FashionTouch in E-commerce: An Exploratory Study of Surface Haptic Interaction Experiences

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 12204)


Fashion is a communicative, hands-on embodied practice. In the digital domain, however, fashion is hands-off – consumers cannot actively sense, perceive and apprehend tactile garment qualities online as they would in an offline setting. Innovations in haptic (active touch) technologies might change this situation, enriching visual and textual content with touch feedback. To date and to the authors’ best knowledge, recent research into the significance of haptic information in apparel e-commerce has not involved the use of haptic technologies. This qualitative exploratory study addressed the gap by using a novel surface haptic device to explore potential consumers’ reactions to the introduction of haptic feedback in a fashion e-commerce context. The study indicates that providing richer perceptual cues – tactile and visual – with interactive surface haptic effects, adds value to the fashion customer’s e-commerce journey, particularly at the information-gathering stage. The finding is moderated by the perceived risk of experiencing a disconnect between the digital touch experience and the actual garment feel.


Touch Surface haptic technologies Fashion e-commerce Digital fashion communication Online customer experience 


  1. 1.
    Kalbaska, N., Sádaba, T., Cantoni, L.: Editorial: Fashion communication: Between tradition and digital transformation. Studies in Commun. Sci. (2018).
  2. 2.
    Geczy, A., Karaminas, V.: The End of Fashion: Clothing and Dress in the Age of Globalization. Bloomsbury, London (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Entwistle, J.: The Fashioned Body: Fashion, Dress and Modern Social Theory. Polity Press, Cambridge (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Field, T.: Touch. MIT Press, Cambridge (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lederman, S.J., Klatzky, R.L.: Haptic perception: a tutorial. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 71, 1439–1459 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shinkle, E.: Fashion’s Digital Body Seeing and Feeling in Fashion Interactives. In: Bartlett, D., Cole, S., Rocamora, A. (eds.) Fashion Media: Past and Present. Bloomsbury Academic, London (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huang, J., Guo, Y., Wang, C., Yan, L.: You touched it and I’m relieved! The effect of online review’s tactile cues on consumer’s purchase intention. J. Contemp. Mark. Sci. 2, 155–175 (2019). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jansson-Boyd, C.V.: Perception and consumption Touch, multisensory integration and congruency. In: Jansson-Boyd, C.V., Zawisza, M.J. (eds.) Routledge International Handbook of Consumer Psychology, pp. 85–101. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, London (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Citrin, A.V., Stem, D.E., Spangenberg, E.R., Clark, M.J.: Consumer need for tactile input. J. Bus. Res. 56, 915–922 (2003). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ackerman, J.M.: Implications of haptic experience for product and environmental design. In: Batra, R., Seifert, C., Brei, D. (eds.) The psychology of design: creating consumer appeal, pp. 3–25. Routledge, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu, W., Batra, R., Wang, H.: Product touch and consumers’ online and offline buying: the role of mental representation. J. Retail. 93, 369–381 (2017). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Manzano, R., Gavilan, D.: Autotelic and instrumental need for touch: searching for and purchasing apparel online. Int. J. Econ. Manage. Sci. 05, 2 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Petit, O., Velasco, C., Spence, C.: Digital sensory marketing: integrating new technologies into multisensory online experience. J. Interact. Mark. 45, 42–61 (2019). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Covaci, A., Zou, L., Tal, I., Muntean, G.-M., Ghinea, G.: Is multimedia multisensorial? - A review of mulsemedia systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 51, 1–35 (2018). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chung, S., Kramer, T., Wong, E.M.: Do touch interface users feel more engaged? The impact of input device type on online shoppers’ engagement, affect, and purchase decisions. Psychol. Mark. 35, 795–806 (2018). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gallace, A., Spence, C.: In touch with the future: The sense of touch from cognitive neuroscience to virtual reality. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bossomaier, T.R.J.: Introduction to the Senses: from Biology to Computer Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Culbertson, H., Schorr, S.B., Okamura, A.M.: Haptics: the present and future of artificial touch sensation. Annu. Rev. Control Robot. Auton. Syst. 1, 385–409 (2018). Scholar
  19. 19.
    O’Doherty, J.E., Shokur, S., Medina, L.E., Lebedev, M.A., Nicolelis, M.A.L.: Creating a neuroprosthesis for active tactile exploration of textures. PNAS 116, 21821–21827 (2019). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ornati, M.: Touching the cloth: haptics in fashion digital communication. In: Kalbaska, N., Sádaba, T., Cominelli, F., Cantoni, L. (eds.) Fashion Communication in the Digital Age, pp. 254–258. Springer International, Cham (2019). Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bayousuf, A., Al-Khalifa, H.S., Al-Salman, A.: Haptics-based systems characteristics, classification, and applications. In: Mehdi Khosrow-Pour, D.B.A., (ed.) Advanced Methodologies and Technologies in Artificial Intelligence, Computer Simulation, and Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 778–794. IGI Global, Hershey (2019)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Riedel, A., Mulcahy, R.F.: Does more sense make sense? An empirical test of high and low interactive retail technology. J. Serv. Mark. 33, 331–343 (2019). Scholar
  23. 23.
    Van Kerrebroeck, H., Willems, K., Brengman, M.: Touching the void: Exploring consumer perspectives on touch-enabling technologies in online retailing. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manage. 45, 892–909 (2017). Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rodrigues, T., Silva, S.C., Duarte, P.: The value of textual haptic information in online clothing shopping. J. Fashion Mark. Manage. 21, 88–102 (2017). Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim, J., Forsythe, S.: Sensory enabling technology acceptance model (SE-TAM): A multiple-group structural model comparison. Psychol. Mark. 25, 901–922 (2008). Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cyr, J.: Focus Groups for the Social Science Researcher. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barbour, R.S.: Doing focus groups. Sage, Los Angeles (2018)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Amed, I., Balchandani, A., Beltrami, M., Berg, A., Hedrich, S., Rölkens, F.: The State of Fashion 2019, vol. 108. McKinsey & Company, New York (2019)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Peck, J., Childers, T.L.: Individual differences in haptic information processing: the “Need for Touch” scale. J. Consum. Res. 30, 430–442 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sandelowski, M.: Whatever happened to qualitative description? Res. Nurs. Health 23, 334–340 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Savin-Baden, M., Major, C.H.: Qualitative Research: The Essential Guide to Theory and Practice. Routledge, Milton Park (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    What is Webrooming? Definition from Techopedia. Access 26 Jan 2020
  33. 33.
  34. 34.
    Obrist, M., Gatti, E., Maggioni, E., Vi, C.T., Velasco, C.: Multisensory experiences in HCI. IEEE Multimedia 24, 9–13 (2017). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Università della Svizzera italianaLuganoSwitzerland
  2. 2.University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland (SUPSI)MannoSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations