave to discribe the extent she browses the cosmetics department, and how much she enjoys using makeup. Table 2 demonstrates the interest levels of each of these groups. The interest level of the women who believed themselves to be atractive only with makeup on (LH) and the women who believed they were atractive regaurdles to cosmetic usage (H) were very similar. While the interest level of the women who had a low self image consistently, regaurdles of their use of cosmetics (L) were substantialy lower. Similar correlations were found betwen these groups and their enjoyment of cosmetics (Table 3). Of the women in the LL group who did enjoy using cosmetics the highest they scored was a !"#$ %#$ &&#$ '%#$ !"#$%&'()*"#+,'#*'))-("%.$) (($)*+,*$-+.*/0.1$*+,*$-+.*2$ (3$)*+,*$-+.*/0.1$4/-$-+.*2$ 3($)4/-$-+.*/0.1$*+,*$-+.*2$ 33$)4/-$-+.*/0.1$4/-$-+.*2$ 29 6, while the mean score for enjoyment of the women in the HH group was a 10, and the LH was an 8. The group with the strongest difences in the low and high interest was the HH group. They either enjoyed makeup very much (8,9, & 10), or were not interested in it (1,2,3,4). Their use in the product was not derived from felings of inadiquacy. 4.1. Psycographic Groups The women in the (H) high confidence group use cosmetics for enjoyment and for recreation, or to be fully dresed. They define their self image by their body, or their mood. ?I look most beautiful when I?m happy, and in shape?. They fel that cosmetics are part of being completley ?put together? in social situations that require a higher level of dres (e. g. work, church, weddings). The HH group does not fel like they ?need? cosmetics to be atractive and they can be divided into two groups. Those who do not ?need? makeup, so they consider it something they can play around with. They are not concerned with sticking to one product, because they ?colect? makeup. This group would be likely to try something new ?just for fun?. The other group of HH women are those that fel that makeup does not make them atractive, and they only use it because it it socialy acepted that a profesional women should wear makeup. They do not play up their girlish side, and have a more functional outlook. They do not look for products that sem more costly, because they do not need makeup to be atractive and the purpose of makeup is only to complete a look. The low confidence group (L) also do not believe that makeup makes them more atractive. They do not put much efort or time in their looks. They may not enjoy the proces of 30 purchasing or applying makeup because this brings focus to their face. A woman who believes she is beautiful is more inclined to enjoy spending time in front of the mirror, while a women who does not like her reflexion wil limit the time as much as possible. Simplicity and ease are her two priorities with products that involve her beauty. Playing up her femininity only solidifies her inadequacy. She has given up on trying to be a beautiful woman, and taken the role of basic female. Girly, fun, and prety products are not appealing, and are often ridiculed. The (LH) conditional confidence group use cosmetics more out of necesity. They use cosmetics primarily to compensate for their disatisifaction with their own appearance. Without makeup on this women fels worried, and anxious. She fels that she ?needs? makeup, more than the average person. She judges a product by what wil best work to make her atractive. If the package sems to be more expensive, or ?nicer? along with having an easy application the value increases. Because she fels the ?need? to use makeup inorder to be atractive and fel feminin, she is not overly concerned about having it smal enough to store. Because of her atachment to makeup she often travels with it. This is where size can cross lines. Where a larger heavier product may sem more expensive or ?nicer?, she is unable to travel with it. This consumer may purchase multiple products to fit al of her needs. She expreses her feminine identity through her cosmetics, and is likely to spend more money if she believes the product is beter. She validates the expense because she believes she is not atractive without makeup and ?needs? it to fel good about herself. 31 Table 2. Measuring consumer interest levels for each confidence group Table 3. Measuring enjoyment levels for each confidence group %$ 5$ '$ !$ &$ 6$ "$ (($ 33$ 3($ 789:8;$ ?$ (($ 33$ 3($ @=A/BC8=.$ (($ 33$ 3($ 32 Each product had various reactions from participants. Some women did not wear al three products and did not evaluate products they do not purchase. Every confidence group did not have similar reactions in every aspect. However, al the similar reactions were analyzed, along with the reasoning behind them based on the psychological evaluation in the earlier part of the survey. The three cognitive responses afected by product design are beliefs about the product, categorization, and consumer atention (Schoormans et al., 1996). Afective responses are both positive and negative aesthetic responses (Schoormans et al., 1996). This study determined how the appearance of the product creates beliefs about the product categorization, consumer atention, and the efects on expected product use. The relationship women had with makeup was then compared to the confidence groups. This relationship was determined by having the participants choose one of the following statements to identify them. a. Makeup is a toy. Fun to play and learn! b. I like makeup, but it is not one of my favorite things. c. I use makeup as litle as possible either because I am uncomfortable applying it, I fel it is a bother, or I think it can be overdone. d. I need to wear makeup to fel or look atractive. The groups listed above had similar taste in eyeshadow. Eyeshadow is a venture in cosmetics with more area for exploration and creativity in the application. The proces of applying eyeshadow can be far more in-depth than other cosmetics. Because the emotions related to cosmetics are so complex, using two levels of psychographic evaluation (confidence and 33 interest) beter construct groups depending on the diferent benefits the product provides. Foundation has les room for creativity in application and use while eyeshadow can be used more creatively through various applications. These various uses for the products relate with the confidence groups and the various cosmetic relationships, signified by a cosmetics catchphrase. The relationships below are a combination of perceived user need, and user interest. I love makeup! It is a toy, fun to play and learn! (high ned high interest) These women tend to have more of a fun outlook on makeup. They are not frugal when it comes to the cosmetics they buy. They regard their skils and knowledge of cosmetics to be high, and are regarded by their friends as a good source for information on makeup. Their favorite cosmetic products are eyeshadows and eye makeup. These products alow them to be more creative. They shop for makeup recreationaly. They buy new products on impulse more often than they let themselves run out. These women shop for eyeshadows like they are profesional makeup artists. They prefer products with crisp clean lines, using black modern package styles. They are not as interested in having labels and applicators to help them apply the eyeshadow. This group most likely already has brushes or applicators at home. Coloring the applicator tool to blend with the package and focus the eye on the texture and color of the actual filer is more productive when seling to this individual. Adding simple design details through material layering and textures wil create an ilusion of a ?fancier? product. More luxurious products are more appealing to this user because the makeup she applies to her faces defines who she is. She typicaly considers herself unatractive prior to wearing makeup. Therefore, she prefers the identity she projects with makeup, and identifies herself with this projection. 34 I like makeup, but it is not one of my favorite things. (high interest, low ned) These women are fairly nonchalant about their makeup. They enjoy it to an extent but do not spend time becoming perfectionist. They think of makeup much more casualy than other groups. These women give makeup les credit for determining whether or not they are atractive. They usualy fel they are atractive regardles of the cosmetics they use. They are open to new products and fun innovative ways of using them as long as they don?t require that much time investment for learning and application. Cosmetics may improve her looks, but her looks are not dependent on them. She does not consider herself an expert in makeup application. She wil be curious of brands and new products. Products that sem ?fun? and not necesarily profesional quality are appealing. She does not often compare products to other brands. She is interested in products that are trendy, stylish and diferent. Her product enjoyment is high, while her need or seriousnes in her product use is minimal. I use makeup as litle as possible either because I am uncomfortable applying it, feel it is a bother, or I think it can be overdone. (low interest, low ned) These women also do not believe cosmetics can make someone atractive or not. They use cosmetics to complete their look and fit in. Their motivation stems from a conformist drive and is not an amusement. They have a certain amount of makeup and only get new products to replace old ones. This person looks for acent makeup (specificaly eyeshadow) she considers compact and easy. This consumer does not enjoy using or purchasing makeup. The quickest and most basic product that wil acomplish the esential function is al she wants. A compact and easy to use product that sems basic and traditional is ideal. Anything with excesive adornments or wrapping is futile and a drawback. 