## 5 Results
### Results of the Product Information Recognition Ease Questionnaire  
We assessed the impact of different product information provision environments on product information recognition using the results from the Product Information Recognition Ease questionnaire. As mentioned in Section 3.2.2, shoe parts were categorized into six types (i.e., quarter, toe, midsole, tongue, eyestay, foxing). For each part, we evaluated the perceived degree of four extrinsic cues: color, shape, pattern, and texture. The analysis was conducted using SPSS for Windows, with the product information provision method declared as the independent variable and employing the Mann-Whitney U test, a nonparametric test. The Mann-Whitney test results indicated statistically significant differences between the groups in the color of the quarter (U = 2931.5, \(p\) = 0.029), the shape of the quarter (U = 2977.0, \(p\) = 0.012), the color of the toe (U = 2971.5, \(p\) = 0.002), the shape of the toe (U = 3210.5, \(p\) < 0.001), the pattern of the toe (U = 2971.5, \(p\) = 0.002), the color of the midsole (U = 2966.0, \(p\) = 0.006), the shape of the midsole (U = 3139.0, \(p\) < 0.001), the pattern of the midsole (U = 2861.0, \(p\) = 0.036), the shape of the tongue (U = 2936.0, \(p\) = 0.025), the color of the eyestay (U = 3053.5, \(p\) = 0.004), the shape of the eyestay (U = 3123.5, \(p\) < 0.001), the pattern of the eyestay (U = 3049.0, \(p\) = 0.004), the color of the foxing (U = 3053.0, \(p\) = 0.004), the shape of the foxing (U = 3214.5, \(p\) < 0.001), and the pattern of the foxing (U = 2954.0, \(p\) = 0.015). These results showed that the VR shopping information provision method ranked higher than the existing e-commerce method (see Figure 7).  
Figure 6: \(t\)-test results of product emotion evaluation for all shoe models.  
The Mann-Whitney test results for ease of product recognition by shoe model showed that, like the overall results, the VR shopping information provision method generally ranked higher. However, statistically significant differences were observed in specific items: In Model 1, three items showed significant differences (i.e., the color of the quarter (U = 60.0, \(p\) = 0.034), the shape of the toe (U = 70.0, \(p\) = 0.034), and the pattern of the foxing (U = 63.0, \(p\) = 0.016)). In Model 2, three items were significant (i.e., the pattern (U = 61.5, \(p\) = 0.027) and material (U = 54.5, \(p\) = 0.034) of the midsole, and the material of the foxing (U = 56.5, \(p\) = 0.042)). In Model 3, five items were significant (i.e., the color (U = 69.5, \(p\) = 0.038), shape (U = 61.0, \(p\) = 0.038), and pattern (U = 63, \(p\) = 0.016) of the toe, the shape of the midsole (U = 63.0, \(p\) = 0.016), and the shape of the foxing (U = 61.5, \(p\) = 0.027)). In Model 4, three items were significant (i.e., the shape (U = 56.5, \(p\) = 0.036) and pattern (U = 52.0, \(p\) = 0.026) of the eyestay, and the shape of the foxing (U = 52.0, \(p\) = 0.017)). In Model 5, seven items were significant (i.e., the shape of the quarter (U = 60.0, \(p\) = 0.043), the shape of the toe (U = 47.5, \(p\) = 0.005), the color (U = 52.5, \(p\) = 0.024) and shape (U = 57.0, \(p\) = 0.046) of the tongue, the color (U = 49.0, \(p\) = 0.014) and shape (U = 58.5, \(p\) = 0.038) of the eyestay, and the color of the foxing (U = 47.0, \(p\) = 0.011)), totaling 18 significant items.