Women may buy designer bags to protect their relationships

Women may buy designer bags to protect their relationships, study suggests

By 

MICHELLE CASTILLO

Could women's penchants for designer handbags and shoes actually be a signal for other women to stay away from their significant other?

A new study currently in press for the February 2014 issue of the Journal of Consumer Research suggests that women may use designer goods to tell other females that their significant other is dedicated to them.

"It might seem irrational that each year Americans spend over $250 billion on women's luxury products with an average woman acquiring three new handbags a year, but conspicuous consumption is actually smart for women who want to protect their relationship," study co-author Vladas Griskevicius, an associate professor at the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota, said in a press release. "When a woman is flaunting designer products, it says to other women 'back off my man.'"

To reach that conclusion, researchers conducted five experiments with 649 women of varying ages.

First, the women were given a scenario of seeing a woman at a party with her date. Then they were asked what they thought about that woman's relationship solely based on the quality of her belongings.

The researchers discovered that women were more likely to think that owners of luxury items were in a devoted relationship, and they were less willing to flirt with the owner's significant other. It didn't even matter to them who had paid for the items: The subjects believed that no matter what, the man had something to do with the luxury purchases.

In another experiment, researchers asked the subjects in relationships to picture that another woman was flirting with their man, in order to make them jealous. Then, in a seemingly unrelated task, the women were asked to draw a designer logo. Women who were jealous drew logos twice as large compared to women who were just asked to draw without being provoked.

"The feeling that a relationship is being threatened by another woman automatically triggers women to want to flash Gucci, Chanel, and Fendi to other women," research co-author Yajin Wang, a PhD student at the Carlson School of Management, said in a press release. "A designer handbag or a pair of expensive shoes seems to work like a shield, where wielding a Fendi handbag successfully fends off romantic rivals."

The researchers saw the same behavior when they tried that experiment on single women. To them, this suggested that unattached women may seek out designer brands in order to prevent other women from taking advantage of them when they are in a relationship. In a way, the luxury goods were a signal to stop women from latching onto their future, prospective significant other. The authors added that future research was needed to test this hypothesis.

In one other experiment, they gave participants $5 and told them that they could spend as much as they wanted to buy $1 raffle tickets to win a $200 shopping spree at eight different luxury brand stores including Nordstrom's, Tiffany and Coach.

Then, they tried to make some of the women jealous just like they had done in the previous experiments. Women who felt their relationships were threatened were willing to spend 32 percent more in order for a chance to win the shopping spree. They were also shown to want more expensive handbags, cars, cell phones and shoes.

Previous research by Griskevicius showed that men bought more expensive products in order to show of their wealth and attract mates. Using this study, he believes women buy expensive products to show off to other women, not in order to appeal to men. The author added to the Minneapolis Post that this behavior happens on subconscious level.

"The fact that most women's luxury products are aimed to impress other women helps explain why men have a hard time figuring out if a woman's handbag costs $50 or $5,000," Griskevicius explained. "Women's designer products are geared to show off to other women not men."

He added that women who don't have the desire to flaunt expensive goods may not have as many fears about losing their significant other.

"For women in relationships who are not displaying these fancy handbags and showing off, it suggests that they are more secure in their relationship, that they feel less threatened," Griskeviciu said to the Minneapolis Post.

Bad credit: A deal breaker for many singles

By Blake Ellis

First comes love ... then comes a credit check.

For many singles, bad credit can be a deal breaker when it comes to finding love. About 30% of women and 20% of men say they won't marry a person with a low credit score, according to a new survey from FreeCreditScore.com that polled 1,000 adults.

Most respondents also said money management skills are just as important as looks when deciding whether someone is worth pursuing.

This is especially true for women, with nearly all female respondents ranking financial responsibility and financial compatibility as more important or just as important as career ambition, physical attraction and sex and intimacy, the survey found.

Male respondents said financial savvy is just as important as physical attraction, slightly less important than sex and intimacy and much more important than career ambition.

While 57% of men say that credit scores play into their dating decisions, a staggering 75% of women said they consider the numerical rating. Credit scores are calculated based on your payment history, amount owed, the types of credit you have and the number of years that credit has been available to you.

Linda Basloe, a 57-year-old from Herkimer, N.Y., with excellent credit, said she won't even give a man her digits until she knows his credit score.

"I definitely consider bad credit a deal breaker," she said. "I wouldn't even consider someone in that situation -- the joke about me has always been 'to please fill out a credit application and I will consider [you].'"

