1. Market Research Report for:
Prepared for Dr. Hill
Prepared by:
Vickie Smith
Michelle Swallick
Al Almeida
Nicholas Sinko
Mike Dzioba
December 21, 2006

2. Pet Product Research, Inc.
99 Normal Avenue (973) 555-0001
Montclair, NJ 07010 Fax (973) 555-0002
November 19, 2006
Mr. Mike Hilltop, President
iPawd Enterprises
666 Dog Avenue
West Orange, NJ 00000
Subject: Market Research Report for iPooch!
Dear Mr. Hilltop:
Enclosed is the market research report for iPooch! that you requested. In your request,
you asked for a study to determine if your iPooch! product should go to market. This
research study was approved on October 1, 2006 and is now completed.
The results from the survey data collected were conclusive. You might want to do an
actual usage study once the product is out in the real world.
The project’s results are extremely informative and should be considered when
structuring future studies. It will give you a general idea of what to expect about attitudes
regarding the iPooch! product concept.
We are grateful to iPawd Enterprises for giving us an opportunity for conducting a
primary research study on iPooch! Feel free to contact us for clarification of this report,
or if any questions arise. Please keep us up to date with your decisions after reviewing
this report.
Sincerely,
__________________ ___________________ _________________
Vickie Smith Michelle Swallick Al Almeida
__________________ ___________________
Nicholas Sinko Mike Dzioba
2

3. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Letter of Transmittal ................................................................................................2
Table of Contents.....................................................................................................3
Executive Summary .................................................................................................4
Survey Results .........................................................................................................7
Data Analysis .........................................................................................................10
Conclusions, Limitations & Recommendations ....................................................24
Appendices.............................................................................................................26
Questionnaire
SPSS Printouts
Open-Ended Questions Responses
iPooch! product concept photos
Slide visuals
Bibliography
3

4. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
The US is a nation of animal lovers and pet owners. Of the over 63 million US
households which own some kind of pet (over 60% of all US households), dogs are found
in 39%, according to a 2002 survey by the American Pet Products Manufacturers
Association. Pet owners spend more per year on pet products and supplies than on pet
food. Sales of pet products rose from $28.5 billion in 2001 to $35.9 billion in 2005. The
pet products and services business is almost independent of the state of the economy –
Americans treat their pets as family members and do not scrimp on caring for them.
Americans are becoming well known for treating animals like humans. iPawd
Enterprise’s mission is to enter the booming luxury dog accessory market with their high-
tech product concept.
Consumer demand for pet apparel and accessories is a trend evident across the range of
retailers -- online specialty outlets, such as PamperedPuppycom, retail pet stores such as
PetSmart and PetCo, and even large department stores such as Macys which launched its
second pet department in Philadelphia earlier this year. The special relationship between
dog owners and their pets is the subject of many studies on the sharing of human interests
with dogs. Behavior studies show that dogs are affected by the type of music they are
hearing. 65% of pet owners have admitted singing and/or dancing for their pets. Why
not share music?
Over 33 million Americans are using digital media players (DMPs). Apple Computer’s
iPod holds over 75% of the marketshare in this market. Sales of an estimated 172
million units in 2006 are projected to go to almost 215 million units in 2007. DMP
Accessories accounted for over $412 million in sales for the first 9 months of 2005, up
over 370% from the same period in 2004.
iPawd Enterprises is planning to bring the iPooch! to market within 2 years. The purpose
of this study is to learn if there is enough of a positive attitude about the product to go
further in their mission. This information will be used by iPawd Enterprises to make
decisions regarding how they want to focus future research initiatives.
An exploratory research study was conducted in the Northern NJ area for iPawd
Enterprises which consisted of primary data gathering. iPawd Enterprises needed an
inexpensive, convenient and efficient way of collecting data about dog owners’ attitudes
towards purchasing the iPooch! product concept. Respondents were selected by
convenience sampling. The study was designed to determine the iPawd’s feasibility of
marketing a new high-tech dog product to those who use DMPs and also own dogs,
developing a new segment to the expanding luxury dog accessory market. Meeting the
criteria of being a dog owner AND owning a digital media player would need to be
satisfied before proceeding with our questionnaire for the iPooch! product concept. One
hundred completed surveys were collected, and SPSS Statistical Analysis software was
used to analyze the results. A variety of tests were used to analyze the data, including an
4

