INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 1
www.rsisinternational.org
The Pink Tax Effect: Analyzing Consumer Behavior and Pricing
Dynamics in Women’s Products
Senthil Kumar N1, Preya Darsine S2, Sowmi Shruthiksha K3
1*Assistant Professor -III, School of Management Studies, Bannari Amman Institute of Technology,
Sathyamangalam, India
2Second year MBA, School of Management Studies, Bannari Amman Institute of Technology,
Sathyamangalam, India
3Second Year MBA, School of Management Studies, Bannari Amman Institute of Technology,
Sathyamangalam, India
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.121000001
Received: 07 Oct 2025; Accepted: 14 Oct 2025; Published: 27 October 2025
ABSTRACT
The "Pink Tax Effect," a pricing phenomenon in which goods marketed to women are sold for more than
comparable or identical goods offered to men, is the subject of this study. Through an examination of pricing
dynamics and consumer behavior, the study pinpoints the causes of this discrepancy, including societal
standards, gendered marketing tactics, and brand perception. To determine why women are more vulnerable to
these pricing strategies, psychological factors such as perceived value, brand loyalty, and the influence of
societal expectations are examined. The study also looks into how merchants and manufacturers use
packaging, product design, and targeted advertising to support charging more for women's goods. It draws
attention to the financial burden that the Pink Tax places on women as well as its wider effects on economic
justice and purchasing power. The study intends to increase awareness of the Pink Tax and its hidden
consequences by thoroughly examining pricing structures and consumer behaviours. In order to combat
gender-based price discrimination, it advocates for more pricing transparency, consumer education, and
legislative actions. The study aims to educate consumers and persuade stakeholders to implement fair pricing
methods by bringing these systematic practices to light.
Keywords: Gendered Pricing, Brand, Pricing, Psychological.
OBJECTIVES
To analyze consumer awareness and perception regarding the Pink Tax and its influence on purchase decisions.
To evaluate the impact of Pink Tax on consumer behavior, particularly in terms of brand loyalty, willingness to
pay, and product substitution.
To investigate the psychological and sociocultural factors influencing women’s acceptance or resistance
towards higher-priced gendered products.
INTRODUCTION
Have you ever noticed that a pink razor or a women’s shampoo costs more than the regular blue or black ones
marketed for men even though they basically do the same thing? That’s what people mean when they talk
about the “Pink Tax.” It’s not an actual tax, but a name given to the extra money, women are often charged just
because a product is designed or branded for them. This pricing difference shows up in all sorts of everyday
products from personal care items like razors, deodorants, and shampoos to clothes, toys, and even some
services like dry cleaning or haircuts.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 2
www.rsisinternational.org
The main reason behind this? Marketing. Companies often make tiny changes to the product maybe a softer
scent, a curvier shape, or pastel-coloured packaging and then label it as “for women.” These changes may look
nice, but they usually don’t justify the higher price. What’s really happening is that businesses are taking
advantage of social norms and gender expectations. Women are often more brand loyal and feel a stronger
push from society to buy certain products to look or feel a certain way. This gives companies an opening to
charge more. Over time, paying a little extra here and there really adds up and it ends up hurting women
financially without them even realizing it.
To get a better understanding of how people feel about the Pink Tax, we spoke to everyday shoppers through
survey. Many women shared that they had always felt something was unfair when buying products, but didn’t
know there was actually a name for it. When they learned more about the Pink Tax, most were upset and said
they’d think twice before buying gender-specific products again. Some even mentioned switching to men’s
products, especially when they found them cheaper and just as effective. A few people also said this issue
made them more aware of how companies play into gender stereotypes for profit.
But we didn’t stop at just observing price tags. To dig deeper and understand how widespread the issue is and
how people truly feel about it we designed a detailed survey and reached out to the public. The questions
covered a range of topics: from basic demographics like age, location, education, and income, to their
shopping habits, awareness of gender-based pricing, and how often they encountered it in their daily lives. We
asked them about the kinds of stores they shop from, how much they spend on personal care and hygiene
products, and what influences their purchase decisions whether it's the price, brand, packaging, or gender
labels.
