触觉意象对消费者服装在线购买意愿的影响

韩铂; 李沛; 刘鑫

doi:10.12299/jsues.23-0142

触觉意象对消费者服装在线购买意愿的影响

doi: 10.12299/jsues.23-0142

上海工程技术大学纺织服装学院, 上海 201620

详细信息

作者简介:
韩铂：韩　铂（2001−），女，硕士生，研究方向为服装市场营销、消费行为。E-mail：hb1317149486@163.com

通讯作者:
李　沛（1983−），女，副教授，博士，研究方向为服装感官营销。E-mail：pacywu@126.com

中图分类号: F426
计量
- 文章访问数: 91
- HTML全文浏览量: 49
- PDF下载量: 12
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-06-14
- 刊出日期: 2024-06-30

Influence of haptic imagery on purchase intention in apparel online purchase

School of Textiles and Fashion, Shanghai University of Engineering Science, Shanghai 201620, China

摘要

摘要: 触觉意象在线上购物中为消费者提供真实触感和虚拟触感的连接体验。基于S-O-R模型与文献研究，实证分析触觉意象对服装在线购买意愿的影响。研究结果表明：触觉意象显著正向影响产品质量感知、购买意愿和愉悦度；愉悦度、时间风险显著正向影响购买意愿；愉悦度在触觉意象与购买意愿间具有显著中介效应；接触需求在触觉意象与产品质量感知、触觉意象与愉悦度间有显著的正向调节作用。研究成果可为服装企业完善在线触觉营销策略，丰富线上购物体验提供依据。
- 触觉意象 /
- 接触需求 /
- 产品质量感知 /
- 愉悦度 /
- 购买意愿
Abstract: Haptic imagery provides consumers with sensory connection experiences between physical touch and online virtual touch in online shopping. Based on the S-O-R model and in conjunction with the literature, an empirical analysis was conducted to explore the influence of haptic imagery on apparel online purchase intention. The results show that in apparel online shopping, haptic imagery has a significant positive effect on perceived product quality, purchase intention and pleasure; pleasure and time risk significantly and positively affect purchase intention; pleasure has a mediating effect between haptic imagery and purchase intention; need for touch has a significant positive moderating role in the relationship between haptic imagery and perceived product quality, and between haptic imagery and pleasure. The results of the study can provide a basis for apparel companies to improve their online haptic marketing strategies.
- haptic imagery /
- need for touch /
- perceived product quality /
- pleasure /
- purchase intention

HTML全文

图 1 研究模型

Figure 1. Research model

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 样本基本状况

Table 1. Basic status of samples

个体特征	类别	样本数	比例/%
性别	男	135	23.9
性别	女	429	76.1
年龄	18岁以下	2	0.4
	18~22岁	86	15.2
	23~27岁	137	24.3
	28~32岁	208	36.9
	33~37岁	94	16.7
	38~42岁	25	4.4
	43岁及以上	12	2.2
学历	小学及以下	2	0.4
	初中	4	0.7
	高中/中专/技校	28	5.0
	大学专科	95	16.8
	大学本科	364	64.5
	硕士研究生及以上	71	12.6
职业	在校学生	117	20.7
	私营企业	209	37.1
	国有企业	137	24.3
	个体经营	66	11.7
	政府资助机构	23	4.1
	退休	1	0.2
	其他	11	2.0
每月服装可支配收入	300元及以下	33	5.9
	301~500元	100	17.8
	501~1000元	216	38.3
	1001~2000元	131	23.3
	2000元以上	83	14.7

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 KMO和巴特利特检验

Table 2. KMO and Bartlett's test

检验方法		整体	HI	NFT	PPQ	PLS	TR	PI
KMO值		0.957	0.858	0.865	0.908	0.879	0.886	0.879
巴特利特球形检验	X²	17571.032	3116.566	1946.731	1887.425	2011.295	1948.889	2109.589
	Df	946	55	45	15	10	15	15
	Sig值	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 回归分析显著性检验结果

