Journal of Business Research: Pascal Kowalczuk, Carolin Siepmann (N Ee Scheiben), Jost Adler

Journal of Business Research xxx (xxxx) xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Business Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres
Cognitive, affective, and behavioral consumer responses to augmented

reality in e-commerce: A comparative study☆
Pascal Kowalczuk *, Carolin Siepmann (née Scheiben), Jost Adler
University of Duisburg-Essen, Lotharstraße 65, 47057 Duisburg, Germany
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: This study explores the relative advantage of augmented reality (AR) over web-based product presentations. We
Augmented reality develop a consumer response model and compare consumers’ reactions to the IKEA Place app and IKEA mobile
AR marketing website on smartphones. The results reveal that AR outperforms web-based product presentations by generating
Perceived reality congruence
greater immersion and enjoyment, whereas the opposite is true for media usefulness. The findings further show
Consumer response system
E-commerce
that behavioral responses (reuse and purchase intention) are formed by affective (immersion, enjoyment,
Product presentations product liking) and cognitive (media usefulness, choice confidence) responses to the AR characteristics (inter
activity, system quality, product informativeness, reality congruence). Since the reuse intentions of AR apps
result from enjoyment and usefulness, retailers should improve system quality, product informativeness, and
reality congruence to enhance media usefulness and interactivity to increase enjoyment. To achieve high pur
chase intentions, they should also increase interactivity, as it boosts product liking and in turn ensures confidence
about the chosen products.
1. Introduction Chylinski, de Ruyter, Mahr, & Keeling, 2019; Lemon & Verhoef, 2016).
Among those retailers that have already explored the possibilities of AR
One of the central objectives in today’s retailing environments is the are IKEA, Ray-Ban, and Sephora. While IKEA lets consumers place cat
creation of superior customer experiences. To achieve effective online alog items to give them a real-time scale view of the desired product at
experiences, scholars have emphasized the importance of overcoming their homes, Ray-Ban and Sephora offer magic mirrors to provide con
the physical separation between consumers and products through well- sumers with a better impression of how the firms’ sunglasses or make-up
designed digitally enhanced product presentations (Bleier, Harmeling, & will look on them. Underlining its huge potential, recent market
Palmatier, 2019). Rapid advances in technology and the strong diffusion research anticipates AR to reach a market size of $85 billion in 2025, of
of mobile devices provide retailers with more options for presenting which $11.4 billion would account for AR in retailing (Singh, 2019). The
their products and increasing these experiences. Augmented reality expected 1.9 billion monthly active users by 2022 underpin that mobile
(AR), an innovative tool that superimposes virtual objects (e.g., images, AR applications, in particular, are becoming increasingly relevant
texts, and sounds) on the user’s real environment (Faust et al., 2012), (Tractica, 2017).
has emerged as one of the most promising options in recent years. AR Considering the high investments associated with developing and
expands the “physical environment with computer-generated perceptual introducing AR, a better understanding is needed of the relative
information, leveraging visual, auditory, haptic, somatosensory, and advantage of AR-based product presentations over web-based ones on
olfactory modalities” (Roggeveen & Sethuraman, 2018, p. 3) and smartphones to guide retailers on whether it is worth investing in AR.
therefore adds a completely new experience that requires less imagi For this reason, this study addresses the following two research ques
nation than even highly vivid web-based product presentations. By tions: 1) What are the relevant characteristics of product presentations
integrating AR-based product presentations into their e-commerce on smartphones and how do consumers cognitively, affectively, and
channels, retailers can increase customer value and create outstanding behaviorally respond to these characteristics? 2) How do cognitive, af
experiences across the touch points within the customer journey (Heller, fective, and behavioral consumer responses to AR-based and web-based
☆
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: pascal.kowalczuk@uni-due.de (P. Kowalczuk), carolin.siepmann@uni-due.de (C. Siepmann (née Scheiben)), jost.adler@uni-due.de (J. Adler).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.050
Received 30 August 2019; Received in revised form 16 October 2020; Accepted 19 October 2020
0148-2963/© 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc.
Please cite this article as: Pascal Kowalczuk, Journal of Business Research, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.050
P. Kowalczuk et al. Journal of Business Research xxx (xxxx) xxx
product presentations on smartphones differ? To answer these ques section, the theoretical framework is outlined by integrating the EHM
tions, this study builds on the experiential hierarchy model (EHM; into the customer journey (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016), and the existing
Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982) to develop a model that explains through literature on AR in retail settings is reviewed through the lens of the
which mechanisms AR characteristics are processed before resulting in EHM. In Section 3, the proposed research model, which demonstrates
behavioral responses and compare the reactions to the IKEA Place app how AR characteristics elicit cognitive, affective, and behavioral con
with those to the IKEA mobile website on smartphones. sumer responses, is presented. Section 4 outlines the research method,
This research contributes to the literature in several ways. First, including the study design and data collection. Thereafter, in Section 5,
despite the relevance and importance of AR for retailing, research we report the empirical data analysis conducted to test our proposed
examining the relative advantage of AR-based over web-based product hypotheses and compare the results for AR-based and web-based prod
presentations is scarce. Instead, the reactions to these product presen uct presentations. This paper concludes with a discussion of the findings,
tation types have been mostly considered in two separate research implications, as well as limitations and future research directions.
streams. In the first, scholars (e.g., Algharabat, Alalwan, Rana, & Dwi
vedi, 2017; Jiang & Benbasat, 2007) have exclusively focused on web- 2. Theoretical framework
based product presentations by comparing presentations with more
vivid, interactive, and three-dimensional content with traditional 2.1. AR-based experiences along the customer journey
product presentations comprising static pictures and text descriptions
(Wang et al., 2019). In the second stream of the literature, researchers The customer decision journey is defined as “the process a customer
have almost entirely focused on consumer reactions to AR (e.g., Smink, goes through, across all stages and touch points, that makes up the
Frowijn, van Reijmersdal, van Noort, & Neijens, 2019). In this branch, customer experience” (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016, p. 71). This journey is
only Yim, Chu, and Sauer (2017) and Yim and Park (2019) systemati dynamic and iterative, and it extends across the pre-purchase, purchase,
cally contrast AR-based with traditional web-based product and post-purchase stages (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Customers experi
presentations. ence different touch points on this journey, among which this study
Second, while Yim et al. (2017) focus on two functional mechanisms, focuses on the two most prominent brand- and partner-owned online
namely, vividness and interactivity, this study additionally incorporates touch points: mobile apps and browser-accessible mobile websites
informativeness and system quality, which have been proven to be (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016; Sohn, 2017). Since both touch points allow
relevant for both AR-based product presentations (e.g., Kim & Hyun, customers to gather information about products before purchasing
2016; Rese, Baier, Geyer-Schulz, & Schreiber, 2017) and web-based them, they are especially relevant for the pre-purchase stage that cap
product presentations (e.g., Bleier et al., 2019; Sohn, 2017; Wang tures all customer experiences from the initial need recognition to the
et al., 2019). Beyond that, reality congruence is introduced as a new consideration of satisfying them through purchases (Lemon & Verhoef,
important factor capturing the extent to which the displayed product 2016). Along this journey, customers engage in the different marketing
matches the real product. mix elements provided by the company. AR marketing, the use of AR for
Third, while the AR literature has focused on explaining either the marketing purposes (Rauschnabel, Felix, & Hinsch, 2019), provides
purchase (e.g., Beck & Crié, 2018) or use intention (e.g., Pantano, Rese, companies with new opportunities to embellish the classic marketing
& Baier, 2017; Rese et al., 2017), this study contributes to the body of mix variables of product, price, place, and promotion (Dwivedi et al.,
knowledge by examining the interplay of the variables relevant for both 2020). In a B2C context, for example, this means that retailers can use
and jointly considers them in one model. Hence, this research addresses AR to extend existing or create new offerings (“product”), to leverage
the important issue that soon, AR will no longer be understood as a their e-commerce activities (“place”), and to draw potential customers’
means of boosting brand engagement and awareness, but much more attention to their brands and products (“promotion”). While the pricing
attention will be paid to the accountable effects of AR on reuse and of AR-based content will become increasingly important for retailers in
purchase intentions as well as sales (BCG, 2018). the future (“price”), AR is currently used as a communication tool in e-
Fourth, in the AR literature, only Poushneh and Vasquez-Parraga commerce that has the ability to generate benefits in the pre-purchase
(2017a, 2017b) explicitly consider the experiential nature of AR. and purchase stages of the customer journey (Rauschnabel et al., 2019).
They, however, do not investigate how experiences elicit behavioral Since consumers increasingly long for experiences in the market
consequences. By building on the EHM, this study further contributes to place (Pelletier & Collier, 2018), this research builds on the EHM
research by taking the information processing as well as experiential (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982) to identify and understand consumer
nature of product presentations into account. Furthermore, while Jav responses to mobile AR-based and web-based product presentations. In
ornik (2016) proposes that AR elicits affective, cognitive, and behavioral line with traditional hierarchy models (Lavidge & Steiner, 1961), the
responses, the underlying mechanisms and their interrelations have EHM posits that environmental or consumer inputs are processed by an
been inadequately addressed in extant research. By positing that the intervening response system (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982). In the
input variables are processed by an intervening response system con EHM, these input variables elicit affective, cognitive, and behavioral
sisting of affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses, the EHM is responses, leading to output consequences such as real usage and pur
appropriate for analyzing the reactions to the system characteristics of chase. In contrast to earlier consumer response models, Holbrook and
both AR-based and web-based product presentations. Hirschman (1982) propose that consumers derive value from con
Finally, prior studies (Yim et al., 2017; Yim & Park, 2019) have sumption experiences rather than the good or service itself. From this
investigated consumer reactions to AR and web-based product pre experience-oriented perspective, they regard consumer responses on the
sentations on personal computers (PCs). Consumers, however, tend to customer journey as being of an information processing or experiential
shift from PCs to ubiquitously available mobile devices, especially nature. Thus, the EHM and customer journey framework perfectly
smartphones, when shopping online. Since these devices are becoming complement each other.
increasingly powerful, they can perform even highly computation- We review the literature on AR in retail settings (Table 1) to identify
intensive product presentations and thus provide easy and flexible ac the most relevant AR characteristics and show the extent to which they
cess to the world of AR. Hence, research investigating the relative also apply to web-based product presentations. Furthermore, we discuss
advantage of AR-based over web-based product presentations on consumer responses to these characteristics through the lens of the EHM.
smartphones is not only called for by scholars (Yim et al., 2017), but also
timely, necessary, and in line with consumers’ current online shopping 2.2. AR characteristics
habits.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In the next As shown in Table 2, the extant literature has examined different, but
2
Table 1
P. Kowalczuk et al.
Prior Research on AR in Retailing.
Study Technology, product, device AR characteristics Affective responses Cognitive responses Behavioral responses Individual factors
Kim and Forsythe 3D vs. virtual try-on, apparel, PC Entertainment value, attitude Usefulness, ease of use Purchase, reuse, and revisit
(2007) toward using intention
Kim and Forsythe Sensory enabling technologies (2D, Entertainment value, attitude Usefulness, ease of use Actual use, post-use Technology anxiety,
(2008a) 3D, virtual try-on), apparel, PC toward using evaluation, purchase innovativeness
(2008b) 3D, virtual try-on), apparel, PC toward using evaluation, purchase innovativeness
(2009) 3D, virtual try-on), apparel, PC toward using evaluation, purchase, reuse, innovativeness
and revisit intention
Rese et al. (2014) AR app (IKEA catalog app), Informativeness Enjoyment, attitude toward Usefulness, ease of use Use intention
furniture, researcher’s tablet using
Spreer and Kallweit AR app (designed for the study), Enjoyment Usefulness, ease of use Intention to reuse
(2014) books, researcher’s tablet
Huang and Liao Virtual try on, apparel, PC Aesthetics Playfulness Usefulness, Ease of use Sustainable relationship Cognitive innovativeness
(2015) behavior
Javornik (2016) AR app (IKEA Place), tablet vs. web Augmentation, control, Flow, application attitude, Thoughts Purchase intentions, revisit
with virtual elements (IKEA), responsiveness brand attitude intentions, recommendation
furniture, PC intentions
Virtual mirror, sunglasses, PC vs. Augmentation, control, Flow, application attitude, Thoughts Purchase intentions, revisit
web with static photo try-on, responsiveness brand attitude intentions, recommendation
sunglasses, PC intentions
Kim and Hyun AR app (Ovjet), navigation, System quality, information Telepresence Usefulness Reuse intention
(2016) smartphone quality, service quality
Hilken et al. (2017) Virtual mirror (Mister Spex), Simulated physical control, Hedonic value Utilitarian value
sunglasses, PC environmental embedding
Virtual mirror (L’Oréal), make-up, Simulated physical control, Hedonic value, spatial presence Utilitarian value, psychological
tablet environmental embedding ownership
3
Virtual mirror (Mister Spex), Simulated physical control, Hedonic value, spatial presence Effectiveness, psychological Involvement, style-of-
sunglasses, PC environmental embedding ownership processing
Virtual mirror (Mister Spex), Spatial presence Decision comfort Word-of-mouth intention Awareness of privacy practices
sunglasses, PC
Huang and Liao Virtual mirror, clothes and Flow (concentration, Self-location, haptic imagery, sense of Time spend on AR
(2017) accessories, PC playfulness, times distortion, body ownership, ownership control,
exploratory behavior) self-explorative engagement,
satisfaction
Pantano et al. Virtual mirror (Ray-Ban), PC Aesthetic quality, Enjoyment, attitude toward Usefulness, ease of use Use intention
(2017) interactivity, response time, adoption of AR
quality of information
Poushneh and 5 AR entertainment apps (Night Sky Consumer satisfaction Familiarity with internet
Vasquez-Parraga Lite; Sky View Free; Star Tracker; usage, product knowledge
(2017a) Star Chart; Space Journey),
2 retailing groups: virtual mirror
(Ray-Ban) vs. virtual model non-AR

(Ray-Ban), sunglasses, own
smartphones
Poushneh and Virtual mirror (Ray-Ban), sunglasses, Users information privacy Hedonic quality Pragmatic quality, trade-off price and Willingness to buy
Vasquez-Parraga PC control, aesthetic quality value, user satisfaction
(2017b)
Rese et al. (2017) AR app (IKEA catalog app), Informativeness Enjoyment, attitude toward Usefulness, ease of use Use intention
furniture, researcher’s tablet using
AR app (Auto Bild), magazine, own
smartphone/ tablet
Virtual mirror (Mister Spex),
sunglasses, own PC/laptop/ tablet
(continued on next page)

Table 1 (continued )
P. Kowalczuk et al.
Study Technology, product, device AR characteristics Affective responses Cognitive responses Behavioral responses Individual factors
Virtual mirror (Ray-Ban), sunglasses,

own PC/laptop/tablet
Yim et al. (2017) AR app vs. web (sunglasses), PC Interactivity, vividness, media Immersion, enjoyment, medium Media usefulness Purchase intention Previous media experience
novelty attitude
AR app vs. web (watches), PC Interactivity, vividness, media Immersion, enjoyment, medium Media usefulness Purchase intention Previous media experience
novelty attitude
Baek, Yoo, and Virtual mirror (Ray-Ban), sunglasses, Self-viewing vs. other-viewing Self-brand connections Purchase intention
Yoon (2018) PC Self-viewing vs. other-viewing Self-brand connections Purchase intention Narcissism
Beck and Crié e-catalog vs. virtual fitting room, Online patronage intention, Perceptual curiosity about
(2018) apparel, PC online purchase intention tool/product, diversive
curiosity, involvement,
expertise
E-catalog vs. virtual fitting room, Offline patronage intention, Perceptual curiosity about
glasses, PC offline purchase intention tool/product, diversive
curiosity, involvement,
expertise
Poushneh (2018) Virtual mirror vs. non-AR (both Ray- Augmentation quality, control User satisfaction
Ban), sunglasses, PC of access to personal
information
AR entertainment app (Star Chart)
vs. non-AR app (Sky Guide), own
smartphone
AR app (Virtual Hyundai AR) vs.
non-AR app (regional Hyundai),
automotive, researcher’s
smartphone/ tablet
Rauschnabel et al. 2 AR apps (IKEA Place), furniture Augmentation quality Attitude toward using the app, Utilitarian benefits
(2019) and Die Fantastischen Vier (German inspiration, hedonic benefits,
4
band), smartphone changes in brand attitude

Smink et al. (2019) AR vs. non-AR self vs. non-AR model Informativeness, intrusiveness Enjoyment, brand attitude Purchase intention,
(Sephora virtual artist), make-up, PC willingness to share personal
data
Yim and Park AR vs. Web, sunglasses, PC Enjoyment, attitude toward Usefulness Adoption intention
(2019) technology
This study AR app (IKEA Place) vs. mobile System quality, reality Enjoyment, immersion, product Usefulness, choice confidence Purchase intention, reuse
website (IKEA), furniture, own congruence, interactivity, liking intention
smartphone product informativeness