5. Independent Sample T-Test, Oneway ANova, and Univariate Analysis. Cross-tabulation
was also used to generate results that will be reflected in our final reporting.
PRODUCT CONCEPT
The iPooch! is high-tech dog accessory that will allow dog owners to listen to their
digital media player along with their dog. The digital media player attaches with a mini
plug, for compatibility with a variety of digital media players. The iPooch! is a
waterproof pouch that fastens to the dog’s collar, housing the DMP. iPooch! has an
external speaker, known as the patented “woofer,” through which the media will be
heard. There are no external wires.
RESULTS
Although there were no actual attitudinal differences between our subjects (gender, age,
income, dog size) and the consequences, we still found that overall there are significant
attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences but just not between each subject. We
also discovered that there is a significant attitudinal difference across the cumulative 11
attitude consequences in relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes
The actual findings included that there was an overall positive attitude towards the
iPooch! concept.
CONCLUSIONS
After conducting our study, we found that there was a positive attitude overall across the
11 consequences about iPooch! We determine that there is enough interest in iPooch! to
go to market, however, more research is needed at this time. Please see the following
limitations section in the survey results portion of this report for a discussion on this.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Prior to bringing iPooch! to market, a few things should be considered. This research
was conducted to clarify an ambiguous problem, “Are people interested in iPooch!” This
question needs to be addressed before a great deal of money is invested in manufacturing
and bringing the product to market. The results of this report are not intended to provide
conclusive evidence from which to determine a particular cause of action. It should be
noted that subsequent research will be required to provide such conclusive evidence.
Future research should be directed to a target audience about specific objectives. The
research objectives should be reidentified which will in turn delineate the type of
information that should be collected and it will provide the framework for the scope of
the new study. In the research study, one objective should be to see how the attitudes are
AFTER the consumers have actually used it. Once problems have been identified
through this research, they will be ready to be solved.
Secondary data should also be collected on other competitors, such as other luxury dog
accessories. Some of the ideas that are implemented can be useful and adopted by iPawd
Enterprises. This data can be gathered quicker and at a lower cost than primary data.
The new research study should be conducted more scientifically to obtain the results
needed to make business-related decisions. Also, ordinal and interval data questions
5

6. should be asked to help in analyzing the data. A larger sample size and a random sample
technique should be used in order to obtain meaningful data. The new survey should
address questions that were left out of this study.
6

7. IPAWD ENTERPRISES SURVEY RESULTS
INTRODUCTION
Consumer demand for pet apparel and accessories is a trend evident across the range of
retailers -- online specialty outlets, such as PamperedPuppycom, retail pet stores such as
PetSmart and PetCo, and even large department stores such as Macys which launched its
second pet department in Philadelphia earlier this year. The special relationship between
dog owners and their pets is the subject of many studies on the sharing of human interests
with dogs. Behavior studies show that dogs are affected by the type of music they are
hearing. 65% of pet owners have admitted singing and/or dancing for their pets. Why
not share music?
Over 33 million Americans are using digital media players (DMPs). Apple Computer’s
iPod holds over 75% of the marketshare in this market. Sales of an estimated 172
million units in 2006 are projected to go to almost 215 million units in 2007. DMP
Accessories accounted for over $412 million in sales for the first 9 months of 2005, up
over 370% from the same period in 2004.
The purpose of this study is to learn more about people’s attitudes toward the iPooch!
product concept to see if it was feasible to go to market. iPawd Enterprises has
contracted Pet Product Research, Inc. to conduct an exploratory study in order to
determine the market potential of the iPooch! digital media player carrier for the dog and
their owners. This information will be used by iPawd Enterprises to get an idea of
general attitude towards the iPooch! product concept and to make decisions regarding
how they want to focus future research projects.
OBJECTIVES
Several key areas were identifies when determining the boundaries of this study. The
following describe the specific research objectives: Determining if there is a positive
purchase intent for iPooch!, what attitudes would drive that behavior, and answering the
management decision problem “Should iPooch! go to market?”
METHODOLOGY
In choosing our population of interest, we determined that two criteria would need to be
satisfied for eligibility to participate in the research study: Owners of both a dog AND a
digital media player. Both of those criteria would need to be satisfied before proceeding
with our questionnaire for the iPooch! product concept.
Pet Product research conducted an exploratory research study in the Northern New Jersey
area for iPawd Enterprises that consisted of primary data gathering. The opinions of this
specific population were necessary in order to satisfy our research objectives. We chose
to use a self-administered questionnaire for our primary data research. The surveyor was
present to explain things to the respondent and clarify responses to open-ended questions,
if necessary. Our sampling frame is from the population of Northern NJ. Currently the
7