A particularly eye-opening set of responses came when we asked people if they had ever noticed a price
difference between men’s and women’s products. Many said yes. Others weren’t sure, which suggests that
these pricing gaps are often subtle and go unnoticed. When asked directly if they had heard of the "Pink Tax"
before, only a fraction of respondents were aware of the term. But once it was explained, most agreed that
women’s products were often more expensive and felt that this was unfair and intentional on the part of
companies. In fact, many believed this kind of pricing discrimination exists not just in personal care, but across
clothing, dry cleaning, haircuts, toys, and even healthcare.
To support these findings with data, we ran several statistical tests using SPSS, a software tool used to analyze
large sets of data. We compared the prices of gendered products like razors, deodorants, shampoos, and
clothing items. We explored correlation analyses to see how people’s attitudes and beliefs influenced their
buying habits. For example, we found that women who considered personal care products “essential” were
more likely to pay higher prices, regardless of brand or gender labels. This shows how societal norms and
beauty standards can shape not only what we buy, but how much we’re willing to pay. The results were clear:
in most categories, women’s products cost more, and the difference wasn’t just by chance it was real and
measurable.
In short, the responses and data showed a strong pattern: the Pink Tax is not just a theory it’s something people
are experiencing every day. By combining real voices from the public with strong statistical analysis, we can
now clearly say that gender-based pricing is a systemic issue that deserves more attention, consumer
awareness, and regulatory action.
So why does this all matter? Because it’s not just about a few extra rupees or dollars. The Pink Tax quietly
chips away at women’s spending power and contributes to a wider gap in financial equality especially when
you consider that many women also earn less than men for doing the same work. By studying this issue closely
and sharing both people’s opinions and data-backed results, we hope to spark awareness, change in buying
behavior, and better policies that protect consumers from gender-based price discrimination.
In short, the Pink Tax is a real problem hiding in plain sight. It’s time we recognize it, talk about it, and take
steps big or small to make shopping fair for everyone.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 3
www.rsisinternational.org
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Conceptual Background of the Pink Tax
The practice of charging more for goods and services targeted at women than for nearly identical products
targeted at men is known as the "Pink Tax." It is a subtle but persistent form of gender-based price
discrimination in international markets, even though it is not an actual tax imposed by the government [12]. In
areas like toys, personal care, and apparel, women's products typically cost 7% more than comparable men's
products, according to early studies like From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being a Female Consumer [12].
Traditional social roles and marketing tactics that divide customers into groups according to gender stereotypes
have been connected to gendered pricing [5]. Highlighted that these price disparities, which are frequently
excused by differences in appearance or design, represent the economic cost of femininity in contemporary
consumer markets. Therefore, gender-based pricing contributes to structural inequality in consumer economies
and goes beyond individual purchasing decisions [3], [5], [10].
Gendered Marketing and Pricing Dynamics
One of the main causes of the Pink Tax's continued existence has been found to be gendered marketing tactics.
In order to conform to perceived gender preferences, marketers frequently alter product design, color,
fragrance, and packaging, creating artificial differentiation between male and female variants [1], [9]. found
that pink-coloured packaging and feminine imagery increase perceived value among women consumers,
giving marketers justification for charging premium prices.
Further research shows that rather than functional distinctions, these practices mainly rely on psychological
cues and symbolic differentiation. For example, [9] noted that companies employ gender segmentation to
create emotional bonds, enhancing brand loyalty and attachment in spite of price differences. This strategy is
consistent with the emotional branding theory, which positions goods marketed to women as representations of
self-expression, beauty, or confidence [13].
Furthermore, by suggesting that women need specialized products for fundamental tasks like grooming or
hygiene, gendered marketing frequently perpetuates preexisting stereotypes [5]. This perception enables
businesses to present "feminine" product versions as superior or high-end, as demonstrated in [10]. Together,
these results show how emotional, symbolic, and aesthetic appeals are used by gendered marketing to maintain
price disparities [1], [5], [9],[13].
Consumer Awareness and Perception Studies
Consumer awareness of the Pink Tax varies by demographic. Because they frequently believe that price
differences are a reflection of brand value or product quality, many women are unaware that they pay more for
comparable goods [2]. On the other hand, social media activism and rising digital literacy have raised
awareness recently. Online debates and public support for fair pricing have been sparked by campaigns like
#EndPinkTax [11].