35 I ned to wear makeup to feel or look attractive. (low interest, high ned) These women believe they have some kind of physical imperfection that makes them need makeup to look good. They are extremely uncomfortable going out in public without makeup on. They shop for makeup frequently, and not for recreation. They have a poor body image, and their cosmetic consumption is a crutch to help them escape these felings of inadequacy. They do not enjoy makeup and would prefer a product that can be easily stored. Features that signify easy use, but stil high quality are their typical criteria. This shopper defines herself with cosmetics, but identifies herself with the pre-makeup self. She fels she is unatractive before makeup, and that using cosmetics wil remedy this. This is diferent from the user that loves makeup, because that user identifies herself as the person with makeup on and buys products that best fit the post makeup self. While this user fels that she needs makeup, she stil does not enjoy them. She is more confident in her knowledge of cosmetics, but scared of being overly loud with her display. She does not wear colors or styles that draw to much atention to her. Similarly she does not like products that draw to much atention to themselves. Compact products with elegant modern style are her ideal criteria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able 8. Positive and Negative word selections to describe foundation of H group. The HH group has a greater tendency to use descriptors that referred to the aesthetic atributes of the foundations. ??*I"2$,* H"1'7'#$* ??*I"2$,* K$&+7'#$* X*$+15* X*.;$+9* J*,+7<%+(* J*;$+#5* J*.($+,* J*(+%&$* J*+99('.+7"%* R*0<15* J*D'71*O$(* R*,"*+99('.+7"%* R*.(+11'.* R*O$'%=* R*1'29($* * * R*"%&+,'.* * * R*1($8* * * Table 9. Positive and Negative word selections to describe foundation of L group. The LL group is strictly interested in a basic functional product. 44 ?L*I"2$,* H"1'7'#$* ?L*I"2$,* K$&+7'#$* 3*$+15* 3*.;$+9* 3*.($+,* X*<&(5* 3*9%$75* X*O$'%=* X*1;',5* J*&$,$%'.* X*1($8* R*&%$$,* J*17<%=5* R*%<,5* J*."29+.7* R*=+%8* J*+99('.+7"%* R*1;"%7* J*2"=$%,* R*"(=* J*D(+1;5* R*0"%',&* J*$:9$,1'#$* R*!+,M7*&$7*'7*"<7* J*.<7$* * * R*.(+115* * * R*',7$%$17',&* * * R*,+7<%+(* * * R*1"D7* * * Table 10. Positive and Negative word selections to describe foundation of LH group The LH group was divided in their criteria for foundations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able 1. Product Sumaries for foundation 46 -* J* 3* >* W* R-* RJ* R3* R>* RW* J-* !"#$%&'%()*!($+,* *4+50$((',$*6'7C* ?@A%$+()*4+&'.*B2""7;* 4+50$((',$)*F&$*G%+1$%* H;51'.'+,1@*6"%2<(+*A%&+,'.*I$+%)* K$<7%+&$,+)*L$+(7;5*B8',C* ?MA%$+()*N'1'0($*?'^* L+%=*!+,=5)* F(2+5)* !"#$%&'%()*FS<+C* 4+50$((',$)*4',$%+(*H"O=$%* ?+,."2$)* K$<7%+&$,+)*4',$%+(*B;$$%1C* K$<7%+&$,+)*]("O*B;$$%1C* 6'%17*7"*.+7.;*$5$* ?$+17*6<,._",+(* 4"17*6<,._",+(* ?$+17*6+#"%'7$* 6+#"%'7$* Table 12. Foundation ranking in function, product preference, and eye-catching 47 4.2.1. Functionality of product in Foundation When participants ranked products based on functionality, the dispenser for the filer was the number one thing they looked at, size came second. The products that were asumed to be most functional were products that had the dispenser highlighted (Figure 7). In the Maybeline Instant Age Rewind? (Figure 7 left) the cap is transparent and atention is brought to the applicator with a red acent. In the Neutrogena? Mineral Sheers? (Figure 7 middle) the transparent cap displays the brush applicator very clearly. The L?Oreal? Visible Lift? (Figure 7 right) also has a clear lid, and the pump is emphasized using blue. This is the only color on the package. When the dispenser is visible and atention is drawn to it, the product is perceived to work beter, because the user does not have to figure out how it wil work. Figure 7. Functional products: The dispensers of these products are highlighted, resulting in a higher level of perceived functionality. Figure 8. Functional products: These products are perceived as functional because of the visible pump on (left), and the storable size and that it is squeezable, (right) 48 4.2.2. Foundation Packaging Perceived as Cheap Materials influence the perceived value of the product, in the materials used and the way they are displayed and treated. The most common negative response women had towards foundation was they felt the product was cheap. The products that were described as cheap were those that integrated paper products into the packaging. This was a box, or a sticker that was not transparent and made of paper (Figure 9). Hard Candy was sen as cheap, more than any other product and the least favorite. The script font and overly decorated box of Hard Candy? does not describe the product, or any positive emotions women asociate with foundation (fun, modern, natural, clean, fancy). The products shows in Figure 9 are the top products described using the word ?cheap?. The things al three of these products have in common that the other products do not have is the visibility of paper or cardboard in the packaging, decorative graphics instead of bold solid colors, and they limit the view of the filer product by covering it with packaging. The bulky packaging covers the product, making it dificult for the consumer to decide if it wil work wel. This packaging also makes it dificult to evaluate the color of the filer. The word ?tacky? or ?busy? often acompanied the middle packaging (Hard Candy?). The type on this package has script, san serif, and a scratched looking artistic type. The thicknes of the san serif type Figure 9. Products that integrate paper product: left to right, Almay? Pure Blends?, Hard Candy? Sher Envy, Physicians Formula? Organic Wear? 49 changes, using a large white border. The excesive decorating visualy weighs down the package. The product was said to appear ?thick? or ?heavy?. It also came across as too young. However, the younger women and women who like the more interesting and designed products were also put off by this packaging because of the lack of saturation in the colors. It uses blacks, and grays for the majority of the package. Avoiding hiding the filer product in exces package, wil help keep the product from being perceived by most as cheap. Having les visibility of the filer product makes the consumer fel uneasy about the quality and consistency of the filer (mas). When buying foundation the packaging only asist in conveying positive traits about the filer. The idea in packaging should be to showcase the filer. Concealing the filer decreases credibility of quality, color and consistency of the product. Products were also perceived as cheap if they miicked anything other than foundation (toothpaste, lotion, eye drops). In Figure 10 the three products on top very closely resemble the medical products below each of them. These similarities were sen as negative by women in the (H) high confidence group and the (LH) conditional confidence group. Products that women could asociate with another product were repeatedly asociated with the term ?cheap?. Figure 10. Packaging that resembles a cheaper product is perceived as cheap 50 4.2.3. Glas Use in Foundation Packaging Glas was a feature often perceived as making the product more expensive or beter quality. This was only the case when it was given a visible thicknes, where the inner siding of the material varies from the outer siding. Figure 11 gives an example of variation in material thicknes. The blue line shows the inner lining of the glas, while the red line shows the outer side. The glas on the bottle of the figure on the left, gives atention to the thicknes variation of the material. The inner lining of the glas and outer lining have diferent angles. This brings more atention to the glas. Glas is typicaly perceived to house a higher quality or ?nicer? product, but it only becomes ?luxurious? when treatment is given to the glas that brings more atention to the material. Having thicker glas alows light to shine through and reflect more. This shine also plays a part in adding the ilusion of luxury. The object on the right (Figure 11) does not vary in thicknes until the bottom. Using material variation in thicknes only on the bottom was not shown to signify a more expensive or luxurious product. The Neutrogena? bottle on the right in Figure 11 has a more stream line application of the glas. This consistent thicknes of glas, using straight lines and a flush cap give the product a ?clean? and ?simple? look, often appealing the LL group. This same approach is considered boring to women who are recreational shoppers. Figure 1. Material thicknes variations: Left product shows variation in thicknes of outer and inner layer of material. Right product shows variation only on bottom. 