Swiping vs. Scrolling in Mobile Shopping Applications

  • Ben C. F. Choi
  • Samuel N. KirshnerEmail author
  • Yi Wu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9751)


Smartphone gestures are an essential feature of app design that influence both behavioral attitudes and user performance. Due to the popularity of Tinder, a number of high profile shopping applications have adopted interfaces utilizing the swiping gesture to navigate and make sequential evaluation decisions. To understand the impacts of adopting a swipe-based interface over a traditional scroll-based interface, we construct an experiment to study the two types of haptic interactions. The results suggest that the swiping interface leads to greater cognitive absorption and playfulness in shopping applications. We find convincing support that cognitive absorption and not playfulness is significant in increasing reuse intentions and task performance.


Gestures Cognitive absorption Playfulness Mobile shopping apps 


  1. 1.
    Agarwal, R., Karahanna, E.: Time flies when you’re having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Q. 24, 665–694 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berlyne, D.: Uncertainty and epistemic curiosity. Br. J. Psychol. 53(1), 27–34 (1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bragdon, A., Nelson, E., Li, Y., Hinckley, K.: Experimental analysis of touch-screen gesture designs in mobile environments. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 403–412. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burton-Jones, A., Straub Jr., D.W.: Reconceptualizing system usage: an approach and empirical test. Inf. Syst. Res. 17(3), 228–246 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chung, J., Tan, F.B.: Antecedents of perceived playfulness: an exploratory study on user acceptance of general information-searching websites. Inf. Manag. 41(7), 869–881 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13(3), 319–340 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dou, X., Sundar, S.S.: Power of the swipe: why mobile websites should add horizontal swiping to tapping, clicking and scrolling interaction techniques. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 32(4), 352–362 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frijda, N.H.: Emotion, cognitive structure, and action tendency. Cogn. Emot. 1(2), 115–143 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jarvenpaa, S.L., Tractinsky, N., Vitalec, M.: Consumer trust in an Internet store. Inf. Technol. Mgmt. 1(1), 45–71 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lucero, A., Holopainen, J., Ollila, E., Suomela, R., Karapanos, E.: The playful experiences (plex) framework as a guide for expert evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces, pp. 221–230. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moon, J.W., Kim, Y.G.: Extending the tam for a world-wide-web context. Inf. Manage. 38(4), 217–230 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oh, J., Bellur, S., Sundar, S.S.: Clicking, assessing, immersing, and sharing an empirical model of user engagement with interactive media. Commun. Res. 1–27 (2015). Advance online publicationGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oliver, R.L., Robertson, T.S., Mitchell, D.J.: Imaging and analyzing in response to new product advertising. J. Advertising 22(4), 35–50 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pilke, E.M.: Flow experiences in information technology use. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 61(3), 347–357 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smallwood, J., Schooler, J.W.: The restless mind. Psychol. Bull. 132(6), 946 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Song, K., Fiore, A.M., Park, J.: Telepresence and fantasy in online apparel shopping experience. J. Fashion Mark. Manage. Int. J. 11(4), 553–570 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sundar, S.S., Bellur, S., Oh, J., Xu, Q., Jia, H.: User experience of on-screen interaction techniques: an experimental investigation of clicking, sliding, zooming, hovering, dragging, and flipping. Hum. Comput. Interact. 29(2), 109–152 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Underwood, G., Everatt, J.: Automatic and controlled information processing: the role of attention in the processing of novelty. Handb. Percept. Action 3, 185–227 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Webster, J., Martocchio, J.J.: Microcomputer playfulness: development of a measure with workplace implications. MIS Q. 16(2), 201–226 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Webster, J., Trevino, L.K., Ryan, L.: The dimensionality and correlates of flow in human-computer interactions. Comput. Hum. Behav. 9(4), 411–426 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Woszczynski, A.B., Roth, P.L., Segars, A.H.: Exploring the theoretical foundations of playfulness in computer interactions. Comput. Hum. Behav. 18(4), 369–388 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UNSW Business SchoolUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.College of Management and EconomicsTianjn UniversityTianjinChina

Personalised recommendations