Table 2 The category processing quality comprises responsiveness (Javornik,

Categorization of the Investigated AR Characteristics. 2016), response time (Pantano et al., 2017), and service and system
Category Definition Subsumed Source quality (Kim & Hyun, 2016). In a qualitative study, tom Dieck and Jung
constructs (2018) prove the importance of the latter for the adoption of mobile AR
1) Interaction Captures all the Control Javornik (2016) technology in the tourism context. As system quality captures the sys
with virtual constructs that Simulated Hilken et al. tem’s capacity to perform accurately and reliably in such a way that it
products address the extent to physical control (2017) provides the requested services at an adequate processing speed
which the user can Interactivity Pantano et al. (Kowalczuk, 2018), it contains the relevant quality aspects already
interact with the (2017); Yim et al.
virtual product (e.g., (2017)
considered in the AR literature. In addition, in the context of web-based
position, rotate) product presentations, Sohn (2017) demonstrates the relevance of
2) Processing Captures all the Responsiveness Javornik (2016) technical and functional quality for mobile online stores. Since a high
quality constructs that Response time Pantano et al. degree of system quality is required to make both product presentations
address how (2017)
work, it is a crucial factor constituting the user experience.
accurately, reliably, Service and Kim and Hyun
and promptly AR system quality (2016) Information about virtual products summarizes three similar factors:
provides the quality of information (Pantano et al., 2017), information quality (Kim
requested services. & Hyun, 2016), and informativeness (Rese, Schreiber, & Baier, 2014;
3) Information Captures all the Quality of Pantano et al. Rese et al., 2017; Smink et al., 2019). Following Lim and Ting (2012)
about virtual constructs that information (2017)
products address the quality Information Kim and Hyun
and Rese et al. (2014), product informativeness is defined as the degree
and amount of quality (2016) to which mobile online touch points provide helpful product informa
information AR Informativeness Rese et al. tion for purchase decisions. In online purchases, consumers must typi
provides about the (2014); Rese cally ground their product choices on less information than for in-store
virtual products. et al. (2017);
shopping, where they can sensorially experience the offered products.
Smink et al.
(2019) While websites with interactive product presentations enable a virtual
4) Quality of Captures all the Spatial presence Hilken et al. exploration of the good (Yoon, Laffey, & Oh, 2008), Poushneh (2018)
virtual constructs that (2017) and Pantano et al. (2017) argue that AR has the potential to compensate
product address the graphical Environmental Hilken et al. for this information deficit by simulating shopping experiences and
presentation visualization quality embedding (2017)
allowing consumers to directly experience virtual products. Thus, while
and environmental Vividness Yim et al. (2017)
embedding of virtual Aesthetics Huang and Liao AR provides additional information by consolidating reality and virtu
products/objects. (2015) ality, establishing highly informative product presentations is crucial in
Aesthetic quality Pantano et al. both contexts.
(2017); Poushneh
Further, AR research has shown that the following factors addressing
and Vasquez-
Parraga (2017b) the quality of virtual product presentations are relevant for eliciting posi
Augmentation Poushneh (2018); tive affective and cognitive consumer responses: spatial presence
quality Rauschnabel (Hilken et al., 2017), environmental embedding (Hilken et al., 2017),
et al. (2019) vividness (Yim et al., 2017), aesthetics (Huang & Liao, 2015), aesthetic
Augmentation Javornik (2016)
quality (Pantano et al., 2017; Poushneh & Vasquez-Parraga, 2017b),
5) Handling of Captures all the Information Poushneh and
personal constructs that privacy control Vasquez-Parraga augmentation quality (Poushneh, 2018; Rauschnabel et al., 2019), and
information address the (2017b) augmentation (Javornik, 2016). While these aspects are mostly con
perception of data Control of access Poushneh (2018) cerned with the graphical quality of the displayed products, we argue
and security concerns to personal
that not only the quality of the virtual product presentation but also the
when using AR. information
Intrusiveness Smink et al.
degree to which the consumer perceives that the augmented product
(2019) matches the real product is important for eliciting positive consumer
reactions. Therefore, this study introduces reality congruence, which
beyond quality also comprises the fit between the virtual and real
products. In web-based product presentations, 3D authenticity captures
partly overlapping, AR characteristics, which can be classified into five this fit between the real and displayed objects (Algharabat et al., 2017;
categories: variables that deal with the 1) interaction with virtual Algharabat & Dennis, 2010). If the product presentations are of poor
products, 2) processing quality, 3) information about displayed prod quality or the wrong size, pixelated, inaccurate, or unrealistic, they do
ucts, 4) quality of virtual product presentation, and 5) handling of not create value for the customer. For these reasons, reality congruence
personal information. is important for eliciting positive consumer responses to both product
Interaction with virtual products encompasses control (Javornik, presentation types.
2016), simulated physical control (Hilken, de Ruyter, Chylinski, Mahr, The last category, handling of personal information, covers informa
& Keeling, 2017), and interactivity (Pantano et al., 2017; Yim et al., tion privacy control (Poushneh & Vasquez-Parraga, 2017b), control of
2017). Among these, interactivity, defined as the extent to which con access to personal information (Poushneh, 2018), and intrusiveness
sumers can directly interact with virtual products (Steuer, 1992), con (Smink et al., 2019). Research has shown that the use of smart glasses,
stitutes a core characteristic of immersive experiences (e.g., Pantano which automatically and constantly screen the environment, could
et al., 2017; Yim et al., 2017). In an AR context, interactivity reflects the cause privacy concerns (Rauschnabel, He, & Ro, 2018). However, since
degree to which consumers can position virtual products in their actual mobile AR applications, especially the IKEA Place app, require only
physical environment and use 360-degree rotation to inspect them time-limited camera access, are directed at the environment, and do not
thoroughly. In the web context, interactivity encompasses the visual save the recorded content, the last category is less relevant in the context
inspection of product presentations with the help of interactive func of this study.
tions such as rotation, zoom, and enlargement (Algharabat et al., 2017).
Although this interaction happens on the user’s screen and not in their 2.3. Consumer responses to AR characteristics
physical environment, research also regards interactivity as one of the
core factors of web-based product presentations (e.g., Fiore, Jin, & Kim, The core of the EHM constitutes a comprehensive consumer response
2005; Jiang & Benbasat, 2007). system, which consists of affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses.
5
Each of these dimensions comprises a rational information processing (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982). The AR literature has largely focused on
and an experiential perspective considering more subconscious elements the information processing perspective by explaining how AR affects
(Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982). consumers’ willingness to buy (Poushneh & Vasquez-Parraga, 2017b) as
Affective responses. In the affective state, the information processing well as their purchase (e.g., Beck & Crié, 2018; Smink et al., 2019),
perspective centers on attitudes and preferences, while disregarding recommendation (Hilken et al., 2017; Javornik, 2016), use (Pantano
experiential hedonic responses. However, emotional reactions are et al., 2017; Rese et al., 2017), and reuse intentions (e.g., Javornik,
especially key requirements for the application of the experiential 2016; Kim & Hyun, 2016). This research centers on reuse and purchase
perspective (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982). While, for example, Jav intentions, which are especially important for retailers to generate
ornik (2016) examines the attitude toward the brand/app as an affective subsequent conversions and revenues in the pre-purchase stage.
construct, other researchers have acknowledged the importance of
assessing experiential affective responses to AR. As shown in Table 1, 3. Model development
they have considered enjoyment and immersion (Yim et al., 2017), flow
(Huang & Liao, 2017), and playfulness (Huang & Liao, 2015). In 3.1. Model overview
accordance with these studies, this research suggests that the experi
ential factors of enjoyment and immersion are the focal affective re A comprehensive model (Fig. 1) is developed to investigate how AR
sponses to AR. Moreover, product liking, an affective evaluation of the characteristics (interactivity, system quality, product informativeness,
product’s design, is assumed to be particularly relevant for AR in retail and reality congruence) lead to affective (immersion, enjoyment, and
settings (Cox & Cox, 2002). product liking) and cognitive (media usefulness and choice confidence)
Cognitive responses. From an information processing perspective, the consumer responses. Subsequently, we investigate these affective and
cognitive state is determined by memories, knowledge structures, and cognitive responses as mediators causing changes in the behavioral
thoughts (Lavidge & Steiner, 1961). Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) consumer responses (reuse and purchase intention). The proposed
additionally consider more subconscious cognitive elements (e.g., im model is assumed to be valid for both AR-based and web-based product
ages and fantasies) in the experiential view. Owing to the difficulty of presentations. However, in contrast to the latter, AR enables consumers
capturing these soft aspects, the extant AR literature (Table 1) has to visually experience, position, and inspect the desired goods in their
examined the following cognitive responses to AR inherent in the in physical environment. Owing to the utilitarian benefits associated with
formation processing perspective: psychological ownership and decision AR, we hypothesize that consumers perceive cognitive constructs as
comfort (Hilken et al., 2017), media usefulness (e.g., Yim et al., 2017), higher for AR-based than for web-based product presentations. Con
and perceived ease of use (Huang & Liao, 2015; Rese et al., 2014). In line cerning the hedonic side of AR, we follow Yim et al. (2017) and suggest
with studies highlighting utilitarian aspects as the most dominant higher affective consumer responses in the AR than in the web condi
cognitive response, this study focuses on media usefulness. Since AR tion. We ultimately assume stronger behavioral responses in the AR
apps contribute to reducing purchase uncertainty (Dacko, 2017), choice condition.
confidence, which has not yet been considered in AR research, is also
examined. 3.2. Affective and cognitive responses to AR characteristics
Behavioral responses. The experiential perspective recognizes that
consumer behavior is driven by the desire for experiences and draws In the context of vivid product presentations, immersion and
attention to the mental events associated with the act of consumption enjoyment are conceived as the most relevant affective consumer
Fig. 1. Conceptual Model.
6
responses to interactivity. While immersion describes the degree to H3. Product informativeness positively affects media usefulness.
which AR creates a feeling of being temporarily absorbed by virtual
The more realistic the product presentation, the better consumers
product presentations (Palmer, 1995; Yim et al., 2017), enjoyment is
can imagine and inspect the augmented product. This enhances their
defined as the extent to which the use of AR is perceived as enjoyable in
shopping experience, helps them save time and effort, and thus increases
its own right, regardless of the anticipated consequences (Davis,
the usefulness of the medium. Yim et al. (2017) identify vividness as an
Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1992). Both are integral parts of the flow
antecedent of media usefulness. Since vividness captures the graphical
construct, which can be defined as the state in which a consumer focuses
quality of the displayed products in terms of clearness, sharpness, defi
entirely on the interaction with a medium and screens out irrelevant
nition, and level of detail, we suggest a positive impact of reality
perceptions (Hoffman & Novak, 1996). Despite an inconsistent under
congruence on media usefulness.
standing of the flow construct (see Drengner, Jahn, and Furchheim
Phillips, Olson, and Baumgartner (1995) state that consumption vi
(2018) for a comprehensive discussion), research has agreed upon
sions help consumers imagine the future consumption of and interaction
enjoyment and immersion as relevant factors constituting flow (Csiks
with specific products, which in turn increases the confidence of having
zentmihalyi, 1975). Van Noort, Voorveld, and Van Reijmersdal (2012)
chosen the right product. Choice confidence “reflects the clarity with
show that higher levels of website interactivity induce higher levels of
which the consumer understands his or her preferences and the extent to
flow. Since Yim et al. (2017) confirm the effect of interactivity on im
which those preferences are believed to be correct” (Andrews, 2013, p.
mersion in an AR setting, we also hypothesize that interactivity en
751). While consumption visions are assumed to be perceived mentally,
hances immersion. The findings on the effect of interactivity on
with AR, consumers can not only mentally but also virtually try and
enjoyment, however, are mixed. In contrast to Pantano et al. (2017),
experience products they do not yet own. Furthermore, Poushneh
who find no support for this effect, Li, Daugherty, and Biocca (2001)
(2018) argues that 3D product presentations can increase certainty
state that enjoyment is particularly influenced by the ability to virtually
while shopping online since they enable consumers to better evaluate
inspect and interactively customize the product presentation. We follow
the desired product. Hence, we propose a positive effect of reality
this notion and expect a positive impact of interactivity on enjoyment.
congruence on choice confidence.
Further, online retailing research confirms that interactivity elicits
hedonic values (Yoo, Lee, & Park, 2010), which consist of pleasant H4a,b. Reality congruence positively affects a) media usefulness and b)
feelings while using a product. We argue that the positive feelings that choice confidence.
arise from using AR spread from the medium to the product and lead to
more positive evaluations, specifically product liking. Product liking 3.3. Interplay of affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses
comprises an affective evaluation of a chosen product. Research has
demonstrated that ownership imagery stimulates psychological owner Research assumes that individuals highly immersed in an activity do
ship and positive product evaluations (Kamleitner & Feuchtl, 2015). not necessarily perceive positive feelings during the flow experience, but
Moreover, the effect of ownership on evaluation is presumably even do so afterward (e.g., Mainemelis, 2001; Mainemelis & Dionysiou,
stronger when consumers can interact with virtual products. This 2015). Following this notion, Drengner et al. (2018) propose a process
interaction leads to greater familiarity with and more positive attitudes perspective of flow and expect enjoyment to be the outcome of an
toward the product, thereby enhancing product liking. immersive state. In an AR context, Yim et al. (2017) identify the positive
influence of immersion on enjoyment. In line with earlier studies, we
H1a–c. Interactivity positively affects a) immersion, b) enjoyment, and c)
conclude that consumers using AR do not have positive feelings while
product liking.
being immersed, but do so afterward.
In a virtual reality (VR) context, the quality of experience is
H5. Immersion positively affects enjoyment.
composed of user experience and quality of service, of which the latter
