Consumer preference within a wide range of fragrances by Lee Jay Alter.

CONSUMER PREFERENCE WITHIN A WIDE RANGE OF FRAGRANCES

By Lee Jay Alter

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE

at the

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 1960

Signature redacted

Signature of Author'--

S

-

t red-acted

Scho 1 of Industrial Management

Signature redacted

Certified by

Letter of Transmittal

Professor Philip Franklin

Secretary of the Faculty

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge 39, Massachusetts

Dear Professor Franklin:

In accordance with the requirements for graduation, I herewith

submit a thesis entitled 11_{Consumer Preference within a Wide Range of}

Fragrances 11.

I should like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation

to Mr. Ralph Zehner of Firmenich, Inc., Mr. Louis I. Furlager and Mr. Morton Daniels of Paris Cosmetics, Inc., for their vital assistance in the preparation of the research. Also I should like to thank

Mr. Robert Swain of Arthur D. Little, Inc., for his invaluable suggestions; and Miss Joan Messmer for her typing assistance.

Sincerely yours,

Signature redacted

rl /

Lee Jay Alter

Submitted to the School of Industrial Management on May 20, 1960 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science.

This paper is an exnloration of the possibilities of using consumer marketing research techniques to aid the decision-making part of introducing a new fragrance on the market.

The scope of the study was to distribute four unlabeled samples of name-brand colognes to a cross-section of Boston area college women, allow them

the opportunity to use the colognes, amd then administer a questionnaire ask-ing for prefferences and other appropriate information regardask-ing fragrance.

There were three major hypotheses: 1) college women can differentiate between fragrances and make decisions as to preference; 2) the respondents' preference could be related to the popularity in the market of the four brands of cologne used in the study; and 3) some generalizations could be made concerning the association of particular combinations of scent with specfic situation-images.

A sample of seventy women was chosen at random from Boston University,

Simmons College, and Lesley College, at a ratio of 2:1:1. The selected women were given the four one dram bottles and then after approximately one week, were contacted for the personal interview.

The questionnaire was devided into three major parts: 1) preferences and reasons for this preference for each fragrance, when it would be appropriate to wear, and price relationships between each; 2) association of a combination of nine catagories of scent with specific situation-images (such as: outdoors, fancy, modesty, relaxation, et cetera); and 3) background classificat'on.

The results of the study were very gratifying with respect to the hy-pothoses outlined above. Contrary to my original thought, college womes do have an understanding of fragrance and are able to make reasonable decisions between them. The four colognetotypes used ( Arpege, Replique, Shalimar, and Blue

Grass) were described fairly accurately by the respondents although they were not recognized by brand-name. Their preferences compared well with the popular-ity of these brands among the respondents. From the association questions it was possible to plot differences in the respondents' outlook as the situations changed and to draw conclusions from this data that might be useful in psy-chological study as well as decision-making.

In general, the results of this ayudy indicate that the consumer has an understanding of fragrances and is reasonably definitive in their preferences and reasons for this preference. It seems that there would be a great deal to gain in reaching the consumer level and discovering their feelings before attempt-ing to introduce a new fragrance on the market.

Thesis Supervisor: Ross M. Cunningham

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter I Purpose and Scope Page 1

Chapter II Research Design - Sample 4

Chapter III Research Design - Questionnaire and

Interviews 8

Chapter IV Analysis of Data 14

Chapter V Major Conclusions and Recommendations 39

Appendices:

I Questionnaire (fold out) II Table of catagories of Scent III Complete Tabulation of Data

List of Exhibits

growing rather rapidly since the Second World War. The development and subsequent acceptance by the consumer of new products is possibly a more vital problem in this field than to the rest of American Industry. This

industry is a perfect example of Carrollts situation: "...It takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place."1 It is completely an academic point as to what is the most important function: imagination on the part of the research people or effective promotion and distribution. Both are vital to the success of the individual firm and a mistaken decision in either could be disastrous.

There are two major ways that a company can introduce a new member of their product line. The first is to come up with a new idea or a new use for an old one, carry it through research, development, and promotion and hope that it will catch the fickle consumerts fancy. Secondly, it can look for an idea developed by a competitor, develop a similar product (similar, not necessarily identical), and attempt to cqure some of the ready-made market and/or grow with the competitor.

Although the latter vehicle is the most common, it is much less im-portant in the long run, because one can get just so much mileage from a good idea before it loses its luster. The purpose of this paper is to develop a technique for aiding the decision-making process for the intro-duction of a new fragrance on the market. For testing purposes I have used

the cologne form of the fragrance, however the results could be applied either to perfume or to a fragrance as an inheent part of another product.

2

This is a marketing research problem and it seems very strange that there should be such a great dearth of literature discussing this problem in the trade magazines. From my contacts with the industry I have dis-covered the usual path that a new fragrance takes from the chemistts mind or workbench to full-scale production. To start, there are an almost infinite number of combinations of scents that can be used to make up a fragrance. They range in price from the very inexpensive synthetics to the most expensive hand-pressed oils, and they range in scent from the terrible smelling animal extracts such as skatol or ambegris to the very fragrant florals. Any of these may be combined in certain proportions to yield fragrances of virtually all price ranges and scents. The chemist, at this point, draws upon his experience and directives from management and pre-pares and submits a number of possibilities to a screening group. This group, which may consist of one or many people, studies the samples with respect to the potential market and price range, and selects a relatively few samples for further consideration.

It is at this point that I beli~ve the industry is lacking. Assume that four fragrances have reached this plateau and also assume that market to be reached is that of a younger woman and that the cologne shall be sold at a moderately high price. What happens now in the real world? There are two choices open. Either the top executive or some other top level decision-maker, studies the market and the samples and makes a decision; or some form of market testing is conducted.