As per [14], consumers are encouraged to engage in substitution behavior by recognizing unwarranted price
differences and choosing men's or gender-neutral alternatives. However, due to cultural conditioning and
limited exposure to gender equality campaigns, awareness levels are still relatively low in developing nations
like India [16].
Reference [16] also noted that demographic factors like location, income, and education have a big impact on
awareness and buying decisions. Higher awareness consumers are more likely to question discriminatory
pricing practices and show more scepticism toward brand messaging. On the other hand, people with less
exposure or awareness still make routine purchases, frequently putting convenience or brand loyalty ahead of
price [2], [16].
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 4
www.rsisinternational.org
As a result, awareness plays a crucial mediating role in how customers view and react to the Pink Tax in the
marketplace [2], [11], [14], [16].
Psychological and Sociocultural Dimensions
The Pink Tax's sociocultural and psychological aspects emphasize how social norms and gender identity
influence consumer behavior. Internalized norms that associate femininity with aesthetic consumption,
personal care, and appearance frequently impact women's purchasing decisions [17]. According to Reference
[17], these kinds of trends increase consumers' receptivity to branding signals that convey sophistication or
elegance.
From a psychological standpoint, willingness to pay is largely determined by perceived value. Especially in the
beauty and personal care sectors, consumers usually equate higher costs with better quality or emotional
fulfilment [4], [8]. Reference [4] showed that women perceive price as a sign of status and dependability and
are more receptive to symbolic messaging and emotional branding.
This behavior is also influenced by sociocultural factors. The idea that purchasing appearance-related products
is both desirable and essential is supported by media representations of women as image-conscious consumers
[7]. Even when customers are aware of unfair pricing, these representations deepen their emotional ties to
brands and foster patterns of dependency [3], [7].
In the end, the reason why many women continue to pay more for gendered products can be explained by the
interaction of psychological incentives and societal pressures [3], [17]. This suggests that, in addition to being
an economic issue, the Pink Tax is a behavioural and cultural phenomenon that is deeply embedded in the
development of consumer identities [3, 4, 7, 17].
Economic and Policy Perspectives
In terms of the economy, the Pink Tax increases the already-existing gender wealth gap and places a long-term
financial burden on women. Over time, the cumulative effect of paying more for routine goods and services
reduces savings and purchasing power [12]. According to Reference [12], in certain markets, the extra money
that women spend each year as a result of the Pink Tax may amount to USD 1,351.
From a policy standpoint, several global initiatives have been started to address gender-based pricing
discrimination. The European Parliament [6] called on member states to review pricing policies and promote
gender-neutral pricing standards. By prohibiting gender-based price disparities for essentially identical goods,
legislative reforms like California Assembly Bill 1287 (2022) also guarantee transparency in marketing
practices [14].
However, there is currently no clear legislation in India that addresses the Pink Tax. The necessity of specific
consumer protection legislation that acknowledges gender as a factor in pricing fairness was underlined by
Reference [18]. According to academics like [15] and [18], labelling standards and comparative price displays
are two ways that public policy should promote price transparency. Gender inequality in market participation
is sustained when discriminatory pricing goes unchecked in the absence of such measures.
Therefore, policy changes in conjunction with consumer advocacy and education are essential to lessening the
moral and financial ramifications of gender-based pricing [6], [14], [15], [18].
Research Gap Identification
Few studies have looked at the Pink Tax in the Indian context, despite the fact that it has been widely studied
globally from the perspectives of marketing, consumer psychology, and policy. To fully understand consumer
responses, there is a dearth of integrated analysis that combines behavioural, sociocultural, and psychological
factors [15], [16], [18].
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 5
www.rsisinternational.org
There is a knowledge gap regarding how cultural values and awareness levels influence women's attitudes
toward price discrimination in developing economies because the majority of previous research has
concentrated on Western markets. In order to close these gaps, this study examines Indian consumers'
awareness, perceptions, and behavioural reactions to the Pink Tax, paying special attention to psychological
and sociocultural factors.[15], [16], [18].