51 It is important to notice the visibility of the filer in both products in Figure 12. There is minimal type, color, and decoration on both bottles. The relationship of the lids and the glas line up exactly, creating a streamline efect. Women who used foundation on a daily basis and are more cautious about geting every drop out believed glas containers that did not have a pump would not alow them to get the product from the bottom of the bottle. They also believe the containers that implemented thick glas with visible thicknes were wasteful. 4.2.4. Plastic Use in Foundation Packaging Plastic packaging in foundation is not always perceived as ?cheap?. The benefits of using plastic packaging are a reduction in weight, and a more durable product for storing and carrying around. The plastic products that use a more opaque plastic treatment are more often considered cheap, and they cloud the view of the filer. These plastics are also most likely to be perceived as boring. Plastics that have more reflection do not mute the filer, and give it a more luminous look. This opaque plastic (Figure 13) was never considered atractive, and gave the foundations a cheap and generic feling. Figure 12. Clean streamline treatment of glas. Figure 13. Opaque plastic in foundation packaging. 52 4.2.5 Color Use in Foundation Packaging The use of color and the amount of color both afect how a product is perceived. L?Oreal? Magic Smooth? (object 1 in Figure 14) has a large pink lid. Using a feminine color gave this package a more ?fun? and ?girly? response from women. The color is displayed in a solid, bold and simple way which keeps it from looking ?tacky? or over decorated. No negative responses were made about the color of this product. The application of dark type on the Hard Candy? (object 2 in Figure 14) packaging made the filer product sem darker and heavier. Even though three of the four colors used in this package are unsaturated (black, grey, white, pink), there are more color variations on this package than there are on any other packages, with grey being the most prominent. Grey did not evoke any kind of happy, prety, girly, or positive response. The drab and dull colors make the product appear dark and cheap. De-saturated colors are only perceived favorably when the material they are on is given a shiny, or metalic treatment, and correlate to the shape or function of the product. The Hard Candy? package was asumed to be thick, and heavy by multiple participants. Dark colors, and black tend to be ?heavier? colors and must be used sparingly. The black type on the plastic tube adds visual weight to the filer product in the Hard Candy? package, ironicaly this product is tinted Figure 14. Color asumptions in foundation packaging 53 moisturizer and supposed to have a lighter consistency than foundations. Black was considered ?clasy? in Maybeline? Fit? (product 5 in Figure 14). This package uses a shiny black cap with gold details. Products using black as the main color were al considered boring, except Maybeline? Fit?. The combination of gold and a shiny finish of the black were wel perceived by women looking for something simple and modern. The simple color choices used in the Neutrogena? packaging produced a clean and simple response without being boring. The shine of the product also made it more eye-catching and likely to get noticed. Neutrogena? products did not consistently score high in functionality, but they were al referred to as ?easy?. The simplicity of the color palet in packaging (clear and silver), along with the down play of text on the face gives a clean and uncomplicated reaction. These features are sen positively by women who do not want to take time to read the bottle. They are not interested in a lot of information. The consistent lines and absence of extra wording, colors, and shapes gives the product a straightforward appeal that is to the point. The light acent of blue in the L?Oreal? Visible Lift? gives atention to the pump, as wel as a touch of personality to the product. This personality wil be more atractive to women who take enjoyment in purchasing and using cosmetics. 4.2.6. Shape Asumptions in Foundation Packaging The Neutrogena? Healthy Skin? (middle, Figure 15) was recognized as runny by four participants. The large lid makes the bottle look like it has a wide mouth. The tapering of the Covergirl? Clean (left, Figure 15) to a smaler cap makes the bottle appear to have a smaler opening. The Covergirl? Clean was also perceived to be smaler 54 than the Neutrogena? Healthy Skin?. L?Oreal? Visible Lift? (right, Figure 15) was the only glas to have a curved silhouete. This product was recognized as fancy, even though it did not have much variation in material thicknes. The curved lines give the product novelty and a more elegant character with its subtle curves. Organic shapes integrated in a silhouete give a soft and graceful quality to the product. This product was also thought to fit wel in a makeup bag and in a woman?s hand. This can also be contributed to the curves of the bottle. For women who are les interested in cosmetics and do not want them displayed on a counter or sink, a smaler and travel friendly bottle is preferred. Squared edges make the product sem more bulky. Simply highlighting the pump, or dispenser increases perceived functionality. Lanc?me? (left, Figure 8) was also sen as functional because of the pump, the lid is clear and pump is easy to view although more atention is not drawn to the pump with color or novelty. The L?Oreal? Visible Lift? (right, Figure 15) scored higher because of this extra emphasis on the pump with the color acent. The Neutrogena? Glow Sheers? (right, Figure 8) was also viewed as functional because it was squeezable and would fit into a bag easily. Size played a larger role with women who limit their makeup collection to a smaler amount of space (Figure 6). Women in the LH group fel they ?need? to use makeup in order to be atractive and fel feminine, they are not overly concerned with having the product smal enough to store, and it rarley influences their product perception. This consumer (LH) may purchase multiple products (one that she can carry with her like a compact and another more luxerious product to use at home) to fit al of her needs. She does not fel comfortable in public without makeup on, so carrying some to ?touch up? is necesary for those who are more insecure without it. The 55 products that were explained to be bulky and large had thicker glas and more geometric shapes, but were not the largest products. The Lancome foundation is 1/16 inch shorter than the Neutrogena? meneral sheers? foundation. The products that were perceived to take up more room al had squared containers. The Maybeline? Fit?(product 5 in Figure 1) foundation is 3/8 inch shorter and ~1/8 inch thinner on both sides, in comparison the the L?Oreal? Visible lift? (right, Figure 15), but it is described as being bulky. The squared corners and material thicknes in packaging of Lancome? (product 6 in Figure 1), Maybeline? Fit? (product 5 in Figure 1), and L?Oreal? Magic Smooth?(product 12 in Figure 1) ad visual bulk and wieght to the size of the product. They are perceived as more dificult to store. More organicaly shaped products (products 1, 3, 13, & 14 in Figure 1) are understood to be easier for travel and storage. Figure 15. Botle shapes for foundation packaging. 56 4.3. Lipstick Results Lipstick is the most changeable and easy to use color cosmetic product. A woman?s lipstick color can be changed easier than any other product. Lipstick represents a mood or a season. It requires far les cosmetic knowledge to change lip color than with eye shadow, where new colors sometimes require a new technique or application. There is less commitment with a new lipstick, as with foundation where the cost is higher. This is the primary product women carry with them, and for this reason it carries more personal connection. It is one of the most enjoyable product to purchase (second to eyeshadow). In my experience in the cosmetic retail environment, I learned that women spend more time nit picking over smal shade variations in lipstick more than any other acent color cosmetic product. Women had the most confidence when evaluating lipstick. 