Advertisement

An Examination of Online Product Comparison Service: Fit Between Product Type and Disposition Style

  • Fiona Fui-Hoon Nah
  • Weiyin Hong
  • Liqiang Chen
  • Hong-Hee Lee
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4553)

Abstract

Horizontal and vertical disposition styles are two main formats used in product comparison service on e-commerce websites. In this research, we hypothesize that there is a fit between product type (‘think‘ vs. ‘feel‘ product) and disposition style (horizontal vs. vertical style), where horizontal disposition style is more appropriate for ‘feel‘ products and vertical disposition style is a better fit for ‘think‘ products. An experiment will be carried out to test the hypotheses.

Keywords

Cognitive fit product comparison service product type presentation format e-commerce websites 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Zid, L.A.-S.: Shop and Compare. Marketing Management 14, 1, 3-3, 2/5p (January/February 2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nah, F., Lee, H.-H., Chen, L.: Information Search Patterns in E-commerce Product Comparison Services. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Workshop on HCI Research in MIS, pp. 75–79 (2005) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dahlen, M.: Thinking and Feeling on the World Wide Web: The Impact of Product Type and Time on World Wide Web Advertising Effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Communications 8(2), 115–125 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ratchford, B.T.: New Insights about the FDB Grid. Journal of Advertising Research, 24–38 (August/September 1987)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vessey, I.: Cognitive Fit: A Theory-based Analysis of the Graphs versus Tables Literature. Decision Sciences 22(2), 219–240 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hong, W., Thong, J.Y.L., Tam, K.Y.: The Effects of Information Format and Shopping Task on Consumers’ Online Shopping Behavior: A Cognitive Fit Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems 21(3), 151–188 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vessey, I., Galletta, D.: Cognitive Fit: An Empirical Study of Information Acquisition. Information Systems Research 2(1), 63–85 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ojanpaa, H., Nasanen, R., Kojo, I.: Eye Movements in the Visual Search of Word Lists. Vision Research 42, 1499–1512 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A.: The Psychology of Reading. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1989)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Claeys, C., Swinnen, A., Abeele, P.V.: Consumers’ Means-end Chains for “think” and “feel” Products. International Journal of Research in Marketing 12, 193–208 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kirk, R.E.: Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd edn. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, US (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fiona Fui-Hoon Nah
    • 1
  • Weiyin Hong
    • 2
  • Liqiang Chen
    • 1
  • Hong-Hee Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Nebraska-Lincoln, College of Business Administration, Lincoln, Nebraska 68588-0491USA
  2. 2.University of Nevada, College of Business, Las Vegas, Nevada 89154-6034USA

Personalised recommendations