Evaluations That Matter: Customer Preferences Using Industry-Based Evaluations and Eye-Gaze Data

This study is the first stage of a research program aimed at understanding differences in how people process 2D and 3D automotive stimuli, using psychophysiological tools such as galvanic skin response (GSR), eye tracking, electroencephalography (EEG), and facial expressions coding, along with respondent ratings. The current study uses just one measure, eye tracking, and one stimulus format, 2D realistic renderings of vehicles, to reveal where people expect to find information about brand and other industry-relevant topics, such as sportiness. The eye-gaze data showed differences in the percentage of fixation time that people spent on different views of cars while evaluating the “Brand” and the degree to which they looked “Sporty/Conservative”, “Calm/Exciting”, and “Basic/Luxurious”. The results of this work can give designers insights on where they can invest their design efforts when considering brand and styling cues.

[1]  Wei Chen,et al.  An Approach to Decision-Based Design With Discrete Choice Analysis for Demand Modeling , 2003 .

[2]  Andreas Glöckner,et al.  An eye‐tracking study on information processing in risky decisions: Evidence for compensatory strategies based on automatic processes , 2011 .

[3]  Levent Burak Kara,et al.  Semantic shape editing using deformation handles , 2015, ACM Trans. Graph..

[4]  Adrian M. Madsen.  Studies of Visual Attention in Physics Problem Solving. , 2013 .

[5]  Robert S. Billings,et al.  Measures of compensatory and noncompensatory models of decision behavior: Process tracing versus policy capturing , 1983 .

[6]  Thomas S. Tullis,et al.  Online Viewing and Aesthetic Preferences of Generation Y and the Baby Boom Generation: Testing User Web Site Experience Through Eye Tracking , 2011, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[7]  Erin F. MacDonald,et al.  Eye-Tracking Data Predict Importance of Product Features and Saliency of Size Change , 2014 .

[8]  R. Pieters,et al.  A Review of Eye-Tracking Research in Marketing , 2008 .

[9]  A. Glöckner,et al.  Multiple-reason decision making based on automatic processing. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[10]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  The adaptive decision maker , 1993 .

[11]  N. Mackworth,et al.  Cognitive determinants of fixation location during picture viewing. , 1978, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  Mitsuo Nagamachi,et al.  Kansei Engineering: A new ergonomic consumer-oriented technology for product development , 1995 .

[13]  R. Säljö,et al.  Expertise Differences in the Comprehension of Visualizations: a Meta-Analysis of Eye-Tracking Research in Professional Domains , 2011 .

[14]  Jose Antonio Diego-Mas,et al.  Influence of the mode of graphical representation on the perception of product aesthetic and emotional features: An exploratory study , 2008 .

[15]  Erin F. MacDonald,et al.  Products' Shared Visual Features Do Not Cancel in Consumer Decisions , 2015 .

[16]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  Quantification of perceived environmental friendliness for vehicle silhouette design , 2010 .

[17]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. , 1977 .

[18]  E. Dahan,et al.  The predictive power of internet-based product concept testing using visual depiction and animation , 2000 .

[19]  M. Just,et al.  The role of eye-fixation research in cognitive psychology , 1976 .

[20]  R. Nagel,et al.  Search Dynamics in Consumer Choice under Time Pressure: An Eye-Tracking Study , 2011 .

[21]  Martin Meißner,et al.  Eye-Tracking Information Processing in Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis , 2010 .

[22]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Consumer neuroscience: Assessing the brain response to marketing stimuli using electroencephalogram (EEG) and eye tracking , 2013, Expert Syst. Appl..

[23]  Levent Burak Kara,et al.  Deciphering the Influence of Product Shape on Consumer Judgments Through Geometric Abstraction , 2015 .

[24]  Jonathan Cagan,et al.  Quantifying Aesthetic Form Preference in a Utility Function , 2008 .

[25]  Erin F. MacDonald,et al.  Impact of Product Design Representation on Customer Judgment , 2013 .

[26]  Joseph H. Goldberg,et al.  Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs , 1999 .

[27]  Nada Bates-Brkljac,et al.  Assessing perceived credibility of traditional and computer generated architectural representations , 2009 .

[28]  H. Montgomery,et al.  A think aloud study of dominance structuring in decision processes , 1989 .

[29]  Andreas Sonderegger,et al.  The influence of prototype fidelity and aesthetics of design in usability tests: effects on user behaviour, subjective evaluation and emotion. , 2009, Applied ergonomics.

[30]  Jeremy J. Michalek,et al.  Measurement of Headlight Form Preference Using a Choice Based Conjoint Analysis , 2007, DAC 2007.