Cargando…

How Customers Evaluate Genitalia versus Torso Sex Toys on Amazon.com: A Content Analysis of Product Reviews

Sex toys are widely marketed on the Internet. Browsing for, buying, and reviewing sex toys online are popular cybersexual activities. The aim of this study was to investigate consumers’ experiences with different types of realistic sex toys via online product reviews on Amazon.com. Toys were categor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Döring, Nicola, Mikhailova, Veronika, Noorishad, Pari-Gole
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9221648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35735463
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe12060042
_version_ 1784732674140667904
author Döring, Nicola
Mikhailova, Veronika
Noorishad, Pari-Gole
author_facet Döring, Nicola
Mikhailova, Veronika
Noorishad, Pari-Gole
author_sort Döring, Nicola
collection PubMed
description Sex toys are widely marketed on the Internet. Browsing for, buying, and reviewing sex toys online are popular cybersexual activities. The aim of this study was to investigate consumers’ experiences with different types of realistic sex toys via online product reviews on Amazon.com. Toys were categorized in a 2 × 2 design regarding their representation of the human body (genitalia sex toys representing reproductive organs only versus torso toys representing larger parts of the human body) and their depiction of gender (toys representing female versus male body parts). Informed by feminist discourses on sex toys as well as sexual script theory and consumer research, the study explored the overall evaluations (RQ1), most frequently addressed characteristics (RQ2), usage patterns (RQ3), and perceived effects (RQ4) of the four groups of sex toys. A quantitative manual content analysis of N = 778 online sex toy reviews showed that 79% of consumers gave popular realistic sex toys positive ratings (RQ1). The most frequently mentioned characteristics were quality, material, and shape (RQ2). Most reviewers were men and used sex toys for solo sexual activities (RQ3). An additional qualitative analysis of n = 69 reviews addressing the perceived effects of sex toy use revealed that consumers predominantly mentioned positive effects (RQ4). Genitalia sex toys received better evaluations than torso sex toys and were perceived to be complementary tools to enhance sexual arousal, whereas the use of torso toys entailed anthropomorphization and symbolic social interactions. Implications for future research and design of different types of sex toys are discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9221648
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92216482022-06-24 How Customers Evaluate Genitalia versus Torso Sex Toys on Amazon.com: A Content Analysis of Product Reviews Döring, Nicola Mikhailova, Veronika Noorishad, Pari-Gole Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ Article Sex toys are widely marketed on the Internet. Browsing for, buying, and reviewing sex toys online are popular cybersexual activities. The aim of this study was to investigate consumers’ experiences with different types of realistic sex toys via online product reviews on Amazon.com. Toys were categorized in a 2 × 2 design regarding their representation of the human body (genitalia sex toys representing reproductive organs only versus torso toys representing larger parts of the human body) and their depiction of gender (toys representing female versus male body parts). Informed by feminist discourses on sex toys as well as sexual script theory and consumer research, the study explored the overall evaluations (RQ1), most frequently addressed characteristics (RQ2), usage patterns (RQ3), and perceived effects (RQ4) of the four groups of sex toys. A quantitative manual content analysis of N = 778 online sex toy reviews showed that 79% of consumers gave popular realistic sex toys positive ratings (RQ1). The most frequently mentioned characteristics were quality, material, and shape (RQ2). Most reviewers were men and used sex toys for solo sexual activities (RQ3). An additional qualitative analysis of n = 69 reviews addressing the perceived effects of sex toy use revealed that consumers predominantly mentioned positive effects (RQ4). Genitalia sex toys received better evaluations than torso sex toys and were perceived to be complementary tools to enhance sexual arousal, whereas the use of torso toys entailed anthropomorphization and symbolic social interactions. Implications for future research and design of different types of sex toys are discussed. MDPI 2022-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9221648/ /pubmed/35735463 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe12060042 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Döring, Nicola
Mikhailova, Veronika
Noorishad, Pari-Gole
How Customers Evaluate Genitalia versus Torso Sex Toys on Amazon.com: A Content Analysis of Product Reviews
title How Customers Evaluate Genitalia versus Torso Sex Toys on Amazon.com: A Content Analysis of Product Reviews
title_full How Customers Evaluate Genitalia versus Torso Sex Toys on Amazon.com: A Content Analysis of Product Reviews
title_fullStr How Customers Evaluate Genitalia versus Torso Sex Toys on Amazon.com: A Content Analysis of Product Reviews
title_full_unstemmed How Customers Evaluate Genitalia versus Torso Sex Toys on Amazon.com: A Content Analysis of Product Reviews
title_short How Customers Evaluate Genitalia versus Torso Sex Toys on Amazon.com: A Content Analysis of Product Reviews
title_sort how customers evaluate genitalia versus torso sex toys on amazon.com: a content analysis of product reviews
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9221648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35735463
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe12060042
work_keys_str_mv AT doringnicola howcustomersevaluategenitaliaversustorsosextoysonamazoncomacontentanalysisofproductreviews
AT mikhailovaveronika howcustomersevaluategenitaliaversustorsosextoysonamazoncomacontentanalysisofproductreviews
AT noorishadparigole howcustomersevaluategenitaliaversustorsosextoysonamazoncomacontentanalysisofproductreviews