Table 3. Results of significance test for regression analysis

假设	自变量	因变量	未标准化系数B	标准化系数β	R²	F值	显著性
H1	触觉意象	购买意愿	0.706	0.706	0.498	558.680	***
H2	触觉意象	产品质量感知	0.781	0.781	0.609	877.485	***
H3	触觉意象	愉悦度	0.733	0.733	0.537	652.461	***
H4	愉悦度	购买意愿	0.792	0.792	0.626	943.583	***
H5	产品质量感知	时间风险	0.294	0.294	0.085	52.191	***
H6	时间风险	购买意愿	0.378	0.378	0.141	93.564	***
注：为P < 0.05；为P < 0.01；**为P < 0.001。

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 中介效应检验结果

Table 4. Results of mediation analysis

维度	效应类型	Effect	SE	t值	P值	95%置信区间(CI)
维度	效应类型	Effect	SE	t值	P值	区间下限 (LLCI)	区间上限 (ULCI)
愉悦度	直接效应	0.2719	0.3620	7.5161	0.0000	0.2008	0.3429
愉悦度	中介效应	0.4345	0.0346			0.3688	0.5032
产品质量感知、时间风险	直接效应	0.2582	0.0444	6.3563	0.0000	0.1952	0.3698
产品质量感知、时间风险	中介效应	−0.0028	0.0072			−0.180	0.0110
注：因变量为购买意愿。

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 调节效应检验结果

Table 5. Analysis result of moderating effect

自变量	因变量	R²	标准化系数	F值	显著性
触觉意象	产品质量感知	0.609	0.781	877.485	***
触觉意象和接触需求	产品质量感知	0.612	0.788	443.971	***
触觉意象	愉悦度	0.537	0.733	652.461	***
触觉意象*接触需求	愉悦度	0.538	0.738	327.935	***
注：为P < 0.05；为P < 0.01；**为P < 0.001。

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(31)