comprises factors such as response time, reliability, error, and latency Prior research has identified enjoyment as a main driver of online
(Hamam, Eid, El Saddik, & Georganas, 2008). Since the ultimate quality retail shopping (Childers, Carr, Peck, & Carson, 2001). In a VR context,
of experience is total immersion, we argue that smoothly and reliably Domina, Lee, and MacGillivray (2012) find a significant positive effect
running AR product presentations are required to create a feeling of of enjoyment on shopping intention. In addition, research indicates that
being absorbed and expect that system quality is a driver of immersion. enjoyment either directly (Spreer & Kallweit, 2014) or indirectly
Following research on innovative technologies (Yang, Yu, Zo, & Choi, through attitude toward use positively influences the intention to use AR
2016; Kowalczuk, 2018), we posit that media usefulness is a cognitive (Pantano et al., 2017; Yim et al., 2017). In line with this literature, we
response to system quality. Media usefulness encompasses the extent to argue that enjoyment is an important factor for inducing reuse in
which individuals believe that AR improves their shopping experience in tentions as a behavioral response.
terms of product search, evaluation, and choice quality through
H6. Enjoyment positively affects reuse intention.
decreased time and effort. We assume that consumers perceive AR-based
product presentations as more useful the more reliably, accurately, and A further antecedent of reuse intention is media usefulness. Based on
fluently they are processed. Thus, we follow Kim and Hyun (2016), who uses and gratification theory (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1973),
demonstrate that system, information, and service quality enhance Rauschnabel (2018) identifies media usefulness as a cognitive gratifi
media usefulness in an AR context. cation that elicits media usage intentions. Furthermore, in the AR
literature, empirical evidence indicates that media and perceived use
H2a,b. System quality positively affects a) immersion and b) media
fulness are major antecedents of use and reuse intentions (Kim et al.,
usefulness.
2016; Kim & Hyun, 2016; Pantano et al., 2017; Rese et al., 2014, 2017).
Mobile online touch points aim to provide consumers with purchase Hence, we posit that media usefulness is an additional relevant factor
relevant information. Research has found that mobile AR apps are influencing reuse intention.
perceived as useful because of the information they provide (Olsson, Owing to the vast number of products available on the Internet,
Lagerstam, Kärkkäinen, & Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, 2013). Moreover, purchase decisions are becoming more complex. Since consumers also
previous AR studies show that information quality (Kim, Hwang, Zo, & feel increasingly time pressured, online retailers face the challenge of
Lee, 2016; Pantano et al., 2017; Kim & Hyun, 2016) and perceived providing their customers with appropriate (i.e., relevant yet not su
informativeness (Rese et al., 2014; Rese et al., 2017) increase perceived perfluous) product information on which consumers can base their
usefulness. Hence, product informativeness is a driver of media purchase decisions (Ariely, 2000). Interactive media such as AR have the
usefulness. potential to solve this problem by allowing consumers to attain virtually
7
generated information by themselves. Since AR thus helps save time and the variations in reuse intention that arise from distinct levels of
effort when evaluating a product and improves product search and knowledge about AR. Furthermore, previous research has shown that
choice quality, it is reasonable to conclude that AR constitutes a helpful age and sex affect technology and media use (Correa, Hinsley, & De
decision aid. In line with Oh, Yoon, and Shyu (2008), who state that Zuniga, 2010); these demographic variables are also commonly
interactive decision aids lead to higher choice confidence, we expect a controlled for in related research fields (Chuah et al., 2016; Rauschna
positive influence of media usefulness on choice confidence. bel, 2018; Rauschnabel et al., 2018).
H7a,b. Media usefulness positively affects a) reuse intention and b) choice
4. Method
confidence.
According to feelings-as-information theory (Schwarz, 2012), the 4.1. Data collection
initial affective reactions to an object can be cognitively appraised and
they consequently determine the resulting beliefs. Thus, in line with the To test the proposed model, a laboratory experiment was conducted
notion that choice confidence can result from internal processes, in with 400 participants recruited at a German university in November and
ferences, and intuition (Andrews, 2013), we argue that product liking December 2018. Undergraduate students earned extra credits for a
leads to affect-consistent beliefs (Verhagen & Bloemers, 2018) and thus marketing course as an incentive for completing the study. In the first
enhances choice confidence. step, participants were asked to imagine that they have been hired at the
Furthermore, decision aids decrease the cognitive effort required to university. They were assigned to one of two conditions and invited to
make decisions and simultaneously increase decision confidence (Sis select a desk chair in the price range of €149–250 either by using the
meiro & Bucklin, 2004). In contrast to web-based product presentations, IKEA Place AR app or by browsing the IKEA mobile website on their
VR enables consumers to better imagine and evaluate how products will smartphones (Appendix A). In the second step, they completed an online
look in reality (Oh et al., 2008). Since AR further increases imagination questionnaire. At the beginning of the questionnaire, respondents were
by augmenting the product into the real world, we conclude that con asked to indicate the name of the chosen chair to verify that they
sumers are even more confident about their chosen product and their participated attentively in the experiment. Because of inappropriate
final purchase decision. responses to this question, two participants were excluded from the
sample. Thus, N = 398 participants (55.5% women) remained in the
H8. Product liking positively affects choice confidence.
final data set, of which n = 208 used the IKEA Place app and n = 190 the
H9. Choice confidence positively affects purchase intention. IKEA mobile website. On average, participants were 25.58 years old (SD
= 8.68) and indicated being rather experienced in using mobile AR apps
3.4. Mediating effects (M = 4.35, SD = 2.31).
Studying new media and innovative technologies with students is an
As noted earlier, AR characteristics are assumed to elicit affective established procedure. In the AR context, research has successfully
and cognitive consumer responses, which in turn affect the relevant conducted controlled experiments with the IKEA Place app and students
behavioral responses. Thus, in the suggested model, the affective re (Rauschnabel et al., 2019). Students are also often attracted to new
sponses of immersion, enjoyment, and product liking and the cognitive technologies early (Rauschnabel, 2018), and a homogeneous sample
responses of media usefulness and choice confidence are placed between increases internal validity, as it may rule out additional exogeneous
the AR characteristics and dependent variables. Hence, AR character variables (Chuah et al., 2016).
istics influence reuse and purchase intention through the affective and
cognitive mechanisms in the proposed model, resulting in the following 4.2. Measures
mediations:
The measurement scales for product informativeness (Rese et al.,
H10a,b. The effect of interactivity on reuse intention is mediated by a)
2014), media usefulness (Yim et al., 2017), immersion (Yim et al.,
immersion and enjoyment and b) enjoyment.
2017), interactivity (Pantano et al., 2017), reuse (Kim & Hyun, 2016),
H10c. The effect of interactivity on purchase intention is mediated by and purchase intention (Yim et al., 2017) were adopted from extant AR
product liking and choice confidence. research. To capture reality congruence, a measure was developed based
on the aesthetic quality items of Pantano et al. (2017). Additionally,
H11a,b. The effect of system quality on reuse intention is mediated by a)
scales for choice confidence (Oh et al., 2008), product liking (Cox & Cox,
immersion and enjoyment and b) media usefulness.
1988), enjoyment (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), and system quality
H11c. The effect of system quality on purchase intention is mediated by (Kowalczuk, 2018; Park, Kim, & Ohm, 2015) were included from studies
media usefulness and choice confidence. of VR and innovative technologies. All the items were adapted to the AR
and web contexts and measured on seven-point Likert or semantic dif
H12a. The effect of product informativeness on reuse intention is mediated
ferential scales.
by media usefulness.
H12b. The effect of product informativeness on purchase intention is 5. Empirical analysis and results
mediated by media usefulness and choice confidence.
5.1. Measurement model assessment
H13a. The effect of reality congruence on reuse intention is mediated by
media usefulness.
The proposed model was validated using partial least squares
H13b,c. The effect of reality congruence on purchase intention is mediated structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), which focuses on maximizing
by b) media usefulness and choice confidence and c) choice confidence. the explained variance of the endogenous constructs (Henseler, Ringle,
& Sarstedt, 2012) and provides robust solutions even for complex
3.5. Control variables models and nonnormally distributed data (Chin & Newsted, 1999;
Henseler et al., 2012). SmartPLS 3.2.8 was used to assess the measure
Three control variables are integrated into the basic model to ac ment and structural model separately for both conditions (web/app); to
count for individual differences in age, sex, and previous media expe contrast the results, a multigroup analysis (MGA) was employed.
rience, defined as the degree of a user’s familiarity with AR (Yim et al., One item from each of the scales for system quality and interactivity
2017). Controlling for previous media experience allows us to single out was excluded to significantly increase the Cronbach’s alpha (α) values.
8
Table 3
Measurement Model: Internal Reliability and Convergent Validity.
Constructs and Items Stand. α C.R. AVE
Loadings
AR Web AR Web AR Web AR Web
Interactivity (Pantano et al., 2017) 0.82 0.78 0.89 0.87 0.74 0.70
Through the interaction with the virtual product presentation in the AR smartphone app 0.871 0.889
(on the mobile website), I can get a profound picture of the product.
The virtual product presentation in the AR smartphone app (on the mobile website) has
remarkable interaction features.*
I am able to interact with the virtual product presentation in the AR smartphone app (on the 0.841 0.788
mobile website) in order to get information tailored to my specific needs.
The degree of interaction with the virtual product presentation in the AR smartphone app 0.861 0.812
(on the mobile website) is outstanding.
System Quality (Kowalczuk, 2018; Park et al., 2015) 0.94 0.90 0.95 0.92 0.80 0.70
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) is promptly responsive to my requests and 0.919 0.854
provides good results.
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) performs its functions quickly and efficiently. 0.896 0.843
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) is reliable (it is always up and running, runs 0.898 0.777
without errors, and does what it is supposed to do).
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) provides perfect and precise services in line with 0.883 0.862
the purpose of the system.
I assume no limitations or problems in using the AR smartphone app (mobile website).*
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) fully meets my needs. 0.866 0.857
Product Informativeness (Rese et al., 2014) 0.85 0.87 0.89 0.90 0.63 0.65
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) shows the information I expected. 0.752 0.784
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) provides detailed information about the 0.854 0.849
products.
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) provides complete information about the 0.788 0.824
products.
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) provides information that helps me in my 0.832 0.856
decision.
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) provides information to compare products. 0.734 0.723
Reality Congruence (developed based on Pantano et al., 2017) 0.93 0.88 0.95 0.91 0.74 0.62
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) presents virtual products impressively.+ 0.864 0.825
Overall, I find that the AR smartphone app (mobile website) presents virtual products 0.849 0.817
attractively.
The design of the virtual products is visually pleasant. 0.883 0.805
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) presents virtual products visually appealingly. 0.910 0.845
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) presents the design of the virtual products (e.g., 0.842 0.715
colors, shapes) realistically.
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) presents virtual products as if they were real.+ 0.816 0.722
Immersion (Yim et al., 2017) 0.82 0.86 0.89 0.91 0.73 0.78
Not deeply engrossed / deeply engrossed 0.835 0.859
Not absorbed / absorbed 0.847 0.897
My attention was not focused / my attention was focused 0.878 0.895
Enjoyment (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) 0.89 0.78 0.93 0.87 0.82 0.70
I find using the AR smartphone app (mobile website) to be enjoyable. 0.900 0.852
The actual process of using the AR smartphone app (mobile website) is pleasant. 0.879 0.763
I have fun using the AR smartphone app (mobile website). 0.931 0.882
Product Liking (Cox & Cox, 1988) 0.83 0.71 0.90 0.84 0.74 0.63
Bad / good 0.876 0.835
Unpleasant / pleasant 0.848 0.832
Unlikable / likable 0.857 0.714
Media Usefulness (Yim et al., 2017) 0.90 0.88 0.92 0.91 0.71 0.67
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) enhances my ability to make product choices 0.879 0.806
more effectively.
Using the AR smartphone app (mobile website) saves me time. 0.743 0.753
Using the AR smartphone app (mobile website) improves the quality of my search for 0.898 0.875
products.
The AR smartphone app (mobile website) enables me to acquire information more quickly. 0.787 0.830
Overall, I find the AR smartphone app (mobile website) useful in my shopping experience. 0.897 0.836
Choice Confidence (Oh et al., 2008) 0.90 0.90 0.94 0.94 0.84 0.84
Not satisfied at all / very satisfied+ 0.915 0.938
Not confident at all / very confident 0.940 0.903
Uncertain / certain 0.891 0.905
Reuse Intention (Kim & Hyun, 2016) 0.95 0.94 0.97 0.96 0.91 0.90
I intend to reuse the AR smartphone app (mobile website). 0.960 0.967
I predict I will reuse the AR smartphone app (mobile website). 0.939 0.907
I plan to reuse the AR smartphone app (mobile website). 0.961 0.969
Purchase Intention (Yim et al., 2017) 0.94 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.86 0.89
Uncertain / certain 0.910 0.919
Unlikely / likely 0.925 0.954
Improbable / probable 0.941 0.945
Impossible / possible 0.922 0.948
Note: + new scale item; * item excluded from the scale.
9
Table 4
Correlations of the Constructs and Square Root of the AVE.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Interactivity(1) 0.831/ 0.449 0.541 0.581 0.487 0.478 0.357 0.488 0.469 0.383 0.333
0.858
System Quality(2) 0.626 0.839/ 0.500 0.373 0.273 0.444 0.379 0.537 0.340 0.370 0.161
0.892
Product Informativeness(3) 0.623 0.530 0.809/ 0.442 0.302 0.417 0.265 0.568 0.277 0.405 0.165
0.793
Reality Congruence(4) 0.623 0.484 0.530 0.790/ 0.420 0.385 0.441 0.424 0.462 0.301 0.275
0.861
Immersion(5) 0.430 0.452 0.402 0.333 0.884/ 0.516 0.347 0.399 0.355 0.336 0.255
0.853
Enjoyment(6) 0.640 0.598 0.497 0.547 0.551 0.834/ 0.300 0.632 0.323 0.461 0.228
0.903
Product Liking(7) 0.368 0.330 0.272 0.335 0.193 0.266 0.796/ 0.410 0.616 0.366 0.365
0.860
Media Usefulness(8) 0.650 0.633 0.635 0.529 0.555 0.713 0.246 0.821/ 0.403 0.484 0.093
0.843
Choice Confidence(9) 0.451 0.426 0.293 0.391 0.268 0.309 0.633 0.365 0.916/ 0.381 0.371
0.915
Reuse Intention(10) 0.500 0.413 0.391 0.398 0.416 0.615 0.259 0.608 0.312 0.948/ 0.188
0.953
Purchase Intention(11) 0.274 0.257 0.227 0.209 0.066 0.130 0.421 0.225 0.527 0.113 0.942/
0.925
Note: Square root of the AVE is shown in italics on the diagonal. Correlation values for AR (web) are shown below (above) the diagonal.
of system quality and product informativeness, the cognitive response of

