Perceived Realism and Eye Tracking Performance within a Virtual Shopping Environment

Understanding how consumers observe and interact with packaging has become increasingly more accessible and pertinent through the advent of eye tracking technology. In order to accurately predict how a package is going to sell or appeal to the customer, the test subject must feel and act as if they are in a natural shopping environment. If the process were executed virtually, this would create a more economical, customizable and faster way to investigate packaging stimuli. Using 3D modeling and real time rendering software, we created a virtual copy of our CUshop consumer experience shopping lab to compare with the physical lab. In order to negate the potential for cognitive dissonance within the study, video walkthroughs were recorded of each and are timed identically to minimize noticeable differences. The user’s gaze is then tracked as they watch a video path moving through the grocery aisle in each environment. Gaze data combined with a modified version of the Witmer-Singer survey to gauge immersion within the environment allowed us to compare realism and eye tracking performance. Results revealed significantly lower scores in survey questions regarding Involvement and Sensory Fidelity, as well as differences in Total Fixation Duration between prerecorded video walkthroughs and the physical shopping environment. INTRODUCTION The packaging design workflow is heavily influenced by what is appealing to the consumer. Aside from asking someone to explain what led them to choose that product; you are limited to the few methods available for investigating packaging stimuli. Eye tracking has become one of the leading methods to answer the question of which package designs are actually holding consumers visual attention. Studies show that 90% of people make a purchase decision after only examining the front of the packaging and without having the product in hand. [Clement 2007] This means that the product’s visual graphics can offer cues that act as a selling point for the product without the consumer having to interact with the package. Eye tracking analysis allows us to see the consumers’ intentions quantified visually. CUshop is the consumer experience lab used to conduct industry supported and student run eye tracking studies at Clemson University. The lab is designed to look and feel as if one is walking in a grocery store through the use of aisles lined with shelving, frozen food displays, and wall décor. Although many major companies have implemented this methodology, most seek it out after the product has been designed and fabricated. [Pieters 1999] This can create major losses in both time and money if the product isn’t successful after the study. An alternative to testing how these packages are perceived would be to do it completely digitally. Advancements in 3D modeling and rendering software as well as graphics hardware have enabled the creation of highly realistic virtual environments. Programs like Rhinoceros 3D and Google SketchUp can be utilized to model, script and render an environment all within the same program. Modeling software integrated in to the graphic and dieline design process allow for a large number of possibilities for packaging visualization. The challenge is taking a realistic looking product and presenting it in an environment that doesn’t convolute the ability of the consumer to analyze and decide as they would in a grocery store environment. We used a program called Esko Studio Store Visualizer to create the shopping environment. This program allows one to import a 3D Collada file in to a scene that has pre-rendered lighting, shadows and reflections to create a realistic looking product in context. Each object imported in to the scene can be adjusted in scale, color, reflection, gloss, physical properties etc. When all of these tools are combined, we are able to design an immersive environment to conduct eye tracking studies in comparison to a real world shopping environment. This study will continue to explore whether eye tracking studies in computer generated environments will be a viable substitution for packaging design evaluation currently conducted in real stores. BACKGROUND Understanding the connection between purchasing patterns and packaging design has been a topic of discussion for decades. James Pilditch termed packaging design as the silent salesmen for a company’s branding. [Pilditch] Since majority of the purchase decision is made without actually touching the package, it can be said that “what you see is what you choose. ” [Clement 2006] So to gather an understanding of what sells, we must understand how the package is perceived. There have been several methodologies for the process in which people analyze products, but Ursula Hansen seems to break it down in to its simplest terms. She said that packaging has influence on buying behavior through three characteristics: communication, functionality and environment. [Hansen 1986] Communication focuses on the primary visuals of the package (graphics, color etc) that help initiate the first fixation on a product. The functionality pertains to how the consumer interacts with the package from shelf to actual usage. Lastly, the environment consists of shelf life to disposal of the product (recyclability, reusability etc). [Hansen 1986] Although these three functions of the package are not necessarily considered at once, they are accounted for at some point within the life of package. Majority of consumer studies are run through focus groups and interviews but could be much more effective if the data were able to be quantified through what and how long they looked at the target objective. Quantifying the time and location of a participant’s focus can be accessed using eye tracking tools in conjunction with a convincing environment. A shopping context is said to be one of the most important contributing factors to obtaining viable data from consumer packaging research. [Young 2004] Meaning that within the shopping environment, the package that stands out most will typically be chosen first. Although not always true, it can be said that packaging that uses distinct features like shape, orientation, color and size are more likely to attract and influence peoples purchasing decisions. [Clement 2006] A shopping context is not only associated with content but also with the environment in which the study takes place. Tonkin et al. study on shopping with projected shelves vs. a physical environment showed that consumers completed their search task significantly faster when immersed in a real world setting than in a virtual environment. [Tonkin 2011] Tonkin indicated that this is due to the fact that “the number of fixations generally coincides with time taken to complete visual search. ” Meaning that the participant possibly took more time on the projected shelf due to reasons like the fidelity of the projected image or higher fixation rate due to the amount of time required in the search for the target product. Visual realism can be one of the major contributing factors to the success of data collection within a virtual environment. In Witmer and Singers’ study about presence in a virtual environment, they said that fully immersed observers feel as if they are actually interacting directly, not indirectly with the given environment. [Witmer & Singer 1998] Realism can be influenced by continuity and consistency that is objectified through previous real world interactions within shopping environments. In order to achieve this validity a virtual environment must feel and look like a real environment. An ideal virtual environment would incorporate the three varieties of realism as mentioned by Ferwerda: Physical realism (visual stimulation in the scene) photo realism (visual response in the scene) and functional realism (visual information in the scene). [Ferwerda 2003] However, creating and rendering a space that incorporates all of these types of realism is unlikely due to the number of variables involved. There will always be a disconnection between the monitor and the user when moving in virtual world since they can’t actually be inside of the space. Our study of virtual shopping intends to explore these issues, focusing on creating an immersive virtual environment able to capture consumer data equal or comparable to that which is recorded in real world situations. (Figure 1: Photo of CUshop Consumer Experience Lab at Clemson University. (Figure 2:: CUshop Lab modeled with Esko Studio Store Visualizer.) METHODOLOGY Measuring the virtual CUshop in comparison to the real CUshop was executed by determining the person’s performance in the given environment using eye tracking data and the perceived realism of the shopping experience.