The influence of website dimensionality on customer experiences, perceptions and behavioral intentions: An exploration of 2D vs. 3D web design

被引：0
|
作者：
Visinescu, Lucian L. [1 ]
Sidorova, Anna [2 ]
Jones, Mary C. [2 ]
Prybutok, Victor R. [2 ]
机构：
[1] McCoy College of Business, Texas State University, CIS/QMST Department, United States
[2] College of Business, ITDS Department, University of North Texas, United States
来源：
Information and Management | 2015年 / 52卷 / 01期
关键词：
3-D environments - Behavioral intention - Cognitive absorptions - Customer experience - Intention to buies - Perceived ease of use - Shopping websites - Threedimensional (3-d);
D O I：
10.1016/j.im.2014.10.005
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
As online retailers seek to attract customers through innovative electronic storefront designs, some are experimenting with three-dimensional (3D) websites. This study examines the influence of website dimensionality on cognitive absorption, perceived ease of use, and, indirectly, perceived website usefulness and intentions to buy online using the website. Findings indicate that shopping websites using 3D environments are associated with lower perceived ease of use and lower cognitive absorption, compared to traditional 2D websites. The effect of website dimensionality on cognitive absorption is moderated by user experience. The implications of the study for research and practice are discussed. © 2014 Elsevier B.V.
引用
收藏
页码：1 / 17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A comparative study of 2D vs. 3D chart visualizations in virtual reality
    Jeong, Jongwook
    Choi, Ayoung
    Kang, Dongwoo
    Lee, Youn Kyu
    JOURNAL OF VISUALIZATION, 2025, 28 (01) : 239 - 253
  • [22] Simulated 2D vs. 3D shock waves: Implications for particle acceleration
    Jones, FC
    Physics of Collisionless Shocks, 2005, 781 : 165 - 169
  • [23] Comparison of 2D vs. 3D mammography with screening cases: An Observer Study
    Fernandez, James Reza
    Deshpande, Ruchi
    Hovanessian-Larsen, Linda
    Liu, Brent
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2012: IMAGE PERCEPTION, OBSERVER PERFORMANCE, AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, 2012, 8318
  • [24] Effect of Axial Resolution on PET image data: 2D vs. 3D
    Oakes, TR
    Holden, JE
    Pyzalski, RW
    Roberts, AD
    Brown, WD
    Nickles, RJ
    Davidson, RJ
    1999 IEEE NUCLEAR SCIENCE SYMPOSIUM - CONFERENCE RECORD, VOLS 1-3, 1999, : 1176 - 1181
  • [25] EXTENSION OF DIMENSIONALITY IN 2D NOESY AND 3D HOMONUCLEAR EXPERIMENTS
    ZUIDERWEG, ERP
    WANG, H
    FISCHER, M
    KUROCHKIN, A
    GLICK, G
    JOURNAL OF CELLULAR BIOCHEMISTRY, 1993, : 259 - 259
  • [26] Routability in 3D IC Design: Monolithic 3D vs. Skybridge 3D CMOS
    Shi, Jiajun
    Li, Mingyu
    Khasanvis, Santosh
    Rahman, Mostafizur
    Moritz, Csaba Andras
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2016 IEEE/ACM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON NANOSCALE ARCHITECTURES (NANOARCH), 2016, : 145 - 150
  • [27] 2D vs. 3D Numerical Approaches for Fish Habitat Evaluation of a Large River - Is 2D Modeling Sufficient?
    Fustos, Vivien
    Eros, Tibor
    Jozsa, Janos
    PERIODICA POLYTECHNICA-CIVIL ENGINEERING, 2021, 65 (04): : 1114 - 1125
  • [28] 2D or Not 2D? Testing the Utility of 2D Vs. 3D Landmark Data in Geometric Morphometrics of the Sculpin Subfamily Oligocottinae (Pisces; Cottoidea)
    Buser, Thaddaeus J.
    Sidlauskas, Brian L.
    Summers, Adam P.
    ANATOMICAL RECORD-ADVANCES IN INTEGRATIVE ANATOMY AND EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY, 2018, 301 (05): : 806 - 818
  • [29] 2D vs. 3D LiDAR-based Person Detection on Mobile Robots
    Jia, Dan
    Hermans, Alexander
    Leibe, Bastian
    IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2022, 2022-October : 3604 - 3611
  • [30] A comparison of 2D vs. 3D thresholding of X-ray CT imagery
    Elliot, Thomas R.
    Heck, Richard J.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF SOIL SCIENCE, 2007, 87 (04) : 405 - 412
12345