people and products sxsw
DESCRIPTION
This is a presentation to share the findings from a study on whether there is a synergistic relationship between people and products.TRANSCRIPT
Products and People:Is there a synergistic relationship?
By Jordan Licero
Presentation Outline
Background
Objectives and Hypotheses
Methods and Procedure
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Future Research
Why aren’t people sitting in the chairs?
Human Features that Attract
Smiling faces are attractive
People looking directly into camera captures the eyes
Reward regions of the brain are activated
An attractive model in direct mail advertisements increases product sales (Caballero & Pride, 1984)
An attractive spokesperson in television advertisements (Petroshius & Croker, 1989)
An attractive model in posters does not increase product sales (Caballero & Solomon, 1984)
Background
Attractiveness and Aesthetics
Perceived comfort increased as aesthetics increased when viewing chairs (Helander, 2010)
Aesthetics influence the pleasure derived from the use of a product (Jordan, 1997)
Berlyne’s Aesthetic Theory
Background
Pupillary Responses
Background
Pupillometry Measurement of the pupil’s
diameter as it reacts to various and specific stimuli
Both eyes simultaneously react Pupil area and pupil diameter
have both been used to determine pupillary responses
Impossible for humans to suppress pupil dilation and constriction
Pupillary Responses
Background
Sphinter Pupillae Activated to constrict the pupil to restrict light entering
eye
Dilator Pupillae Activated to dilate the pupil to let more light enter the eye
Pupil can constrict to a diameter of 1.5 mm and can dilate to a diameter 8-9 mm
A reaction to a visual image occurs in as little as 0.2 seconds, with the response peaking from 0.5 to 1 second
Pupillary Reactions
Background
Dilate when: Viewing an attractive stimulus,
as seen through sexual stimuli Low light levels Recognition memory Increased cognitive effort
and task difficulty
Constrict when: Viewing unattractive stimulus High light levels Unrecognized, new stimuli Decreased cognitive effort Constricted
Eye Movements
Background
Fixations: A relatively motionless gaze at a specific area on a visual
display Lasts about 200-300 milliseconds Visual information is generally only perceived during
fixations points
Saccades: Continuous, rapid movement between fixation points
Eye Tracking Technology Measures fixations durations, number of fixations, and
areas of focus Infrared light that illuminates the eye, which creates
highly visible reflections from the cornea and pupil.
Complexity
Background
Two ways of varying complexity: Increased number of objects Increased dissimilarity of objects or materials
Number of Fixations: Increases with complexity
Fixation Duration: Increases with complexity
Designer Status Differences
Background
Number of Fixations: More fixations made by artists compared to non-artists
Fixation Duration: Shorter fixations made by artists compared to non-artists
Viewing Pattern: Scattered viewing patterns made by artists compared to
non-artists, who focus on main object
Gender Differences
Background
Stimuli of human faces More fixations made by females compared to males Shorter fixation durations made by females compared to
males
Non-human face stimuli Fewer fixations made by females compared to males Inconclusive on fixation durations
This study aims to answer:
How is product attractiveness influenced by the presence and attractiveness of a person?
Is pupil dilation an objective measure of overall image attractiveness?
How does image complexity systematically affect eye movement patterns?
Are there designer status or gender differences in viewing patterns and attractiveness ratings?
Objectives and Hypotheses
Hypotheses:
1. Images with human models present will receive higher perceived attractiveness ratings compared to those without models present.
2. The higher the perceived attractiveness rating of the human model, the greater the difference between the attractiveness rating of the image with the model minus the attractiveness rating of the image without the model.
3. The pupil will dilate more as the perceived image attractiveness increases.
4. The pupil will constrict when viewing simple images and dilate when viewing moderately complex images.
Objectives and Hypotheses
Hypotheses:
5. Simple images will have fewer fixation points and shorter average fixation durations, while moderately complex images will have more fixation points and longer average fixation durations.
6. When viewing complex images, participants will primarily focus on the human model, but when viewing simple images, participants will focus primarily on the chair.
7. Males will have larger average pupil area, fewer fixations, longer fixation durations, and different areas of focus compared to females.
8. Designers will have smaller average pupil area, more fixations, shorter fixation durations, and different areas of focus compared to non-designers.
Objectives and Hypotheses
Stimuli
32 total images using 16 chairs and 8 models 16 images of a chair against a white background 16 images of a human model in the chair looking directly
at the camera against a white background
Methods and Procedure
Simple Moderately Complex
Human Models
8 female models Dressed in black coat and dark colored pants Neutral face In two stimuli each
Methods and Procedure
Software & Participants
Eye Tracking Software: GazeTracker v9.0 and FaceLAB 4.5
Participants: 32 participants recruited from SUSAN 16 males and 16 females 16 designers and 16 non-designers All Cornell undergraduate students No glasses; Non-smokers Did not recognize human
models used in study
Methods and Procedure
Procedure
Participants welcomed to Cornell HCI Usability Lab
Set up eye-tracking system
Adjust table height
Calibrate gaze
Methods and Procedure
Procedure
Show participants all 32 stimuli for 2 seconds each, with 2 seconds of a white slide between each stimulus
Verbally rate the perceived attractiveness of each image
Verbally rate the perceived attractiveness of each model
Methods and Procedure
Data Analysis
Use FaceLAB and GazeTracker v9.0 Average pupil area of each white slide and stimulus Fixations Heatmaps Gazetrails Lookzones
Use Bruel and Kjaer luminance contrast meter (type 1100) Overall image luminance White slide luminance Model Face luminance
Excel file
Multivariate statistical package (SPSS v19)
Methods and Procedure
Image Attractiveness and Image Complexity
Results
Image attractiveness is significantly positively associated with image complexity
12% interindividual variability, 88% residual variability
Image Attractiveness and Image Complexity
Results
Females rated the attractiveness of images without models higher than males, while males rated attractiveness of images with models higher than females
Image Attractiveness and Model Attractiveness
Results
Image attractiveness is significantly positively associated with model attractiveness
10% interindividual variability, 13% chair-to-chair variability, 77% residual variability
Pupil Area Change
Results
Not Significantly Associated Image attractiveness Model attractiveness Model face luminance Average Number of fixations Log average fixation time
Significantly Negatively Associated Pupil area change and image luminance
(F(1,1012)=42.287, p=0.000)
Significantly Positively Associated Pupil area change and image complexity
(F(1,1010)=33.111, p=0.000)
Pupil Area Change & Image Complexity
Results
On average, pupils dilated by 2.53% when viewing moderately complex images, but further constricted by 2.29% when viewing simple images.