8. population of Essex County, where our research was conducted, is approximately
793,000. However, we will focus our attention to a more convenient sample size. We
chose to use a nonprobability sample on the basis of convenience and the appeal of lower
costs. We chose a mall intercept method, intercepting every 10th person that was entering
PetSmart on Route 23, Wayne, NY to create a more random sample. We determined that
a sample size of 100 would be sufficient in our determination if iPooch! should go to
market.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Several key areas were identified when determining the boundaries of this study. The
following were the specific research objectives: Determining if there is a positive
purchase intent for iPooch!, what attitudes would drive that behavior, answering the
management decision problem “Should iPooch! go to market?”. We came up with ten
(10) hypotheses for responding to the management decision problem:
HYPOTHESES
Ho1 There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners.
Ha1 There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners.
Ho2 There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners
and gender.
Ha2 There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners and
gender.
Ho3 There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners
and age.
Ha3 There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners and
age.
Ho4 There are no attitudinal difference towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners
and income.
Ha4 There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners and
income.
Ho5 There are no attitudinal differences across towards purchasing ipooch among dog
owners and dog size.
Ha5 There are attitudinal differences across towards purchasing ipooch among dog
owners and dog size.
Ho6 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences.
8

9. Ha6 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences.
Ho7 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and gender.
Ha7 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and gender.
Ho8 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and age.
Ho8 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and age.
Ho9 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and income.
Ha9 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and income.
Ho10 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and dog size.
Ha10 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and dog size.
Ho 11 There are no attitudinal differences across the cumulative 11 attitude consequences
in relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes.
Ha 11 There are attitudinal differences across the cumulative 11 attitude consequences in
relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes.
QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN
Using Fishbein’s attitude-toward-the behavior model, as this model seems to correspond
more closely to actual behavior than does the attitude-toward-object model, revealing
more about the act of purchasing iPooch! This is depicted by the following equation:
Where Attitude(beh) is a separately assessed overall measure of effect for or against
carrying out a specific action or behavior: bi is the strength of the belief that an ith
specific action will lead to a specific outcome; and Σ indicates that there are n salient
outcomes over which the b and e combinations are summated.
Demographic data was collected at the end of the questionnaire, including gender, age,
income and dog size. Two open-ended questions were included at the end of the survey
to include as a bonus for iPawd in their continuing research and development for the
product to uncover if there was anything in particular that the respondent liked about the
concept and if they had any concerns.
9

10. DATA ANALYSIS
100 completed surveys were successfully collected, with minimal response omissions.
After collecting our data, we will analyze the responses to the surveys by running the
tests through SPSS Statistical Analysis Software. The surveys were validated, coded and
entered according to standard data analysis procedure. A variety of tests were used to
analyze the data, including an Independent Sample T-Test, Oneway ANova, and
Univariate Analysis. Cross-tabulation was also used to generate results that will be
reflected in our final reporting.
GUIDELINE
This diagram was arranged according to the scores of the 11 attitude questions in our
survey, with 1 being “Very Important,” and 5 being “Very unimportant.” The lower the
score, the more positive an attitude that they have shown towards i-pooch for that
consequence (i.e. innovativeness, comfort, etc.) We used this guideline to measure if
there was a significant finding relating to attitude to measure against the stacked tests that
we ran, which showed a cumulative total for each attitude by creating 11 new variables.
If the cumulative score had not gone beyond (99), we can conclude that there was a
positive attitude towards the iPooch! consequence. However if the cumulative total
was beyond 135, we concluded that this participant had a negative attitude towards the
iPooch! consequence. If the sum of the cumulative responses to the consequence was
between (99 – 135), we would have to conclude that this there is an indifferent attitude,
neither positive or negative outlook. The neutral and negative are being treated equally,
as marketing researchers, we are looking at the cumulative scores less than 99, which
would be in the positive zone.
10

