Abstract
With the development of the advertisement industry, consumers are surrounded by increasing numbers of different types of visual stimuli (e.g., images on billboards, websites, and newspapers or videos on TV and social media). The present research aims to explore the effect of the connection between visual stimuli and objects in consumers’ hands on purchase intention based on motor simulation theory and motor fluency. The results of two studies demonstrate that when right-handed consumers review an image of food with tableware on the right (vs. left) side, they will have higher purchase intention for the food, while the effect reverses when their right hand is under high motor resource load. In addition, when right-handed consumers review an image of food with tableware on the right side and have nothing (vs. an object) in their right hand, they will have higher purchase intention for the food. However, if the image does not include tableware, placing tableware (vs. nothing or other objects) in the right hand of the consumers will induce higher purchase intention for the food. Our findings not only contribute to the literature on motor simulation, motor fluency, and motor resources but also provide valid insights for managerial applications.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(3), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309341564.
Avanzino, L., Gueugneau, N., Bisio, A., Ruggeri, P., Papaxanthis, C., & Bove, M. (2015). Motor cortical plasticity induced by motor learning through mental practice. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 105. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00105.
Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 617–645. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639.
Carr, E. W., Rotteveel, M., & Winkielman, P. (2016). Easy moves: Perceptual fluency facilitates approach-related action. Emotion, 16(4), 540–552. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000146.
Casasanto, D. (2009). Embodiment of abstract concepts: Good and bad in right- and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(3), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015854.
Casasanto, D., & Chrysikou, E. G. (2011). When left is “right”: Motor fluency shapes abstract concepts. Psychological Science, 22(4), 419–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611401755.
Chao, L. L., & Martin, A. (2000). Representation of manipulable man-made objects in the dorsal stream. Neuroimage, 12(4), 478–484. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2000.0635.
Dreisbach, G., & Fischer, R. (2011). If it's hard to read… try harder! Processing fluency as signal for effort adjustments. Psychological Research, 75(5), 376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-010-0319-y.
Elder, R. S., & Krishna, A. (2012). The “visual depiction effect” in advertising: Facilitating embodied mental simulation through product orientation. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(6), 988–1003. https://doi.org/10.1086/661531.
Fritz, J., & Dreisbach, G. (2013). Conflicts as aversive signals: Conflict priming increases negative judgments for neutral stimuli. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 13(2), 311–317. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-012-0147-1.
Gordon, R. M. (1986). Folk psychology as simulation. Mind & Language, 1(2), 158–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.1986.tb00324.x.
Grèzes, J., & Decety, J. (2001). Functional anatomy of execution, mental simulation, observation, and verb generation of actions: A meta-analysis. Human Brain Mapping, 12(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0193(200101)12:1<1::AID-HBM10>3.0.CO;2-V.
Grèzes, J., & Decety, J. (2002). Does visual perception of object afford action? Evidence from a neuroimaging study. Neuropsychologia, 40(2), 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00089-6.
Hayes, A. E., Paul, M. A., Beuger, B., & Tipper, S. P. (2008). Self produced and observed actions influence emotion: The roles of action fluency and eye gaze. Psychological Research, 72(4), 461–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-007-0125-3.
Im, H., Lennon, S. J., & Stoel, L. (2010). The perceptual fluency effect on pleasurable online shopping experience. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 4(4), 280–295. https://doi.org/10.1108/17505931011092808.
Jeannerod, M. (1994). The representing brain: Neural correlates of motor intention and imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17(2), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00034026.
Jeannerod, M. (1999). To act or not to act: Perspectives on the representation of actions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. A, Human Experimental Psychology, 52(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755803.
Jeannerod, M. (2001). Neural simulation of action: A unifying mechanism for motor cognition. Neuroimage, 14(1), S103–S109. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.0832.
Jeannerod, M. (2004). Actions from within. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2(4), 376–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2004.9671752.
Jeannerod, M. (2006). The origin of voluntary action. History of a physiological concept. Biologies, 329(5), 354–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2006.03.017.
Jiang, D., Edwards, M. G., Mullins, P., & Callow, N. (2015). The neural substrates for the different modalities of movement imagery. Brain and Cognition, 97, 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2015.04.005.
Lee, A. Y., & Labroo, A. A. (2004). The effect of conceptual and perceptual fluency on brand evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(2), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.41.2.151.28665.