57 ?'917'.8* LL* H"1'7'#$* \$1.%'97'",* ??* H"1'7'#$* \$1.%'97'",* ?L* H"1'7'#$* \$1.%'97'",* I$7*,*I'(=)*** I'(=*B;',$)* R** R* 1($8/* 17%$+2(',$/* 1$$*9%"=<.7* X* 7;',/*$+15/*1"D7/* <1+0($/*D'71*',* 25*0+&/*$+15* 7"*1$*."("%* G17$*?+<=$%)* \"<0($*I$+%* R* 7$:7<%$/*Y*.+,* D$$(*',*25* 9<%1$* X* .(+11'./*1"('=/* $:9$,1'#$* R* .(+115/*0(+.8*V* &"(=* K$<7%"&$,+)* 4"'17<%$B;',$)* -** R* 1"D7/*1$.<%$* .+9* -** !"#$%&'%()* K+7<%$?<:$*C* J* 12+(/*.($+%/* ,+7<%+(/* D<,.7'",+(* -** R*.($+,* `'2$()* ?+17',&*6','1;* -** -** -** 4+50$(',$)* !"("%B$,1+7'",+(C* -** -** -** ?@A%$+()* ',D+(('0($)* X* 1($8/*(",&/* D+,.5/* -** E* 1($8/*Y*.+,*1$$* ."("%* !"#$%&'%()*a.<0$b* R* 1($8/*Y*.+,*1$$* ."("%* R*+((*',*",$* R* 7$:7<%$/*Y*.+,* 1$$*."("%* !(','S<$)* ?",&*?+17* X* &(+2"%"<1/* .(+115/*9%$75/* 1;',5/*1"('=/* 7$:7<%$* R* 7$:7<%$/* ='D$%$,7* X* .(+11'./*17<%=5/* 1'(#$%* `$#(",)* !"("%0<%17C* J* 1($8/*.(+115/* ='D$%$,7* R*.(+11'.* J*,'.$/*.(+15* `'2$()* 4"'17<%$*`$,$O* X* %'.;/*0%'&;7/* ;+995/*9%$75* R*D<,* E* ."("%D<(/*D<,/* 0%'&;7/*("#$* 9<%9($/*1;',5/* $5$*.+7.;',&* ?MA%$+()* !"("<%*`'.;$)* J* &(+2"%"<1/*=+5* "%*,'&;7* -** -** K$<7%"&$,+)* B""7;',&*?'91* -** R* ,"*9(+17'./* ,"*D%<*D%<* -** Table 13. Product choice by confidence groups: This table shows the similarities and diferences in lipstick evaluations for each group. 58 LL*I"2$,* H"1'7'#$* LL*I"2$,* K$&+7'#$* X*1($8* 3*.;$+9* J*.(+115* 3*9(+',* J*#'1'0($* 3*<&(5* J*&(+2"%"<1* R*D('215* J*9%$75* R*"(=* J*7$:7<%$* R*0":5* R*0%'&;7* R*,"7*#'1'0($* R*='D$%$,7* R*9<%9($* R*D+,.5* * * R*D<,.7'",+(* * * R*;+995* * * R*(",&* * * R*,+7<%+(* * * R*%'.;* * * R*1;',5* * * R*12+(* * * R*1"('=* * * Table 14. Positive and Negative Word Selections in Lipstick of H group ??*I"2$,* H"1'7'#$* ??*I"2$,* K$&+7'#$* J*.(+11'.* X*.;$+9* J*1"('=* R*"(=* R*='D$%$,7* R*9(+,$* R*D<,* R*9(+17'.* R*,'.$* R*D%<295* R*1$.<%$*.+9* R*,"7*#'1'0($* R*1($8* * * R*1"D7* * * R*17%$+2(',$* * * R*7$:7<%$* * * R*#'1'0($* * * Table 15. Positive and Negative Word Selections in Lipstick of L group 59 ?L*I"2$,* H"1'7'#$* ?L*I"2$,* K$&+7'#$* X*.(+115* 3*<&(5* X*1($8* X*"(=* J*9<%9($* X*.;$+9* J*."("%* X*9(+',* R*9%$75* J*%'0$=* R*7;',* R*18',5* R*$+15* R*5"<,&* R*,'.$* R*0'&* R*D<,* R*,"7*#'1'0($* R*1'(#$%* R*9<%9($* R*17<%=5* * * R*0%'&;7* * * R*.($+,* * * Table 16. Positive and Negative Word Selections in Lipstick of LH group 60 Table 17. Lipstick ranking in function, product preference, and eye-catching There were no similarities in product opinions of lipstick packaging and confidence or interest levels. The way women perceived lipsticks was much more related to life experience or people they asociated with the products. They asociated various products with people the -* J* 3* >* W* R-* RJ* R3* R>* RW* I$7*,*O'(=**I'(=*B;',$* G17$$*?+<=$%*\"<0($*I$+%* K$<7%"&$,+*4"'17<%$B;',$* !"#$%&'%(*K+7<%$*?<:$** `'22$(*?+1_,&*6','1;* 4+50$((',$*!"("%B$,1+_",+(* ?@A%$+(*',D+(('0($* !"#$%&'%(* !(','S<$*?",&*?+17*?'91_.8* `$#(",*!"("%0<%17* `'22$(*4"'17<%$*`$,$O* ?MA%$+(*!"("<%*`'.;$* K$<7%"&$,+*B""7;',&*?'91* 6'%17*7"*.+7;*$5$* ?$+17*6<,._",+(* 4"17*6<,._",+(* ?$+17*6+#"%'7$* 6+#"%'7$* 61 product reminded them of. This is most likely because lipstick is the product most likely to be used publicly and women form judgments with products and people they se using them. Also women across groups looked for function and appearance equaly. Overal the number one most favorable characteristic was ?clasy?. The number one negative term used was ?cheap?. This was continuously a negative characteristic; the variations were what features triggered this negative characteristic response from the participants. I"2$,* H"1'7'#$* I"2$,* K$&+7'#$* c*.(+115* R-*.;$+9* c*1($8* W*9(+',* 3*17<%=5* W*<&(5* X*9%$75* E*"(=* X*7$:7<%$* X*,"7*#'1'0($* X*#'1'0($* J*9<%9($* J*0%'&;7* J*%'0$=* J*."("%* R*D('215* J*='D$%$,7* R*0":5* J*&(+2"%"<1* R*9(+17'.* J*;+995* R*D%<295* J*9<%9($* R*18',5* J*7;',* R*5"<,&* R*.($+,* R*0<(85* R*$+15* * * R*D+,.5* * * R*D<,.7'",+(* * * R*,+7<%+(* * * R*,'.$* * * R*%'.;* * * R*1$.<%$* * * R*1;',5* * * R*1'(#$%* * * R*1"D7* * * R*17%$+2(',$* * * R*7+(* * * Table 18. Positive and Negative word asociations for all women poled: there was not a strong enough conection with confidence groups and their design assumptions in lipstick packaging to study groups separately. 62 4.3.1. Functional vs. Superfluous Lipstick Packaging The products that were described to be the most functional were Wet n Wild? Wild Shine? (product 1min Figure 4) and Neutrogena? Moistureshine? Soothing Lips (product 13 in Figure 4). Both of these products are tal and slim. Taler lipsticks carried the notion of being slek as wel. Products 1,7, and 13 in Figure 4 were al referred to as slek more than any other product. Product 7 in Figure 4, which is the L?Oreal? infalible, is much taler than the other two lipsticks that were referred to as slek. From these results we can asume that a taler and thinner lipstick is sleker and more functional, as long as other negative features are not implemented into the package. In the L?Oreal? infalible? (left, Figure 16) there is a visible thicknes of material on the sides of the product. This same feature created felings of bulk and exces packing in foundation. The characteristics established by this feature holds consistent in lipstick package design. This feature also created a feling of ?fancy?, consistently in lipstick as it did in foundation. When the visible material thicknes does not have a clear line of distinction (right, Figure 16) betwen the inner and outer layer of the package wal, there is no connection with the product being fancy. The objects in Figure 16 have a visible thicknes in the package wal. This produced a response of being ?bulky?, identical to perceptions of visible thicknes in transparent materials found in foundation packaging. Figure 16. Material Thickness in Lipstick Packaging: The blue line represents the center lining of the packaging wal. The red line represents the outside lining of the packaging wal. 63 4.3.2. Transparent Lids Transparent lids are often preferred for judging the color of the filer product without opening the tube. However it can be interpreted as ?cheap? if they are not designed correctly. The Neutrogena? Moistureshine? (product 2 in Figure 17) along with Wet n Wild? Wild Shine? (product 1 in Figure 17), and Maybeline? Colorsensational? (product 3 in Figure 17) were most commonly referred to as cheap. Al of these products have completely transparent caps. There was a recurring certainty that these caps would not stay on, and that the product was cheap. Covergirl? NatureLuxe? (product 4 in Figure 17) was also considered cheap, but not as frequently as the other products. The ability for the lid to stay on was not questioned. The lid in Covergirl? NatureLuxe? is totaly plastic, but the cap is not entirely transparent. In Figure 16 the red arrow shows where this cap is given a color covering that shields the lipstick. The cap is only thought to be unstable when the entire unit is transparent. Even in the Maybeline? ColorSensational? (product 3 in Figure 17) the clear cap was given a pink tint it was stil referred to as flimsy, cheap, and having an insecure lid. Regardles of tint, if a lid is fully transparent it comes across as cheap and the lid is expected to not stay on wel. Products where the side of the lipstick bullet is visible (products 1,2, & 4 in Figure 17. Transparent lids on lipstick packaging Figure 17. Transparency in lipstick lids 64 Figure 18. Plastic application paraleling glass Figure 17) are perceived as ?softer?. When there is a larger surface area of lipstick visible, this view of both the top and side of the filer makes the product sem to have a smoother consistency. Often a sticker or colored plastic is not reliable enough for evaluating the filer color and the consumer wil want to be able to judge the actual product. Transparent lids give more atention to the filer product and are an easier and more reliable way for a consumer to evaluate the filer product. The blue circles in Figure 17 show filer product can be viewable, without using completely transparent plastic lids subsequently cheapening the product. The thicknes of the plastics and the glas-like appearances keep these products from appearing to be cheaply made by adding a visual weight. The fileting of the corners is characteristic of how glas is manufactured, the miicking of glas gives products the visual weight and therefore asumed quality that is often asociated with glas cosmetic packaging. Sharper edges are very rarely used in glas packaging, and are an automatic giveaway when applied to plastic packaging. Because the LH women often use cosmetics to free themselves from their felings of bodily inadequacy, the act of using something that is beautiful and luxurious mimics their desired self-presentation of also being more beautiful and luxurious. Lipstick packaging is evaluated most closely because it also