This "market testing" may be giving the four samples to the executivest wives or to the female employees of the company and asking which one they

larger firms do, may have a consumer panel available for testing new products. Remember, this panel is not necessarily in our assumed market classification

or price range, but rather, a generalized cross-section of the whole market. The dangers involved with using this technique are obvious. Young college-aged women may and do have different preferences, to

w

nothing of the possible price range differential, and in a captive panel, W there is a likelihood that repeated contacts influence the actions of the panel members.*2

I have found no examples in the literature (although they may exist, unpublished) of a marketing research study of an individual market section

for the purpose of introducing a new perfume. The reasons for this are unclear although it would seem that an important one is that cosmetics people feel that any product may be a sucess given the proper theme and amount of advertising.

This reason may be valid but I should like to discover just what the consumer knows about fragrance and possibly stimu] e the industry to take a look at the benefits of going down to the consumer level to gather in-formation that could result in better decisions and less mistakes in the

introduction of a new fragrance.

Specifically, I intend to discuss the preferences of college women and their reasons for this preference over a wide range of famous but unlabeled

fragrances. My hypotheses are: 1. That college women can differentiate between fragrances and can reasonably express their feeling about them,

2. That their preferences make some sense when compared with the gop-ularity of the brands chosen for the sample, and 3. That some

general-izations may be made about the association of different types of scent with with different situations and conditions.

2Marketing Research: Text and Cases, Boyd and Westfall, (Richard D. Irwin, Inc.)

4

II. Research Design - Sample

As stated in the preceding chapter the objective of this study is to deteimine and understand the attitudes and preferences of the college woman in this area with respect to different types of fragrances. The aim is to select a representative sample of the universe, learn what is to be desired from them, and attempt to generalize from the data.

Due to limitations of time and material I decided to select 70 respondents from the total population. It would have been impossible to divide the sample into proportional groups from each school in the area, because of their large number, therefore, by virtue of personal experience and intuition, I chose three schools which when taken together would yield as much a cross-section as possible. The three colleges chosen were Boston University, Simmons College, and Lesley College. Simmons and Lesley are of approximately the same size and Boston University is substantially larger, therefore,

one-half of my sample was taken from Boston University and the other two quarters from Simmons and Lesley.

The deans of residence of the three schools assured me that the girls are distributed homogeneously through the dormitories and that by focusing attention on the larger residences I could get a reasonable cross-section of the dudent body. In fact this is not entirely true. Seniors and day students would have a lower probability of being chosen and there is possibly some bunching of a particular type of girl in the smaller dorms of each school. However, the loss of precision in =king this simplification is counter-balanced by the ease of sampling.

I sub-divided the Boston University portion into equal quotas from two of the three largest dormitories on campus: Charlesgate Hall and the Towers.

I chose Simmons Hall and White Hall, the two largest, from Simmons and Lesley respectively. These dorms are fairly well integrated as to class except in the case of Charlesgate, which is slightly topheavy with Freshmen. Fine Sampling

The optimum sampling procedure would have been to acquire lists of the girls names in each of the dorms, number them sequentially, and

select the names by use of tables of random digits. Practical considerations, however, dictated that a compromise solution would be needed. The practical-ities were two-foldt

1. Although the deans, after personal explanation of the project, were in favor of the sftdy, they would not allow me to have lists of the girlst names.

2.. The study was of such a nature as to make it undesirable to have interchange of information between the respondents.

One procedure was acceptable on both counts. From a list of room numbers (without the girlst names) I would select the appropriate number and distri-bution of rooms to allow as little contact among respondents as possible, and with the belp of the housemothers call each of the rooms and urge the first girl to answer the telephone to take part in the survey. Once I had picked a particular room number, if no one answered I would go on to the next and eventually contact one of the two or three girls in the skipped room. This system gave me very little difficulty as I purposely called at

the time most likely for the girls to be in.

In the Towers, which has nine living floors of two sections each, the plan was relatively easy to implement. I selected, with the use of random digits, one room number from each section of each floor, giving a total number of eighteen respondents. In the other three dorms I divided the number of

6

respondents desired; seventeen from Charlesgate, eighteen from Simmons Hall and seventeen from White Hall, by the number of living floors and selected

that number from each floor, adding or subtracting the odd number(s) at random. Where I had two or more respondents on a floor I spread them apart as much as possible while still keeping the selection as random as possible.

Justifications and Generalizations

It is important to discuss generalizations which can be made from any data generated. The first step is to justify the pooling of the data from the three schools and using the combined information. It is not the purpose of this study to describe the differences of characteristics between girls attending Bosten University, Simmons College, and Lesley College; but rather to

bet a composite picttre of the average college woman. It would

have been easier statistically to keep the data segregated and, in fact the reason that overall statistical confidence limits cannot be calculated is because the data were pooled, It is true that the pooling process loses some meaning as the representation of the three schools in the area are not exactly 2:1:1, however this is a first approximation and if the limitations outlined above are taken into consideration I believe that my sampling plan is justified.

The secmnd step is to believe that the individual dormitories (in Boston U., the two dorms) are cross-sections of the schools in question and that data acquired from the sample of dorms will be consistant when tested against characteristics of the girls in the entire schools. This can be justified only by the assertions of the deans of residence that this is basically true and by the intuition of the researcher. Unfortunately, this

rejected by the reader by his choice.

The same argument is used when justifying the selection of the three colleges as being representative of the area. The argument is much weaker as intuition is the sole benchmark with which to judge. There are two other conditions, aside from representativeness, used in choosing the

schools:

1. That they were readily accessible by the researcher because a great deal of time was spent at each interview and

2. That the schoolts Spring Vacation was at such a time to allow the lag time necessary for interviewing (discussed in Chapter 4) to be approximately one week without too much loss of time. These two considerations ruled out interviewing at Wellesley College because of the former, and Radcliff College for the latter. Representativeness was undoubtedly lost due to the lack of inclusion of one or both of the above schools in the study but it was virtually impossible to work them in within the time available for interviewing.

