Abstract
Product similarity plays an important role in affecting consumer preferences. Although the existing literature discusses consumer preferences or product similarity, there are only a few studies investigating their relationship. The current study explored the influences of product similarity on consumer preferences including the underlying cognitive processes by analyzing eye movement data as well as survey data and retrospective interviews. Forty-four participants were invited to take part in the experiment. The results showed that: (1) increases in preference decision time and fixation counts are caused by a higher product similarity; (2) more fixation time is spent on the ultimately chosen options than on the rejected ones and product similarity has no impact on this phenomenon; (3) preference randomness increases with the increase of product similarity; and (4) there is a negative correlation between the mean discrepancy degree of preference rating and the mean similarity rating. Understanding the influences of product similarity on consumer preferences may contribute to better product design and sales. Further studies should quantify the effects of product features on consumer preferences with more diverse stimulus materials and more advanced technologies and methods.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Al-Samarraie H, Sarsam SM, Guesgen H (2016) Predicting user preferences of environment design: a perceptual mechanism of user interface customisation. Behav Inf Technol 35:644–653. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1186735
Chernev A (2003) When more is less and less is more: the role of ideal point availability and assortment in consumer choice. J Consum Res 30:170–183. https://doi.org/10.1086/376808
Chernev A, Böckenholt U, Goodman J (2015) Choice overload: a conceptual review and meta-analysis. J Consum Psychol 25:333–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2014.08.002
Creusen MEH, Schoormans JPL (1997) The nature of differences between similarity and preference judgements A replication with extension. Int J Res Mark 14:81–87
Creusen MEH, Schoormans JPL (2005) The different roles of product appearance in consumer choice. J Prod Innov Manag 22:63–81
Du P (2016) Investigating effects of product visual designs on consumer judgments with the aid of eye-tracking. Dissertation, Iowa State University
Du P, MacDonald EF (2014) Eye-tracking data predicts importance of product features and saliency of size change. J Mech Des 136:081005. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4027387
Du P, MacDonald EF (2015) Products’ shared visual features do not cancel in consumer decisions. J Mech Des 137:071409. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4030162
Duchowski AT (2007) Eye tracking methodology: theory and practice. Springer, London
Festinger L (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford
Fiedler S, Glöckner A (2012) The dynamics of decision making in risky choice: an eye-tracking analysis. Front Psychol 3:1–18
Findlay JM, Gilchrist IM (2003) Active vision: the psychology of looking and seeing. J Neuro-Ophthalmol 26:69–70
Gao W, Liu Y, Liu Z, Li J (2018) How does presence influence purchase intention in online shopping markets? An explanation based on self-determination theory. Behav Inf Technol 37:786–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1484514
Glaholt MG, Reingold EM (2011) Eye movement monitoring as a process tracing methodology in decision making research. J Neurosci Psychol Econ 4:125–146. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020692
Gordon PC, Moser S (2007) Insight into analogies: evidence from eye movements. Vis Cogn 15:20–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280600871891
Guazzini A, Yoneki E, Gronchi G (2015) Cognitive dissonance and social influence effects on preference judgments: an eye tracking based system for their automatic assessment. Int J Hum Comput Stud 73:12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.08.003
Houston DA, Sherman SJ (1995) Cancellation and focus: the role of shared and unique features in the choice process. J Exp Soc Psychol 31:357–378
Huang PS (2017) An exploratory study on remote associates problem solving: evidence of eye movement indicators. Think Skills Creat 24:63–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.02.004
Iyengar SS (2010) The art of choosing. Little Brown, London
Larkey LB, Markman AB (2005) Processes of similarity judgment. Cogn Sci 29:1061–1076. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_30
Liang Y (2016) Reading to make a decision or to reduce cognitive dissonance? The effect of selecting and reading online reviews from a post-decision context. Comput Hum Behav 64:463–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.016
Liang C, Lin CT, Yao SN et al (2017) Visual attention and association: an electroencephalography study in expert designers. Des Stud 48:76–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.11.002
Medin DL, Goldstone RL, Markman AB (1995) Comparison and choice: relations between similarity processes and decision processes. Psychon Bull Rev 2:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214410
Mogilner C, Rudnick T, Iyengar SS (2008) The Mere categorization effect: how the presence of categories increases choosers’ perceptions of assortment variety and outcome satisfaction. J Consum Res 35:202–215. https://doi.org/10.1086/588698
