Advertisement

Verification of Stereotype on Women Observing Gender Difference on UX of Wearable Device

  • Hee Jae Hwang
  • Jung Min Lee
  • Da Young JuEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9187)

Abstract

There has been contending views on women and men as a consumer, and we believe that it is necessary to analyze and verify who will be the upcoming consuming subject in next 10 years. Herein, using adjectives of AttrackDiff2 which analyze how people perceive the product using hedonic quality and pragmatic quality, we have conducted FGI (Focus Group Interview) on 20–25 female and male group respectively, analyzing how major consumers in 10 years perceive about current trend over the world, wearable devices. As a result of the study, we find that women tend to perceive pragmatic quality as important as men in respect of UX of wearable devices. Instead of the difference between two gender groups, there were greater gap between the individuals. Here, we suggest that stereotype on women that they are an impulsive consumer should be adjusted.

Keywords

Gender Women UX Gender gap Wearable device 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the MSIP (Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning) under the “IT Consilience Creative Program” support program supervised by the NIPA (National IT Industry Promotion Agency) (NIPA-2014-H0201-14-1002).

References

  1. 1.
    Charness, G., Gneezy, U.: Strong evidence for gender differences in risk taking. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 83(1), 50–58 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fausto-Sterling, A.: The problem with sex/gender and nature/nurture. In: Williams, S., Birke, L., Bendelow, G. (eds.) Debating Biology, pp. 123–132. Routledge, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Butler, J.: Gender Trouble. Routledge, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gong, B., Yan, H., Yang, C.-L.: Gender differences in the dictator experiment: evidence from the matrilineal Mosuo and the patriarchal Yi, Experimental Economics (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huffman, A.H., Whetten, J., Huffman, W.H.: Using technology in higher education: the influence of gender roles on technology self-efficacy. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29(4), 1779–1786 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bhopal, K.: Gender ‘Race’ and Patriarchy: A Study of South Asian Women. Ashgate, Aldershot (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lucas, M., Koff, E.: The role of impulsivity and of self-perceived attractiveness in impulse buying in women. Pers. Individ. Differ. 56, 111–115 (2014)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tifferet, S., Herstein, R.: Gender differences in brand commitment, impulse buying, and hedonic consumption. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 21(3), 176–182 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Badgaiyan, A.J., Verma, A.: Intrinsic factors affecting impulsive buying behaviour—Evidence from India. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 21(4), 537–549 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miner, C.S., Chan, D.M., Campbell, C.: Digital jewelry: wearable technology for everyday life. In: CHI 2001 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 45–46. ACM, Seattle, Washington (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Morgan, D.L.: Focus groups as qualitative research. Planning (2013). doi: 10.4135/9781412984287.n4
  12. 12.
    Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., Koller, F.: AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer and pragmatischer Qualität. In: Szwillus, G., Ziegler, J. (eds.) Mensch & Computer 2003, pp. 187–196. Springer, Verlag (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Trevisan, B., Willach, A., Jakobs, E.-M., Schmitt, R.: Gender-specific kansei engineering: using AttrakDiff2. In: Szomszor, M., Kostkova, P. (eds.) e-Health. LNICST, vol. 69, pp. 167–174. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tsai, M.-J., Tsai, C.-C.: Junior high school students’ Internet usage and self-efficacy: a re-examination of the gender gap. Comput. Educ. 54(4), 1182–1192 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rauche, T.: Summative usability evaluation: Hedonic and pragmatic quality of a mobile device application Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Integrated Technology, Yonsei Institute of Convergence TechnologyYonsei UniversityIncheonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations