The association between need for touch and desire for unique products and consumer (inter)dependent problem-solving

Some people cannot buy products without first touching them, believing that doing so will create more assurance and information and reduce uncertainty. The international consumer marketing literature suggests an instrument to measure consumers' necessity for pohysical contact, called Need for Touch (NFT). This paper analyzes whether the Need for Touch structure is empirically consistent. Based on a literature review, we suggest six hypotheses in order to assess the nomological, convergent, and discriminant validity of the phenomenon. Departing from these, data supported four assumptions in the predicted direction. Need for Touch was associated with Need for Input and with Need for Cognition. Need for Touch was not associated with traditional marketing channels. The results also showed the dual characterization of Need for Touch as a bi-dimensional construct. The moderator effect indicated that when the consumer has a higher (vs. lower) Need for Touch autotelic score, the experiential motivation for shopping played a more (vs. less) important role in impulsive motivation. Our Study 3 supports the NFT structure and shows new associations with the need for unique products and dependent decisions.

Injuries Resulted From Breastfeeding: A New Approach To A Known Problem

This study aimed at analyzing nipple trauma resulted from breastfeeding based on dermatological approach. Two integrative reviews of literature were conducted, the first related to definitions, classification and evaluation methods of nipple trauma and another about validation studies related to this theme. In the first part were included 20 studies and only one third defined nipple trauma, more than half did not defined the nipple’s injuries reported, and each author showed a particular way to assess the injuries, without consensus. In the second integrative review, no validation study or algorithm related to nipple trauma resulted from breastfeeding was found. This fact demonstrated that the nipple’s injuries mentioned in the first review did not go through validation studies, justifying the lack of consensus identified as far as definition, classification and assessment methods of nipple trauma.