Why such concern over this magic number? Respondents said they worry that a partner with bad credit could hurt their prospects for qualifying for home loans, auto loans or lower interest rates and they'd be irresponsible about handling joint finances.

Basloe said she has worked hard to achieve financial independence and doesn't want a relationship with someone financially irresponsible to ruin that.

20% of men and 30% of women say they won't marry someone with a poor credit score, a new survey finds.

"I wouldn't attach myself to someone who would bring me down -- mortgage-wise, or when it comes to buying a larger house or even [qualifying for] insurance rates -- it affects every aspect of your life," she said. "It doesn't matter how beautiful they are, that's not going to pay the mortgage."

"I wouldn't attach myself to someone who would bring me down -- mortgage-wise, or when it comes to buying a larger house or even [qualifying for] insurance rates -- it affects every aspect of your life," she said. "It doesn't matter how beautiful they are, that's not going to pay the mortgage."

But no matter how important it may be, it can be an awkward topic to broach. Roughly half of the survey respondents have talked about their credit score with a romantic interest, with 39% discussing it during the first year of a relationship, 21% bringing it up before committing to a relationship and 19% comparing scores before moving in together. A mere 1% discussed their scores on a first date.

Basloe doesn't ask someone for their credit score before dating them because she thinks they could easily lie, but she does look for red flags. She scans the local newspaper for people who owe back taxes, pays attention to what kind of car a man drives and whether he has purchased a home or is still renting.

Jerry Koller, a 50-year old from Irvine, Calif., said he put a halt to a budding romance a couple of years ago after seeing stacks of unopened bills and rent notices in his date's kitchen.

"I went to dinner and casually asked her about her credit and she told me she couldn't buy a car recently as her scores were no good," he said. "[I] made it a last date."

To cater to the credit-obsessed, there are even dating sites where you can find someone in your score range. At Creditscoredating.com, credit scores are factored into the matchmaking process, pairing you with users who have similar scores. Since scores are self-reported, however, it's hard to tell if someone is telling the truth.

According to the site's scoring guide:

"800-850 is 'MARRIAGE POTENTIAL DING DING DING' 750-800 is 'take him/her home to Mom' 700-750 is a 'fixer-upper' 650-700 is 'fun for a night out, maybe, but bring cash' 600-650 is 'keep lookin'!'; anything below 500 is 'RUN because they won't even get a car loan, probably, and how embarrassing will that be at the PTA meetings?' 200 is 'this person is just pulling your leg and is really royalty.'"

Similarly, Texas matchmaker Melanie Matcek said she runs background checks on clients before helping them find love. While she doesn't pull their credit scores, she says she can get a clear picture of their financial situations and find out if they've ever been in legal trouble that would have impacted their credit.

"If they are unstable financially, they are weeded out," she said. "I've run across many singles that are looking for someone to 'rescue' them. This is a recipe for disaster. Everyone must be able to stand on their own two feet first." 

Do you only date people with perfect credit? E-mail blake.ellis@turner.com to share your story.

Cellphones and texting have blown up the dating culture

Drew Johnson has learned that when it comes to asking a woman out, texting beats calling every time.

"Most of the girls I've hung out with lately prefer a group activity rather than one-on-one," says Johnson, 30, a mechanical engineer from West Chicago, Ill., who plays bass in a band. "From my observations, the response rate on, 'Do you want to go for dinner or meet for a drink?' is very low compared to 'I'm here with a group of people. Show up if you want to,' " he says.

Casual, easy and non-threatening — the simple beauty of text messaging is upending American dating culture. Not since the dawn of the automobile has a technology — the cellphone — so swiftly and radically changed the way people interact, meet and move forward (or not) in a relationship. Texting has created a new brand of mobile etiquette, and for dating, it has given rise to new ways of flirting and even defining exactly what's going on between two people.

A new survey of 1,500 daters provided to USA TODAY reveals how deeply mobile technology has rocked the dating world. The daters, ages 21 to 50, give even greater insight into mobile behaviors and a new range of dating questions: Do you check your phone during a date? How soon must you reply to a text? Should a friend call or text you to see how the date is going? Hearing someone's voice on the phone is still a key element for a relationship, yet people are increasingly more likely to rely on the relative "safety" of a text for initial contacts as well as keeping in touch as a relationship develops.

Although the survey was commissioned by two niche dating websites — ChristianMingle.com and JDate.com — their members did not participate. Rather, an independent research firm conducted the survey in May. The data illustrate just how much mobile technology has altered dating behavior, communication and expectations for romance.