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Approach and Design
This study adopts a quantitative research approach, which allows for the systematic investigation and statistical
measurement of consumer perceptions and behaviors related to the Pink Tax phenomenon in India.
Quantitative research is particularly suited to this study as it facilitates objective assessment and numerical
analysis, enabling researchers to identify trends, patterns, and correlations among consumer responses.
A descriptive research design was employed, aimed at providing a detailed account of consumer awareness,
attitudes, and behaviors concerning gender-based pricing. The design was chosen to capture the current state of
consumer perceptions across multiple product categories, including personal care products, household services,
fashion, and lifestyle products. By employing this approach, the study not only documents consumer opinions
but also enables comparative analysis across demographic segments such as gender, age, education, and
income level, thereby providing a comprehensive understanding of the Pink Tax’s impact on consumer
decision-making.
Population, Sampling, and Sample Size
The target population for this study included consumers in India who actively purchase personal care, hygiene,
household, and lifestyle products. These products were selected as they commonly exhibit gender-based
pricing differences, making them relevant for the study of the Pink Tax phenomenon.
A convenience sampling technique was employed to select participants. This non-probability sampling method
was deemed appropriate due to practical constraints and the exploratory nature of the study, ensuring the
inclusion of respondents who are readily available and regularly engaged in purchasing the products under
investigation.
The final sample consisted of 50 respondents, representing a diverse mix of genders, age groups, educational
backgrounds, and income levels. This demographic diversity ensures that the study captures a wide spectrum
of consumer perspectives, enhancing the reliability of insights derived regarding awareness, perception, and
behavioral responses to gender-based pricing.
Data Analysis Techniques
Data collected were analysed using SPSS software employing multiple statistical methods to ensure
comprehensive understanding:
Crosstabulation and Chi-Square Tests: To explore relationships between demographic factors (gender,
education, income) and product selection criteria, identifying patterns and potential influences on purchasing
behavior.
Spearman’s Rank-Order Correlation: To measure the strength and direction of associations among variables
such as awareness, perceived fairness, perceived intentionality, and brand influence.
One-Way ANOVA: To examine significant differences between male and female respondents regarding their
willingness to continue purchasing women’s products despite higher prices, revealing gender-based
behavioural patterns.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 6
www.rsisinternational.org
These techniques collectively allow for both descriptive and inferential insights, enhancing the study’s
reliability and interpretability.
Reliability, Validity, and Ethical Considerations
Reliability: Ensured by employing pre-tested, structured questionnaires, consistent coding of responses, and
standardized measurement scales, minimizing potential errors in data collection and analysis.
Validity: Maintained through clear operational definitions and careful measurement of relevant variables,
ensuring that the questionnaire accurately captures consumer perceptions, awareness, and behavior related to
gender-based pricing.
Ethical Considerations: Respondents were fully informed about the study’s objectives, and strict measures
were taken to maintain anonymity and confidentiality. Participation was entirely voluntary, and respondents
were free to withdraw at any stage without any consequences. The study adhered to ethical research practices,
ensuring integrity, transparency, and respect for participant rights.
Data Collection Instrument
A structured questionnaire was used to collect primary data on consumer awareness, perceptions, and
behaviors related to the Pink Tax in India. It consisted of six sections with close-ended questions and 5-point
Likert scales for easy analysis.
Section 1: Personal Information – Captured demographics such as age, gender, education, income,
employment, shopping habits, and brand influence.
Section 2: Awareness & Perception – Measured awareness of gender-based pricing, perceived fairness, and
beliefs about companies’ intentional pricing.
Section 3: Purchasing Behavior & Preferences – Explored factors influencing product choice, past purchases
of men’s alternatives, and willingness to switch to gender-neutral products.
Section 4: Industry-Specific Pricing – Assessed observed price differences across categories like personal care,
clothing, and services, and consumer responses to these differences.
Section 5: Psychological & Social Impact – Examined the perceived impact of the Pink Tax on financial
independence, support for regulations, and social media influence.
Section 6: Additional Thoughts – Collected open-ended feedback on personal experiences and suggestions to
reduce gender-based pricing.