Table 5
media usefulness, and the behavioral response of reuse intention achieve
Results of the Mann–Whitney Test.
significantly higher values in the web condition. On the contrary, the
Constructs IKEA Place AR IKEA mobile p affective responses of immersion and enjoyment are significantly higher
app website
rated in the AR condition. Hence, in contrast to the initial assumption,
M SD M SD the overall pattern shows that cognitive and behavioral responses are
AR Characteristics perceived as higher in the web condition and that only affective re
Interactivity 4.85 1.27 4.90 1.13 0.872 sponses are perceived as higher in the AR condition.
System Quality 4.86 1.40 5.58 1.02 0.000
Product Informativeness 4.89 1.11 5.36 1.07 0.000
5.3. Structural model assessment
Reality Congruence 5.07 1.25 5.12 1.06 0.864
Affective Responses
Immersion 4.70 1.30 4.14 1.35 0.000 The significances of the path coefficients in the proposed model were
Enjoyment 5.35 1.40 4.67 1.29 0.000 assessed separately for both conditions. Fig. 2 displays the parameter
Product Liking 5.48 1.03 5.70 0.83 0.059
estimates.
Cognitive Responses
Media Usefulness 4.93 1.41 5.49 1.16 0.000
The results for the AR condition indicate that all hypotheses except
Choice Confidence 5.13 1.14 5.33 1.02 0.074 for one (H3d) are corroborated and that the AR characteristics positively
Behavioral Responses influence affective consumer responses. Interactivity has a significant
Reuse Intention 4.68 1.66 5.21 1.53 0.001 effect on immersion (H1a; βH1a = 0.242; p ≤ 0.01), enjoyment (H1b;
Purchase Intention 4.32 1.71 4.41 1.76 0.495
βH1b = 0.494; p ≤ 0.001), and product liking (H1c; βH1c = 0.368;
Note: Means were computed using the aggregate scale values.
p ≤ 0.001). The findings further show that system quality enhances
immersion (H2a; βH2a = 0.300; p ≤ 0.001) and media usefulness (H2b;
As shown in Table 3, after these adjustments, all the constructs exhibited βH2b = 0.365; p ≤ 0.001). The AR characteristic of product informa
α values higher than 0.70, indicating internal consistency (Nunnally, tiveness significantly affects media usefulness (H3; βH3 = 0.355;
1978). p ≤ 0.001). While the hypothesized relationship between reality
The requirements for convergent validity were met since all the congruence and media usefulness (H4a; βH4a = 0.164; p ≤ 0.01) turns
scales exceeded the threshold values of composite reliability (C.R. > out to be significant, the effect on choice confidence is not (H4b; βH4b =
0.70) and average variance extracted (AVE > 0.50) (Hair, Babin, 0.118; p = 0.062). Concerning the interrelations of affective responses,
Anderson, & Black, 2014). The high factor loadings of all the items the results imply that immersion exerts a significant effect on enjoyment
proved the applicability of the scales to our context. Further, discrimi (H5; βH5 = 0.338; p ≤ 0.001). In terms of behavioral responses, enjoy
nant validity was established by employing the Fornell–Larcker criterion ment (H6; βH6 = 0.368; p ≤ 0.001) and media usefulness (H7a; βH7a =
(Table 4; Fornell & Larcker, 1981) as well as the heterotrait-monotrait 0.346; p ≤ 0.001) influence reuse intention. In addition, media useful
(HTMT) ratio of correlations, where all the reflective constructs were ness (H7b; βH7b = 0.167; p ≤ 0.05) and product liking (H8; βH8 = 0.552;
found to be below the threshold value of 0.85 (Henseler, Ringle, & p ≤ 0.001) significantly affect choice confidence, which is a strong
Sarstedt, 2015). predictor of the behavioral response of purchase intention (H9;
βH9 = 0.527; p ≤ 0.001).
In the web condition, three divergent findings emerge. In contrast to
5.2. Descriptive statistics the AR condition, no empirical support is found for the effects of system
quality on immersion (H2a; βH2a = 0.068; p = 0.344) and media use
To investigate the differences between the two forms of product fulness on choice confidence (H7b; βH7b = 0.123; p = .061). The influ
presentation, a nonparametric Mann–Whitney test was applied since a ence of reality congruence on choice confidence, however, turns out to
Shapiro–Wilk test indicated that all the variables were nonnormally be significant (H4b; βH4b = 0.199; p ≤ 0.01). While both models show an
distributed. Overall, the results in Table 5 imply that the characteristics appropriate predictive power for all the dependent variables, more
10
Fig. 2. Model and Results.
Table 6
Mediation Paths: The Impact of AR on Consumer Responses.
Paths IKEA Place AR app IKEA mobile website Mediation
Path. p t SE Path. p t SE
coeff. coeff.
Interactivity
H10a → Immersion → Enjoyment → Reuse Intention 0.030 < 0.05 2.48 0.012 0.044 < 0.05 2.28 0.019 ✓/✓
H10b → Enjoyment → Reuse Intention 0.182 < 0.01 3.95 0.046 0.076 < 0.05 2.22 0.034 ✓/✓
H10c → Product Liking → Choice Confidence → Purchase Intention 0.107 < 0.01 3.66 0.029 0.063 < 0.01 3.04 0.021 ✓/✓
System Quality
H11a → Immersion → Enjoyment → Reuse Intention 0.037 < 0.05 2.16 0.017 0.007 0.422 0.80 0.008 ✓/⨯
H11b → Media Usefulness → Reuse Intention 0.126 < 0.01 3.37 0.038 0.098 < 0.01 3.04 0.032 ✓/✓
H11c → Media Usefulness → Choice Confidence → Purchase 0.032 0.081 1.74 0.018 0.014 0.094 1.68 0.008 ⨯/⨯
Intention
Product Informativeness
H12a → Media Usefulness → Reuse Intention 0.123 < 0.01 2.97 0.041 0.111 < 0.01 2.94 0.038 ✓/✓
H12b → Media Usefulness → Choice Confidence → Purchase 0.031 < 0.05 2.31 0.014 0.016 0.092 1.69 0.009 ✓/⨯
Intention
Reality Congruence
H13a → Media Usefulness → Reuse Intention 0.057 < 0.05 2.16 0.026 0.051 0.085 1.73 0.029 ✓/⨯
H13b → Media Usefulness → Choice Confidence → Purchase 0.014 0.082 1.74 0.008 0.007 0.207 1.26 0.006 ⨯/⨯
Intention
H13c → Choice Confidence → Purchase Intention 0.062 0.073 1.79 0.035 0.074 < 0.05 2.52 0.029 ⨯/✓
variance of reuse (R2AR = 0.44 vs. R2web = 0.27) and purchase intention 0.197; p = .02) and system quality on immersion (H2a; β|AR-Web| =
(R2AR = 0.28 vs. R2web = 0.14) is explained in the AR than in the web 0.232; p = .023) differ significantly between both conditions (Appendix
condition. B).
To assess whether the observed differences between both groups are
significant, an MGA was conducted. Specifically, the PLS-MGA approach 5.4. Mediation tests
was used, in line with the nonparametric nature of PLS-SEM. The
bootstrap results (5,000 samples, no sign changes; two-tailed, p < 0.05) As this study explores the mechanisms through which AR charac
show that the effects of interactivity on enjoyment (H1b; β|AR-Web| = teristics drive reuse and purchase intention, additional mediation tests
11
were carried out. Building on the hypotheses that were significant in the Second, to identify unobserved heterogeneity, which occurs when
overall analysis, several important mediation paths through the cogni subgroups exist in the data that produce notably different model esti
tive and affective responses for AR-based and web-based product pre mates (Sarstedt et al., 2020; Hair, Risher, Sarstedt, & Ringle, 2019), a
sentations were identified. Testing these mediators provides deeper finite mixture (FIMIX) segmentation was employed. Since the indicators
insights into the mechanisms through which AR characteristics influ do not jointly point to a particular segmentation solution,2 unobserved
ence behavioral consumer responses. In accordance with Preacher and heterogeneity is not critical.
Hayes (2008), bootstrapping (5,000 samples) was employed to test the Finally, we tested for endogeneity. Measurement errors, simulta
hypothesized mediations. Table 6 displays the results of the mediation neous causality, (un)observed heterogeneity, and omitted variables
analysis separately for both product presentation types. have been identified as potential roots of endogeneity (Ebbes, Papies, &
The findings show that all the analyzed AR characteristics exert van Heerde, 2017; Hult et al., 2018). Based on the preceding analysis,
significant indirect effects on either reuse intention or purchase inten measurement errors and heterogeneity were discarded as potential
tion. For AR-based product presentations, purchase intention is driven sources of endogeneity; however, concerns remained about omitted
by the AR characteristics of interactivity (H10c) and product informa variables, which are the most common threat to endogeneity (Hult et al.,
tiveness (H12b). While the first impacts purchase intention via both 2018). In our case, omitted variables could result from not considering
affective (product liking) and cognitive (choice confidence) responses, consumers’ needs for new products and technology optimism, two fac
the latter is only cognitively processed (media usefulness and choice tors that could affect both the exogeneous and the endogenous variables.
confidence). The reuse intention of AR-based product presentations is Hult et al. (2018) propose dealing with the endogeneity arising from
affected by interactivity, system quality, product informativeness, and omitted variables in PLS-SEM using a Gaussian copula approach (Park &
reality congruence. Interactivity is processed affectively by immersion Gupta, 2012). As the data in the present study are nonnormally
and enjoyment (H10a,b). System quality elicits both affective (immer distributed, the prerequisite for applying this procedure is fulfilled (Rutz
sion) and cognitive (media usefulness) responses, through which it & Watson, 2019). The Web Appendix presents the detailed results of the
indirectly affects reuse intention (H11a,b). The relationships of product Gaussian copula approach. The partly significant Gaussian copulas point
informativeness (H12a) and reality congruence (H13a) on reuse inten to a potential endogeneity issue in the effects of media usefulness on
tion are purely cognitively mediated through media usefulness. Despite choice confidence (AR), interactivity on product liking, and reality
a significant direct effect, the hypothesized mediating effect of media congruence on choice confidence (web). These results cast doubt on the
usefulness and choice confidence on the relationship between system significance of H7b in the AR condition as well as H4b and H8 in the web
quality and purchase intention is not significant (H11c). After account condition.
ing for the hypotheses that are not supported, two differences in the web
condition emerge. While the hypothesized mediation path of reality 6. Conclusion
congruence through media usefulness on reuse intention is not signifi
cant (H13a), the mediating effect of choice confidence on the relation 6.1. Theoretical implications
ship between reality congruence and purchase intention is significant
(H13c). This study explores the relative advantage of AR-based over web-
based product presentations. In the first step, we compare the mean
values of the system characteristics and consumer reactions to the IKEA
5.5. Robustness tests Place app and IKEA mobile website. In the second step, we apply SEM to
reveal the paths by which consumers cognitively, affectively, and
We controlled for the effects of age, sex, and previous media expe behaviorally respond to different system characteristics.
rience on reuse intention. While none of the control variables is signif The results of the mean comparisons show that the system charac
icant in the AR condition, previous media experience and sex are teristics of system quality and product informativeness are perceived as
significantly related to reuse intention in the web condition. When higher for web- than for AR-based product presentations, while no dif
controlling for these variables, the results of the hypothesized re ferences exist in terms of interactivity and reality congruence. Partici
lationships remain stable. To further assess the robustness of the results, pants did not find AR as informative as websites, at least for the chosen
supplementary analyses that address nonlinear effects, unobserved product category. Consumers’ information needs may explain these re
heterogeneity, and endogeneity (Sarstedt et al., 2020) were conducted. sults. Since websites offer additional information (e.g., about materials
First, to test for nonlinear effects, Ramsey (1969) regression equation and specifications), they are better suited to satisfy the information
specification error test (RESET) was applied on the latent variable scores demand of potential customers. Therefore, identifying the required in
of the original model, as recommended by Sarstedt and Mooi (2019). formation would help improve AR apps. Regarding system quality,
This test was applied to all the partial regressions in the model.1 Then, websites presumably require less processing speed than computation-
the interaction terms, representing the quadratic effects, were included intensive AR media, where performance differences become more
in the critical regressions (Sarstedt et al., 2020). The bootstrapping re obvious. Further, reality congruence does not significantly differ be
sults (5,000 samples, no sign changes) indicate no significant nonlinear tween both conditions, indicating that the computer-generated products
effects in either condition. Hence, the linear model is robust. in the AR app are perceived as equally realistic as the product pictures
shown on the mobile website. This implies the high augmentation
quality of the tested IKEA Place app.
1
The RESET implies that two of 10 partial regressions in the AR condition The results of the mean comparisons further show that AR-based
and one of 10 partial regressions in the web condition are subject to non product presentations are superior to web-based product presentations
linearities (95% confidence interval). Therefore, we ran curve estimations
(Sarstedt & Mooi, 2019), finding quadratic relationships between system
quality and interactivity on immersion (web).
2
Owing to the minimum sample size requirements to reliably estimate our
model, we considered two- and three segment solutions in our analyses and
assessed different segmentation retention criteria (for a detailed discussion, see
Sarstedt et al. (2020) and Hair, Sarstedt, Matthews, and Ringle (2016)). For
both data sets, AIC3 and CAIC do not point to the same number of segments. For
AR, AIC4 and BIC do not unambiguously support one of these solutions and for
web, they imply a one-segment solution.
