Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Mid candidature Review Presentation

292 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Mid candidature Review Presentation

  1. 1. Online Pro perty Ma rketing : The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options Jacqueline Baker / Mid-Candidature Review Presentation sub heading to be inserted here Presenter’s Name, Department Title – xxth Month 2014 1
  2. 2. Presentation Agenda 1. Methodology & Conceptual Model 2. Survey 3. Analysis - Effects 4. Analysis Hypothesis 1 5. Analysis Hypothesis 2 6. Study 2 7. Expected Contributions 8. Timeline 9. References 2 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  3. 3. Methodology & Conceptual Model 3 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  4. 4. Where the study is positioned 4 Topics Domain Papers Representation Marketing, Communication, Education, Architecture / Environmental Design & Planning Lurie, N. & Mason, C. (2007) Orzechowski et al. (2005, 2012) Oppewal, H. and M. Klabbers (2003) Johnson (1998) Online Marketing Marketing, Environmental Psychology, Consumer behaviour Rohrmann, B. & Bishop, I. (2002) Schlosser, A. (2006) Housing choice Housing Research, Real Estate, Property Development Iman et al. (2012). Jansen et al. (2009) Walker, B., et al. 2002 Cognitive style Psychology, Education Childers, Houston & Heckler (1985) Mayer, R. E. & Massa, L. J. (2003) Pacini, R., & Epstein, S. (1999) The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  5. 5. • Stated Preference (SP) methods measure preference or choice for intended behaviour (Louviere, Hensher & Swait, 2000) • Underpinned by Information Integration Theory (Anderson, 1982, 1981,1970) • 4 stages of evaluating and choosing Stated Preference Methods 5 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  6. 6. The research – Two choice and preference studies Two stages of the same conceptual model 6 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  7. 7. Conceptual Model at Confirmation Independent Variables Spatial Layout Price Parking Storey Proximity to services Dependent Variables Rating of property Intention to visit Moderated by Cognitive Style & Experience H3 7 Presentation H1 Training H2 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  8. 8. Conceptual Model with additional experimental variables Apartment Features: Size Orientation Dependent Variables Rating of property Intention to visit Moderated by: Cognitive Style & Experience H3 8 Presentation Style H1 Training Type Before/After training H2 C O N D I T I O N S Needs Type The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  9. 9. Research Hypotheses: (Based on Stated Preference Tasks) 9 HI • visually presented spatial attributes will be more important than verbal H2 • after training, the verbal and the visual versions of spatial attributes will generate greater similarity in utilities H3 • the more experienced individuals are with spatial representations and the more visual an individual is, the more the spatial attribute gains in importance The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  10. 10. Survey Presentation title 10
  11. 11. The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options 11 Four collections were carried out in the Behavioural Lab, Building S, Monash University. Collection 1: 19th - 20th September 2013 Collection 2: 31st March - 2nd April 2014 Collection 3: 7th - 9th May 2014 Collection 4: 28th – 29th August 2014 Data collection dates
  12. 12. Pilot Study Collection 1 Main Study Collection 2 Main Study Collection 3 Main Study Collection 4 Version 1 70 61 46 79 Version 2 18 71 36 66 Version 3 10 71 42 68 Version 4 27 74 30 63 Number of participants 118 277 154 276 Cases removed 7 7 7 11 Total together 118 270 147 265 % cases removed 5.6% 3.7% Total sample size 800 12 Data collection numbers The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  13. 13. Within subjects variables Level 1 Level 2 Size With dining room No dining room Orientation North-facing South-facing Training Evaluations Before training Evaluations After training Between subjects variables Level 1 Level 2 Presentation Style Visual Verbal Needs Type Plenty of Space Good Orientation Training Type Size training Orientation training
  14. 14. 14 Scenario: Rental Property Search Survey Flow Assumed Needs: Apartment needs to be sunny OR needs to be spacious Evaluate again Training: Either training about assessing orientation Or Assessing size Evaluate: Either evaluate visual or verbal apartments Questions: Online search behaviour Cognitive Style testingThe Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  15. 15. Suppose you have graduated. You have decided you want to live alone. You have decided you'll search for a 1 bedroom apartment on-line. You have selected South Yarra in Melbourne, Australia, as your preferred location. You have determined you can afford to pay $350-$450 per week rent. Now imagine that you enter your search criteria on-line using a real estate portal such as realestate.com: Property type: Apartment Number of bedrooms: 1 Location: South Yarra (Melbourne, Australia) Price: $350 - $450 per week 15 We are interested in people's decision-making process when renting apartments. For this study, please imagine the following: Hypothetical Scenario The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  16. 16. 16 1 Four apartment options match your search criteria. The four apartments are presented over the following pages. When considering each apartment option, you decide to check whether they can accommodate your further requirements. Imagine that you specifically want: To dry clothes on a clothes airer Natural warmth in winter A separate foyer A compact laundry 2 Four apartment options match your search criteria. The four apartments are presented over the following pages. When considering each apartment option, you decide to check whether they can accommodate your further requirements. Imagine that you specifically want: To hold dinner parties for 6 people Room for friends to sleepover A separate foyer A compact laundry Assumed spatial needs: The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  17. 17. Apartment Evaluations Respondents were asked to evaluate 4 different apartments Apartments were represented by either floor-plans or content-equivalent text descriptions (not both) Respondents were either asked to evaluate the apartment for either their space related or orientation related needs (not both) Scale 1 (dislike extremely) – 5 (like extremely) 17 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  18. 