takes on a role of being an acesory. Some women commented that the lipstick would be nice for day or night, or that the purple case would not match everything. These comments show that when 65 purchasing lipstick, women take into acount how they wil look when they use this product in public. Women in the LH group are typicaly the ones to have these reactions. The HH and LL groups chose products they liked and did not worry as heavily about what other people would think about their products. This brings us back to the idea of shopping to match what a consumer believes to be their own image (H, LL) or purchasing products that reflect the consumers idealized image (LH). Lids that were considered sturdy and looked like they would remain secure in a purse or bag were those that compose a longer portion of the tube. Figure 19 shows the lipsticks that consumers believed had stable lids. These products al have non-transparent lids and the percent of the product length that is the lid is over half. Figure 20 shows the length of al the lipsticks with solid caps. Of these lipsticks the ones believed to have the most secure caps are those highlighted in red (Table 19). Placing the parting line for a lipstick cap below the halfway point gives an alusion of a more secure cap regardles of the method used to secure the cap. Figure 19. Lipsticks with visualy secure lids consistently have parting lines below the halfway mark. 66 ?'917'.81* ?$,&7;*.2* ?'=*?$,&7;*.2* ?'=*9$%.$,7*"D*($,&7;* !"#$%&'%()*?'9*H$%D$.7'",C* cZJ* >ZR* -ZW3cJJJJJJ* !(','S<$)*?",&*?+17* c* EZJ* -Zc3JWEcR3X* G17$*?+<=$%)*\"<0($*I$+%* cZW* XZ>* -Z3>REXW3>J* K$<7%"&$,+)*B"7;',&*('91* WZJ* 3ZR* -ZE* `$#(",)*!"("%0<%17C* cZ3* 3ZJ* -ZE>cE>cE>W* `'2$()*4"'17<%$*`$,<$* c* XZJ* -Z3EcR3JWEc* `'2$()*?+17',&*6','1;C* cZ3* XZJ* -Z3XJ3XJ3XJ* Table 19. Lid height: Products believed to have more secure lids (red) when the height of the lid made up more than 50% of the product height. 67 4.3.3. Texture and Color Execution in Lipstick Packaging Texture in a patern gave products a ?clasic? or ?clasy? response from the participants. Products 1, 2, and 3 in Figure 20 are the three to be described as clasy. These products were also asociated with a high-end brand. Metal texture gives the products a more expensive appearance. This more expensive look is also asociated with a more mature consumer. The metal products 1 and 2 in Figure 20 were referred to as ?grandma?. The Este Lauder? lipstick (product 1 in Figure 20) was most often referred to as old. The reason for this connection with predominantly gold lipstick tubes is that in the 1950?s lipstick was nearly always designed with a gold tube. For more comparison, a Revlon? lipstick tube from the 1960?s is shown in product 2 of Figure 23 beside the Este Lauder Tube (product 1 in Figure 23). It was also the style in that time to wear bright red lipstick. For this reason both bright red lipstick and gold tubes are asociated with women who are from this era. The makeup Figure 20. Textured and not textured lipstick casing Figure 21. Lipstick ad from 1950?s Figure 2. Max Factor ad 1950s 68 ads shown in Figure 21 and Figure 22 are examples of this style patern that dominated women?s lipstick during the 1950?s. During that time period lipstick tubes and cases were a textured metal with a color or one solid metal color, with gold being the prominent choice. Staying away from these color/texture combinations would be beneficial for a more trendy or updated look. The Revlon? Colorburst? (product 3 in Figure 20) was also referred to as clasy, but not ?old?. This combination of a brighter pink at the top of the lid, and mate black instead of a metal made the distinction betwen ?clasic old? and just ?clasic?. Dark colors combined with gold and silver create the ?grandma efect? (when consumers believe a product is representative of something they se their grandmother or a grandmother using). L?Oreal? Colour Riche? uses predominately metal in the package design, however the depth and lines integrated in the design with the clear plastic area keep it from emulating lipstick designs of the 1950?s. Colors used on a lipstick packaging can make them ?fun? and ?happy? (product 5 in Figure 23) or ?old fashion? and ?boring? (products 3 & 4 in Figure 23). Dark colors have a much higher risk of being perceived as boring. Tubes concluded to be boring were Covergirl? lip perfection?(product 3 in Figure 23), Rimel? Lasting Finish? (product 5 in Figure 23) , Covergirl? NatureLuxe (product 6 in Figure 23) and Este Lauder? (product 1 in Figure 23). Large areas of darker colors should be broken up with depth in materials using layering or textures. The Revlon? Colorburst? (product 3 in Figure 20) uses texture on the sides of the package and a pop of pink at the top. The Covergirl? lip perfection?( product 6 in Figure 23), and Rimel? Lasting Finish? (product 4 in Figure 23) do not breakup the smooth dark coloring with textures, this lack of personality and detail makes these products les appealing to customers in the LH and HH groups because they reflect their ideal image through lipstick and 69 these products are to simple or boring to do that. The red line in Figure 23 on the Rimel? Moisture Renew? (product 5 in Figure 23) shows where the packaging integrates two layers of material to add depth to the product. The outer layer is a thick clear plastic around an inner silver tube. The layering of minerals using transparent plastic ads depth and detail. The purple color used in this lipstick tube made it the most eye catching of al the lipsticks. This product was concluded to be ?fun? and ?happy? and women who preferred this product had an average score of 7 out of 10 on how girly they believed they were. The solid bright colors had more positive and ?girly? reactions than the colors that were applied with graphic designs. Covergirl? NatureLuxe ? (product 6 in Figure 23) displays a green floral graphic on the lid. This design makes the product sem more like chap stick, and one participant believed it was ?frumpy? and looked like it was from the 1970?s. These asociations with products influenced the participants? perceptions of the lipsticks very strongly. Designing products that do not mimic past designs and styles would keep products from being asociated with outdated time periods. Bold colors make a statement that can be acepted by a wide range of women. Adding pictures and graphic designs narrow the market. This can be comparable to walpaper. Bright wals wil be appealing to anyone who likes bright wals, however walpaper is far to specific and wil turn away far more people than it wil bring in. Design elements and details are much more appreciated and influence the product value Figure 23. Color and depth treatment in lipstick packaging 70 positively when they are integrated into the shape through physical elements such as layering, part splits, raised designs and textures, not through graphics. 4.4. Eyeshadow Results Eyeshadow preference was determined by a users interest and enjoyment in makeup. This is because of the wider spectrum eyeshadow can be used and manipulated, widening the gap betwen enthusiast and apathetic users. With eyeshadow the women who are eyeshadow aficionados, (they know about al the products and consider themselves wel versed in cosmetics and cosmetic application) prefer eye shadows that look more profesional. Women who don?t take makeup as seriously, have higher confidence and enjoy makeup wil go for more playful forms of packaging. Women with the least interest and enjoyment in applying eyeshadow prefer maximum visibility of product and ease of use. Eyeshadow was considered the most enjoyable cosmetic to shop for. It generated the most excited answers, (?Yay!?, ?I love new colors!? ?Fun and new?). Eyeshadow is the product with the most area for variety in color and application methods. While most women use that same foundation daily, some change eyeshadow based on their mood the occasion. The women who enjoy ?playing? with makeup tend to have higher confidence in their makeup know how. They prefer products that mimic what they think is a more profesional quality or style of eyeshadow. These are minimalistic packaging with square corners, glossy finishes, thicker and heavier plastic, black white or silver coloring, and limited type. 71 Women who change their cosmetic routine tend to buy eyeshadow even when they don?t need it. Brand loyalty is not strong with this product category. Eyeshadow is a huge impulse buy, second only to lipstick. Applying eyeshadow requires some kind of knowledge and skil in the application. A Woman?s likelihood to invest additional time to learn a technique is based on her perceived ?need? (she believes she needs to invest time because it is the only way she can make herself presentable) or interest (she gets enjoyment or entertainment from trying new looks). This is the cosmetic product that women are most likely to fel unsure about their application skil. 72 G5$1;+="O* LL* #"7$1* H"1'7'#$* \$1.