Augmented reality versus conventional interface: Is there any difference in effectiveness?

• Type: Article in International Scientific Journal
• Date: 2018

Authors

Pedro Quelhas Brito (Author) FEP; Stoyanova, J (Author) Other; coelho, a (Author) FEUP

Journal

Title: Multimedia Tools and Applications

Vol. 64 No. 3

Pages: 1-30

ISSN: 1380-7501

Publisher: Springer Nature

Indexing

ISI Web of Knowledge - 16 Citations

Scopus - 19 Citations

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-00M-NWY

DOI: 10.1007/s11042-017-4658-1

Abstract (EN): The moment immediately before the ¿add to cart¿ decision is very critical in online shopping. Drawing on theories of transfer, spreading activation and human-computer interaction, the superiority of markerless Augmented Reality (AR) and Marker-based augmented reality (M) over Conventional Interactive (CI) is hypothesized. Although those multimedia tools are not part of the product/brand motivating the consumer interest they interfere in the interactive performance of the ecommerce. 150 consumers in a lab experiment showed higher emotional response, interactive response and brand evaluation in M and AR than CI. Contrary to what was expected the usability results were the inverse. That is, usability of CI outperforms M and AR. Considering only AR and M interfaces their effect on psychological variables was not statistically significant. A sophisticated or a simple interface had no impact on intention to buy the target brand, but the brand recommendation improved from M to AR. The differing effect of those three interface systems was mediated by brand familiarity, perceived risk, opinion leadership and positive emotional traits. © 2017 Springer Science+Business Media New York

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific