Background Information
We began our search for related
studies on the proportions of specific kinds of phones in specific
demographics by using the Google search engines. The exact keywords
we used were “smart phone proportions.” This phrase failed
miserably; the majority of articles that Google provided were
concerning the physical proportions of smart phones in terms of
their dimensions, as opposed to the proportions of smart phones in
the population.
As a result, we supplemented our keyword with “in American
population.” However, instead of searching this, Google suggested a
potentially more effective set of keywords as “proportion of smart
phone users.” This search was clearly more successful.
The first website available (http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/gadgetbox/its-android-or-apple-71-percent-us-smartphone-users-118828)
on this search was a related study reported by NBC News that was
conducted by Nielsen, which is a leading global market company that
provides extensive information on products purchased by the
population. The study indicated that, as of the third quarter of
2011, 44 percent of all mobile subscribers in the United States had
smart phones. This is relevant to our study because, as the survey
is random, we must be prepared to have students respond to our
questionnaire without selecting either Apple or Android for lack of
owning a smart phone. The study continues, explaining that of the 44
percent of Americans who do own a smart phone, 42.8% own Androids
while 28.3% own iPhones. The article continued to shed light on what
precisely our categories of “Androids” and “iPhone” contained.
Since the inception of the study, we had assumed that
“Androids” only referred to Samsungs. However, the Nielsen study
indicated that there were several brands of phones that could
support the Android operating system. As a result, in our study, we
must incorporate HTC, Samsung, and Motorola as the main
sub-categories in the “Android” realm. Other brands could
potentially operate on the Android operating system. Conversely, the
“iPhone” category is far simpler, as only iPhone devices can utilize
the iPhone’s operating system.
The other element of the study that we hope to analyze is
whether or not there is a disjoint between preference of Android and
iPhone between men and women. Initially, we typed “smart phone
preference by gender” into the Google search engine. This was not
effective, however, because Google misinterpreted the meaning of the
keywords, returning articles that suggested that men are more likely
to use smart phones because 49% of males use them while only 44% of
females use them. However, further searching along this phrase
yielded an article by business insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/men-want-android-women-prefer-iphone-2010-12)
which indicated that women tend to prefer iPhones while men tend to
prefer Androids. This conclusion is based off of a 2010 study also
conducted by Nielsen group on 9200 individuals. The study indicated
that 33% of men use Androids while only 29% of men use iPhones. On
the other hand, 31% of women use iPhones while only 23% of women use
Androids.
Both studies provided valuable insight for the study that our
group will be conducting in the high school. Based on the
information provided in the study, we are able to hypothesize that
more students in North Olmsted High School will elect to use some
sort of Android over an iPhone. However, based on the second study,
we can predict that the majority of females at NOHS will use an
iPhone while the majority of males will use an Android. Our study is
unique from these two because it targets a specific audience, namely
adolescents in a specific high school, and so it could potentially
yield differing results to those of the Nielsen studies.