%'97'",* ??* #"7$1* H"1'7'#$* \$1.%'97'",* ?L* #"7$1* H"1'7'#$* \$1.%'97'",* 4+50$(',$)*G:9$%7* I$+%)* J* H%+.7'.+(/* #'1'0($a:Jb* J* $+15/* 9%+.7'.+(* R*(+0$($=* K$<7%"&$,+)* K"<%'1;',&*$5$*S<+=* J*#'1'0($/*.($+,* -** X* ."29+.7/* (+%&$*0+1$/* $+15* H;51'.'+,1*6"%2<(+)* U+8$=*!"(($.7'",*)* R*7%$,=5* -** J* 7%$,=5/* 9%$75* `$#(",)* Y((<2',+,.$C* -** R*175($* -** !"#$%&'%()*$:+.7* $5$('&;71C* R*D<,* -** R* 1+51*D"%*25* $5$*."("%* F(2+5)*',7$,1$*'d ."("%C* R*."("%1* R*."("%1* X* $+15/*D"%*25* $5$1/*."("%1* `$#(",)* !<17"2G5$1C* >* %'.;*a:Jb/*$+15/* 7$:7<%$*a:Jb/* D+,.5/*9%$75/* +77%+.7'#$/* X* +77%+.7'#$*a:* Xb/*."29+.7/* 2"%$* c* D<,.7'",+(/* 9%$75*a:Jb/* .(+11'.*a:Jb/* 7$:7<%$1* a:Jb/*1'29($/* 1($8/*2"%$/* ."29+.7* ?@A%$+()*I$+%* Y,D','7$)*B7<='"* B$.%$71C* -** -** -** `'2$()*](+2@*G5$1* R*."29+.7* X* 17<%=5/* ."29+.7/* 9%$1$,7+7'" ,/*.(+15/* 9%+.7'.+(* -** G5$17<='"*05* 4+50$(',$)* R*175('1;* -** J*2"=$%,/*;'9* !"#$%&'%()*G5$* G,;+,.$%1* -** R*$+15* -** F(2+5)*',7$,1$*'d ."("%C*12"85d'C* R*$+15* -** X* $5$* .+7.;',&/* 175('1;/*D<,* ?@A%$+()*I$+%* Y,D','7$)* R*#'1'0($* -** -** Table 20. Eyeshadow choice by confidence groups: This table shows the similarities and diferences in eyeshadow evaluations for each group. 73 LL*H"1'7'#$* LL*K$&+7'#$* 3*#'1'0($* E*0<(85* J*%'.;* J*0"%',&* J*7$:7<%$* J*O$'%=* * 9%+.7'.+(* J*<,+99$+(',&* * .($+,* J*$5$*0+((1* * 7%$,=5* R*7""*7%$,=5* * D<,* R*.;$+9* * ."("%1* R*=%5* * ."29+.7* R*."29('.+7$=* * $+15* R*.",D<1',&* * D+,.5* * * * +77%+.7'#$* * * * 9%$75* * * ??* *H"1'7'#$* ??* K$&+7'#$* X*+77%+.7'#$* J*0<(85* J*$+15* J*.;$+9* J*."29+.7* J*.",D<1',&* * ."("%1* * 0%$+8* * 175($* * 9(+',* * 2"%$* * 12+(* * 9%+.7'.+(* * =%5* * .(+115* * * * 17<%=5* * * * 2$* * * * 9%$1$,7+7'",* * * Table 22. Positive and Negative word asociations of women in the LL group describing eyeshadow. Table 21. Positive and Negative word associations of women in the H group describing eyeshadow. 74 ?L* H"1'7'#$* ?L* K$&+7'#$* X*."29+.7* E*0<(85* X*9%$75* 3*0(+,=* J*(+0$($=* X*0"%',&* J*$+15* J*12+(* J*7%$,=5* J*.;$+9* J*1+51*D"%*2$* R*"(=* J*.(+11'.* * &%+5* J*7$:7<%$1* * 0%$+8* * (+%&$*0+1$* * =%5* * ."("%1* * 2$15* * D<,.7'",+(* * ,"7*+99$+(',&* * 1'29($* * .",D<1',&* * 1($8* * * * 2"%$* * * * 2"=$%,* * * Table 23. Positive and Negative word asociations of women in the LH group describing eyeshadow. * Y*!""#*7"*O$+%* 2+8$<9*7"* D$$(e("8* +77%+.7'#$Z* * Y*<1$*2+8$<9*+1* ('77($*+1*9"1'0($* $'7;$%*0$.+<1$*Y*+2* <,."2D"%7+0($* +99(5',&*'7/*Y*D$(*'7* '1*+*0"7;$%/*"%*Y* 7;',8*'7*.+,*0$* "#$%=",$Z* * Y*('8$*2+8$<9/* 0<7*'71*,"7*",$* "D*25*D+#"%'7$* 7;',&1Z* * Y*("#$*2+8$<9f* Y7*'1*+*7"5/*D<,* 7"*9(+5*+,=* ($+%,f* J*.(+11'.* E*$+15* 3*+77%+.7'#$* E*D+,.5* J*."29+.7* 3*1'29($* X*7%$,=5* J*D<,.7'",+(* *9%$75* J*+99$+(',&* X*='D$%$,7* J*9%$75* * .",7%+17* J*."29+.7* J*$+15* J*D<,* * $+15* * D<,* J*#'1'0($* J*#'1'0($* * "<717+,=',&* * 2<(7'd."("%1* * ,+7<%+(* *12"7;* * 2"=$%,* * 1($8* * #$%1+7'($* * ."("%* * .($+,* * * * 0"(=* *************0"(=* * 17<%=5* * * * .(+11'.* * 1+115* * 175($* * * * * * * Table 24. Cosmetics relationship groups preferences in eyeshadow 75 Table 25. Eyeshadow ranking in function, product preference, and eye-catching 0 5 10 15 20 Maybelline? Expert Wear? Neutrogena? Nourishing eye quad Physicians Formula Baked Collection? Revlon? Illuminance? Covergirl? exact eyelights? Almay? intense i-color? Revlon? CustomEyes? L?Oreal? Wear Infinite? Studio Secrets? Rimmel? Glam? Eyes Eyestudio by Maybelline? Covergirl? Eye Enhancers Almay? intense i-color? smoky-i? L?Oreal? Wear Infinite? Eye Catching Least Functional Most Functional Least Favortive Favorite 76 4.4.1. Colors used in Packaging for Eyeshadow Eyeshadow colors should be displayed the way you would display a painting. The frame should showcase the piece and not take over the piece. Black, silver and white make the colors stand out best. The products that used black and white and silver color palets were acepted more favorable. Black treated with a shiny finish made participants received the colors as more bold. From the information gathered in lipstick packaging, black was received beter because darker colors signify beter value, or a more expensive brand. Women expect more expensive eyeshadows to be of beter quality, les likely to crease on the eyelid, and beter staying power. The color of the package influences the perceived color of the filer. The two L?Oreal ? Infinite? shadow quads have the exact same filer (also caled mas), but one is packaged in black with a square frame and the other in a gold colored plastic with a round frame. The gold case was perceived as having more bland colors that ?don?t pop?. The black case was stil understood to be boring. The plastic used in the black case does not have a shiny finish. The les contrast betwen the shadow and the case makes the colors look les pigmented and chalky. Numbers printed on the shadows were also not as informative as word labels (product 1 in Figure 5), or the shape of the shadow to explain locations for application (product 3 in Figure 5). Shapes of the shadows combined with the framing of the window on the case were one of the strongest if not the strongest indications of usability and function. Figure 24. Color in Eyeshadow Packaging 77 4.4.2. Windows on Eyeshadow Packaging Figure 25. Eyeshadow packing window shapes 78 The viewing window on an eyeshadow packaging is the window you look through to view the filer products. The shape of these windows and the amount of the window compromised of filer are definitive in product judgment for stability, cleanlines, and value. Products with a clear flat lid that extended al the way to the ends of the package were received to have beter visibility. Figure 25 shows the shapes of the frames that extend to the ends. Product 1 (Figure 24) had black thicknes on both right and left end of the face, but the long clear plastic lid extends to both ends. The other product noticed specificaly for its visibility of eyeshadow filer was product 7 in Figure 25. Applying a frame to the window was shown to increase the perceived strength of the package. Product 6 and 8 in Figure 25 have no change in the material used on the lid. These products only apply a black color coating around the frame of the shadows. This frame visualy strengthens the plastic used in the lid. In product 8 the frame completely blocks out everything else contained in the packaging other than filer product. The filer product does not have plastic separating each color. The top view of the packaging is compromised of 60% product view. Crisp framing is characteristic of clasic and modern eyeshadows. Another feature that was always perceived as compact was using a square shaped package with squared corners opposed to a rectangular shaped product. Products 6 and 7 (Figure 25) were perceived as compact, regardles of the exces spacing betwen shadows in product 7. Women who value compactnes of eyeshadow packaging are those who enjoy cosmetics les. 79 4.4.3. Features to Indicate Quality in Eyeshadow Packaging Superfluous packaging using paper product is across the board considered to cheapen a product. Product 2 and 5 in Figure 4 were most commonly considered the cheapest products. Product 12 came in a distant third. The irony of product 5 being perceived as cheaper than product 11 is that this is the exact same product, with product 5 having a white box and brush added to the package. This similarity of inclosing a product in a cardboard exterior packaging resulting in visualy cheapening a product also existed in foundation. Another feature that made women fel like they were being swindled on the product was excesive spacing betwen shadows. Product 9, 7, and 2 have exces space betwen round shadows. Using round shadows increases the amount of space needed betwen the filer shadows. This increased space is perceived as wasted space. Giving the shadows geometric shapes that fit together makes the product stand out because it does not use basic polygons, and does not require the package to space out shadows (products 3,6, & 10 in Figure 4). These unique shapes were appealing to women who enjoy makeup. They are atracted to new interesting shapes that sem new and modern. Al three products that used circles were confusing to many participants. The product would be perceived as more valuable and cost eficient if the volume of the shadow was not used in height, but flatened to have the visual footprint of each filer shade maximized. Products that use sharper angles for the casing are perceived as modern. When the filer products are giving texture without being strange or ?weird?, they are expected to have a richer quality of filer. This texture gives the filer depth. The rounding of the shadows does not give it this ?rich? quality. Round products are atractive to women who enjoy experimenting with new 80 or diferent products. Using texture is very wel received by women who prefer a