Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles (한국의류학회지)

The Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles (한국의류학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Different Types of Product Presentation in Online Fashion Retailing -The Moderating Role of Need for Touch on Overall Certainty of Fit-

  • Haruka Zenke (Human-Tech Convergence Program, Dept. of Clothing & Textiles, Hanyang University) ;
  • Eunsoo Baek (Human-Tech Convergence Program, Dept. of Clothing & Textiles, Hanyang University)
  • Received : 2024.01.26
  • Accepted : 2024.09.15
  • Published : 2024.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Product images in online fashion retail play a crucial role in shaping consumers' decision-making processes. This study investigates the effects of product display types (i.e., flat vs. human display) on consumers' purchase intentions and willingness to pay (WTP) in online fashion retailing. Using a basic shirt as the target product, we examine how overall certainty of fit (OCF) is perceived differently based on the product display type, and for which individuals the effect is amplified, considering individual differences in the need for touch (NFT). A one-factor (flat vs. human display type) between-subject experiment was conducted via an online survey platform (N = 212). The results indicated that the flat display mode generates a higher purchase intention than the human display, along with a marginally higher WTP. Additionally, the positive effect of a flat display on OCF was significant for individuals with low NFT. This study extends our understanding of online retail product displays and their influence on consumer behavior, yielding valuable insights for marketers to improve product presentation in online retail environments.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded by the Korean government (MSIT) (No. RS-2022-00166652).

