隨著網路與行動裝置的普及性，現代人可以透過線上平台瀏覽商品資訊，由線上平台引起消費動機的機率也隨之上升，因此了解消費者的視覺偏好，能夠掌握商品照片呈現方式吸引目光。然而由於線上環境在感官上的限制，商品照片的展示呈現成為影響消費者的重要因素。在無法實際接觸商品的情況下，資訊不足或過於複雜的商品照片都容易造成負面的感受。因此，本研究基於廣告學將商品照片分成的三項元素：商品、場景、人，在亞洲文化常見的情境式商品照片中，探討不同背景組成與商品比例大小是否影響消費者的視覺偏好。本研究使用眼動儀配合事後問卷調查，以生、心理量值共同探討觀者瀏覽商品照片時的視覺體驗感受。
研究結果顯示，比例差異、背景組成與比例和背景的交互作用會對參與者之主觀評價和眼動行為產生部分影響。當商品大小佔照片的20%、40%、60%呈現之變因中，以40%的中等大小呈現之主觀評價會高於60%的大小；而當比例與背景產生交互作用時，有無人物元素背景之視覺偏好會受到比例調配的影響而有偏好反轉情況產生。另外，商品屬性與商品的造型差異也會影響商品在不同呈現形式照片之視覺偏好。其中，造型相對簡單的商品，其情境式商品照片之視覺偏好受到比例與背景影響的情況較為單純，而造型相對複雜的商品則較容易受到其他變數的交互影響。

With the popularity of the Internet and mobile devices, it is convenient to browse for product information through online platforms. Due to the features of the online marketplace, vision is the main sensory channel by which to receive stimuli. Many studies have found that visual stimuli affect consumers’ feelings and their shopping intentions. Additionally, a product image has become a common way to display products when consumers cannot touch or use products as they can at a brick-and-mortar store. Therefore, exploring consumers’ visual preferences can make it possible to attract their attention among multiple choices. Based on a study of advertising, product images can be divided into three elements: product, setting, and person, where the composition and proportion of elements can create different marketing environments. This study explores whether the composition and proportion of the elements in product images affect consumers' visual preferences in terms of the decision making process. In this study, an eye tracker and questionnaire are used to measure participants’ visual preferences based on physical and psychological valuations when they are browsing different styles of product images.
The results of the study show that differences in the proportion, the composition of the background, and the interaction of both partially affect subjective evaluations and eye movements. When a product was presented in different sizes in images, the participants preferred the product to be presented as 40% of the available area in the pictures to those occupying 60% based on subjective evaluations. While the composition of the background had an impact on the proportion of the product size, the interaction induced a preference reversal phenomenon. Furthermore, differences in products categories and appearances also affected the visual preferences for the composition and proportion of the product in product images. In the case of products with a relatively complex appearance, there were more interactions with other variables that affected the visual preference toward the product image, while the interaction of the variables had simpler impacts on visual preferences for products with a relatively simple appearance.

Alwin, D. F., & Krosnick, J. A. (1985). The measurement of values in surveys: A comparison of ratings and rankings. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49(4), 535-552.
Anderson, R. E., & Jolson, M. A. (1980). Technical wording in advertising: Implications for market segmentation. The Journal of Marketing, 57-66.
Augustin, D., & Leder, H. (2006). Art expertise: A study of concepts and conceptual spaces. Psychology Science, 48(2), 135.
Berlyne, D. E. (1974). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Hemisphere.
Berridge, K. C. (2003). Pleasures of the brain. Brain and cognition, 52(1), 106-128.
Constantinides, E. (2004). Influencing the online consumer's behavior: the Web experience. Internet Research, 14(2), 111-126.
Desmet, P. M., & Hekkert, P. (2002). The basis of product emotions. Pleasure with products, beyond usability, 60-68
Freud, S. (2003). Beyond the pleasure principle. Penguin UK.
Guéguen, N., Hélène, L. G., & Jacob, C. (2004). Sound level of background music and alcohol consumption: An empirical evaluation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 99(1), 34-38.
van der Heijden, H., Verhagen, T., & Creemers, M. (2001, January). Predicting online purchase behavior: replications and tests of competing models. In System Sciences, 2001. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 10-pp). IEEE.
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing?. Journal of personality and social psychology, 79(6), 995.
Jordan, P. W. (2000). Designing pleasurable products: An introduction to the new human factors. London, England: Taylor & Francis.
Keith Rayner(1998). Eye movements in Reading and Information Processing: 20 Years of Research. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 124, No. 3, 372-422.
Knutson, J.F. (1998). The effect of the user interface design on adoption of new technology dissertation abstracts international: section B:The Sciences and Engineering 59(3-B), 1399.
Leiss, W., Stephen, K., and Sut, J.(1997), Social Communication in Advertising: persons, products & images of well-being’, Routledge.
Liang, B., Runyan, R. C. & Fu, W. 2011. ‘The effect of culture on the context of ad pictures and ad persuasion: The role of context-dependent and context-independent thinking’, International Marketing Review, 28(4): 412-434.
Mano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993). Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer research, 20(3), 451-466.