Among the findings:

•Approximately one-third of men (31%) and women (33%) agree it's less intimidating to ask for a date via text vs. a phone call.

•One in four say an hour is the longest acceptable response time to a text to someone you are dating or interested in dating; one in 10 expect a response instantly or within a few minutes.

•More men (44%) than women (37%) say mobile devices make it easier to flirt and get acquainted.

"Texting is kind of an ongoing conversation. It does make it easier to flirt. Maybe you're talking every day," says Alex Pulda, 27, who works in product research in San Francisco. "It's not like text conveys a ton of emotion, but you are getting a little more comfortable with each other."

A SAFER WAY TO FLIRT

Clinical psychologist Beverly Palmer, a professor at California State University-Dominguez Hills, has researched flirting and non-verbal behavior. She says that because text doesn't afford the level of intimacy that voice does, relationships can be ended much quicker.

Palmer says men traditionally make the first move and women respond, which she says is "very difficult" for men. "In texting, a man can pull back quickly if he gets rejected, and it's easier to say 'no' to the guy because you're not having to confront the guy."

Men and women are adjusting to this new reality of dating in a mobile-dependent society. According to a report released this year by Nielsen based on actual phone bills of mobile contract subscribers, about 764 text messages per person were sent/received each month in the USA in 2012, compared with about 165 mobile calls per month.

The rise of text in the world of dating is another indication of how much has changed in the way relationships develop. Young adults are used to being overscheduled and multitasking. They've grown up with group activities and are more comfortable in packs. Experts say it should be no surprise they're treating their romantic relationships in much the same way — not wanting to invest too much time or effort in case they don't click.

Texting vs. talking keeps it casual. First dates are largely a chemistry check anyway, and to many young adults, the one-on-one time spent on an actual date feels too much like a commitment.

"If you're sitting down for a dinner date, that's putting way too much time out there for a first date. You don't know how it's going to go," says Adam Diamond, 29, a movie trailer editor in Los Angeles.

Preschool teacher Rachel Goetz of Manhattan likes the flexibility a drink allows for both parties.

"It can also work for the woman. If I'm not interested, then I don't feel bad that the gentleman spent a lot of money on a dinner," says Goetz, 34. "People are too worried that they're not going to like the person they're meeting, and the drink is an easy hour if it doesn't work out."

HIDING BEHIND TECHNOLOGY

Being time-efficient means text blasts for dates, says Ruthie Dean, 28, of Nashville, co-author of Real Men Don't Text, being published in September.

"Guys are using text messages to send the same message to multiple women. 'Hey, do you want to hang out tonight.' They're kind of fishing for a response," she says.

Dean, a Millennial who writes about her generation — generally born 1982 to 2000 — says, "We really see this generation as having a huge handicap in communication. We have our heads down in our smartphones a lot. We don't know how to express our emotions, and we tend to hide behind technology, computers and social media.

"People are uncomfortable using the phone. A text message is easier. You can think exactly what you want to say and how to craft it. When they are face-to-face or over the phone, there's this awkwardness," she says.

Pulda says he texts for everything, including dates.

"I don't love phone calls," he says. "They have all the downsides and don't have the benefit of face-to-face communication. It's kind of this in-between. And part of it is, it's a lot more work than a text."

Millennials' love of texting is rubbing off on other generations, suggests Naomi Baron, a linguistics professor at American University in Washington who studies electronically mediated communication.

She says telephone calls are often thought of as an intrusion, while texting affords a way of "controlling the volume," a term she uses to describe the sense of control that text gives users that they can't get with a voice conversation.

"We tell ourselves we don't want to disturb someone. Sometimes it's true, but more often, it's because we can't get them off the phone," she says.

In texting, "we don't have to talk to people or listen to what another person has to say. We decide how we want to encounter or whether we want to encounter other people. Technology gives us tools for controlling our relationships."

Baron co-authored research, published last year in the journal Language Sciences, which studied mobile phone use in five nations, including the USA.

Among the study's findings: "More women than men reported choosing to text rather than talk because 'talking takes too long.' In the focus groups, students in several countries noted how easy it is to become embroiled in a lengthy voice call. With texting, senders manage the interaction, circumventing potential obligation to hear the other person out."

Johnson knows that firsthand.

"Often if I call, I get a text back saying, 'What's up?' I find that people not only prefer texting but have no problem making it blatantly clear that they only want to handle the conversation by text," he says.