To summarize the sample design it must be admitted that it is less than perfect. The sample silection and the universe sampled from were compromised by necessity and practicality, while the ability to generalize from the sample

to the universe is questionable. I contend, however, that it is the best possible under the circumstances and, in answer to the objectives of the

8

III. Research Design Questionnaire and Interview

Preparation for the Interview

When the girlst names had been selected (as discussed in Chapter 3), I, with thehelp of the housemother, called them on the house phone. They were interviewed three at a time for about ten minutes. After I explained who I was and what I was trying to accomplish the girls were given the following instructions:

1. That they were to receive four bottles of cologne, labeled only by number.

2. That they were touse the colognes to the exclusion of everything else that they may have, and use it in their normal usage pattern, neither more nor less than they normally use.

3. That they were to be certain that they use each one and attempt to formulate some opinions about each, as if they had been placed in a buying situation.

4. That I would contact each girl individually in about a weekts time and ask her some questions regarding the samples.

No definite appointments were made with the girls as I had learned my pretest and experience that it is almost impossible to make these kinds of arrangements before hand. After the instructions were completed I noted the names and room numbers and gave each girl four bottles of cologne numbered

23, 38, 41, and 67.

Questionnaire Deskgn (See App. I)

The questionnaire was to~administecdpersonally and it was divided into three broad sections. The first, after the introduction, was designed to learn how the girls reacted to each of the four fragrances; how much they liked it, what purposes it was appropriate for, relatively how expensive

girls associated catagories of individual scents (See App. II for catagories). The third section asked classification questions.

The questionnaire opened with a query designed to put the respondent at ease and give her a chance to start talking: Have you enjoyed taking part in this trial? Wfhy?.

Questions 2 and 3 asked what kinds of cologne the respondents had and used, when they were used, and whether they had been purchased personally or given as gifts. It served two purposes: to set the stage for the relatively personal questions which were to follow, and to be useful data in itself,

Question

4

was originally designed to serve as a comparison with the preference questions which followed but after two or three interviews proved to be impractical (even though pretest results were encouraging). The lag between the distribution of the fragrance and interviewing time was not kept constant because it was quite dependent on when the girls were available. It is doubtful that the question would have yielded any reasonable results in any event since the quantity of cologne used on each application is unknown and is quite varied with the individual.

Questions 5-8 were similar except that the different fragrances were used as the frame of reference. The first part of each question asked how much the girls liked the particular cologne and their reasons. The possible answers were given to the respondent to insure consistency in the data. The answer desired was one which would consider both the absolute preference and that of the particular cologne in relation to the other three. The second questioned the appropriatness of each number. The objective was to catagorize

certain types of fragrances into usage groups which could be compared with question 10b.

Question 9 and 10a were designed to discover what the respondents knew of fragrance in general and how they could relate their preference and

experience to specific decisions in relative price and description. They were given catagories of scent from which to choose, see App. II.

Question 10b was, by far, the most interesting part of the entire study. There are two different ways th6 could have been used to interpret the answers. The first, which I followed, was to pool the answers together and relate certain sections of the question to each other. The second, a more psychological approach, would have been to study each questionnaire

separately, learn a great deal about each individual, and then look at total data in terms of the entities from which it was generated. The best reason that I had for using the first approach is that I an not a psychologist, and frankly, wouldntt know what to do with the individual answers. Another reason is that I am studying a cross-section of the universe and it is only the cumulated data that relates to the rest of this study.

Question 12 was originally intended to find out what effect the respondents' associates had on the decision of preference, however it was discovered early in the interviewing the question could only be used in this manner if the questionnaires were interpreted individually. The data that was generated by this answer could only be helpful in setting an atmosphere of external reaction to the colognes. Question 13, also, did not live up to expectations. It was a #sleeper" question with the intention of leaving a possibility of unexpected answers. It was not asked after about one-third of the interviews were taken as there was more trouble with semantics than

the question was worth.

The next block of questions was for the purposes of classification. Numbers 14, 15, and 16 described the sample while 17, 18, and 19 attempted to place the sample within the universe. Question 17 turned out to be unworkable in the analysis due to the spread of answers and 18, and 19 served as a basis for generalization of the sample to college students as a class of society.

Question 11 was purposely left until last in the discussion for it is a convenient vehicle for explanation of the four colognes used in the study. When I had decided on the subject of the thesis I went to an acquaintance in an essential oil firm (the company which supplies the raw perfume oil to manufacttrers), explained what I had intended to do, and asked him if his company might be interested in supplying a small quantity of oil to be worked up in the form of cologne and distributed as samples. He agreed, and two questions had to be resolved: How much oil? and What types of fragrance?

With respect to the latter, it was decided that four examples of the wide range of fragrances sold on the market would be appropriate. The four, although they are not mutually exclusive, typify the "corners" of the spectrum within the limits of the present market. In order to simplify the formulation and classification of the fragrances, fairly accurate copkes of presently marketed colognes were used:

1.

23 - Blue Grass by Arden: a light refreshing outdoors scent, reminicsent of new-mown hay, with a floral blend.

2. 38 - Shalimar by Gvermain: a sweet, exotic type

3. 41 - Arpege by Lanvint a sweet, floral blend with a jasmin aldehydic (sharp) note.

4. 67 - Replique by Raphael: a spicy sweet blend with a softer under-note than 41.

12

In order to anticipate an obvious question Chanel 5 was not used as a sample as it is complex blend of many different types of scent and would fall somewhere in the center of a distribution of perfume catagorization.

The aim of Question 11 was to check preference against recognition and also to determine just how well the respondents can recognize scents whith which they are familiar (by either association or use). The data from this question loses some of its meaning when it is reasoned that the "guessing" of the name of the cologne is likely to be a group effort between the respondent and her friends. This situation connot be avoided with-out everly complicating the questionnaire.

The answer to the former question was resolved as follows: One hundred drams of each frangrance at a 1:1 ratio of oil and alcohol would be needed. Therefore t.x and one-quarter fluid ounces of raw oil was necessary. In order to allow for shrinkage I was given ten fluid ounces of each scent. I received the bottles, alcohol and facilities for bottling gratis from another acquaintance in the industry.