11. ATTITUDES TOWARDS PURCHASING IPOOCH!
Hypothesis
Ho1: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog
owners.
Ha1: There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog
owners
One-sample t-test:
Out of the one hundred possible attitudinal surveys, 84 contained valid responses, and 16
are missing. The mean average of these attitudinal purchases was 74.2 which is below the
99 test value, indicating that there is positive mean average of iPooch! in dog owners.
After conducting the independent sample t- test, we concluded that there are attitudinal
differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog owners, we reject the null.
One-Sample Statistics
Std.
Std. Error
N Mean Deviation Mean
attitudes towards
purchasing 84 74.1786 33.22148 3.62476
iPooch!
One-Sample Test
Test Value = 99
95% Confidence
Mean Interval of the
Sig. (2- Differenc Difference
t df tailed) e Lower Upper
attitudes towards
purchasing -6.848 83 .000 -24.82143 -32.0309 -17.6119
iPooch!
GENDER
Hypothesis
Ho2: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog
owners and gender.
Ha2: There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog
owners and gender.
11

12. Independent Sample T Test:
Out of 39 valid male responses the mean average was 77.2. Out of a valid 44 female
responses there was a mean average of 71.7. Both have a positive attitude towards
iPooch! After conducting the independent sample t- test, we concluded that there are no
attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog owners and gender, and
we retain the null.
Group Statistics
Std.
Std. Error
Gender N Mean Deviation Mean
attitudes towards Male 39 77.1795 43.30241 6.93393
purchasing Female
44 71.7273 21.37741 3.22277
iPooch!
12

13. AGE COHORT
Hypothesis
Ho3: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog
owners and age.
Ha3: There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog
owners and age.
One-Way Anova Test:
After conducting a one way ANOVA we observed that the age cohort of 25-34 had the
most positive mean attitude out of all five age cohorts and 55 and above had the lowest
positive mean attitude. After conducting the test we found there are no attitudinal
differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog owners and age, and we retain the
null.
attitudes towards purchasing iPooch!
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between
5272.046 4 1318.012 1.235 .303
Groups
Within Groups 83250.91
78 1067.319
8
Total 88522.96
82
4
90.00
Mean of attitudes towards purshasing ipooch
85.00
80.00
75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
Less than 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+
Age Group
13

14. INCOME
Hypothesis
Ho4: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog
owners and income.
Ha4: There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog
owners and income.
One Way Anova Test:
After conducting the one way ANOVA test we observed that the income class of 50,001-
65,000 had the highest positive mean attitude toward purchasing the iPooch! and the
35,001-50,000 had the lowest positive mean attitude towards purchasing the iPooch!.
However, we concluded that there are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing
iPooch! among dog owners and income, and we retain the null.
attitudes towards purchasing iPooch!
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between
7836.413 5 1567.283 1.470 .210
Groups
Within Groups 78907.53
74 1066.318
8
Total 86743.95
79
0
95.00
Mean of attitudes towards purshasing ipooch
90.00
85.00
80.00
75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
Under $35,000 $35,001-$50,000 $50,001-$65,000 $65,001-$80,000 $80,000-$95,000 Over $95,000
Household Income
14