high-end product, making the filer appear more dense and rich. The textures aid in making the filers sem rich, along with the way the powder interacts with its imediate casing (spacing betwen shadows, placement of shadows, and windows). Figure 26 shows the special gaps betwen the filer powder and the case. These gaps make the product sem les durable, and les high end. Using a lip above the shadows to created both depth in the package material, as wel as making it impossible to se the space betwen a shadow filer product and the casing. This is shown in Figure 27, with the smal red rectangle serving as a lip, connected to the base of a package (grey polygon) limiting the likelihood a product wil look like it wil fal out. Figure 26. Shadow filer gaps betwen packaging and filer 81 4.5. Result Summary Grouping women based on only confidence and product interest leaves a lot of area of ambiguity. When studying what forms appeal to these various groups, analysis examines similarities to se what personality traits influence design choice. Also the women who have preconceived notions of various brands, or designs reflective of brands wil afect how they judge the products. This cannot be evaluated, because their notions may be formed by past experiences, and al of the women have diferent experiences. There was no consistent correlation betwen personality groups and product selection. The consistency was in what features had certain traits such as cheap, cute, natural, and luxurious. What importance we draw from the personality types are the factors that motivate each group to purchase cosmetics, and expectations they hope to receive from purchasing a product. Taking this into consideration and combining it with the product atributes that carry Figure 27. Sugestion to conceal gaps betwen filer and package 82 certain implications visualy, we can design an ideal product for a larger combination of the population. 83 5. Conclusion 5.1. Design Guides Design Guidelines for Foundation Many of these rules can be used interchangeably betwen products and should be used to innovate new forms in products betwen categories. Products should evolve within these guidelines, but continue to change in their style and design to keep looking new and innovative, especialy for the groups who enjoy to recreationaly shop for cosmetics. High confidence with and without the use of makeup (HH): ! Glas container with variation in thicknes of wals ! Bulk is not a concern ! Solid bright color acents ! Play up feminine qualities ! Emphasis on hedonic performance ! Young modern designs ! Innovative silhouete ! Ornate design in form and not only graphic elements 84 Low confidence regardles of cosmetic use (LL) ! Easier storage (les bulk) so superfluous packaging ! Avoid very tal of thick products ! Simple and direct design ! Looks like a ?typical? of familiar foundation ! Keywords (natural, clean, simple, easy) ! No fancy or ornate detailing ! Streamlines ! Minimal text or type ! Acent of atention to the dispenser or application method (easy/clean pump, storage, use), this can be shown through material acents, color, or size. ! Use dark or heavy colors minimaly ! Use transparent, metal, and minimal to no color ! Round or curved edges High confidence conditional to cosmetic use (LH) ! Play up feminine qualities ! Use bold shapes ! Material thicknes variation or variation in silhouete that looks like it has variation in thicknes ! Bold simplicity ! Acented features ! Modern 85 ! Secure for travel ! Minimal color Things to consider when designing foundation for any women ! Use solid colors ! Avoid decorative graphics if they do not serve a purpose ! Do not place package in an additional paper product carton ! Show as much filer (mas) as possible ! Avoid dark text over foundation (this makes the product appear thick or darker) ! Make sure the product does not have visual similarities to other products that are not cosmetics (ex. toothpaste, eye drops) ! Do not use script font. Make font easy to read quickly (preferably san serif) ! Use dark colors minimaly and only to acentuate product shape or function ! Use colored plastic (especialy darker) should be reflective or shiny and not mate. ! If you use black, integrate a bright or metalic acent as wel. ! Large lids without a filer dispenser may suggest a runny or mesy product Lipstick Because women are more comfortable with lipstick and confident in their knowledge of the application and use, confidence and cosmetic use did have a strong significance on design preference. 86 ! Thin tubes indicate slek or functional ! Exceses plastic is bulky (LL) ! Visible material thicknes is fancy (HH) ! Avoid completely transparent caps, they sem cheap and not secure ! To make a lipstick sem softer show the side of the lipstick bullet (filer) ! When using transparent plastics give a large enough radius (use similar restrictions as if using glas) ! Have the filer product visible, this may be done through a store display (colored plastics and stickers are not substantial, and consumers wil be more likely to open the product). ! Lid height should make up more than 50% of the entire product height to indicate a secure and sturdy cap (LH and LL) ! Gold should be used very minimaly, because of the symbolic references to older woman and the 1950?s ! Textured metalic products relate to a more mature (older) audience ! Texture indicates luxury, or a high end product ! Dark colors are most often perceived as boring, they should integrate a color acent or texture to break up large dark areas ! Bright and colorful products are best received by the more ?girly? consumers ! Limit or avoid decoration with images through graphics. 87 EyeShadow I love makeup! It is a toy, fun to play and learn! (high ned high interest) ! Angled/ sharp corners and lines ! Glossy black ! Textured, raised, or embossed shadow filer ! Applicator should not stand out and is not in any way a part of decision (may be completely hidden ! Avoid coving filer with the lid. (make window large) ! Concerned with the amount of product since this is an avid user, so give shadow a larger footprint, minimal space, and/or acentuated depth of pan. ! Modern and new design, maintaining profesional look ! Black and silver are safest colors I like makeup, but it is not one of my favorite things. (high interest, low ned) ! Variation in shadow shapes (not always squares, rectangles and circles) ! Variation in shadow sizes (if they are squares or rectangles give larger areas to more popular colors, and ad interest with sizing) ! New hip and trendy shapes and styles (impulse buyer for something diferent) ! Freedom to develop new application method 88 I use makeup as little as possible either because I am uncomfortable applying it, feel it is a bother, or I think it can be overdone. (low interest, low ned) ! Compact (square) ! Simple and basic ! Large window ! Clean lines ! not likely to spend time reading labels (get to the point) ! Black is not necesarily a good color (white and silver are equaly preferable) I ned to wear makeup to feel or look attractive. (low interest, high ned) ! Increase filer footprint as with ?I love makeup it?s fun to try and learn new things?. ! Cover as litle of the filer product as possible with lid ! Square (compact case) ! Variation in material thicknes (visual weight to package) ! Clasic look ! Integrate texture Things to consider when designing eyeshadow for any women ! Completely clear lid that bleds to the ends makes product sem cleaner (use material thicknes on sides if they are visible) ! Frame on window makes product appear sturdier ! Squares indicate more compact product 89 ! Incasing product in package that covers it cheapens the product. If you do this validate it with images of the product and do not have excesive boxing. Package may be adhered to paper hangtag without cheapening the product. 