[1]	SILVA A, TVR B, RDC C, et al. Need for touch and haptic imagery: An investigation in online fashion shopping[J] . Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,2021,59:102378. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102378
[2]	PECK J, SHU S B. The effect of mere touch on perceived ownership[J] . Journal of Consumer Research,2009,36(3):434 − 447. doi: 10.1086/598614
[3]	PECK J, CHILDERS T L. Individual differences in haptic information processing: The "need for touch" scale[J] . Journal of Consumer Research,2003,30:430 − 442. doi: 10.1086/378619
[4]	郭婷婷, 李宝库. “看得见”还是“摸得着”?: 在线评论中感官线索引发的意象体验效应[J]. 财经论丛, 2019, 9: 82−91.
[5]	PINO G, AMATULLI C, NATARAAJAN R, et al. Product touch in the real and digital world: How do consumers react[J] . Journal of Business Research,2020,112:492 − 501. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.002
[6]	PECK J, BARGER V A, WEBB A. In search of a surrogate for touch: The effect of haptic imagery on perceived ownership[J] . Journal of Consumer Psychology,2013,23(2):189 − 196. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.001
[7]	MULCAHY R F, RIEDEL A S. ‘Touch it, swipe it, shake it': Does the emergence of haptic touch in mobile retailing advertising improve its effectiveness?[J]. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2020, 54: 101613.
[8]	LV X, LI H, XIA L. Effects of haptic cues on consumers' online hotel booking decisions: The mediating role of mental imagery[J] . Tourism Management ,2020,77:10425.
[9]	JHA S, BALAJI M S, PECK J. Conveying product weight in digital media using a hand image[J] . Journal of Retailing ,2023,99(3):353 − 369. doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2023.07.001
[10]	PECK J, WIGGINS J. It just feels good: Customers' affective response to touch and its influence on persuasion[J] . Journal of Marketing ,2006,70(4):56 − 69.
[11]	HELLER J, CHYLINSKI M. Touching the untouchable: Exploring multi-sensory augmented reality in the context of online retailing[J] . Journal of Retailing,2019,95(4):219 − 234. doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2019.10.008
[12]	PECK J, CHILDERS T L. To have and to hold: The influence of haptic information on product judgments[J] . Journal of Marketing ,2003,67(2):35 − 48. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.67.2.35.18612
[13]	HUANG M, ALI R, LIAO J. The effect of user experience in online games on word of mouth: A pleasure-arousal-dominance (PAD) model perspective[J] . Computers in Human Behavior ,2017,75:329 − 338. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.015
[14]	EDELL J A, RICHARD S. The Information processing of pictures in print advertisements[J] . Journal of Consumer Research ,1983(1):45 − 61.
[15]	RACAT M, CAPELLI S, LICHY J. New insights into 'technologies of touch': Information processing in product evaluation and purchase intention[J] . Technological Forecasting and Social Change ,2021,170:120900. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120900
[16]	GROHMANN B, SPANGENBERG E R, SPROTT D E. The influence of tactile input on the evaluation of retail product offerings[J] . Journal of Retailing ,2007,83(2):237 − 245. doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2006.09.001
[17]	LEE J G, THORSON E. Cognitive and emotional processes in individuals and commercial web sites[J] . Journal of Business and Psychology ,2009,24:105 − 115. doi: 10.1007/s10869-008-9087-8
[18]	方圆, 杨恺文, 李沛. 移动终端服装购买行为影响因素研究: 多视角的消费者感知[J] . 现代纺织技术,2022,30(3):216 − 223.
[19]	FRÉDÉRIQUE S, NOOTEBOOM B, HOOGENDOORN A. Actions that build interpersonal trust: A relational signaling perspective[J] . Review of Social Economy ,2010,68(3):285 − 315. doi: 10.1080/00346760902756487
[20]	GREWAL D, MUNGER J L, IYER G R, et al. The influence of internet‐retailing factors on price expectations[J] . Psychology & Marketing ,2003,20(6):477 − 493.
[21]	AGHEKYAN-SIMONIAN M, FORSYTHE S, KWON W S, et al. The role of product brand image and online store image on perceived risks and online purchase intentions for apparel[J] . Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services ,2012,19(3):325 − 331.
[22]	PECK J, WIGGINS J. Persuasion and haptic properties: There’s more to touch than meets the eye[J] . Advances in Consumer Research ,2004,31:237 − 272.
[23]	KÜHN F, LICHTERS M, KREY N, et al. The touchy issue of produce: Need for touch in online grocery retailing[J] . Journal of Business Research ,2020,117:244 − 255. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.017
[24]	YOO J, KIM M. The effects of online product presentation on consumer responses: A mental imagery perspective[J] . Journal of Business Research ,2014,67(11):2464 − 2472. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.03.006
[25]	LOUREIRO S M C, KOO D M, RIBEIRO L. Effects of atmospherics on emotions and intention with respect to involvement in different shopping environments[J] . Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science ,2013,23(4):435 − 459. doi: 10.1080/21639159.2013.820880
[26]	MEHRABIAN A, RUSSELL J A. An approach toenvironmental psychology[M]. Cambridge: The MITPress, 1974: 12−15.
[27]	CANIO F D, BLASCO M F. I need to touch it to buy it! How haptic information influences consumer shopping behavior across channels[J] . Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services ,2021,61:1 − 12.
[28]	PARK M. The compensatory effects of pictorial and verbal information for haptic information on consumer responses in non-store shopping environments[D]. Columbus: Graduate School of the Ohio State University, 2006.
[29]	DODDS W B, MONROE K B, GREWAL D. Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations[J] . Journal of Marketing Research ,1991,28(3):307 − 319.
[30]	GUO J, WANG X, WU Y. Positive emotion bias: Role of emotional content from online customer reviews in purchase decisions[J] . Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services ,2020,52:101891. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101891
[31]	Bashir S, Muddasar G K, Asif M, et al. Refining e-shoppers' perceived risks: Development and validation of new measurement scale[J] . Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services ,2020,58:102285.