15. DOG SIZE
Hypothesis
Ho5: There are no attitudinal differences across towards purchasing iPooch!
among dog owners and dog size.
Ha5: There are attitudinal differences across towards purchasing iPooch!
among dog owners and dog size.
One-Way Anova Test:
After conducting a one way ANOVA test we observed that owners of small canines had
the highest positive mean attitude. The least positive mean attitude came from the
medium sized canine group. However, we concluded that there are no attitudinal
differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog owners and dog size, and we retain
the null.
attitudes towards purchasing iPooch!
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between
5172.628 2 2586.314 2.344 .103
Groups
Within Groups 86050.95
78 1103.217
2
Total 91223.58
80
0
85.00
Mean of attitudes towards purshasing ipooch
80.00
75.00
70.00
65.00
Small Medium Large
Size of Dog
15

16. ATTITUDINAL DIFFERENCES ACROSS THE 11 CONSEQUENCES
Hypothesis
Ho6 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences.
Ha6 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences.
One Way Anova Test:
After conducting a one way ANOVA test, we found that the consequence of dog comfort
while wearing iPooch! had the highest positive mean. The concept of innovativeness had
the lowest positive mean consequence. After conducting the one way ANOVA we found
there are significant attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences. The null
hypothesis was rejected, and we conclude that a difference does exist.
Consequences
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between
97.874 10 9.787 8.327 .000
Groups
Within Groups 1259.995 1072 1.175
Total 1357.869 1082
3.00
2.75
Mean of Consequences
2.50
2.25
2.00
1.75
would be would be is an looks like it would draw would make would make would make would draw would cost would be
comfortable enjoyable to innovative would break positive me feel my dog less my dog less negative more than i fun to use
for my dog listen to with concept easy attention to confident distracted responsive attention to am willing while
to wear my dog me that it is by other to me my dog to spend walking my
waterproof dogs dog
Consequence type
16

17. GENDER STACK
Hypothesis
Ho7: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and
gender.
Ha7: There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and gender.
Univariate Analysis Of Variance Test:
By conducting the univariate analysis of variance test, we observed that females have a
more positive attitude towards the iPooch! concept. We concluded that there are no
attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and gender.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: Consequences
Type III
Sum of Mean
Source Squares df Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 111.508(a) 21 5.310 4.483 .000
Intercept 4788.57
5672.284 1 5672.284 .000
7
ComTyp 97.372 10 9.737 8.220 .000
genstacked 1.326 1 1.326 1.119 .290
ComTyp *
11.182 10 1.118 .944 .492
genstacked
Error 1243.772 1050 1.185
Total 7028.000 1072
Corrected Total 1355.280 1071
a R Squared = .082 (Adjusted R Squared = .064)
Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences
2.325
Estimated Marginal Means
2.30
2.275
Male Female
Gender Stacked
17

18. AGE COHORT STACK
Hypothesis
Ho8: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and age.
Ha8: There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and age.
Univariate Analysis Of Variance Test:
By conducting the univariate analysis of variance test, we observed the estimated
marginal means of consequences pertaining to the age cohort stack. We observed that the
25-34 age cohort has the highest favorable attitude toward the iPooch! concept. The 55+
has the lowest positive favorable attitude toward the iPooch! concept. Even though we
observed this we still concluded that there are no attitudinal differences across the 11
consequences and age, and we retain the null.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: Consequences
Type III
Sum of Mean
Source Squares df Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 169.817(a) 54 3.145 2.735 .000
Intercept 3544.25
4074.817 1 4074.817 .000
2
ConType 106.537 10 10.654 9.267 .000
agestack 36.362 4 9.090 7.907 .000
ConType *
34.157 40 .854 .743 .880
agestack
Error 1169.242 1017 1.150
Total 7081.000 1072
Corrected Total 1339.059 1071
a R Squared = .127 (Adjusted R Squared = .080)
Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences
2.60
2.50
Estimated Marginal Means
2.40
2.30
2.20
2.10
2.00
Less than 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+
Age Group Stacked
18

19. Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences
4.00
Age Group Stacked
Less than 25
25-34
3.50 35-44
Estimated Marginal Means
45-54
55+
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
would would is an looks would would would would would would would
be be innovati like it draw make make make draw cost be fun to
comfort enjoyabl ve would positive me feel my dog my dog negative more use
able for e to concept break attention confiden less less attention than i while
my dog listen to easy to me t that it distracte responsi to my am walking
to wear with my is d by ve to me dog willing my dog
dog waterpr other to spend
oof dogs
Consequence type
INCOME STACK
Hypothesis
Ho9: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and income.
Ho9: There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and income.
Univariate Analysis Of Variance Test:
By conducting the univariate analysis of variance test, we observed that the estimated
marginal means of consequences pertaining to income . We found that the income class
of 50,001-65,000 had the highest positive mean attitude toward purchasing the iPooch!
The 35,001-50,000 had the lowest positive mean attitude towards purchasing the iPooch!.
We conclude that there are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and
income, and we retain the null.
19

20. Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: Consequences
Type III
Sum of Mean
Source Squares df Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 164.467(a) 65 2.530 2.250 .000
Intercept 4468.83
5025.125 1 5025.125 .000
5
ConType 95.637 10 9.564 8.505 .000
incomestack 24.960 5 4.992 4.439 .001
ConType *
47.592 50 .952 .846 .767
incomestack
Error 1082.876 963 1.124
Total 6729.000 1029
Corrected Total 1247.343 1028
a R Squared = .132 (Adjusted R Squared = .073)
Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences
2.60
2.50 Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences
Estimated Marginal Means
2.40
3.50
Income Stacked
2.30 Under $35,000
$35,000-$50,000
$50,001-$65,000
Estimated Marginal Means
2.20
3.00 $65,001-$80,000
2.10 $80,001-$95,000
Over $95,000
2.00
2.50 Under $35,000 $35,000-$50,000 $50,001-$65,000 $65,001-$80,000 $80,001-$95,000 Over $95,000
Income Stacked
2.00
1.50
would would is an looks would would would would would would would
be be innovati like it draw make make make draw cost be fun to
comfort enjoyabl ve would positive me feel my dog my dog negative more use
able for e to concept break attention confiden less less attention than i while
my dog listen to easy to me t that it distracte responsi to my am walking
to wear with my is d by ve to me dog willing my dog
dog waterpr other to spend
oof dogs
Consequence type
20

21. DOG SIZE STACK
Hypothesis
Ho10: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and dog
size
Ha10: There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and dog
size.
Univariate Analysis Of Variance Test:
By conducting the univariate analysis of variance test, we observed that owners of large
canines had the highest positive mean attitude. The least positive mean attitude came
from the medium sized canine group. There are no attitudinal differences across the 11
consequences and dog size, and we retain the null.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: Consequences
Type III
Sum of Mean
Source Squares df Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 128.755(a) 32 4.024 3.379 .000
Intercept 4498.89
5356.346 1 5356.346 .000
1
ConType 98.235 10 9.823 8.251 .000
sizestack 16.364 2 8.182 6.872 .001
ConType *
15.351 20 .768 .645 .881
sizestack
Error 1200.117 1008 1.191
Total 6816.000 1041
Corrected Total 1328.872 1040
a R Squared = .097 (Adjusted R Squared = .068)
Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences
2.50
Estimated Marginal Means
2.40
2.30
2.20
Small Medium Large
Size of Dog Stacked
21

22. CUMULATIVE ATTITUDES * POSITIVE ATTITUDES VERSUS NEGATIVE
AND NEUTRAL ATTITUDES
Hypothesis
Ho 11 There is no significant attitudinal difference across the cumulative 11 attitude
consequences in relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes.
Ha 11 There is a significant attitudinal difference across the cumulative 11 attitude
consequences in relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes.
Cross-Tabulation:
This was the final test we ran to determine if there was enough of a cumulative positive
attitude towards iPooch! to conclude if iPawd Enterprises should or should not proceed to
market with iPooch! This is the sum of all collected attitudes responses to our attitude
questions from our marketing research project. We compared the cumulative results, as
either totally positive (below 99), or indifferent/negative (above 99), compared with the
guideline chart. We had to create another variable that would identify a particular
participant’s weighted score as (1) for positive or (2) for either negative or neutral. We
then conducted a frequency and cross tabulation to dissect our results.
As you can see we had a total of 84 valid responses out of 100. To indicate if a weighted
sum attitude average was missing, we labeled it with a -9. We found that out of the valid
84 attitudes, 76 had a positive response towards purchasing the iPooch! This makes up
90.5% of all attitudes, versus 9.5% of negative or neutral attitudes purchasing the iPooch!
which had a valid count of 8.
We conclude that there is a significant attitudinal difference across the cumulative 11
attitude consequences in relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral
attitudes, and we reject the null.
Positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes
80
60
Frequency
40
20
0
Positive attitude Negative or neutral attitude
Positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes
22

23. Cumulative attitudes * Positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes
Cross-tabulation
Positive attitudes
versus negative
and neutral
attitudes
Negativ
Positiv e or
e neutral
attitude attitude Total
Cumulat Positive attitudes Count 76 0 76
ive towards Expected
68.8 7.2 76.0
attitudes purchasing IPooch Count
% of Total 90.5% .0% 90.5%
Negative or neutral Count 0 8 8
attitudes towards Expected
7.2 .8 8.0
purchasing IPooch Count
% of Total .0% 9.5% 9.5%
Total Count 76 8 84
Expected
76.0 8.0 84.0
Count
% of Total 100.0
90.5% 9.5%
%
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Exact Exact
Sig. (2- Sig. (2- Sig. (1-
Value df sided) sided) sided)
Pearson Chi- 84.000(b
1 .000
Square )
Continuity
72.796 1 .000
Correction(a)
Likelihood Ratio 52.835 1 .000
Fisher's Exact
.000 .000
Test
Linear-by-Linear
83.000 1 .000
Association
N of Valid Cases 84
a Computed only for a 2x2 table
b 1 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .76.
23

24. CONCLUSIONS
After conducting our study, we found that there was a positive attitude overall across the
11 consequences about iPooch! We also received many questions and comments through
the use of the open-ended questions that were provided on the questionnaire. There were
many comments regarding the dog’s safety and health, including things like “it will hurt
my dog’s ears” and “will it be comfortable for my dog to wear?” There were also many
comments on how much the iPooch! actually is considering that a price was not stated on
the questionnaire. On the other hand, we also received positive comments on the sleek
style and versatility of the iPooch! and how “cute” it is. We determine that there is
enough interest in iPooch! to go to market, however, more research is needed at this time.
Please see the following limitations section for a discussion on this.
LIMITATIONS
As with any research project, this one had several limitations. One very important
limitation had to do with budget. As a result of limited resources, the methodology used
to collect the data was hindered. The selection of respondents was obtained by
convenience sampling because of this reason. Since this sampling method was used,
projecting the results beyond the specific sample is inappropriate and unscientific.
Another problem had to do with the sample size. Originally, we had chosen a sample
size of 250 for this research project, but because of budget limitations, we were limited to
obtaining 100 completed questionnaires. If a larger sample size were used, this may have
generated more significant statistical findings.
Other problems that were encountered had to do with respondent error. Nonresponse
error was encountered minimally. This could have been eliminated if the interviewer
checked the survey for completeness. We were gracious when intercepting respondents
who sacrificed their time to participate in our survey, when on their way to make a
purchase at PetSmart. Limitations might also include that some of the questions might
have been falsified or answered with a certain slant. Those questions that were
misunderstood could also yield biased answers. Because this was an exploratory research
survey for a new company, iPawd, the intentions of subjects who have little knowledge or
who have not yet made any purchase plans cannot be expected to accurately predict their
purchase behavior of a luxury dog product concept.
More questions are needed involving the characteristics of peoples’ dogs and getting at
the underlying notion of why people would purchase iPooch. We might want to uncover
what breeds of dogs are more likely to be owned by people who have a positive attitude
towards purchasing iPooch!, how many dogs they own, what kind of digital media player
do they own, etc.
Quantitative Research alone has its limitations, as more in-depth analysis should be done
through qualitative research. By seeing how the product works in action, and speaking to
people in a focus group setting, more would be revealed than just an open-ended question
at the end of a survey.
24