Mazzoni, G., Vannucci, M., & Batool, I. (2014). Manipulating cues in involuntary autobiographical memory: Verbal cues are more effective than pictorial cues. Memory & cognition, 42(7), 1076-1085.
Mourao-Miranda, J., Volchan, E., Moll, J., de Oliveira-Souza, R., Oliveira, L., Bramati, I. & Pessoa, L. (2003). Contributions of stimulus valence and arousal to visual activation during emotional perception. Neuroimage, 20(4), 1955-1963.
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological review, 108(2), 291.
Priebe, J. A., Messingschlager, M., & Lautenbacher, S. (2015). Gaze behaviour when monitoring pain faces: An eye‐tracking study. European Journal of Pain, 19(6), 817-825.
Rosbergen, E., Pieters, R., & Wedel, M. (1995). Undirected visual attention to advertising. A segment-level analysis, 1999.
Sagoff, M. (2003). On the relation between preference and choice. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 31(6), 587-598.
Schifferstein, H. N., & Desmet, P. M. (2007). The effects of sensory impairments on product experience and personal well-being. Ergonomics, 50(12), 2026-2048.
Seva, R. R., & Helander, M. G. (2009). The influence of cellular phone attributes on users' affective experiences: A cultural comparison. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39(2), 341-346.
Simion, C., & Shimojo, S. (2006). Early interactions between orienting, visual sampling and decision making in facial preference. Vision research, 46(20), 3331-3335.
, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53-66.
Timmermans, D.(1993) The impact of task complexity on information use in multi-attribute decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 6(2), 95-111.
Wedel M., Pieters F.G.M.(2007). A Review of Eye-Tracking Applications in Marketing, Review of Marketing Research, 4, 123-147
Wei, P. S., & Lu, H. P. (2013). An examination of the celebrity endorsements and online customer reviews influence female consumers’ shopping behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 193-201.
Wu, K., Vassileva, J., Zhao, Y., Noorian, Z., Waldner, W., & Adaji, I. (2016). Complexity or simplicity? Designing product pictures for advertising in online marketplaces. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 28, 17-27.
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 9(2p2), 1.
Nicolas Guéguen (2010)。消費心理好好玩 (簡薇倫，譯)。台北市：博雅書屋。
黃世輝 & 吳瑞峰(1992)。展示設計。台北市：三民。
黃振家 & 新聞學(2007)。會展產業概論。經濟部商業司。
陳烜之(2007)。認知心理學。臺北市:五南。
丘永福(1989)。 商品展示設計。藝風堂出版社。
顏承亭(2012)。新奇產品類型之展示暴露程度對於產品偏好影響。成功大學工業設計學系學位論文。
盧彥年(2016)。產品造形偏好對瞳孔變異量的影響之探究。成功大學工業設計學系博士論文。
蘇民傑 (2009)。訊息品質對商品需求的影響-以台灣雅虎拍賣為例。臺灣大學經濟學研究所學位論文。
蘇志安 (2009)。網頁商品呈現方式對產品認知與評價的影響：從重複盲到實際應用。東吳大學心理學系研究所碩士論文。
侯承志 (2015)。以眼動儀探討商品圖片之情境對於電子商務網站視覺吸引力和使用者購買意願之影響。 中山大學資訊管理學系研究所學位論文。
陳欣怡(2009)。 視覺凝視對情感喜好與意象認知之研究。長庚大學工業設計研究所碩士論文。
傅遠喻(2012)。以眼動“觀”點探討網頁圖片配置對於使用者經驗之影響。國立中山大學資訊管理學系研究所碩士論文。
蕭坤安 & 莊瑋靖(2017)。產品造形的愉悅性，美感，吸引力與視覺注視時間之探討。設計學報 ， 22(4)。
蕭坤安(2008)。造形複雜度認知與視覺記憶關係之探討。設計學報，11(4) 。
蕭坤安(2013)。造型輪廓的複雜性認知探討。高雄師大學報: 自然科學與科技類，(34), 25-42。
蕭坤安(2006)。產品造形情感意象的認知探討。國立臺灣科技大學設計研究所博士論文。
黃梓育(2004)。產品視覺複雜度對消費者喜好關係之探討。國立臺灣科技大學設計研究所碩士論文。
賴郁晴(2009)。以商品屬性建立顧客分類之新商品預測模型。國立臺灣大學商學研究所學位論文。
王蘭亭＆李傳房(2003)。以類神經網路探討網頁視覺圖像複雜度偏好之研究，設計學報，(8)2，89-102。
林岳(2013)。學生創造思考能力與平面廣告圖像偏好及其相關因素研究。國立台灣師範大學創造力發展碩士班碩士論文。
楊淑斐(2014)。以眼動行為探討網路購物環境之框架效應現象與詳盡思考程度調節效果。國立中山大學資訊管理學系研究所博士論文。
何皓庭(2017)。消費者對展示櫥窗之視覺偏好與進店意願關係研究。國立臺灣師範大學設計學系碩士論文。
傳立媒體 (2015年1月9日)。2014傳立與亞太區雅虎共同分享市調報告全集。取自 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCIIYbx_lhY