Number of Fixations and Image Complexity
Results
Number of fixations is significantly negatively associated with image complexity
10% interindividual variability, 90% residual variability
Number of Fixations and Image Complexity
Results
Males had significantly more fixations on moderately complex images compared to simple images, while there were no significant differences of the number of fixations between simple and moderately complex images for females
Number of Fixations and Image Complexity
Results
Designers had significantly more fixations on simple images compared to non-designers, while non-designers had significantly more fixations on moderately complex images compared to designers
Fixation Time and Image Complexity
Results
Log average fixation time is significantly positively associated with image complexity
16% interindividual variability, 84% residual variability
Fixation Time and Image Complexity
Results
Fixation time was significantly higher for moderately complex images compared to simple images for designers. For non-designers, fixation time was still higher for moderately complex images compared to simple images, but the difference was less than it was for designers.
Heatmaps & Lookzones
Results
Heatmaps showed no gender differences
Females spent an average 61.1% of time viewing faces, while males spent an average 63.9% of time viewing faces.
Females Males
Heatmaps & Lookzones
Results
Heatmaps showed designers had more scattered viewing patterns when viewing the simple images and non-designers were more centrally focused.
Designers spent an average 67.3% of time viewing faces, while non-designers spent an average of 57.4% of time viewing faces.
DesignersNon-Designers
Heatmaps
Results
Heatmaps showed participants focused on the face of the model when the model was present and the chair when the model was not present
Pupillary Response Discussion
Discussion
Previous research has found pupils dilate when viewing attractive stimuli, present research may have found no effect because of confounding variables: Content of stimulus Measuring techniques Timeframe of data collection Separation between stimuli Image luminance Facial luminance Time-of-day Image sequence Recognition memory Cognitive effort and task difficulty
Eye Movement Discussion
Discussion
Previous research has found more, longer fixations would occur as image complexity increased, however the present research may have found fewer, longer fixations occur as image complexity increased because of confounding variables: Timeframe to view stimuli Human model as a way of varying complexity Familiar/Unfamiliar
Designer Status Differences Discussion
Discussion
Previous research has found designers have more, shorter fixations with a more scattered viewing pattern compared to non-designers. Present research aligned with those findings for simple images, but not moderately complex images.
Possible differences between present and prior research: Time allotted for viewing each stimulus Content of stimuli Human model presence
vs
Gender Differences Discussion
Discussion
Previous research has found males rate females more attractive than females, which is aligned with present findings.
Previous research has found males elicited more fixations compared to females, while the present study only found this to be true for simple images
Possible differences between present and prior research: Human model presence
vs
Conclusions
The combined presence of a human model with a product increases the perceived overall image attractiveness
The more attractive the human model, the more attractive the overall image is perceived
Initial evidence that pupillary responses cannot be used as an objective measure of perceived image attractiveness, but further investigation is necessary
An increase in complexity lengthens duration of fixations, decreases the number of fixations, and dilates the pupil
Conclusions
Conclusions
Designers had more, shorter fixations when viewing simple images compared to non-designers, but when viewing moderately complex images, designers exhibited fewer, longer fixations compared to non-designers
Females rated images without a model more attractive and had fewer fixations compared to males, whereas males rated images with a model more attractive and had fewer fixations compared to females.
Conclusion
Significance
The platform for creating attractive, effective, and successful promotional designs
Conclusion
Future Research
Broaden the population in order to generalize outside of university students
Broaden the array of various product categories
Broaden the array of human models
Investigate possible effects of ethnicity, iris color, or diseases, which may be confounding variables on pupillary responses
Use constant luminance levels across stimuli and faces of models used in stimuli
Vary complexity levels of stimuli
Future Research
Thank you for listening!
Questions?
Physiology of the Human Eye
Three layers of tissues Outermost layer: Cornea and Sclera Middle layer: anterior (iris & ciliary body)
and posterior (choroid) Innermost layer: retina
Three fluid chambers Anterior chamber
between cornea and iris Posterior chamber
between iris and lens Vitreous chamber
between lens and retina
Background
Visual Processing
Light waves enter eye through cornea progresses through pupil focused on fovea photoreceptors in retina retinal ganglion cells optic nerve optic chiasm LGN primary visual cortex occipital cortex
Background
Model Attractiveness and Facial Luminance
Results
Model attractiveness is significantly positively associated with model facial luminance
Image Attractiveness
Results
Image attractiveness mean rating of 4.69
Model Attractiveness
Results
Model attractiveness mean rating of 5.36
Number of Fixations
Results
Number of Fixations mean of 3.51
Number of Fixations
Results
Number of Fixations mean of 3.51