12
in terms of affective consumer responses. Specifically, the AR condition Regarding the interrelations among affective, cognitive, and behav
outperforms the web condition regarding the effects on immersion and ioral responses, our results show that, in both conditions, immersion
enjoyment. These findings are consistent with those obtained by Yim enhances enjoyment, supporting the process perspective of flow postu
et al. (2017) and they underline the experiential nature of AR. lated by Drengner et al. (2018). Further, in line with uses and gratifi
Conversely, concerning cognitive responses, the values for usefulness cation theory, they confirm the importance of utilitarian and hedonic
are higher for web-based product presentations. This implies that con values, as enjoyment and media usefulness increase AR reuse intentions
sumers perceive lower effectiveness and efficiency when they use AR to in both conditions. Therefore, this study supports the findings obtained
search for information in the pre-purchase stage. Consumers may not yet in the extant AR literature (Pantano et al., 2017; Rese et al., 2017).
be familiar with the interfaces, features, and novel AR media in general Although product liking and choice confidence have been proven to
and the established design of a website may save them more time when, be relevant for explaining purchase intentions in online shopping
for example, searching for purchase relevant information. Another (Flavián, Gurrea, & Orús, 2016; Lee, Hong, & Lee, 2004; Maier & Dost,
reason could be that AR is not primarily designed to enhance purchase 2018), prior AR research has widely neglected them. We address this
efficiency, but rather increase engagement with products and brands research gap by integrating these constructs into our model. The finding
(Rauschnabel et al., 2019). We expect that future diffusion and media that product liking, which arises from the interaction with a virtual
experience with AR will increase media usefulness, although results of product, increases choice confidence is supported by feelings-as-
Yim et al. (2017) do not support this notion. Finally, regarding behav information theory (Schwarz, 2012).3 Finally, this research shows that
ioral responses, higher reuse intentions are observed in the web condi choice confidence has a huge impact on purchase intention.
tion. As consumers are currently more accustomed to choosing and By conducting mediation analyses, this study establishes the rele
purchasing products on websites than by AR, these results could be vance of AR characteristics for not only directly enhancing cognitive and
explained through habitualization concerning the web channel. affective responses but also indirectly increasing reuse and purchase
SEM unravels how consumers respond to the system characteristics intentions. While all the examined characteristics (interactivity, system
of interactivity, system quality, product informativeness, and reality quality, product informativeness, and reality congruence) indirectly
congruence of both the AR-based and the web-based product pre influence reuse intention through the affective and cognitive mecha
sentations. In both conditions, interactivity elicits the affective re nisms in the AR condition, reality congruence exerts no significant in
sponses of immersion, enjoyment, and product liking. The better direct effect on reuse intention in the web condition.
consumers perceive the possibility to interact with a virtual product, the For the indirect effects of the AR characteristics on purchase inten
more they are immersed and caught in the situation and the more they tion, divergent findings exist. While, in the AR condition, only inter
enjoy the technology. The MGA results show that the effect of inter activity and product informativeness have a significant indirect effect on
activity on enjoyment is significantly higher for the AR condition than purchase intention, interactivity and reality congruence are especially
the web condition, whereas the opposite is true for the effect of inter important for indirectly establishing purchase intentions in the web
activity on immersion. AR is a completely new experience, where con condition.
sumers can view virtual products in their actual environment. Thus, we Overall, this research addresses two important aspects raised in the
suppose that the interaction with virtual products is of less importance AR marketing literature. First, as this study concentrates on the unique
for creating a feeling of being absorbed compared with web-based pre aspects of AR, our understanding of AR-specific constructs is deepened
sentations with static pictures, where much more interactivity is (Dwivedi et al., 2020). Second, the results of this study provide support
required to create immersive experiences. The model further shows that, for AR marketing by generating “a profound understanding of user
in the AR condition, system quality is also a significant driver of im behavior” (Hinsch, Felix, & Rauschnabel, 2020, p. 2).
mersion, implying that smoothly and reliably running AR presentations
are required to create a feeling of being absorbed. This effect is not 6.2. Managerial implications
significant in the web condition, supporting the assumption that the
success of web-based product presentations is less dependent on a high The findings provide valuable implications for retailers and app
processing speed. In both conditions, system quality significantly en developers alike. Since AR outperforms product presentations on mobile
hances media usefulness. As system quality is identified as the main websites in terms of affective responses, we recommend AR as a valuable
driver of usefulness for AR-based product presentations, the usefulness extension of the marketing strategy. While maintaining the convenience
of the system is more pronounced when AR performs accurately and of online shopping, with AR, retailers offering products such as furni
reliably. This finding supports research on innovative technologies ture, fashion, and accessories can integrate a sense of offline shopping
(Yang et al., 2016; Kowalczuk, 2018). The finding that product infor into their online channels and provide consumers with the possibility to
mativeness increases media usefulness is also in line with those of prior directly experience and interact with virtual product presentations. This
AR research (Rese et al., 2014). visualization reduces uncertainty and helps consumers make more
This research contributes to the AR literature by integrating reality informed decisions when shopping online. In this regard, companies
congruence. Since consumers derive value from using AR through could benefit from reduced return rates on the part of online shopping
interacting with virtual product presentations, we hypothesize that the affine consumers and reduced webrooming among those who prefer
success of AR depends on how realistically the virtual product pre offline shopping.
sentations are perceived. To capture the visual appeal and entertainment When deciding to integrate AR into their e-commerce channels, re
value of AR, previous studies have examined factors such as aesthetics tailers should first ensure that potential customers use and reuse their
(Huang & Liao, 2015), aesthetic quality (Pantano et al., 2017), vividness applications and then motivate consumers to buy their products. Mar
(Yim et al., 2017), augmentation (Javornik, 2016), and augmentation keters may see the highest adoption of AR when emphasizing both
quality (Poushneh, 2018). Reality congruence, however, goes beyond cognitive and affective benefits. In advertisements on their websites or
these aspects, as it describes how the virtual fits the real product. For in social media campaigns, retailers should focus on underlining the
both conditions, the findings show that reality congruence significantly playful character of AR to reinforce immersion and enjoyment, and
enhances media usefulness, underlining its relevance for online shop
ping, where consumers rely on a realistic size and shape of the product.
By contrast, the results on the effect of reality congruence on choice 3
The results of the effects of media usefulness on choice confidence (AR) and
confidence are less clear. In the AR condition, this effect is insignificant reality congruence and product liking on choice confidence (web) should be
and thus we need to be cautious about the positive effect in the web interpreted with caution because of possible endogeneity issues indicated by
condition due to the significant Gaussian copulas. the Gaussian copula results.
13
ultimately enhance the customer experience. Despite exclusively high for endogeneity and would thus be a fruitful extension to this research
lighting its hedonic values, retailers should equally focus on the utili given the potential endogeneity issues identified with the help of the
tarian aspects (Rauschnabel et al., 2019) of AR by communicating its Gaussian copulas.
usefulness. We see a need for action in this regard, as our findings Furthermore, Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) emphasize the
indicate that web-based product presentations score higher on useful importance of integrating experiential factors when studying consumer
ness than AR. Hence, to benefit from AR in the long run, marketers responses. We followed this notion by considering the affective experi
should solve actual customer needs and provide outstanding customer ential constructs of enjoyment and immersion in the model. Since the
experiences rather than creating short-term buzz with new gimmicks. As results highlight the importance of these affective factors for establish
a practical example of useful AR content, Hyundai concentrates on ing reuse and purchase intentions, further research is needed to examine
customer needs and enhances the value of the customer journey beyond if wear-out effects are an important barrier to continuous AR usage and
the fun factor by offering an AR-based user manual (CX Network, 2019). how they could be attenuated. In addition, future research should
Another important area on which retailers and developers should identify and examine further experiential factors in the cognitive and
focus is AR characteristics. To elicit positive cognitive and affective ultimately in the behavioral states in the AR context. For example,
consumer responses and reuse intentions, they should provide promptly qualitative research is well-suited to shed light on the mental events and
responsive AR apps that are informative, interactive, and entail realistic private processes associated with the consumption and usage of AR
product presentations. For example, IKEA, while making a great technologies in retailing.
contribution toward pushing AR further into mainstream, has not yet While the findings of this study imply that virtual products are
managed to supplement its AR app with the full amount of information perceived as realistic, future research should examine post-purchase
available on the website (e.g., materials and measurements of the product satisfaction to determine if AR technologies have the potential
furniture). However, for retailers, it is crucial to identify and provide the to decrease return rates in online channels. Since reality congruence
key information required for decision making to increase the informa significantly affects media usefulness, it is likely that the perceived fit
tiveness and usefulness of AR. App developers should further enhance between the virtual and real products is also relevant for other mixed
interactivity by integrating more options to position, adjust, and rotate reality and VR technologies. Because this study is based on only one
the shown products. They should also ensure the precise camera align product category, further research should apply the proposed model to
ment of virtual objects to the real world, even under poor light condi other product categories and choice situations.
tions, and steadily enhance the quality and reliability of their AR tools. This study compares two product presentation forms currently
Only through high system quality can a realistic virtual product pre offered by one company, which allows us to enhance the external val
sentation be achieved, which in turn increases the usefulness of AR. idity of the results and prevent differences in brand preferences or
Finally, retailers should focus on enhancing customers’ choice con product involvement from altering them. However, as we compare static
fidence, as it significantly increases purchase intentions. To generate web-based with AR-based product presentations, we contrast two pre
positive product evaluations and in turn choice confidence, the results sentation forms at the opposite ends of an interaction continuum. Since
imply that they should further improve interactivity. One practical research has already shown differences between static and more vivid
example to increase choice confidence is LEGO’s digital box, an AR kiosk product presentations in the web context (e.g., Jiang & Benbasat, 2007),
in which consumers can see how the assembled LEGO technic product future research should compare reactions between AR and more vivid
will look. Through this innovation, LEGO has managed to increase web-based product presentations. Overall, while AR is still in its infancy,
engagement and convince visitors to buy its products. it is considered as a new and promising tool and should therefore be the
focus of future retailing research.
6.3. Limitations and future research directions
Although this study provides meaningful findings and implications, Declaration of Competing Interest
it is not free of limitations. The results are limited to the extent that a
convenience sample consisting of college students was used. While this The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
young sample is assumed to be appropriate for studying AR, students are interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
often attracted to new technologies early (Rauschnabel, 2018), limiting the work reported in this paper.
the generalizability of the findings. Although a homogeneous sample