Interviewing Technique

When the girls were contacted individually, I personally administered the twenty minute questionnaire. The questions were asked in the same order and manner as they are written on the paper, with the expeptions noted above. In cases where the

respondents had trouble answering questions 5

-

8

I probed as much as necessary to get a specific answer. I found that all I had to do, most of the time, was to give them examples of answers I was looking for. Although there is danger of biasing the respondents' reply in using this technique, I had little indication of this being the case and, I did get specific answers. Wherever possible I let the respondent do the

talking but always kept her at ease as to assure spontaneous answers, especially with 10b. Whenever the respondents suggested anywhere during the interview except at 11, that the samples were *real" brands I was noncomittal and suggested that they might or might not be. At the end of the interview I answered any questions including telling them what the fragrances were if they asked.

In general, my respondents were very cooperative and interested and, I believe, answered the questions honestly.

14

IV. Analysis of Data

The problem of analysis is not only to discover general impressions and be able to state that something is true or false but also to be able to

separate the relatively insignificant answers from the major ones and be in a position to justify this separation. The majority of my questions called for multiple answers, therefore the percentages for each answer may add up to more than one-hundred per cent. To be able to say the one response

is insignificant when compared with others is a very complex one when handled statistically but can make sense when done with a liberal amount of intuition. I wish to point out that due to the multiplicity of the answers and the fact that they were not mutually exclusive, I could not solve the statistics but rather used my intuition whenever the situation demended. The intuitive analysis is clearly labeled in all cases and in most of them I was able to back them up with concurrance by a noted perfumer in the Boston area.

The analyds will be made on a question to question basis in this chapter and major conclusions will be discussed in Chapter 6. Only the relavant sections of each question and answer will be discussed here, however a complete set of data will be found in Appendix III.

Question One

Every respondent answered that they had enjoyed taking part in the survey although there were dtfinite degrees of enjoyment. Whenever there was hesitation I took that opportunity to put the respondent at ease, so the hundred percent response is misleading. The reasons they gave for enjoying the trial were: 35% because they like perfume or like to try new ones,

25% because they were curious as to the purpose of the test or that it was

a different sort of experience, and 40% thought that it was fun or interesting to participate.

Questions two and Three

It was interesting to learn of all the different types and brands of perfume and cologne that college women posess and use. Of the sixty-four respondents, there were fifty-five distinct brands or lines of fragrance. Only five polled more than nine per cent of the sample although undoubtedly there are many in the lesser popular brands that are copies of the leaders. Selected data as to number, usage, and whether the fragrance was purchased or acquired as a gift follows: (all data are presented in percentage)

Nae Per cent Dayiie Evening Spec. Occ. Purchased Chanel No. 5 39% 12.5% 25.0% 25.0% 15.6%

Arpege 31 14.0 19.0 19.0 12.5

Replique 20 6.2 9.5 11.0 15.0

Faberge* 20 4.7 7.8 4.7 1.6

Shalimar 9.2 1.6 7.8 4.7 0.0

It

is

significat to note that Chanel, Arpege, and Shalimar, the sweeter scents

(and

Most expensive) are used primarily in the evening while Replique, which is less expensive and less advertised (in addition to being not as

sweet) is not decisive one way or the other. gUestion Five

This question is the first that asked for opinions and judgement.

12.5% of the respondents liked No. 23 a great deal, 34% a fair amount, 22% not very well, and 30% did not like it at all. It is significat that the majority of the respondents were not decided strongly for or against the fragrance, but rather were middle of the roaders.s The distribution of reasons why the respondents liked it fairly well indicate the reason for this indecisiveness. The only two significant reasons were:

A light scent 28%

Pleasant, refreshing or nice 23%

* Faberge is a manufacturer and all of the brands in the line are combined. The individual fragrances were not specified most of the time because the respondents coald not remember what the names were.

16

Thr first reason is fairly descriptive and, according to the industry, correct. The second seems as though it is a *hedge* or lack of vocabulary, however, this is not the case. Perfumers have, very often, compounded fragrances that could not be accurately described in any other way but

calling

it a "complex#. The layman's term for such a scent has, in the past, been "nice". The description of

No.

23 used in Chapter 4 is rather vague fof just that reason. This scent is one which, in my opinion, is either disliked for the reasons discussed below or liked for no easily verbalized reason.

The grounds for disliking this number were also rather sharply defined:

Too Strong 22.0%

Too Sharp, Bitter, Harsh 12.5

Medicinal 7.8

Too Sweet 15.6

Didntt 9.4

The first three reasons may be taken together for the purposes of analysis as these answers were usually given together and broadly explain the same type of phenomenon; that of a too powerful odor. This observation seems in direct conflict with the preceeding discussion of the reasons for liking this fragrance. Also, the other three fragrances show this same dichotomy, although the results are not as evenly split. There can be one explanation to this situation: that there is-a core of respondents for which any of these (and therefore, most) perfumes are too strong.

There is as demonstrated by the data, a certain type of person who desires a sweeter smell than a blend of floral and woody scents. The

lingering factor is-one which is difficult to describe as a percentage because it is so often a personal thing dependent entirely upon body chemistry.

The section of question

No.

5 dealing with usage follows the same

appropriate for daytime use, fourteen and 5 percent liked it for evening and special occassions and 44% didnt think it appropriate for anything. The reasons for daytime use were identical to the positive responses in the previous discussion and it weLd seem that it is just this *niceness# that makes it a casual scent.

The respondents that liked it for evening and special occasions did so because of its lightness or lingering qualities and only a few thought it actually a dressy perfume. Those that disliked it can be clissified the same as beforet

1. Those that thought it too powerful (a catchall phrase combining too "strong", %harp", "medicinalE, etc.)

2. Those that thought it too sweet. Question Six

Sample No. 38 suggests a different situation, as will be noted from the datat

25% Like it a great deal 25% Like it a fair amount

28.2% Like it not very well

21.8% Don't like it at all

The percentage differences between the four catagories is small enough to be neglected and we find a complete split of opinion. These data, alone,

lead one to believe that one of two explanations is true: 1. That this split in opinion is, in fact, the case or

2. That the respondents did not know what to say about it and just couldnt make up their minds.

Although the respondents can never be certain, a closer look at the reasons they gave for feeling this way about this number would give a clue to the answer.