ANALYSIS
ONE WAY -ANOVA
Descriptives
TABLE 1
N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval
for Mean
Lower Bound Upper
Bound
Brand loyalty Female 36 .894 .149 1.70 2.30
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 7
www.rsisinternational.org
Male 14 .730 .195 1.65 2.49
Total 50 .845 .119 1.78 2.26
Product quality Female 36 .760 .127 1.52 2.03
Male 14 .770 .206 1.70 2.59
Total 50 .773 .109 1.66 2.10
Specific formulation for
women’s needs
Female 36 .770 .128 1.49 2.01
Male 14 .514 .137 2.27 2.87
Total 50 .795 .112 1.75 2.21
Social norms/marketing
influence
Female 36 .934 .156 2.07 2.71
Male 14 .745 .199 1.93 2.79
Total 50 .878 .124 2.13 2.63
Unawareness of alternative
options
Female 36 1.117 .186 2.32 3.07
Male 14 .893 .239 1.70 2.73
Total 50 1.072 .152 2.26 2.86
ANOVA TABLE 2
Sum of
Squares
df Mean
Square
F Sig.
Brand loyalty Between
Groups
.051 1 .051 .071 .791
Within
Groups
34.929 48 .728
Total 34.980 49
Product quality Between
Groups
1.343 1 1.343 2.308 .135
Within
Groups
27.937 48 .582
Total 29.280 49
Specific formulation for
women’s needs
Between
Groups
6.801 1 6.801 13.502 .001
Within
Groups
24.179 48 .504
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 8
www.rsisinternational.org
Total 30.980 49
Social norms/marketing
influence
Between
Groups
.010 1 .010 .013 .910
Within
Groups
37.770 48 .787
Total 37.780 49
Unawareness of alternative
options
Between
Groups
2.324 1 2.324 2.066 .157
Within
Groups
53.996 48 1.125
Total 56.320 49
Interpretation
A statistically significant difference was found in “specific formulation for women’s needs” (p= .001). This
indicates that female respondents perceive gender-specific formulations as more important compared to males.
The mean scores show that women are more inclined to believe that products designed “for women” justify
higher prices due to added care, softness, or specialized ingredients.
This aligns with psychological and sociocultural influences—marketing narratives, gender-targeted packaging,
and social conditioning—that make women more accepting of higher-priced “female-oriented” products.
In contrast, factors like social norms and marketing influence (p = .910) did not show a significant difference,
meaning both genders equally recognize marketing’s role but react differently to it.
Product performance VS Age group TABLE 3
Crosstab
Count
Crosstab
Count
Chi-Square Tests TABLE 4
Value df Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-
Square
20.836a 12 .053
Likelihood Ratio 14.835 12 .251
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.712 1 .399
N of Valid Cases 50
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 9
www.rsisinternational.org
CROSS TABS Age group Total
18-
24
25-34 35-
44
45-54
Product
perfor
mance
Not Important 4 1 0 0 5
Slightly
Important
2 1 1 0 4
Moderately
Important
2 2 0 0 4
Important 7 6 0 0 13
Very Important 21 2 0 1 24
Total 36 12 1 1 50
FIGURE 1
Interpretation:
The Chi-Square test (χ² = 20.836, p = 0.053) shows no significant association between age group and the
importance of product performance, though it is close to significance. Most respondents aged 18–24 rated
performance as very important, indicating that younger consumers value quality more when making purchases.
This suggests that product performance influences younger buyers’ willingness to pay higher prices, even
under the Pink Tax effect.
Symmetric Measures
TABLE 5
Valu
e
Asymp.
Std.
Errora
Approx
. Tb
Ap
pro
x.
Sig
.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 10
www.rsisinternational.org
Interval by
Interval
Pearson's R -.121 .148 -.841 .40
4c
Ordinal by
Ordinal
Spearman
Correlation
-.257 .135 -1.839 .07
2c
N of Valid Cases 50
Non parametric Correlations: Spearman's
Brand
loyalty
Product
quality
Women
Product
Design
Impact
of
Pink
Tax
Gender
Pricing
Impact
of Pink
Tax
Correlati-
on
.068 -.271 -.101 1.000 .307
Sig. .640 .057 .487 . .030
N 50 50 50 50 50
Gender
Pricing
Correlati-
on
.199 .229 -.013 .307 1.000
Sig. .167 .109 .930 .030 .
