IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea13/150431.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Incorporating Eye Tracking Technology and Conjoint Analysis to Better Understand the Green Industry Consumer

Author

Listed:
  • Campbell, Benjamin L.
  • Behe, Bridget K.
  • Khachatryan, Hayk
  • Hall, Charles R.
  • Dennis, Jennifer H.
  • Huddleston, Patricia T.
  • Fernandez, R. Thomas

Abstract

Plants are often merchandised with minimal packaging, thus, consumers have only the plant itself (intrinsic cue) or information signs (extrinsic cues) on which to assess product and on which to base their purchase decision. Our objective was to explore consumers’ preference for select plant display attributes and compare how consumers visually looked at the attributes. Using conjoint analysis we identified three distinct consumer segments: plant oriented (73%), production method oriented (11%), and price oriented (16%) consumers. Utilizing eye tracking technology we show that subjects spent more visual attention on cues in the retail displays that were relatively more important to them. For instance, plant oriented consumers were the fastest to fixate on the plants and looked at the plants for longer amounts of time compared to the other segments. Production method oriented consumers looked at the production labeling for a longer duration, while the price oriented consumer looked at the price sign the longest. Findings suggest that retailers should carefully consider the type of information included on signs and the relative importance those terms may have to a variety of consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Campbell, Benjamin L. & Behe, Bridget K. & Khachatryan, Hayk & Hall, Charles R. & Dennis, Jennifer H. & Huddleston, Patricia T. & Fernandez, R. Thomas, 2013. "Incorporating Eye Tracking Technology and Conjoint Analysis to Better Understand the Green Industry Consumer," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150431, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:150431
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.150431
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/150431/files/Paper%203027%20-%20AJAE%20Conference%20Eye%20Tracking%20Paper%20-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.150431?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Narayan Janakiraman & Robert J. Meyer & Andrea C. Morales, 2006. "Spillover Effects: How Consumers Respond to Unexpected Changes in Price and Quality," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 33(3), pages 361-369, October.
    2. Selin Atalay & H. Onur Bodur & Dina Rasolofoarison, 2012. "Shining in the Center: Central Gaze Cascade Effect on Product Choice," Post-Print hal-00758534, HAL.
    3. Kuisma, Jarmo & Simola, Jaana & Uusitalo, Liisa & Öörni, Anssi, 2010. "The Effects of Animation and Format on the Perception and Memory of Online Advertising," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 269-282.
    4. Thales S. Teixeira & Michel Wedel & Rik Pieters, 2010. "Moment-to-Moment Optimal Branding in TV Commercials: Preventing Avoidance by Pulsing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 783-804, 09-10.
    5. Atalay , Selin & Onur Bodur , H. & Rasolofoarison , Dina, 2012. "Shining in the Center: Central Gaze Cascade Effect on Product Choice," HEC Research Papers Series 978, HEC Paris.
    6. Andre Gabor & C. W. J. Granger, 1961. "On the Price Consciousness of Consumers," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 10(3), pages 170-188, November.
    7. A. Selin Atalay & H. Onur Bodur & Dina Rasolofoarison, 2012. "Shining in the Center: Central Gaze Cascade Effect on Product Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(4), pages 848-866.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rihn, Alicia & Wei, Xuan & Khachatryan, Hayk, 2019. "Text vs. logo: Does eco-label format influence consumers’ visual attention and willingness-to-pay for fruit plants? An experimental auction approach," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    2. Natália Munari Pagan & Karina Munari Pagan & Adriano Alves Teixeira & Janaina Moura Engracia Giraldi & Nelson Oliveira Stefanelli & Jorge Henrique Caldeira Oliveira, 2020. "Application of Neuroscience in the Area of Sustainability: Mapping the Territory," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 21(1), pages 61-77, June.
    3. Ellen J Van Loo & Carola Grebitus & Rodolfo M Nayga & Wim Verbeke & Jutta Roosen, 2018. "On the Measurement of Consumer Preferences and Food Choice Behavior: The Relation Between Visual Attention and Choices," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 538-562, December.
    4. Hongpeng Xu & Jing Li & Jianmei Wu & Jian Kang, 2019. "Evaluation of Wood Coverage on Building Facades Towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-12, March.
    5. Neuhofer, Zachary & McFadden, Brandon R. & Rihn, Alicia & Wei, Xuan & Khachatryan, Hayk & House, Lisa, 2020. "Can the updated nutrition facts label decrease sugar-sweetened beverage consumption?," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    6. Zhang, Xumin & Khachatryan, Hayk & Gao, Zhifeng, 2020. "Using Mixed Logit Based Models to Control Attribute Nonattendance in Choice Experiments," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304547, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Huddleston, Patricia T. & Behe, Bridget K. & Driesener, Carl & Minahan, S., 2018. "Inside-outside: Using eye-tracking to investigate search-choice processes in the retail environment," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 85-93.