The positive reasons were:

Nice, fresh, subtle 15.6%

Sweet 14.0

Floral 9.4

Light 9.4

These answers do not give the impression that a definite characteristic was found in No. 38. Half of the respondents liked it, but they seem to have been stabbing in the dark for the reason why they liked it. When this reaction is compared with those of No. 23, then the point becomes clear. Previously the definition of the answer caused some problems but now, it is the distribution of answers themselves which cannot be pinned dow*.

On the other hand, the reasons why the rest of the respondents did not like No. 38 is obvioust

Too strong 39%

Medicinal, soapy 12.5

Too sharp or pungnet 11.0

The same type of analysis can be made as was on the negative responses to No. 23 however, in this case, the order of magnitude is much more important. What more can be said about this fragrance except that although it is strong, which is admitted by the industry, the people liking it do not know why, while those that do not like it are very clear about the reason. It seems very strange that the sweet and spicy notes of the scent were not noticed as much as I expected. The only explanation that I can hypothesise for this NoversightW is that people cannot recognize this combination as such and therefore attempt to find other words to explain the phenomenon.

Below is the preferences for when to wear this particular fragrance. The responses are conclusively towards evening wear or not at allt

Daytime 15.6

Evening 31.0

Special Occasion 28.0

The daytime users are indecisive with Acasual" orklean and lights while the evening users are merely trying to say that they like the scent but it is just to strong for the daytime therefore it is appropriate for evening. Those not liking it for any use are pretty much sticking to their previous answers of "too strong" and "too sweet". The only conclusion that may be drawn from this question is that the girls that like a stronger fragrance, like it for evening wear and dressing up. This certainly makes sense but it seems that they are loath to be pinned down on any one answer.

Question Seven

We now turn to a fragrance whose responses give encouragement to those who felt that women (and college women specifically) do know something about perfumes. One of the most heavily advertised and largest selling perfumes on the market showed up very well when unlabeled and, incidentally, not recognized. Number 41, the Arpege type, showed pre-ference data as follows:

Like a great deal 31%

Like a fair amount 39%

Like not very well 8%

Liked not at all 22%

I, for one, was surprised to see this as I felt this number would not do well once the label was removed and it was detatched from its advertising prestige. The reasons why it is liked seem to follow the industry's description fairly well:

Mice, fresh 36.0%

Sweet 23.5%

Light 20.0%

Floral 140%

It is my opinion that the first and the third reasons may be combined and serve as an alternate to the Asweet" and "floral" characteristics that were given less frequently.

20

There are only two significant reasons given for disliking the number. The "too strong" group is about 20% and an 11% catchall group of "not appealing or inexpensive smelling". This seems to be the same core of respondents feeling that all of my samples are too strong.

The time that number 41 was to be used is also an indication that the Arpege type is more than just a name. A substantial majority of respondents

picttred it as an evening or a #dressy" fragrance and, in fact, a number of the people that stated they disliked it said that they would use it. This, by itself, is a good indication that it has appeal. The breakdown of usage is:

Daytime 33%

Evening 51.5%

Special Occasions 39%

Not at all 17

The important responses for liking it for daytime use are 17% feel it is light, 96% just think it is appropriate, and 9.4% like it because it lingers. The lingering characteristic comes up in all of these answers and I have chosen to ignore it in the analysis because, as I said before, it is mostly a question of body chemistry. In general, the above percentages do not mean much as it appears that some people liked it for daytime or for all use (which was not too common) and just had no special reason.

The answers for liking it for evening wear tell a bit more. Strongenough for evening 23,5%

Appropriate for evening 16.0%

Dressy 16.0%

All of these answers say the same thing: that No. 41 is a dressy, sexy fragrance. It is sweet and floral but with enough "bite" to make it inter-esting, and, as an added feature, has an exotic note of jasmine that one

must look for.

The only real reason why people did not find it appropriate was because it just did not appeal to them. This answer is significant because it left out most of the respondents who felt it was specifically too strong. Certainly, this is a feason for not finding it appealing but his just was not repeated in the answer and, some people changed their minds. The group of respondents who did answer in this way would seem to be the people less interested in a "sexy" or sappealing" type frangrance and more in a casual scent such as No. 23

Question.Ei-ght

The preference results for No. 67 seem at first glance to parallel those for No. 41:

Like a great deal 42%

Like a fair amount 19%

Like not very well 14%

Not like at all 25%

The major difference thus far is that people were more willing to be decisive about their answer, ie. either like a great deal or dislike entirely. The reasons behind these answers, however, are most confusing. There are a great number of thest and, in addition, they are somewhat contradictory. Nice 22% Light 19 Sweet 12.5 Fresh, clean 11 Heavy 9.4 Different 9.4 Lemon smell 9.4 Pungent 7.8 Spicy 7.8

How can these responses be interpreted? It seems that the key to this list is "light vs. heavy", and "diffemt and lemon". The only

22

conclusion that can be drawn from the contradiction, in the first case, and the "odd" answers in the second is that this scent defies definition by the layman. I do not mean to say that this case is the same as that of No. 23, but rather that there J1 a particular characteristic but the vocabulary is lacking. Frankly, I lack the word also but I believe that it is sufficient to say that the fragrance is different. It Is spicy, yet sweet; subtle, yet with a sharpness that makes you remember it.

The body of people that disliked this number is primarily made up of those that thought the others were too powerful also. The data show that somewhere in the order of 20-25% of my people like really light and mild scents. It is the old story of not being able to please everybody at once,

Usage also paralleled that of No. 41 and now the reasons make more sense:

Daytime 25%

Evening 51.5%

Special Occasions 36%

Not at all 30%

This is also an evening perfume and the reasons for this, although they are different, are all leading towards the same thingt that it is unusual and therefore something special.