5.2. Implications of Findings For al participants, the areas of focus in determining each group?s visual favorites and choices should be the main area to focus atention on during the design of these products as it pertains to each personality group. Another industry to have tried this suggested targeted design is the tobaco industry. The tobaco industry has altered atributes of product design to target smoker groups (Cook, Wayne, Keithly, & Connolly, 2003). RJ Reynolds did this with its Camel brand, targeting youth smokers succesfully through the creation of cigaretes with reduced harshnes and irritation, increased nicotine impact, reduced perception of harshnes, and taste enhancers (Wayne & Connolly, 2002). The industry has altered atributes of product design to reduce perception of environmental tobaco smoke to appeal to smokers concerned with aceptability of second hand smoke (Connolly et al., 2000, as cited by Cook et al., 2003). The tobaco industry has shown targeted design can be used to improve sales, the cosmetic industry to similarly increase sales and market design direction by implementing similar behaviors. This study finds, based on the four responses that cosmetics create when being used by women, (Apaolaza-Ibanez, Hartmann, Diehl, & Terlutter, 2010) that the four emotional experiences related to the use of cosmetics were social implications of a cosmetic purchase are only part of the hedonic performance of a cosmetic product. The final decision of what the 90 participants intended to purchase was compared to what the consumer chose as the most functional, most aesthetic, and first to catch their eye. The participants who chose products that they perceived to be most functional as their favorite product signified that function is the most important aspect in their decision-making for a cosmetic purchase, while the participants who choose products based on their atractivenes show these women place more value on aesthetic beauty than functionality. This was asumed to paralel with the personality groups of functional shoppers verses recreational shoppers (Philips, 2009). In al these design evaluations, the advertising must match what the consumer is looking for. The women read labels and are interested in what the product says. The initial asesments wil get the consumer to approach a product and wil give more credit to the claims made. As with any design and sale of products, the marketing, design, and timing for market aceptance are al integral factors that must work together. 91 6. Area of Future Studies The products used in the study carried a large number of design traits. This makes it dificult to fully analyze the features independently. A follow-up study alowing these features to be studied independently would permit a beter understanding of these features. Another study should compare fashion trends and outcomes. Repeating the current study in five years would alow us to compare similarities in characteristics given to design traits in cosmetic packaging. 92 References Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research. 34, 347- 56. Adaval, R.. (2001). Sometimes It Just Fels Right: The diferential weighting of afect-consistent and afect-inconsistent product information. Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (5), 1-17. Ahtola, O. T., & Batra, R., (1990). Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer Atitudes. Marketing Leters, 2(4), 159-170. Bagozzi, R. P., Mahesh, G., & Prashanth, U. N., (1999). The role of emotions in marketing. Journal of Academic Marketing Science, 27(2), 184-206. Bruseberg, A., Haslan, C., & McDonagh, D., (2002). Visual product Evaluation: Exploring users? Emotional Relationships with Products. Applied Ergonomics, 33(3), 231-240. Bhat, S., & Reddy, S. K. (1998). Symbolic and functional positioning of brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 15 (1): 32-43. Cacioppo, J. T., Pety, R. E., & Schumann, D. T. (1983). Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Efectivenes: The Moderating Efect of Involvement. Journal Consumer Research, 10, 135-146. 93 Cash, T. F. & Cash, D. W. (1982). Women?s use of cosmetics: psychosocial correlates and consequences. International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 4, 19-28. Chao, A., & Schor, J. (1998). Empirical tests of status consumption: Evidence from women?s cosmetics. Journal of Economic Psychology, 19, 107-131. Connolly, G. N., Wayne, G. D., Lymperis, D. & Doherty, M. C. (2000). How cigarete additives are used to mask environmental tobaco smoke. Tobaco Contrology, 9, 283-291. Cook, B. L., Wayne, G. F., Keithly, L., & Connolly, G. (2003). One size does not fit al: how the tobaco industry has altered cigarete design to target consumer groups with specific psychological and psychosocial needs. Addiction, 98, 1547-1561. Desmet, P., & Hekkert, P., (2007). Framework of Product Experience. International Journal of Design. Retrieved August 12, 2010 from http:/ww.ijdesign.org/ojs/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/66/15 Desmet, P.M.A., Overbeeke, C.J., & Tax, S.J.E.T. (2001). Designing products with added emotional value: development and application of an approach for research through design. The Design Journal, 4(1), 32-47. Demir, E. (2008). The Field of Design and Emotion: Concepts, Arguments, Tools, and Current Issues. Middle East Technical University Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 25(1), 135-152. 94 Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. (2000). Consumer Choice Betwen Hedonic and Utilitarian Goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37 (2), 60-71. Elowitz, Ronald S. (2009). Design Director, In-Store Strategy at Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc., Global Strategic Design Ofice. Interview on June 10, 2010. Forbes, G., Jumg J., & Has, K. (2006), Benevolent sexism and cosmetic use: a replication with three college and one adult sample. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145(5), 635-640. Jacoby, J. (1971). Personality and Innovation Pronenes. [Electronic version]. Journal of Marketing Research, 8(2), 244-247. Janiszewski, C. (1990). The Influence of Print Advertisement Organization on Afect Toward a Brand Name. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 53-65. Jung, J., & Lennon, S. J. (2003). Body Image, Appearance Self-Schema, and Media Images. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 32(1), 27-51. Kumar, S. (2005). Exploratory Analysis of Global Cosmetic Industry: Major Players, Technology and Market Trends, Technovations, 25, 1263-1272. 95 Le, M. S. , & Mital, B., (1989). A causal model of consumer involvement. Journal of Economic Psychology, 10(6), 363-389. Martel, J. (Aug. 11, 2008). The History of Cosmetics ? A Vanity Fair. Retrieved August 19, 2010 from http:/ww.thehistoryof.net/the-history-of-cosmetics.html McDonagh-Philip, D., & Lebbon, C. (2000). The Emotional Domain in Product Design. The Design Journal, 3(1), 31-43. Meyer, M. (1988). Atention shoppers! Marketing and Media Decisions, 23, 67. Morgan, M., Carol, Levy, D. J., Fortin, & Michel. (Dec. 1, 2002). Psychographic Segmentation. Communication World. Retrieved August 12, 2010, from http:/ww.albusines.com/marketing-advertising/market-research-analysis-market/10603849- 1.html Mano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993). Asesing the Dimensionality and Structure of the Consumption Experience: Evaluation, Feling, and Satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(12), 451-466. Moschis, G. P. (1979). Social Comparison and Informal Group Influence. Journal of Marketing Research, 13, 237-244. 96 Nuyts, E., Petermans, A., Van Clempoel, K., & Vanrie, J. (2009). Measuring emotions in customer experiences in retail store environments. Retrieved from http:/iasdr2009.org Philips, B. (2009). Through the Looking Glas: New Ideas about the Consumption of Beauty. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 154-156. Rafaeli, A., & Vilnai-Yavets, I. (2004). Emotion as a Connection of Physical Artifacts and Organizations. Journal of Organization Science, 15(6), 671-686. Schoormans, J. P. L., & Robben, H. S. J. (1996). The Efect of New Package Design on Product Atention, Categorization and Evaluation. Journal of Economic Psychology 18, 271-287. Spilers, F. (2004). Emotion as a Cognitive Artifact and the Design Implications for Products That are Perceived As Pleasurable. Experience Dynamics. Retrieved from http:/ww.experiencedynamics.com/sites/default/files/spilers-emotiondesign-procedings.pdf Stat, David A. (1997). Understanding the Consumer: A Psychological Approach, Basingstoke : Macmillan Taylor, A. (1995). Porsche slices up its buyers. Fortune, 131, 24. Retrieved May, 2010, from http:ww.strategicbusinesinsights.com/vals/ 97 Trigg, A. B. ( 2001). Veblen, Bourdieu, and Conspicuous Consumption [Electronic version]. Journal of Economic Issues, 35, 99-115. Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B., (2003). Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Consumer Atitude. Journal of Market Research., 40(3), 310-320. Xue, L., & Yen, C. C. (2007). Towards Female Preferences in Design- A Pilot Study. International Journal of Design, 1(3), 11-27. 98 Appendices Designs prior to research using no guides 99 100 Implementation of guides 101 Final designs using guides LH Foundation ? Form should highlight function ? Variation in material thicknes ? Use light colors or metalic ? Soft shapes and corners 102 I need to wear makeup to fel/look atractive ? Increase filer footprint as with ?I love makeup it?s fun to try and learn new things?. ? Cover as litle of the filer product as possible with lid ? Square (compact case) ? Variation in material thicknes (visual weight to package) ? Clasic look ? Integrate texture ? Not loud but stil bold 103 I like makeup, but its not one of my favorite things. ? "#$%&'#()*%+,-.#/% ? 0121'%-33#(&/% ? 4(15-&65#%71'8/% ? 9:(%-()%,-.*/% 104 I love makeup! It is a toy, fun to play and learn. (LH) 105 I love makeup! It is a toy, fun to play and learn. (LH)