Main Article Content

Chih-Long Lin
Si-Jing Chen


Willingness of touch, backgrounds removed image, scenario photo, academic major, preferences


Purpose of the study: This study was aimed to investigate the effect of product presentation mode and education background of the subject on the willingness of touch, preferences and visual imagery.

Methodology: A total of 60 students were recruited to participate. The independent variables included product presentation mode (physical products, backgrounds removed image, scenario photo) and academic major of the subject (design major or management major). Three different kind dependent variables were measured in the study. On physical product condition, one sample was placed in front of subjects at a time. Both backgrounds removed image and scenario photo conditions, the subjects view experimental photos through a 22-inch LCD screen. They watched the sample item for 10 seconds and then were asked to assess the subjective questionnaire.

Main Findings: The study results showed that when watching a physical product, the motivation of touch was greatest. The scenario photo generated more positive feelings and resulted in higher preference rating. The willingness of touch, preference and sensory ratings of management major students were higher than design major students.

Applications of this study: The findings of this study can serve as a reference for enterprises to properly present products on web pages in order to increase consumers’ motivation to touch and preference.

Novelty/Originality of this study: This study reinforces construction of a model of motivation to touch, and find that product presentation mode significant affect motivation to touch, preference and novelty feeling.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...
Abstract 279 | PDF Downloads 152


Breckler, S. J., & Wiggins, E. C. (1991). Cognitive responses in persuasion: Affective and evaluative determinants. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27(2), 180-200.

Carlos, F., Raquel, G., & Carlos, O. (2016). Choice confidence in the webrooming purchase process: The impact of online positive reviews and the motivation to touch. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 15, 459-476.

Chen, S. J., Chien, C.-W., & Lin, C. L. (2014). The influence of age and object form on the motivation of haptic. Paper presented at the the 4th International Conference on Healthcare System Ergonomics and Patient Safety (HEPS2014), Taipei, Taiwan.

Chen, S. J., Lin, C. L., & Chien, C. W. (2013).The Influence of the Nature of Need for Touch, Handcraft Material and Material Color on the Motivation for Touch. Paper presented at the 15th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI 2013), Las Vegas, USA.

Chen, Y. C. (2012). A Study of Vision-induced Tactile Enticement. National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City.

Dholakia, U. M., Kahn, B. E., Reeves, R., Rindfleisch, A., Stewart, D., & Taylor, E. (2010). Consumer Behavior in a Multichannel, Multimedia Retailing Environment. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 24, 86-95.

Djamasbi, S., Siegel, M., and Tullis, T. (2010). Generation Y, web design, and eye tracking. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68, 307-323.

Häubl, G., & Trifts, V. (2000). Consumer Decision Making in Online Shopping Environments: The Effects of Interactive Decision Aids. Marketing Science, 19, 4-21.

Hernandez, J. M. d. C., Wright, S. A., & Ferminiano Rodrigues, F. (2015). Attributes Versus Benefits: The Role of Construal Levels and Appeal Type on the Persuasiveness of Marketing Messages. Journal of Advertising, 44, 243-253.

Holbrook, M. B. (1983). On the importance of using real products in research on marketing strategy. Journal of retailing, 59(1), 4-23.

Lee, C.-T. (2016). Brand, appeal type and product detail page design-The effect of mental imagery and psychological ownership. Soochow University, Taipei City.

Leiss, W., Kline, S., and Jhally, S. (1997). Social Communication in Advertising: persons, products & images of well-being. Routledge: New York, USA.

Liang, B., Runyan, R. C., and Fu, W. (2011). The effect of culture on the context of ad pictures and ad persuasion: The role of context‐dependent and context‐independent thinking. International Marketing Review, 28, 412-434.

Lin, C.L. (2018). The Effect of Object Form and Tactile Enticement Material on the Motivation of Haptic. International Journal of Liberal Arts and Social Science, 6(5), 8-16.

Lin, C. L., & Chen, S. J. (2011). The influence of product characteristic and need for touch on the motivation of haptic. Paper presented at the 2011 Conference of TIK (Taiwan Institute Kansei)(TIK 2011), Kaohsiung, Taiwan.

Lin, C. L., & Chen, S. J. (2012a). The influence of handcraft materials and colors on the motivation of touch. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Meeting & Conference of Ergonomics Society of Taiwan, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.

Lin, C. L., & Chen, S. J. (2012b). The influence of material colors and the nature of need for touch on the motivation of touch. Paper presented at the Asian Basic Design Forum, New Taipei City, Taiwan.

Lin, C. L., & Chen, S. J. (2016).The Influence of the smart phone type and tactile enticement material on the motivation of touch. Paper presented at the The Asian Conference on the Arts and Humanities (ACAH2016), Kobe, Japan.

Millar, M., & Tesser, A. (1986). Thought-Induced Attitude Change: The Effects of Schema Structure and Commitment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(259-269).

Peck, J., & Childers, T. L. (2003a). Individual Differences in Haptic Information Processing: The “Need for Touch” Scale. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 430-442. doi: doi:10.1086/378619

Peck, J., & Childers, T. L. (2003b). To Have and to Hold: The Influence of Haptic Information on Product Judgments. The Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 35-48.

Peck, J., & Wiggins, J. (2006). It Just Feels Good: Customers' Affective Response to Touch and Its Influence on Persuasion. Journal of Marketing, 70, 56-69.

Schlosser, A.E.(2003). Experiencing Products in the Virtual World: The Role of Goal and Imagery in Influencing Attitudes versus Purchase Intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 184-198.