References

  1. Almousa, M., & Almousa, M. (2020). The relationship between experience and demographic variables on concern with apparel fit in online context. International Business Research, 13(1), 11-17. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v13n1p11
  2. Argo, J. J., Dahl, D. W., & Morales, A. C. (2006). Consumer contamination: How consumers react to products touched by others. Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 81-94. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.2.081
  3. Baek, E., Huang, Z., & Lee, S. H. M. (2021). More than what meets the eye: Understanding the effects of poly-contextual cues in online fashion retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 60, 102504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102504
  4. Bagatini, F. Z., Rech, E., Pacheco, N. A., & Nicolao, L. (2023). Can you imagine yourself wearing this product? Embodied mental simulation and attractiveness in e-commerce product pictures. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 17(3), 470-490. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIM-11-2021-0280
  5. Beck, B. (2003). Key strategic issues in online apparel retailing. Tech Exchange. http://www.techexchange.com/thelibrary/online_fit.html
  6. Berg, H. (2015). Headless: The role of gender and self-referencing in consumer response to cropped pictures of decorative models. Psychology & Marketing, 32(10), 1002-1016. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20838
  7. Boardman, R., & McCormick, H. (2019). The impact of product presentation on decision-making and purchasing. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 22(3), 365-380. https://doi.org/10.1108/qmr-09-2017-0124
  8. Campbell, W. K., Goodie, A. S., & Foster, J. D. (2004). Narcissism, confidence, and risk attitude. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17(4), 297-311. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.475
  9. Flavian, C., Gurrea, R., & Orus, C. (2017). The influence of online product presentation videos on persuasion and purchase channel preference: The role of imagery fluency and need for touch. Telematics and Informatics, 34(8), 1544-1556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.07.002
  10. Hattula, J. D., Herzog, W., & Dhar, R. (2023). The impact of touchscreen devices on consumers' choice confidence and purchase likelihood. Marketing Letters, 34(1), 35-53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-022-09623-w
  11. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
  12. Hinz, O., Hann, I. H., & Spann, M. (2011). Price discrimination in e-commerce? An examination of dynamic pricing in name-your-own price markets. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 81-98. https://doi.org/10.2307/23043490
  13. Hong, Y., & Pavlou, P. A. (2014). Product fit uncertainty in online markets: Nature, effects, and antecedents. Information Systems Research, 25(2), 328-344. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2014.0520
  14. Hsu, H.-J., & Burns, L. D. (2002). Clothing evaluative criteria: A cross-national comparison of Taiwanese and United States consumers. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 20(4), 246-252. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X0202000408
  15. Huang, M. H. (2000). Information load: Its relationship to online exploratory and shopping behavior. International Journal of Information Management, 20(5), 337-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-4012(00)00027-X
  16. Kakaria, S., Saffari, F., Ramsoy, T. Z., & Bigne, E. (2023). Cognitive load during planned and unplanned virtual shopping: Evidence from a neurophysiological perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 72, 102667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102667
  17. Kim, H., & Damhorst, M. L. (2010). The relationship of body-related self-discrepancy to body dissatisfaction, apparel involvement, concerns with fit and size of garments, and purchase intentions in online apparel shopping. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 28(4), 239-254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X10379266
  18. Kim, J. H., Kim, M., & Lennon, S. J. (2009). Effects of web site atmospherics on consumer responses: Music and product presentation. Direct Marketing: An International Journal, 3(1), 4-19. https://doi.org/10.1108/17505930910945705
  19. Kim, J., & Forsythe, S. (2008). Adoption of virtual try-on technology for online apparel shopping. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 22(2), 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20113
  20. Kim, M., & Lennon, S. (2008). The effects of visual and verbal information on attitudes and purchase intentions in internet shopping. Psychology & Marketing, 25(2), 146-178. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20204
  21. Lee, H. H., Kim, J., & Fiore, A. M. (2010). Affective and cognitive online shopping experience: Effects of image interactivity technology and experimenting with appearance. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 28(2), 140-154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X09341586
  22. Lee, H. K., & Choi, D. (2021). Touch effect of mental simulation in online fashion shopping-the role of instrumental and autotelic needs for touch. Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles, 45(2), 376-389. https://doi.org/10.5850/JKSCT.2021.45.2.376
  23. Lindstrom, A., Berg, H., Nordfalt, J., Roggeveen, A. L., & Grewal, D. (2016). Does the presence of a mannequin head change shopping behavior? Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 517-524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.04.011
  24. Luangrath, A. W., Peck, J., Hedgcock, W., & Xu, Y. (2022). Observing product touch: The vicarious haptic effect in digital marketing and virtual reality. Journal of Marketing Research, 59(2), 306-326. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437211059540
  25. Malhotra, N. K. (1984). Reflections on the information overload paradigm in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(4), 436-440. https://doi.org/10.1086/208982
  26. Olsen, S. O. (1999). Strength and conflicting valence in the measurement of food attitudes and preferences. Food Quality and Preference, 10(6), 483-494. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(99)00049-X
  27. Park, M. (2006). The Compensatory effects of pictorial and verbal information for haptic information on consumer responses in non-store shopping environments. The Ohio State University.
  28. Peck, J., & Childers, T. L. (2003). Individual differences in haptic information processing: The "need for touch" scale. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 430-442. https://doi.org/10.1086/378619
  29. Peck, J., Barger, V. A., & Webb, A. (2013). In search of a surrogate for touch: The effect of haptic imagery on perceived ownership. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(2), 189-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.001
  30. Pino, G., Amatulli, C., Nataraajan, R., De Angelis, M., Peluso, A. M., & Guido, G. (2020). Product touch in the real and digital world: How do consumers react? Journal of Business Research, 112, 492-501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.002
  31. Plotkina, D., & Saurel, H. (2021). Show me the real world: reactions of American female consumers to more realistic and diverse human models in e-commerce. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 29(2), 250-269. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2020.1824121
  32. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
  33. Qu, Y., & Baek, E. (2024). Assembled or unassembled? Different types of outfit coordination presentations in online fashion retailing. Fashion and Textiles, 11(8), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-024-00371-1
  34. Rosa, J. A., Garbarino, E. C., & Malter, A. J. (2006). Keeping the body in mind: The influence of body esteem and body boundary aberration on consumer beliefs and purchase intentions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(1), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1601_10
  35. Verhagen, T., Vonkeman, C., Feldberg, F., & Verhagen, P. (2014). Present it like it is here: Creating local presence to improve online product experiences. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 270-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.036
  36. Wang, Y., Ramachandran, V., & Liu Sheng, O. R. (2021). Do fit opinions matter? The impact of fit context on online product returns. Information Systems Research, 32(1), 268-289. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2020.0965
  37. Wertenbroch, K., & Skiera, B. (2002). Measuring consumers' willingness to pay at the point of purchase. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(2), 228-241. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.39.2.228.19086
  38. Wu, R., & Li, Y. (2021). The effect of human model image backgrounds on consumer responses: Empirical evidence from a Chinese apparel e-retailer. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 33(8), 1844-1860. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-05-2020-0343
  39. Xi, N., Chen, J., Gama, F., Riar, M., & Hamari, J. (2023). The challenges of entering the metaverse: An experiment on the effect of extended reality on workload. Information Systems Frontiers, 25, 659-680. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10244-x
  40. Yoo, J., & Kim, M. (2012). Online product presentation: The effect of product coordination and a model's face. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 6(1), 59-72. https://doi.org/10.1108/17505931211241378
  41. Yoo, J., & Lennon, S. (2014). The effects of apparel product presentation on consumer responses in US online retailing. Journal of Society for e-Business Studies, 19(2), 31-51. https://doi.org/10.7838/jsebs.2014.19.2.031