Milhau, A., Brouillet, T., & Brouillet, D. (2013). Biases in evaluation of neutral words due to motor compatibility effect. Acta Psychologica, 144(2), 243–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.06.008.
Milhau, A., Brouillet, T., & Brouillet, D. (2015). Valence-space compatibility effects depend on situated motor fluency in both right- and left-handers. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(5), 887–899. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.967256.
Milhau, A., Brouillet, T., Dru, V., Coello, Y., & Brouillet, D. (2016). Valence activates motor fluency simulation and biases perceptual judgment. Psychological Research, 81(4), 795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-016-0788-8.
Moran, A., Guillot, A., MacIntyre, T., & Collet, C. (2012). Re-imagining motor imagery: Building bridges between cognitive neuroscience and sport psychology: Re-imagining motor imagery. British Journal of Psychology, 103(2), 224–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02068.x.
Munzert, J., Lorey, B., & Zentgraf, K. (2009). Cognitive motor processes: The role of motor imagery in the study of motor representations. Brain Research Reviews, 60(2), 306–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2008.12.024.
O’Shea, H., & Moran, A. (2017). Does motor simulation theory explain the cognitive mechanisms underlying motor imagery? A critical review. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00072.
Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Effects of perceptual fluency on judgments of truth. Consciousness and Cognition, 8(3), 338–342. https://doi.org/10.1006/ccog.1999.0386.
Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review: An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology Inc, 8(4), 364–382. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3.
Ridderinkhof, K. R., & Brass, M. (2015). How kinesthetic motor imagery works: A predictive-processing theory of visualization in sports and motor expertise. Journal of Physiology, 109(1–3), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphysparis.2015.02.003.
Rizzolatti, G., & Matelli, M. (2003). Two different streams form the dorsal visual system: Anatomy and functions. Experimental Brain Research, 153(2), 146–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-003-1588-0.
Schieber, M. H. (2000). Inactivation of the ventral premotor cortex biases the laterality of motoric choices. Experimental Brain Research, 130(4), 497–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002219900270.
Schouppe, N., De Houwer, J., Richard Ridderinkhof, K., & Notebaert, W. (2012). Conflict: Run! Reduced stroop interference with avoidance responses. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(6), 1052–1058. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.685080.
Scott, G. G., O’Donnell, P. J., Leuthold, H., & Sereno, S. C. (2009). Early emotion word processing: Evidence from event-related potentials. Biological Psychology, 80(1), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2008.03.010.
Sirigu, A., & Duhamel, J. R. (2001). Motor and visual imagery as two complementary but neurally dissociable mental processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13(7), 910–919. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892901753165827.
Solodkin, A., Hlustik, P., Chen, E. E., & Small, S. L. (2004). Fine modulation in network activation during motor execution and motor imagery. Cerebral Cortex, 14(11), 1246–1255. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhh086.
Stevens, J. A. (2005). Interference effects demonstrate distinct roles for visual and motor imagery during the mental representation of human action. Cognition, 95(3), 329–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.02.008.
Taylor, S. E., Pham, L. B., Rivkin, I. D., & Armor, D. A. (1998). Harnessing the imagination: Mental stimulation, self-regulation, and coping. American Psychologist, 53(4), 429–439. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.53.4.429.
Topolinski, S., & Strack, F. (2009). Motormouth: Mere exposure depends on stimulus-specific motor simulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(2), 423–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014504.
Unkelbach, C., Fiedler, K., Bayer, M., Stegmüller, M., & Danner, D. (2008). Why positive information is processed faster: The density hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.36.
Winkielman, P., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001). Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 989–1000. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.81.6.989.
Yang, S., Gallo, D. A., & Beilock, S. L. (2009). Embodied memory judgments: A case of motor fluency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(5), 1359–1365. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016547.
Zhang, R., Zhang, T., Liu, T., Liu, D., Li, M., Li, F., et al. (2016). Structural and functional correlates of motor imagery BCI performance: Insights from the patterns of fronto-parietal attention network. Neuroimage, 134, 475–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.04.030.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Stimuli used in Study 1
Appendix 2
Stimuli used in Study 2
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chen, M., Lin, CH. What is in your hand influences your purchase intention: Effect of motor fluency on motor simulation. Curr Psychol 40, 3226–3234 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00261-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00261-6