25. RECOMMENDATIONS
Prior to bringing iPooch! to market, a few things should be considered. This research
was conducted to clarify an ambiguous problem, “Are people interested in iPooch!” This
question needs to be addressed before a great deal of money is invested in manufacturing
a bringing the product to market. The results of this report are not intended to provide
conclusive evidence from which to determine a particular cause of action. It should be
noted that subsequent research will be required to provide such conclusive evidence.
Future research should be directed to a target audience about specific objectives. The
research objectives should be reidentified which will in turn delineate the type of
information that should be collected and it will provide the framework for the scope of
the new study. In the research study, one objective should be to see how the attitudes are
AFTER the consumers have actually used it. Once problems have been identified
through this research, they will be ready to be solved.
Secondary data should also be collected on other competitors, such as other luxury dog
accessories. Some of the ideas that are implemented can be useful and adopted by iPawd
Enterprises. This data can be gathered quicker and at a lower cost than primary data.
The new research study should be conducted more scientifically to obtain the results
needed to make business-related decisions. Also, ordinal and interval data questions
should be asked to help in analyzing the data. A larger sample size and a random sample
technique should be used in order to obtain meaningful data. The new survey should
address questions that were left out of this study.
25

26. APPENDICES (See separate pdf files)
Questionnaire
SPSS Printouts
Open Ended Questions Responses
Slide visuals
Bibliography
26

27. 27

28. References
American Animal Hospital Association. Move Over Cindy Crawford – Fido Had More
Clout. Web Site: http://www.cyberpet.com/cyberdog/articles/general/crawford.htm
Aylesworth, A. et al. (1999) Animal Companions and Marketing . Advances in Consumer
Research. Volume 26, p. 385-391
Brass, L. (December 2005) Developing the purrfect product. Knox News. Retrieved from:
www.knews.com
Chamberlin, G. (August 2005) Pet Lovers Spend Millions Annually on Their Precious. San
Diego Daily Transcript. Retrieved from:
http://www.sddt.com/Commentary/article.cfm?Commentary_ID=10&SourceCode=20050819
tbc
Crossen, C. (December 2003) Bowsers Get the Bling Bling; Whether They Like it Or Not
From Owners in Holiday Mood.” Wall Street Journal Archives Retrieved from:
http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.montclair.edu:2048/pqdweb?index=1&sid=1&srchmode=1
&vinst
Dale, S. (2005) Pet Owner Survey Reveals Strong Bond Between People and Their Pets.
Goodnewsforpets.com Retrieved from:
http://www.goodnewsforpets.com/Articles.asp?ID=90
Dillon, M. (January 2004) Global Market for Luxury Dog Products. Dillin Media LLC
Website. Retrieved from: http://www.dillonmedia.com/luxury-dog-
products.html?id=blogside
Edward, L. (July 20, 1997) A Dog’s Luxe Life. New York Times. Retrieved from:
http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=FB0C10FE3D5F0C738EDDAE0894D
F494D81
Kindel, L. (October 2006) Dogs Shown to React to Music. Retrieved from:
http://www.eternalanimals.com/Dogs_Shown_To_React_To_Music.htm
Devaney, P. (June 2003) Wealth of Potential in the Rise of the ‘Gucci Poochie.’ Marketing
Week. p. 32
Pets Can Drive. (March 2000) American Demographics. p. 10, 12.
Randerson, J. (October 2002) Dogs Prefer Back to Britney. Newsscientist.com Retrieved
from: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2962&print=true
Sanders, C. (1990) The Animal ‘Other’: Self Definition, Social Identity and Companion
Animmals. Advances in Consumer Research. Volume 17, p. 662-668
28

29. Stick It In Your Ear Again, Study on Safe Levels of Music Listening. (October 26, 2006)
Gadgetbloggers. Retrieved from: http://www.gadgetbloggers.com/2006/10/23/stick-it-in-
your-ear-again-study-on-safe-levels-of-music-listening/
The Musical Preferences of Your Pets… CBC Continuous Music Network. Retrieved from:
http://www.galaxie.ca/en/2/faitsinsolites.html
29