The daytime people like it because it is light and casual although it seems likely that they, too, think it is different and unusual and like it for that reason primarily. Those that do not like it at all definitely believe it to be too powerful, unusual or not. The high percentage of respondents calling this scent bitter just show tht whatever it is, it is too much for them.

Question Nine

This question asks for a relative price comparison. The results, as shown by the table, give data ranging from definitive to extreme randomness.

Most Exensive

Next

Exoensive

Next

Exoensive Least Exoensive

23 9.4 20 30 37.5

38 22 20 30 25

41 33 27 20

16

67 34 28 17 17

There is, however, some sense to be made from this. It is evident that No. 23 is believed to be the least expensive of the four; which is in fact true, although the range is not very great. Number 38 is completely random and there is no convenient way to show that the slight differential of the "next to the least expensivew catagory is anything significant. How-ever, this becomes an academic point when the next two numbers are analyzed. Numbers 41 and 67 are identical for all intents and purposes and one cannot

say that one is higher than the other. We can say, now, that the most expen-sive numbers are 41 and 67 without distinguishing between them, 3$ must be next since 23 must be the

east

expensive. There is one important question that you may now ask: These results look very similar to the preferences of the sample, do they mean anything but that girls rate prices with their likes and dislikes? I must answer and say that very often this is the case. I could feel, during the interviews, the girlst thought processes working this way. This shows up in another way. Number 38Ss randomness is very much in keeping with the inability to describe the scent in the first place.

24

The approximate retail price for one ounce of the perfume of each of these fragrances are as follows:

Arpege

$23.50

Shalimar 22.50

Replique 18.50

Blue Grass 17.50

As you can imagine there is no other way to differentiate price than to pick what you like, It is significant to note that the preferences themselves followed (with the exception of 38 and 67) the price scale. This is another mark in favor of those who feel that girls know what they are doing.

QueCstion

Ten-A

We now turn to the problem of describing these scents with the list of catagories shown in Appendix II. Listed below are the responses for each number with only the significant percentages noted. A complete table will be found in the Appendix III under 10a.

23 38 41 67 Pungent 25 19 27

Fruity

19 - - -Sweet 34 36 31 28 Floral 17 20 44 27 Spicy 19 23 14 19 Woody - - 12.5 Heavy 19 28 19 36

Musky

- - - -Lemon 17 22

-The first item to notice is the high percentage of "sweet" in each group. It is evident from this. fact that my respondents, and women in general, feel that every fragrance has some degree of sweetness, even though the most important characteristic may be something else. The next important observation is that there is at least 19% response for

"heavy" in each. This, I attribute to the core of people discussed pre-viously, and the only important factor is the relative difference between

each number. Continuing to speak of generalities, the few 0musky" answers mean one of two things:

1. That none of my fragrances are "musky# or

2. That the respondents didn't know what the word meant and therefore didnt use it. The difinition of the word "musky* is *A substance secreted (by) the male musk deer, having a strong odor, and used in perfumery (and) an artificial imitation (or) a similiar secretion of other animals".* I

It is my opinion that the girls did not know the word, could not picture the odor in their minds, It is an aside that none of the fragrances have a musky smell to begin with.

And now to the specific fragrances. As number 23 has the minimum percentage of "heavy*, (19%), we shall assign that a zero value. With that assumption, it is undoubtably light, suamery, and casual:

Fruity 19%

Sweet 34%

Floral 17%

Spicy 19%

Lemon 17%

The catagory of "woody" is small but it is my opinion that the reson for this is that the respondents could not piettre that one, even as they could not picture "musky". It would seem that it is this outdoor feeling that is trying to be described while actually skirting the catagory which would describe it best. Nevertheless, the point is certainly made, with the high "fruity", Ofloral" and #lemon".

26

There was a reasonable degree of understanding with respect to number 38 considering the indecision and inability to describe it in previous questions. It was high on "pungent", Wheavy", and "sweet" with uspicy", "floral" and "lemon" included to show it to be a blend.

Sweet 36%

Heavy 9% (plus the base number 19%)

Spicy 23%

Pungent 25%

Floral 20%

Lemon 22%

If I were to answer this questi4n, after speaking with people in the industry and using my own descriptive facilities, I would have drawn the exact same conclusions the data indicate with the exception of the "floral". It is this response that poses the only problem of analysis in the question. It is true that most people consider perfume to be bas-ically a floral blend but I doubt the validity of treating this catagory in the same manner as we have treated "heavy". Number 23 definitely has a slight floral note but yet it received the least percentage of the four. The floral percentages in the two remaining numbers can be explained and it is only No. 38 that has a discontinuity about it. The only explanation is that the respondents found a note that I missed and certainly this cannot be held to be bad, but rather to be significant.

Number 41 is, as before, a testimonial to the astuteness of my respondents, They described it very well by calling it sweet and floral with a little "bite" to the scent.

Sweet 31%

Floral _44%

Pungent 19%

which would attest to the jasmine note as well or better than #pungentw does. As I mentioned previously, although the sweetness of a fragrance is always in the forefront, it is sometimes outweighed by other characteristics. In No. 23 it was the sumery and light note while in No. 38 sweetness itself was most important; in No. 41 we have the only example of one catagory tipping the scale, that of *floral". This situation is obvious to those who are familiar with fragrance and I can now say that it is just as obvious to the lay public (within the limitations of my study).

With No. 67, we have the same problem evident as in the preference question. The scent seems to defy fine description. It is not so much the catagories themselves that lead me to say this but rather the eveness of the response within the catagories.