increases internal validity (Chuah et al., 2016), differences to other age Acknowledgements
groups could cause external validity issues (Yim et al., 2017). Thus,
future research should investigate age-related differences. The authors gratefully acknowledge the valuable feedback from the
By relying on a more exploratory analytical approach (i.e., PLS-SEM) reviewers, track chairs, and attendees of the 48th EMAC Annual Con
and a convenience sample, the nature of the presented study is rather ference and the 5th International AR & VR Conference (IAVR). We give
exploratory. Hence, future research is needed to corroborate our results our special thanks to the anonymous Journal of Business Research re
and causal inferences by, for example, employing covariance-based SEM viewers and guest editors for their guidance and suggestions. We
(see Hair, Babin, and Krey (2017) for an extensive review). In addition, furthermore thank the research and the student assistants for their help
the latter provides a straightforward approach to diagnose and control with data collection.
Appendix A:. Experimental conditions
14
Appendix B:. Results of the hypothesis tests and multigroup analysis
Hypotheses IKEA Place AR app IKEA mobile website Sig. effects AR/web
Path. coeff. p t SE Path. coeff. p t SE
H1a Interactivity → Immersion 0.242 < 0.01 2.90 0.084 0.456 < 0.001 6.39 0.071 ✓ / ✓*
H1b Interactivity → Enjoyment 0.494 < 0.001 8.23 0.060 0.297 < 0.001 3.88 0.077 ✓ / ✓*
H1c Interactivity → Product liking 0.368 < 0.001 5.27 0.070 0.357 < 0.001 5.34 0.067 ✓/✓
H2a System quality → Immersion 0.300 < 0.001 3.42 0.088 0.068 0.344 0.95 0.072 ✓ / ⨯*
H2b System quality → Media usefulness 0.365 < 0.001 4.36 0.084 0.305 < 0.001 4.32 0.071 ✓/✓
H3 Product informativeness → Media usefulness 0.355 < 0.001 4.56 0.078 0.346 < 0.001 4.67 0.074 ✓/✓
H4a Reality congruence → Media usefulness 0.164 < 0.01 2.66 0.062 0.158 < 0.05 2.09 0.075 ✓/✓
H4b Reality congruence → Choice confidence 0.118 0.062 1.86 0.063 0.199 < 0.01 3.12 0.064 ⨯ / ✓**
H5 Immersion → Enjoyment 0.338 < 0.001 5.91 0.057 0.371 < 0.001 4.86 0.076 ✓/✓
H6 Enjoyment → Reuse intention 0.368 < 0.001 4.65 0.079 0.257 < 0.01 2.94 0.087 ✓/✓
H7a Media usefulness → Reuse intention 0.346 < 0.001 4.48 0.077 0.322 < 0.001 4.20 0.076 ✓/✓
H7b Media usefulness → Choice confidence 0.167 < 0.05 2.30 0.073 0.123 0.061 1.88 0.066 ✓** / ⨯
H8 Product liking → Choice confidence 0.552 < 0.001 10.44 0.053 0.477 < 0.001 7.35 0.065 ✓ / ✓**
H9 Choice confidence → Purchase intention 0.527 < 0.001 10.92 0.048 0.371 < 0.001 5.56 0.067 ✓ / ✓*
**
Note: * Significant differences from the MGA (two-tailed; p < .05; p > .95) Gaussian copula results point to nonsignificant effects (Web Appendix)
Appendix C. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.050.
References BCG. Augmented Reality: Is the Camera the Next Big Thing in Advertising? (2018).
http://image-src.bcg.com/Images/BCG-Augmented-Reality-Apr-2018-r_tcm9-
188072.pdf Accessed 01 August 2018.
Algharabat, R., Alalwan, A. A., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2017). Three dimensional
Beck, M., & Crié, D. (2018). I virtually try it… I want it! Virtual Fitting Room: A tool to
product presentation quality antecedents and their consequences for online
increase on-line and off-line exploratory behavior, patronage and purchase
retailers: The moderating role of virtual product experience. Journal of Retailing
intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 40, 279–286. https://doi.org/
and Consumer Services, 36, 203–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.08.006.
jretconser.2017.02.007.
Bleier, A., Harmeling, C. M., & Palmatier, R. W. (2019). Creating effective online
Algharabat, R., & Dennis, C. (2010). Using authentic 3D product visualisation for an
customer experiences. Journal of Marketing, 83(2), 98–119. https://doi.org/
electrical online retailer. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 9(2), 97–115. https://doi.
10.1177/0022242918809930.
org/10.1362/147539210X511326.
Childers, L. T., Carr, L. C., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian
Andrews, D. (2013). The interplay of information diagnosticity and need for cognitive
motivations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77(4), 511–535.
closure in determining choice confidence. Psychology & Marketing, 30(9), 749–764.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00056-2.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20643.
Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with small
Ariely, D. (2000). Controlling the information flow: Effects on consumers’ decision
samples using partial least squares. Statistical Strategies for Small Sample Research, 1
making and preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 233–248. https://doi.
(1), 307–341.
org/10.1086/314322.
Chuah, S. H. W., Rauschnabel, P. A., Krey, N., Nguyen, B., Ramayah, T., & Lade, S.
Baek, T. H., Yoo, C. Y., & Yoon, S. (2018). Augment yourself through virtual mirror:
(2016). Wearable technologies: The role of usefulness and visibility in smartwatch
The impact of self-viewing and narcissism on consumer responses. International
adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 276–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Journal of Advertising, 37(3), 421–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/
chb.2016.07.047.
02650487.2016.1244887.
15
Correa, T., Hinsley, A. W., & De Zuniga, H. G. (2010). Who interacts on the Web?: The Huang, T. L., & Liao, S. (2015). A model of acceptance of augmented-reality interactive
intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, technology: The moderating role of cognitive innovativeness. Electronic Commerce
26(2), 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.09.003. Research, 15(2), 269–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-014-9163-2.
Cox, D. S., & Cox, A. D. (1988). What does familiarity breed? Complexity as a moderator Huang, T. L., & Liao, S. L. (2017). Creating e-shopping multisensory flow experience
of repetition effects in advertisement evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 15 through augmented-reality interactive technology. Internet Research, 27(2),
(1), 111–116. https://doi.org/10.1086/209149. 449–475. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-11-2015-0321.
Cox, D., & Cox, A. D. (2002). Beyond first impressions: The effects of repeated exposure Hult, G. T. M., Hair, J. F., Jr, Proksch, D., Sarstedt, M., Pinkwart, A., & Ringle, C. M.
on consumer liking of visually complex and simple product designs. Journal of the (2018). Addressing endogeneity in international marketing applications of partial
Academy of Marketing Science, 30(2), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/ least squares structural equation modeling. Journal of International Marketing, 26(3),
03079459994371. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.17.0151.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Javornik, A. (2016). “It’s an illusion, but it looks real!” Consumer affective, cognitive and
CX Network. 9 Brilliant ways augmented and virtual reality are transforming customer behavioural responses to augmented reality applications. Journal of Marketing
experiences. (2019). https://www.cxnetwork.com/cx-experience/articles/virtual- Management, 32(9–10), 987–1011. https://doi.org/10.1080/
reality-in-customer-experience Accessed 08 August 2019. 0267257X.2016.1174726.
Dacko, S. G. (2017). Enabling smart retail settings via mobile augmented reality Jiang, Z., & Benbasat, I. (2007). Research note—investigating the influence of the
shopping apps. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 124, 243–256. https:// functional mechanisms of online product presentations. Information Systems
doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.09.032. Research, 18(4), 454–470. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0124.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to Kamleitner, B., & Feuchtl, S. (2015). “As if it were mine”: Imagery works by inducing
use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), psychological ownership. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 23(2), 208–223.
1111–1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. The
Domina, T., Lee, S. E., & MacGillivray, M. (2012). Understanding factors affecting Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509–523.
consumer intention to shop in a virtual world. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Kim, H. C., & Hyun, M. Y. (2016). Predicting the use of smartphone-based augmented
Services, 19(6), 613–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.08.001. reality (AR): Does telepresence really help? Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 28–38.
Drengner, J., Jahn, S., & Furchheim, P. (2018). Flow revisited: Process conceptualization https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.001.
and a novel application to service contexts. Journal of Service Management, 29(4), Kim, J., & Forsythe, S. (2007). Hedonic usage of product virtualization technologies in
703–734. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-12-2016-0318. online apparel shopping. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35
Dwivedi, Y. K., Ismagilova, E., Hughes, D. L., Carlson, J., Filieri, R., Jacobson, J., … (6), 502–514. https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550710750368.
Wang, Y. (2020). Setting the future of digital and social media marketing research: Kim, J., & Forsythe, S. (2008a). Adoption of virtual try-on technology for online apparel
Perspectives and research propositions. International Journal of Information shopping. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 22(2), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1002/
Management, 102168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102168. dir.20113.
Ebbes, P., Papies, D., & van Heerde, H. J. (2017). Dealing with Endogeneity: A Kim, J., & Forsythe, S. (2008b). Sensory enabling technology acceptance model (SE-
Nontechnical Guide for Marketing Researchers. In C. Homburg, M. Klarmann, & TAM): A multiple-group structural model comparison. Psychology & Marketing, 25
A. Vomberg (Eds.), Handbook of Market Research (pp. 1–14). Cham, CH: Springer (9), 901–922. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20245.
International Publishing. Kim, J., & Forsythe, S. (2009). Adoption of sensory enabling technology for online
Faust, F., Roepke, G., Catecati, T., Araujo, F., Ferreira, M. G. G., & Albertazzi, D. (2012). apparel shopping. European Journal of Marketing, 43(9/10), 1101–1120. https://doi.
Use of augmented reality in the usability evaluation of products. Work, 41 org/10.1108/03090560910976384.
(Supplement 1), 1164–1167. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2012-0298-1164. Kim, K., Hwang, J., Zo, H., & Lee, H. (2016). Understanding users’ continuance intention
Fiore, A. M., Jin, H. J., & Kim, J. (2005). For fun and profit: Hedonic value from image toward smartphone augmented reality applications. Information Development, 32(2),
interactivity and responses toward an online store. Psychology & Marketing, 22(8), 161–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666914535119.
669–694. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20079. Kowalczuk, P. (2018). Consumer acceptance of smart speakers: A mixed methods
Flavián, C., Gurrea, R., & Orús, C. (2016). Choice confidence in the webrooming approach. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 12(4), 418–431. https://doi.
purchase process: The impact of online positive reviews and the motivation to touch. org/10.1108/JRIM-01-2018-0022.
Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15(5), 459–476. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1585. Lavidge, R. J., & Steiner, G. A. (1961). A model for predictive measurements of
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with advertising effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 25(6), 59–62. https://doi.org/
unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 10.1177/002224296102500611.
39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104. Lee, B. K., Hong, J. Y., & Lee, W. N. (2004). How attitude toward the web site influences
Hair, J. F., Jr, Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. C. (2014). Multivariate Data consumer brand choice and confidence while shopping online. Journal of Computer-
Analysis (7th ed.). Harlow, Essex: Pearson. Mediated Communication, 9(2), 923. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2004.
Hair, J. F., Jr, Babin, B. J., & Krey, N. (2017). Covariance-based structural equation tb00282.x.
modeling in the Journal of Advertising: Review and recommendations. Journal of Lemon, K. N., & Verhoef, P. C. (2016). Understanding customer experience throughout
Advertising, 46(1), 163–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2017.1281777. the customer journey. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 69–96. https://doi.org/10.1509/
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to jm.15.0420.
report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi. Li, H., Daugherty, T., & Biocca, F. (2001). Characteristics of virtual experience in
org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203. electronic commerce: A protocol analysis. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15(3),
Hair, J. F., Jr, Sarstedt, M., Matthews, L. M., & Ringle, C. M. (2016). Identifying and 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.1013.
treating unobserved heterogeneity with FIMIX-PLS: Part I–method. European Business Lim, W. M., & Ting, D. H. (2012). E-shopping: An analysis of the uses and gratifications
Review, 28(1), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-09-2015-0094. theory. Modern Applied Science, 6(5), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.5539/mas.
Hamam, A., Eid, M., El Saddik, A., & Georganas, N. D. (2008). A fuzzy logic system for v6n4p49.
evaluating quality of experience of haptic-based applications. In International Maier, E., & Dost, F. (2018). The positive effect of contextual image backgrounds on