Nuthmann A, Smith TJ, Engbert R, Henderson JM (2010) CRISP: a computational model of fixation durations in scene viewing. Psychol Rev 117:382–405. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018924
Orquin JL, Loose SM (2013) Attention and choice: a review on eye movements in decision making. Acta Psychol (Amst) 144:190–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.06.003
Plous S (2004) The psychology of judgment and decision making. Posts & Telecom Press, Beijing
Popelka S, Stachoň Z, Šašinka Č, Doležalová J (2016) EyeTribe tracker data accuracy evaluation and its interconnection with hypothesis software for cartographic purposes. Comput Intell Neurosci 2016:1–14
Reid TN, MacDonald EF, Du P (2013) Impact of product design representation on customer judgment. J Mech Des 135:091008. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4024724
Rosch JL, Vogel-Walcutt JJ (2013) A review of eye-tracking applications as tools for training. Cogn Technol Work 15:313–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-012-0234-7
Russo JE, Leclerc F (1994) An eye-fixation analysis of choice processes for consumer nondurables. J Consum Res 21:274–290. https://doi.org/10.1086/209397
Russo JE, Rosen LD (1975) An eye fixation analysis of multialternative choice. Mem Cogn 3:267–276. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212910
Schmitt R, Köhler M, Durá JV, Diaz-Pineda J (2014) Objectifying user attention and emotion evoked by relevant perceived product components. J Sens Sens Syst 3:315–324. https://doi.org/10.5194/jsss-3-315-2014
Schotter ER, Berry RW, McKenzie CRM, Rayner K (2010) Gaze bias: selective encoding and liking effects. Vis Cogn 18:1113–1132. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506281003668900
Schotter ER, Gerety C, Rayner K (2012) Heuristics and criterion setting during selective encoding in visual decision making: evidence from eye movements. Vis Cogn 20:1110–1129. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2012.735719
Schreiner TF, Fandrich T, Heitmann M, Talke K (2017) A novel approach for predicting and understanding consumers’ sense of design similarity. J Prod Innov Manag 34:790–820. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12367
Shieh MD, Yang CC (2008) Classification model for product form design using fuzzy support vector machines. Comput Ind Eng 55:150–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2007.12.007
Shimojo S, Simion C, Shimojo E, Scheier C (2003) Gaze bias both reflects and influences preference. Nat Neurosci 6:1317–1322. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1150
Simion C, Shimojo S (2006) Early interactions between orienting, visual sampling and decision making in facial preference. Vis Res 46:3331–3335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2006.04.019
Simon HA (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Q J Econ 69:99–118
Su Y, Rao LL, Li X et al (2012) From quality to quantity: the role of common features in consumer preference. J Econ Psychol 33:1043–1058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2012.07.002
Sun MX, Hsu CH, Chuang MC (2013) The difference of user perception between similarity and dissimilarity judgments. In: Rau PLP (ed) Cross-cultural design cultural differences in everyday life, CCD 2013. Springer, Berlin, pp 60–69
Tsai MJ, Hou HT, Lai ML et al (2012) Visual attention for solving multiple-choice science problem: an eye-tracking analysis. Comput Educ 58:375–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.012
Tversky A (1977) Features of similarity. Psychol Rev 84:327–352. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.4.327
van Kleef E, van Trijp HCM, Luning P (2005) Consumer research in the early stages of new product development: a critical review of methods and techniques. Food Qual Prefer 16:181–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2004.05.012
Vanderhaegen F (2016) A rule-based support system for dissonance discovery and control applied to car driving. Expert Syst Appl 65:361–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.08.071
Vanderhaegen F, Carsten O (2017) Can dissonance engineering improve risk analysis of human-machine systems? Cogn Technol Work 19:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-017-0405-7
Vu TMH, Tu VP, Duerrschmid K (2015) Design factors influence consumers’ gazing behaviour and decision time in an eye-tracking test: a study on food images. Food Qual Prefer 47:130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.05.008
Wei Z, Li X (2015) Decision process tracing: evidence from eye-movement data. Adv Psychol Sci 23:2029–2041. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2015.02029
Weng Y (2015) Research of product form preference prediction based on user’s similarity. Dissertation, South China University of Technology
Funding
This work was supported by The National Natural Science Research Foundation of China (no. 51435011) and Sichuan Science and Technology Program (no. 18ZDYF3189).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ye, C., Xiong, Y., Li, Y. et al. The influences of product similarity on consumer preferences: a study based on eye-tracking analysis. Cogn Tech Work 22, 603–613 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00584-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00584-1