Pungent 27%

Sweet 28%

Floral 27%

Spicy 19%

Woody 12.5%

Heavy 17% (plus the base 19%)

It is obvious that this fragrance had a great impact on the respondents but can we say more? The spiciness was recognized but it wasntt the top note. Neither was the floralness overpowering as in No. 41. It was a subtle blending of these two coupled with a 12.5% woody answer that yielded a description of a powerful and "differentO type of scent.

Questiona Ten-B

Question

10b

yielded data which expresses the feelings of the respondents with respect to fragrance in different situatiods. Some of the association are physical and tangible while others present emotional situations and intangibles. The best way to present this mass of data is by grouping the

28

catagories in sequences and plotting the results on bar graphs. The

following exhibits represent the responses pictorally. (Only selected catagories are shown for each part of the question.)

4c

ANSWERS

_TO

E>< L

SUMMER

SPRIN&

AUTUMN

WiNTER

GELECTED

_{QUESTION IoIB}

so

p 0oo S

Woopy

4EoAW.

PER ENT

75

SELECTED

ANSWERS

_TD

QUESTION

_OBO

Exi l

~+

1

K

.1

II

-1

MODSYFEM~JiI'~T~(

_DAR\N&

_SExY

_VULGAR

w) 0 FRvrry W oopY

L

EAVY L F. mor

75h-SELECTED

ANSWERS

TO QUESTION

log

E

X.

50 $0sPH1S-lC A

T

I ON .uJT L EY -

via

-

HeAVy

- LIMON

rANCY

EVEMW t N

100-

75-5'C0

CO5TLY INEXPENSIVE MASCULIINITY

SELECTED

ANSWERS

TO QUESTION

10B

E1

ML4SUT fl.09AL s{BADY

Pupy

4

SAW

L samoo ''I

j

F

II

RELAXATIONIif

~ODLN

In Example 1 we have the four seasons and outdoors. Notice the close similarity between outdoors, suMr, and sorIng. %Mr. and Rring are, for all purposes, identical while

outdgg2s

only differs by the larger percentage of the Nwoody" catagory. *Sweet", Ofloral and "fruity" are the obvious scents for each of the seasons and the Nwoody" preponderence makes sense in the

outd22rs

situation when one realizes that atum also adds to it. In the autumn section we see a tendency towards the sharper fragrances, "spicy" and "musky", while still remaining in the outdoor vein with the "woody" and "fruity". With

winte

there is a complete departure from the outdoors and we see the heavier, sharper scents, These situations were the easier ones fSr the girls to handle and therefore there are definitive answers and quite a bit of agreement.

The situation images in Example 2 were grouped with the idea of following a changing of moods, if you will, from the

Modest

through intermediate stages to yuxlarity. There is a definite trend apparent from the lighter, "sweeter" scents in modesty; then getting a little spicy, sharper, and ultimately, heavy with 3ulgrit. It is significat to note that there is a smooth transbrmation from one end of the spectrum to the other. #Lemon",

again, is the only one that does not follow along. This makes one wonder whether the girls could really place the odor at all; a small percentage of them

thought it light and casual (it also appears in "subtely", Ex. 3) while another small percentage thought it vulgar (and incexpesive, Ex. 4). This

indicates that it just does not fit in the middle range, while in fact, it is used to advantage in many of the popular, all purpose fragrances.

In Example 3 the intent is to compare between each of the related evening moods and evening itself. As in Ex. 1, you can consider the composite as a

34

sum of its parts. It is a little confusing to group "heavy", "spicy", "musky" and "pungents together with .sweet* and ,"loral". On closer observation, however, it becomes clear that it is just this blend that the girls want. They are looking for something that is neither one nor the other but rather a combination o f the two major classes of scent.

There is little difference between soohistication and fancy except for the small percentage of "musky" in

sgphisticatign

and the larger amount of "floral" in fan . This can be explained by asserting that the former is a little bit further along in effect and therefore would tend to be more exotic than the latter. Sutlety. on the other hand, gives a relatively different profile. It is somewhat akin to Modest but with a sharper note as shown by

the inclusion of "spicy", "heavy", and W pungent", It is almost as if the respondents were trying to create an impression of

modest

while at the same time drawing attention to it.

The next exhibit, Example 4 is the catch-all. Aside from the first group of

ostly

and

inexakive,

it merely presents each of the remaining catagories by itself. The high degree of similarity between the

ostly

and

inexpenjive

classifications indicates that the girls did not know how to handle these catagories. The only definite conclusions tht can be drawn, aside from the confusion which is certainly an important point to keep in mind, is that the spicy scents, and therefore the sexy evening ones, give the impression of being more expensive and the fruity and lemony ones connote lesser costliness. It is a definite possiblilty that I have just stated the cause and effect in reverse order, however, I connot solve this problem, so I will leave it to conjecture.

The next classification, ;elajZtion, has more than a close resemblance to outdoors. This is much more important to a psychologist analyzing this data than to someone interested in determination of perfume preferences however, it certainly points out the direction and theme of any advertising used to sell a casual and relaxing product. The responses to Lodern were

singularly different than any other classification and its composition is im-portant only within itself. We see a powerful scent, ("spicy",

Wheavy#,

and'musky") tempered substantially with Owoody" and "floral". notes. This seems to indicate a daring idea (Ex.2) placed in an outdoors setting (Ex.l). My own impressions of the modern women fit very nicely within the description just made.

The catagory of asulinity was included merely to find out what the girls thought about #ragrance for the opposite sex. Actually, the results to this question were anticipated by the researcher. We find a powerful scent with a "woody" and "spicy" top note (Old Spice After Shave Lotion?). My respondents do not seem to have hWd any exposure to the more sophisticated men's colognes. In general, the spiciness is present in them but they are any-thing but heavy and overpowering.