Conference on Human Haptic Sensing and Touch Enabled Computer Applications fluency and liking. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 40, 109–116. https://
(pp. 129-138). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.09.003.
Heller, J., Chylinski, M., de Ruyter, K., Mahr, D., & Keeling, D. I. (2019). Let me imagine Mainemelis, C. (2001). When the muse takes it all: A model for the experience of
that for you: Transforming the retail frontline through augmenting customer mental timelessness in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 548–565.
imagery ability. Journal of Retailing, 95(2), 94–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.5393891.
jretai.2019.03.005. Mainemelis, C., & Dionysiou, D. D. (2015). Play, flow, and timelessness. In C. Shalley,
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2012). Using partial least squares path M. Hitt, & J. Zhou (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of creativity, innovation, and
modeling in advertising research: Basic concepts and recent issues. In S. Okazaki entrepreneurship (pp. 121–140). New York: Oxford University Press.
(Ed.), Handbook of Research on International Advertising (pp. 252–276). Cheltenham: Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Edward Elgar Publishing. Oh, H., Yoon, S. Y., & Shyu, C. R. (2008). How can virtual reality reshape furniture
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing retailing? Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 26(2), 143–163. https://doi.org/
discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the 10.1177/0887302X08314789.
Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747- Olsson, T., Lagerstam, E., Kärkkäinen, T., & Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. (2013).
014-0403-8. Expected user experience of mobile augmented reality services: A user study in the
Hilken, T., de Ruyter, K., Chylinski, M., Mahr, D., & Keeling, D. I. (2017). Augmenting context of shopping centres. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17(2), 287–304.
the eye of the beholder: Exploring the strategic potential of augmented reality to https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-011-0494-x.
enhance online service experiences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45 Palmer, M. T. (1995). Interpersonal communication and virtual reality: Mediating
(6), 884–905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0541-x. interpersonal relationships. In F. Biocca, & M. R. Levy (Eds.), Communication in the Age
Hinsch, C., Felix, R., & Rauschnabel, P. A. (2020). Nostalgia beats the wow-effect: of Virtual Reality (pp. 277–302). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Inspiration, awe and meaningful associations in augmented reality marketing. Pantano, E., Rese, A., & Baier, D. (2017). Enhancing the online decision-making process
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53, Article 101987. https://doi.org/ by using augmented reality: A two country comparison of youth markets. Journal of
10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101987. Retailing and Consumer Services, 38, 81–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated jretconser.2017.05.011.
environments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 50–68. Park, E., Kim, H., & Ohm, J. Y. (2015). Understanding driver adoption of car navigation
Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: systems using the extended technology acceptance model. Behaviour and
Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132–140. Information Technology, 34(7), 741–751. https://doi.org/10.1080/
https://doi.org/10.1086/208906. 0144929X.2014.963672.
16
Park, S., & Gupta, S. (2012). Handling endogenous regressors by joint estimation using Smink, A. R., Frowijn, S., van Reijmersdal, E. A., van Noort, G., & Neijens, P. C. (2019).
copulas. Marketing Science, 31(4), 567–586. https://doi.org/10.1287/ Try online before you buy: How does shopping with augmented reality affect brand
mksc.1120.0718. responses and personal data disclosure. Electronic Commerce Research and
Pelletier, M. J., & Collier, J. E. (2018). Experiential purchase quality: Exploring the Applications, 35, Article 100854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2019.100854.
dimensions and outcomes of highly memorable experiential purchases. Journal of Sohn, S. (2017). A contextual perspective on consumers’ perceived usefulness: The case
Service Research, 21(4), 456–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670518770042. of mobile online shopping. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 38, 22–33.
Phillips, D. M., Olson, J. C., & Baumgartner, H. (1995). Consumption visions in consumer https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.05.002.
decision making. In F. Kardes, & M. Sujan (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research (pp. Spreer, P., & Kallweit, K. (2014). Augmented reality in retail: Assessing the acceptance
280–284). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research. and potential for multimedia product presentation at the PoS. Transactions on
Poushneh, A. (2018). Augmented reality in retail: A trade-off between user’s control of Marketing Research, 1(1), 20–35.
access to personal information and augmentation quality. Journal of Retailing and Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal
Consumer Services, 41, 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.12.010. of Communication, 42(4), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.
Poushneh, A., & Vasquez-Parraga, A. Z. (2017a). Customer dissatisfaction and tb00812.x.
satisfaction with augmented reality in shopping and entertainment. Journal of tom Dieck, M. C., & Jung, T. (2018). A theoretical model of mobile augmented reality
Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction & Complaining Behavior, 30, 97–118. acceptance in urban heritage tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 21(2), 154-174.
Poushneh, A., & Vasquez-Parraga, A. Z. (2017b). Discernible impact of augmented reality 10.1080/13683500.2015.1070801.
on retail customer’s experience, satisfaction and willingness to buy. Journal of Tractica. Mobile Augmented Reality Market to Reach 1.9 Billion Unique Monthly Active
Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 229–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Users by 2022. (2017). https://www.tractica.com/newsroom/press-releases/
jretconser.2016.10.005. mobile-augmented-reality-market-to-reach-1-9-billion-unique-monthly-active-users-
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing by-2022-according-to-tractica/ Accessed 01 August 2019.
and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Van Noort, G., Voorveld, H. A., & Van Reijmersdal, E. A. (2012). Interactivity in brand
Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879. web sites: Cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses explained by consumers’
Ramsey, J. B. (1969). Tests for specification errors in classical linear least-squares online flow experience. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 223–234. https://doi.
regression analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), org/10.1016/j.intmar.2011.11.002.
31(2), 350–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1969.tb00796.x. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda
Rauschnabel, P. A. (2018). Virtually enhancing the real world with holograms: An on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
exploration of expected gratifications of using augmented reality smart glasses. 5915.2008.00192.x.
Psychology & Marketing, 35(8), 557–572. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21106. Verhagen, T., & Bloemers, D. (2018). Exploring the cognitive and affective bases of
Rauschnabel, P. A., Felix, R., & Hinsch, C. (2019). Augmented reality marketing: How online purchase intentions: A hierarchical test across product types. Electronic
mobile AR-apps can improve brands through inspiration. Journal of Retailing and Commerce Research, 18(3), 537–561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-017-9270-y.
Consumer Services, 49, 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.03.004. Wang, Y. S., Yeh, C. H., Wang, Y. M., Tseng, T. H., Lin, H. H., Lin, S., & Xie, M. Q. (2019).
Rauschnabel, P. A., He, J., & Ro, Y. K. (2018). Antecedents to the adoption of augmented Investigating online consumers’ responses to product presentation modes. Internet
reality smart glasses: A closer look at privacy risks. Journal of Business Research, 92, Research, 29(6), 1233–1255. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-07-2017-0258.
374–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.08.008. Yang, H., Yu, J., Zo, H., & Choi, M. (2016). User acceptance of wearable devices: An
Rese, A., Baier, D., Geyer-Schulz, A., & Schreiber, S. (2017). How augmented reality apps extended perspective of perceived value. Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 256–269.
are accepted by consumers: A comparative analysis using scales and opinions. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.08.007.
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 124, 306–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/ Yim, M. Y. C., & Park, S. Y. (2019). “I am not satisfied with my body, so I like augmented
j.techfore.2016.10.010. reality (AR)”: Consumer responses to AR-based product presentations. Journal of
Rese, A., Schreiber, S., & Baier, D. (2014). Technology acceptance modeling of Business Research, 100, 581–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.041.
augmented reality at the point of sale: Can surveys be replaced by an analysis of Yim, M. Y. C., Chu, S. C., & Sauer, P. L. (2017). Is augmented reality technology an
online reviews? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(5), 869–876. https:// effective tool for e-commerce? An interactivity and vividness perspective. Journal of
doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.02.011. Interactive Marketing, 39, 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2017.04.001.
Roggeveen, A. L., & Sethuraman, R. (2018). Understanding the JR heritage, publishing in Yoo, W. S., Lee, Y., & Park, J. (2010). The role of interactivity in e-tailing: Creating value
JR, and the evolving retail field. Journal of Retailing, 94(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/ and increasing satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(2), 89–96.
10.1016/j.jretai.2018.02.001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2009.10.003.
Rutz, O. J., & Watson, G. F. (2019). Endogeneity and marketing strategy research: an Yoon, S. Y., Laffey, J., & Oh, H. (2008). Understanding usability and user experience of
overview. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(3), 479-498. 10.1007/ web-based 3D graphics technology. International Journal of Human-Computer
s11747-019-00630-4. Interaction, 24(3), 288–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310801920516.
Sarstedt, M., & Mooi, E. (2019). Regression Analysis. In A Concise Guide to Market
Research (pp. 209–256). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Pascal Kowalczuk is a PhD candidate and research assistant at the Chair of Marketing of
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Cheah, J. H., Ting, H., Moisescu, O. I., & Radomir, L. (2020).
the University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany. His research focuses on technology accep
Structural model robustness checks in PLS-SEM. Tourism Economics, 26(4), 531–554.
tance of innovative products and augmented reality in marketing.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1354816618823921.
Schwarz, N. (2012). Feelings-as-information theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A.
Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. Carolin Siepmann (née Scheiben) is a PhD candidate and research assistant at the Chair of
289–308). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Marketing of the University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany. Her research interests cover
Singh, S. Augmented Reality Market worth $85.0 billion by 2025. (2019). https://www. several fields of consumer behavior.
marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/augmented-reality.asp Accessed 01 August
2019.
Jost Adler, PhD, Professor of Marketing at the University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany. He
Sismeiro, C., & Bucklin, R. E. (2004). Modeling purchase behavior at an e-commerce web
received his PhD from the University of Trier, Germany. His research focuses on customer
site: A task-completion approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(3), 306–323.
base analysis and modeling of consumer behavior.
https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.41.3.306.35985.
17

Journal of Business Research: Pascal Kowalczuk, Carolin Siepmann (N Ee Scheiben), Jost Adler

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Business Research: Pascal Kowalczuk, Carolin Siepmann (N Ee Scheiben), Jost Adler

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Business Research: Pascal Kowalczuk, Carolin Siepmann (N Ee Scheiben), Jost Adler

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Business Research xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

Cognitive, affective, and behavioral consumer responses to augmented

Journal of Business Research xxx (xxxx) xxx

(continued on next page)

Virtual mirror (Ray-Ban), sunglasses,

band), smartphone changes in brand attitude

Journal of Business Research xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 2 The category processing quality comprises responsiveness (Javornik,

Fig. 1. Conceptual Model.

AR Web AR Web AR Web AR Web

of system quality and product informativeness, the cognitive response of

Fig. 2. Model and Results.

Appendix A:. Experimental conditions

Appendix B:. Results of the hypothesis tests and multigroup analysis

Path. coeff. p t SE Path. coeff. p t SE

Appendix C. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.050.

You might also like