N 50 50 50 50 50
TABLE 6
Interpretation:
The correlation results indicate that the impact of the Pink Tax is positively correlated with the perceived
fairness of gender pricing (r = 0.307, p = 0.030), suggesting that respondents who perceive stronger effects of
the Pink Tax also tend to view gender-based pricing as unfair.
Other variables like brand loyalty (r = 0.068, p = 0.640), product quality (r = –0.271, p = 0.057), and women’s
product design (r = –0.101, p = 0.487) show weak and statistically insignificant correlations, implying these
factors have limited influence on perceptions of the Pink Tax.
Overall, the findings suggest that while the Pink Tax significantly affects fairness perception, it does not
strongly alter consumer loyalty or product quality evaluation.
CONCLUSION
This study on the Pink Tax shows that many people know women’s products often cost more than similar
men’s products, but most still end up buying them. Many women believe that brands charge extra just because
products are labelled “for women.”
The results show that younger people care more about product performance and quality, even if it costs more.
However, brand loyalty and social influence also play a big role — people often buy the same products
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025
Page 11
www.rsisinternational.org
because of habit, trust, or image, not just price.
The analysis found that some pricing differences are clearly noticed and seen as unfair, especially in personal
care and fashion items. Overall, the study highlights that while awareness about the Pink Tax is increasing, it
hasn’t fully changed buying behavior yet. There is a strong need for fairer pricing, consumer awareness, and
policies that stop gender-based price differences in India.
REFERENCES
1. Agarwal, P., & Banerjee, R., (2020). Gendered product marketing and consumer perception: A
behavioral pricing analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 47(3), 451–468.
2. Bessenoff, G. R., & Del Priore, R. E., (2014). The Pink Price Paradox: Awareness and reactions to
gendered product pricing. Psychology & Marketing, 31(7), 527–535.
3. Blair, H., (2022). Gender identity, consumption, and cultural dependency: Understanding the
persistence of the Pink Tax. Feminist Economics, 28(1), 92–113.
4. Crawford, J., & Unger, R., (2021). Gender and consumer behavior: Emotional branding and the
psychology of pricing. Journal of Marketing Perspectives, 10(2), 211–230.
5. Duesterhaus, M. B., Grauerholz, L., Weichsel, R., & Guittar, N., (2011). The costs of gender:
Consumers’ perceptions of gendered products and pricing. Gender Issues, 28(4), 175–191.
6. European Parliament, (2018). Gender-based pricing and the Pink Tax in the EU: Study for the FEMM
Committee. Brussels.
7. Gill, R., (2016). Postfeminist media culture: Elements of a sensibility. European Journal of Cultural
Studies, 10(2), 147–166.
8. Grewal, D., & Levy, M., (2020). Marketing (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
9. McNeill, L., & Douglas, K., (2011). Retail gendered marketing and consumer ethics. Journal of
Business Ethics, 103(1), 73–88.
10. Miller, S., (2018). The pink price problem: Gender, consumption, and market power. Harvard Business
Review, 96(6), 52–60.
11. Murphy, C., (2019). #EndPinkTax: Social media activism and consumer empowerment. Journal of
Digital Consumerism, 4(3), 121–134.
12. New York City Department of Consumer Affairs, (2015). From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being a
Female Consumer. New York, NY.
13. Pecheux, C., & Derbaix, C., (2019). Emotional branding and gender segmentation. Journal of
Consumer Behaviour, 18(5), 391–404.
14. Pomeranz, J., & Hairston, S., (2019). Gender-based pricing and consumer protection law: Toward
equity and transparency. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 31(2), 165–192.
15. Rastogi, S., & Jha, A., (2020). Gender equity in Indian markets: The case for pricing fairness. Indian
Journal of Economics and Policy, 15(4), 45–58.
16. Sharma, N., & Gupta, S., (2021). Consumer perception and awareness of the Pink Tax in India. Indian
Journal of Marketing, 51(9), 34–49.
17. Sinha, R., (2022). The missing law: Addressing gendered pricing discrimination in India. Economic
and Political Weekly, 57(12), 23–27.
18. Solomon, M. R., (2018). Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, and Being (12th ed.). London: Pearson
Education.