    8. Berning, Joshua & Campbell, Ben, 2017. "Consumer Preference and Market Simulations of Food and Non-Food GMO Introductions," 2017 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2017, Mobile, Alabama 252733, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    9. Zhu, Zhiwen & Behe, Bridget & Huddleston, Patricia & Sage, Lynnell, 2017. "How do pricing and the representation of price affect consumer evaluation of nursery products? A conjoint analysis," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(4), March.
    10. Hayk Khachatryan & Alicia L. Rihn & Benjamin Campbell & Chengyan Yue & Charles Hall & Bridget Behe, 2017. "Visual Attention to Eco-Labels Predicts Consumer Preferences for Pollinator Friendly Plants," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-14, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Huang, Bo & Juaneda, Carolane & Sénécal, Sylvain & Léger, Pierre-Majorique, 2021. "“Now You See Me”: The Attention-Grabbing Effect of Product Similarity and Proximity in Online Shopping," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-10.
    2. Orquin, Jacob L. & Bagger, Martin P. & Lahm, Erik S. & Grunert, Klaus G. & Scholderer, Joachim, 2020. "The visual ecology of product packaging and its effects on consumer attention," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 187-195.
    3. Milica Mormann & Tom Griffiths & Chris Janiszewski & J. Edward Russo & Anocha Aribarg & Nathaniel J. S. Ashby & Rajesh Bagchi & Sudeep Bhatia & Aleksandra Kovacheva & Martin Meissner & Kellen J. Mrkva, 2020. "Time to pay attention to attention: using attention-based process traces to better understand consumer decision-making," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 381-392, December.
    4. Martinovici, A., 2019. "Revealing attention - how eye movements predict brand choice and moment of choice," Other publications TiSEM 7dca38a5-9f78-4aee-bd81-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Greenacre, Luke & Martin, James & Patrick, Sarah & Jaeger, Victoria, 2016. "Boundaries of the centrality effect during product choice," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 32-38.
    6. Kremena Valkanova, 2024. "Markov Stochastic Choice," Papers 2410.22001, arXiv.org.
    7. Huddleston, Patricia T. & Behe, Bridget K. & Driesener, Carl & Minahan, S., 2018. "Inside-outside: Using eye-tracking to investigate search-choice processes in the retail environment," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 85-93.
    8. Lacoste-Badie, Sophie & Gagnan, Arnaud Bigoin & Droulers, Olivier, 2020. "Front of pack symmetry influences visual attention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    9. Orth, Ulrich R. & Crouch, Roberta C., 2014. "Is Beauty in the Aisles of the Retailer? Package Processing in Visually Complex Contexts," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(4), pages 524-537.
    10. Gupta, Shipra & Coskun, Merve, 2021. "The influence of human crowding and store messiness on consumer purchase intention– the role of contamination and scarcity perceptions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    11. Zuschke, Nick, 2020. "The impact of task complexity and task motivation on in-store marketing effectiveness: An eye tracking analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 337-350.
    12. Jacob L Orquin & Sonja Perkovic & Klaus G Grunert, 2018. "Visual Biases in Decision Making," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 523-537, December.
    13. Dellaert, B.G.C. & Johnson, E.J. & Baker, T., 2019. "Choice Architecture for Healthier Insurance Choices: Ordering and Partitioning Can Improve Decisions," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2019-008-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    14. Yu, Junwei & Droulers, Olivier & Lacoste-Badie, Sophie, 2022. "Why display motion on packaging? The effect of implied motion on consumer behavior," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    15. Li, Yaoqi & Liu, Biqiang & Xie, Lishan, 2022. "Celebrity endorsement in international destination marketing: Evidence from eye-tracking techniques and laboratory experiments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 553-566.
    16. Massara, Francesco & Porcheddu, Daniele & Melara, Robert D., 2014. "Asymmetric Perception of Sparse Shelves in Retail Displays," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 321-331.
    17. Tsai Chiao Wang & Chia Liang Tsai & Ta Wei Tang, 2018. "Exploring Advertising Effectiveness of Tourist Hotels’ Marketing Images Containing Nature and Performing Arts: An Eye-Tracking Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, August.
    18. Iana A. Castro & Anuja Majmundar & Christine B. Williams & Barbara Baquero, 2018. "Customer Purchase Intentions and Choice in Food Retail Environments: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-19, November.
    19. Mason, Richard, 2019. "Digital enrollment architecture and retirement savings decisions: Evidence from the field," Other publications TiSEM 58639618-e34e-4b5c-8c8c-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    20. Samet Çelik & Malik Volkan Türker, 2022. "Can Eye Movements Be a Predictor of Implicit Attitudes? Discrimination Against Disadvantaged Individuals During the Recruitment Process," Istanbul Business Research, Istanbul University Business School, vol. 51(2), pages 459-489, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer/Household Economics; Productivity Analysis; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:150431. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.