Abstract

The market for natural makeup has been substantially increasing, primarily because many consumers believe that natural makeup is healthier and higher quality than unnatural makeup. However, perceived health hazards of unnatural makeup have been debunked, and, while there is no evidence disproving the perceived quality superiority of natural makeup, the manipulability of chemical ingredients suggests that unnatural makeup would be superior. Therefore, the question arises as to whether consumers choose natural makeup not because it is actually superior in quality, but because society has led them to believe it is healthier and more effective. A blind consumption test involving four popular brands of lip gloss - two natural and two unnatural - was conducted to determine whether consumers actually prefer their self-identified favorite makeup brands and how influence from the natural product movement affects how closely their self-identified preferences match their blind consumption preferences. Ultimately, it was found that consumers’ self-identified preferences rarely matched their preferences under blind consumption conditions, regardless of how influenced they were by the natural product movement. Thus, the results suggest that makeup consumers make decisions predominantly based on their emotional perceptions of certain brands, as opposed to actual sensed quality differences between makeup products; and, while the natural product movement may be one factor that affects consumers’ perceptions of makeup brands, it is by no means a sole or primary influence in forming consumer opinions.

Monday, November 21, 2016

Making the Method

11/21/2016

While writing my lit review, I justified using a blind consumption test in order to determine whether consumers make decisions between natural and unnatural makeup primarily based off of sensory or emotional distinctions between the products. After analyzing 4 blind consumption tests for my methods assignment, I gained a much better understanding for the trends relevant to the method.

I feel more confident about collecting participants and addressing ethical concerns. Originally, I was scared that I would not be able to collect a large enough sample size to produce meaningful results. However, the blind consumption tests I analyzed typically collected between 50 and 120 participants, which seems like a number I could reasonably obtain. It was also common that participants were selected from one organization or geographic area, so, even if I am only able to obtain participants through one contact, my results will still be meaningful (although I will obviously admit the limitations of only using test subjects from one area). However, something that still remains unclear to me is where I should start/reach out in order to collect participants, and I will need to research local contacts soon. Also, I will need to find a location where I can conduct my experiment. Ideally, all testing would be done in the same room to maintain consistency in basic environmental factors such as lighting and temperature.

As for potential ethical concerns, there was not too much to address beyond maintaining participant anonymity and ensuring that participants were aware of all ingredients present in the products being tested in order to address potential allergy issues. Like I originally expected, I will need to have participants sign a consent form informing them of all the ingredients in the makeups being tested.

As far as what I learned about increasing validity, I will need to ensure that the order the 4 makeup brands are tested in is randomly assigned for each participant, and I will need to provide makeup wipe removers for each participant to adequately remove the lipstick before they test the next lipstick sample. This way, the results will be less affected by potential differences in participant product rankings due to sampling the lipsticks in a different order (e.g. differences due to residue left behind by the previous sample, differences due to participants comparing samples to the previous ones).

The methods assignment also gave me examples of how participant rankings can be recorded. Most blind consumption tests involved participants assigning a number 1-9 (with 1 being "dislike extremely" and 9 being "like extremely") to different aspects of products. I will have my participants rank each lipstick sample using this scale for lipstick factors such as color quality and texture (I will need to find a source that specifically articulates the ideal aspects of a lipstick and make sure that I include all the main factors consumers are looking for).

To see whether or not participant rankings in the blind study match their perceptions of the brands and unnatural versus natural makeup, I will use an exit survey asking participants to rank the individual makeup brands using the same 1-9 scale and questions present in the blind consumption test. Then, I will include a question asking them which lipstick they would expect to be higher quality in terms of the specific lipstick aspects, lipstick made from natural ingredients or that made from unnatural ingredients. If the answers in the exit survey match those in the consumption test, then consumers likely choose makeup based on both sensory and emotional responses to the makeup products. However, if the answers do not match closely, then consumers are likely making decisions based primarily on emotional perceptions of the brands and natural v. unnatural makeup.

Overall, I feel confident in my type of method and the basics for how to conduct it (e.g. addressing ethical and validity concerns, formulating the ranking system and exit survey). It is the logistics associated with collecting participants and finding a location/time to conduct the experiment that I am still somewhat unsure about, but I will be sure to do research and reach out for help regarding such concerns.

(687)


Posted by at

3 comments:

  1. mrslyndsayhaagNovember 22, 2016 at 8:14 AM

    Audrey -- I'm so glad that you've got so much clarity, from ethics to validity to procedure, it seems like you've got an incredible amount of detail, already, in your methods design. I do agree that getting participants is the trickiest part, as it is the part that is least in your control. We'll brainstorm things together -- there's no clear cut, easy answer for figuring out how to secure participants, so we'll combine your amazing brain with my (marginal amount of) wisdom and try to come up with something.

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownNovember 23, 2016 at 12:56 AM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownNovember 23, 2016 at 12:58 AM

    Audrey!

    Great job outlining your methods so far. It seems like you already have a lot figured out!

    As far as your ethics portion goes, I think I may have some information that could help. The American Psychological Association has guidelines for experiments similar to yours. In summary, the ethical criteria are: informed consent, voluntary participation, limited deception, confidentiality, and alternative activities. In regards to limited deception, the APA knows that deception is needed for research. Yet, the APA believes that it is ethical to, after the experiment, debrief or reveal to the participants what the purpose of the study was in order to clear up confusion. And you don't have to worry about alternative activities because that's for alternative ways college participants can get course credits of equal value.

    Here is the link to a way more in depth APA ethics guideline: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/

    Also, how will you make a consent form for your participants? It may be helpful to look up forms from similar experiments. I'm sure we can also help you make one in or out of class.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)