Limits...
Preference bias of head orientation in choosing between two non-durables.

Funaya H, Shibata T - Front Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: We used real non-durable products (cheap snacks and clothing) on a shopping shelf.The results showed that there was a significant preference bias in head orientation at the beginning 1 s when the subjects stood straight toward the shelf, and that the head orientation was more biased toward the selected item than the gaze and the center of pressure at the ending 1 s.Manipulating body orientation did not affect the result of choice.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Graduate School of Life Science and Systems Engineering, Kyushu Institute of Technology Kitakyushu City, Fukuoka, Japan.

ABSTRACT
The goal of this study is to investigate how customers' gaze, head and body orientations reflect their choices. Although the relationship between human choice and gaze behavior has been well-studied, other behaviors such as head and body are unknown. We conducted a two-alternatives-forced-choice task to examine (1) whether preference bias, i.e., a positional bias in gaze, head and body toward the item that was later chosen, exists in choice, (2) when preference bias is observed and when prediction of the resulting choice becomes possible (3) whether human choice is affected when the body orientations are manipulated. We used real non-durable products (cheap snacks and clothing) on a shopping shelf. The results showed that there was a significant preference bias in head orientation at the beginning 1 s when the subjects stood straight toward the shelf, and that the head orientation was more biased toward the selected item than the gaze and the center of pressure at the ending 1 s. Manipulating body orientation did not affect the result of choice. The preference bias detected by observing the head orientation would be useful in marketing science for predicting customers' choice.

No MeSH data available.


Histogram of response times of 172 trials (case 2). The horizontal axis shows response time in seconds. The vertical axis shows the number of trials. Each bin has a constant width of 2 s. Seven trials in case 2 and four trials in case 1 had response times less than 2 s, and thus we omitted those trials from the analysis.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4477059&req=5

Figure 5: Histogram of response times of 172 trials (case 2). The horizontal axis shows response time in seconds. The vertical axis shows the number of trials. Each bin has a constant width of 2 s. Seven trials in case 2 and four trials in case 1 had response times less than 2 s, and thus we omitted those trials from the analysis.

Mentions: Figure 5 shows the histogram of the response times for case 2. As described in the Materials and Methods Section, the starting time was when at least one item first appeared in the view of the eye-tracker's camera and the ending time was when the subjects started moving their arm to point what they like. We collected the response times averaged over corresponding trials (typically 4 in case 1 and 12 in case 2) per subject. There were no significant difference in response times for the item categories (p = 0.8 in case 1 and p = 0.8 in case 2, Student's t-test). Also, which side the selected item was on (left or right) did not affect response times (p = 0.8 in case 1 and p = 0.7 in case 2, Student's t-test). The degrees of freedom of the tests above were 14 in case 1 and 15 in case 2.


Preference bias of head orientation in choosing between two non-durables.

Funaya H, Shibata T - Front Psychol (2015)

Histogram of response times of 172 trials (case 2). The horizontal axis shows response time in seconds. The vertical axis shows the number of trials. Each bin has a constant width of 2 s. Seven trials in case 2 and four trials in case 1 had response times less than 2 s, and thus we omitted those trials from the analysis.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4477059&req=5

Figure 5: Histogram of response times of 172 trials (case 2). The horizontal axis shows response time in seconds. The vertical axis shows the number of trials. Each bin has a constant width of 2 s. Seven trials in case 2 and four trials in case 1 had response times less than 2 s, and thus we omitted those trials from the analysis.
Mentions: Figure 5 shows the histogram of the response times for case 2. As described in the Materials and Methods Section, the starting time was when at least one item first appeared in the view of the eye-tracker's camera and the ending time was when the subjects started moving their arm to point what they like. We collected the response times averaged over corresponding trials (typically 4 in case 1 and 12 in case 2) per subject. There were no significant difference in response times for the item categories (p = 0.8 in case 1 and p = 0.8 in case 2, Student's t-test). Also, which side the selected item was on (left or right) did not affect response times (p = 0.8 in case 1 and p = 0.7 in case 2, Student's t-test). The degrees of freedom of the tests above were 14 in case 1 and 15 in case 2.

Bottom Line: We used real non-durable products (cheap snacks and clothing) on a shopping shelf.The results showed that there was a significant preference bias in head orientation at the beginning 1 s when the subjects stood straight toward the shelf, and that the head orientation was more biased toward the selected item than the gaze and the center of pressure at the ending 1 s.Manipulating body orientation did not affect the result of choice.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Graduate School of Life Science and Systems Engineering, Kyushu Institute of Technology Kitakyushu City, Fukuoka, Japan.

ABSTRACT
The goal of this study is to investigate how customers' gaze, head and body orientations reflect their choices. Although the relationship between human choice and gaze behavior has been well-studied, other behaviors such as head and body are unknown. We conducted a two-alternatives-forced-choice task to examine (1) whether preference bias, i.e., a positional bias in gaze, head and body toward the item that was later chosen, exists in choice, (2) when preference bias is observed and when prediction of the resulting choice becomes possible (3) whether human choice is affected when the body orientations are manipulated. We used real non-durable products (cheap snacks and clothing) on a shopping shelf. The results showed that there was a significant preference bias in head orientation at the beginning 1 s when the subjects stood straight toward the shelf, and that the head orientation was more biased toward the selected item than the gaze and the center of pressure at the ending 1 s. Manipulating body orientation did not affect the result of choice. The preference bias detected by observing the head orientation would be useful in marketing science for predicting customers' choice.

No MeSH data available.