Question Eleven

This question deals with the recognition of the four sample colognes. The results were classified in three ways: actual recognition, a wrong guess, and whether it was a familiar scent. To deal with the wrong guesses first, let me assert that the majority of the guesses were so far off the mark and,

in fact, the names of the other colognes, that I attributed it largely to friends suggesting the names and the respondents getting these suggestions mixed up when I questioned them. The results of the question follow in

36 tabular form: Recognize Familiar 23 7.8% 3.1% 38 12.5% 3.1% 41 14.0% 6.2% 67 25.0% 9.4%

As you can see, the percentages are rather small considering that these four are popular brands. No. 67 was recognized as Replique for much the same reason that it was so well liked: It is unique and different. Once someone uses it or is otherwise exposed to it for any length of time, it seems to remain in memory.

I was rather disappointed with the recognition of No. 41 as Arpege on one hand because it is so popular, but was grateful for this on the other because it made the results to the preference questions more valid. If they had recognized the fragrance, a bias might have been introduced

because of the prestige of the brand name. Question Twelve

Because of the wide variety of anwers to this question in the first few intervivws, I decided to limit the future responses to merely Good or Bad compliments. To try to analyze the respondents' friends' answers would have been a subject within itself unless I limited the field. As evident from the table.

Good Bad

23 31% 20%

38 22% 17%

41 26.5% 17%

67 33% 22%

the responses were quite well distributed between the four samples and the positive or negative answers. There is, however, a consistant positive

differential but it indicates only a generally favorable atmosphere rather than a definite preference. What is evident is the larger percentage of response for 23 and 67 than for the other two numbers. Since the former colognes are the more complex blends, it would seem that people are more willing to state their preference, (or dislike) more readily for such fregrances rather than for the more simply constructed ones.

Classification Information Questions Fourteen Through NinetHn

The class distribution (and therfore the age distribution also) should have more evenly distributed but I discovered after the interviewing was completed that a fairly large percentage of Senior and Junior girls live in smaller dormitories. This unavoidably gave my sample a slight top-heaviness. The distribution between the three schools was discussed fully in Chapter 3. Of the 35 girls selected at Boston University, 33 of them ultimated participated; seventeen out of eighteen from Lesley; and 14 out of 17 from Simmons.

Questions seventeen through nineteen deal with home environment. I did not tabulate the hometown distribution because it would not have been as significant as merely discovering the type of community. As to be

expected of a college group the overwhelming proportion came from the suburbian communities and lived in private homes. The significance of this data is to serve as a warning to any parties generalizing on the study. There might be differences in attitude between my universe and one con-sisting primarily of city dwellers.

The major conclusions which may be drawn from the analysis will be found in the following chapter.

I

should like to reiterate that the data generated

in the study is, by and large, spontaneous and, to the best of my knowlege, relatively unbiased by either interviewing technique and questionnaire con-struction.

Major Conclusions and Recomendations

Ability to Differentiate

The first hypothesis was that my universe could differentiate between fragrances and express their reasons for this preference. When this project was undertaken there was a very definite possibility in my mind of getting completely random results. This would have indicated

the invalidity of the hypothesis and suggested that the most important function of any perfume manufacturer is the application of a proper

marketing scheme, irregardless of the product itself. This possilility as you can see from the data, did not materialize. The study is too crude to be able to be very specific about the importance of the product

characteristics, however I believe it has been shown conclusively that these characteristics are important in consumer decision-making.

Thexespondents gave reasonably definitive responses to all of the

open-ended questions in the questionnaire (with the exceptions noted in Chapter 5) and the answers themselves were amenable to a systematic analysis. Also, in answer to the fragrance description question (10a) the results were very gratifying. The price comparison was made on somewhat of an arbitrary decision. It is unfortunate that I could not have

had four fragrances with a greater price spread for then I might have been able to show whether price and preference are interrelated. The data that

I have certainly indicated this fact but one cannot say for sure if other factors did or did not affect the decision.

In general, the results should give us reason to believe that college women have an understanding of the differences between acents and are able to express themselves about this difference.

Preferences

At this point we wish to discover whether the preferences for the four fragrances are in any way indicative of thekpopularity. Since I could not find any sales data broken down into the college group classification, the only indication that I had of popularity was from the appearance of the four brands in the usage part of questian #1.

Blue Grass (23) was the least preferred. This statement cannot be made

on an absolute listing of percentages because I asked for four degrees of preference (great deal, fair amount, not very well, not at all); but rather on a basis of relative strength in each catagory and the relationships be-tween each catagory. This preference matehes its position in question #1 except in degree. Blue Grass is an older brand and has not been very popular for a num-ber of years. I believe that the popularity of the scent itself would follow the data I have generated but that the"old" name constitues the reason for its decline.

Shalimar did not show up as well in the study as might be expected. The four degrees of preference were almost exactly broken into quarters. This does not indicate indecision on the part of the respondents for its frequency of usage in question #1 is just as discouraging. The only conclusions that can be drawn is that any increase in popularity (and sales) in the near future can be solely attributed to an increase in advertising intensity and "peestige. Arpege preference (41), as I indicated in Chapter 5, compared very well with question #1. Almost three-quarters of the respondents liked the scent, and

those who did not were opposed to the others as well because of the strength. The respondents liking the fragrance were split between liking it a great deal and a fair amount. The difference between the perfmen's high popularity and the split preference indicates that there is a preetkge factor present in this case but only in terms of degree.

Replique (67) received very good credit in my preference study as compared with a lesser popularity in question #1. It is a newer brand that seems to be beginning to catch the public's eye. If I were to make a prediction of future sucess I should be very enthusiastic. This number is the closest to the description of a modern scent given in question l0b and I believe that it is this factor which makes it popular.

In answer to the hypothesis that preference between my four fragrance-types would compare with brand popularity, it is sufficient to say that we can get an indication from the data. It is certainly true that I have not outlined the whole answer to the question of sucess and it is evident that advertising and "prestige# of a product play an important role. However, it is just as clear to me that the consumer is in a position to chart the sucess or failure of a perfume oS the basis of scent combination.

Association of Scent to Situation

We have seen from the analysis of question 10b that my respondents were

fairly definitive in their responses to an association problem. I believe that this reaction was purely spontaneous and, in fact, that that the girls had never thought of doing this before in a formal manner. If we