18. 18 Apartment 1 Given your needs, how much do you like this apartment? The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  19. 19. Apartment 1 19 Apartment 1 • Total floor-space 60m2 • 8.5m x 3.5m open plan living, dining and kitchen • Built-in robe in bedroom • Large windows and all-day direct sun • Dining room seats 6 • Compact laundry in cupboard Given your needs, how much do you like this apartment? The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  20. 20. Apartments – Visual Presentation Style 20 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  21. 21. Apartments: Verbal Presentation Style 21 Apartment 2 •Total floor-space 50m2 •5.9m x 3.5m open plan living and kitchen •Built-in robe in bedroom •Large windows and all-day direct sun •No dining room • Compact laundry in cupboard Apartment 1 •Total floor-space 60m2 •8.5m x 3.5m open plan living, dining and kitchen •Built-in robe in bedroom •Large windows and all-day direct sun •Dining room seats 6 •Compact laundry in cupboard Apartment 3 •Total floor-space 60m2 •8.5m x 3.5m open plan living, dining and kitchen •Built-in robe in bedroom •Large windows but no direct sun •Dining room seats 6 •Compact laundry in cupboard Apartment 4 •Total floor-space 50m2 •5.9m x 3.5m open plan living and kitchen •Built-in robe in bedroom •Large windows but no direct sun •No dining room •Compact laundry in cupboard The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  22. 22. Training sheet: “Understanding Property Descriptions” 22 When assessing the position of property in relation to the sun, check the direction of the North Point adjacent to the floorplan. North indicates roughly the direction of the sun at midday. The sun rises to the east of north and sets to the west of north. Knowing the direction of north can assist in checking whether direct sunlight will penetrate any of the window openings on the outside walls of the apartment. If the windows of the apartment are located to the east or west of north and/or directly north, this tells you that the apartment is well positioned in relation to North. The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  23. 23. Analysis – Effects 23 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  24. 24. Significance Partial Eta Squared 1 Size 0.000 .583 2 Size * Needs Type 0.000 .130 3 Orientation * Presentation Style 0.000 .103 4 Size * Presentation Style 0.000 .086 5 Orientation 0.000 .081 6 Orientation * Needs Type 0.000 .060 7 Orientation * Presentation Style * Needs Type 0.000 .031 8 Orientation * Training Type 0.000 .028 9 Presentation Style 0.000 .023 10 BeforeAfter * Orientation * Training Type 0.000 .020 11 BeforeAfter * Size 0.003 .013 12 BeforeAfter * Orientation 0.004 .012 13 Size * Presentation Style * Needs Type 0.007 .011 14 BeforeAfter * Orientation * Needs Type 0.008 .010 15 BeforeAfter * Orientation * Presentation Style * Needs Type 0.064 .005 16 Size * Needs Type * Training Type 0.072 .005 17 BeforeAfter * Orientation * Presentation Style * Needs Type * Training Type 0.048 .006 Significant Effects 24 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  25. 25. 25 1. Size 2. Size* Needs type 3. Orientation* Presentation Style 4. Size*Presentaion Style 5. Orientation 1. Size 2. Size* Needs type 3. Orientation* Presentation Style 4. Size*Presentaion Style 5. Orientation 6. Orientation* Needs type 7. Orientation* Presentation Style*Needs Type 8. Orientation* Training Type 9. Presentation Style 10. BeforeAfter*Orientation* Training Type 11. BeforeAfter*Size 12. BeforeAfter*Orientation 13. Size*Presentation Style*Needs Type 14. BeforeAfter*Orientation* Needs Type 15. Size*Needs Type*Training Type 16. BeforeAfter*Orientation* Presentation Style * Needs Type Relative Effect sizes The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  26. 26. Analysis – Hypothesis 1 In a SP task, visually presented spatial attributes will be more important than verbal 26
  27. 27. • Participants don’t appear to understand the floorplan – or perhaps people from the Northern hemisphere were confused by “North-facing”? 27 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  28. 28. • Verbal version more important, this is the opposite of what was expected 28 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  29. 29. • Orientation related Needs/ orientation attribute = verbal more important and floor- plan not understood in visual condition 29 Space related Needs/ orientation attribute = verbal more important. Haven’t understood floor-plan in visual condition. Once again south-facing scores higher. Floor-plans score highly perhaps because they are pictures? The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  30. 30. Analysis – Hypothesis 2 Visually presented apartments will be more important than verbal, conditional on training 30 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  31. 31. • Orientation a fairly large effect before training • Note there is no significant effect between Presentation Style and before/after training 31 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  32. 32. • After training, those who received “space training” rated north-facing and south-facing much the same but for those who received “orientation training,” there is an increased effect after training. 32 The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to Inspect Property Options
  33. 33. Study 2 Presentation title 33
  34. 34. Study 2 • Consumers looking to buy off-the-plan apartments • Missing from the first study is participants with experience with floor-plans or other visual styles of spatial representations. These consumers are expected to be much more experienced with reading floor-plans (they could be screened) • Recruitment – approach developer & request access to their contact list of buyers in the market to purchase off-the-plan. • Contacts could be sent an email with a link to the survey. • It is proposed that the survey is much simpler and shorter. Some of the conditions developed for study 1 won’t be necessary, such as “Needs Type, “Training”, “Training Type” however of particular interest will be “presentation style” as we would like to test the original hypotheses and compare results with the rental study. • It is expected that participants will have experience with floor-plans and so we will not be measuring evaluations before and after training. • It is proposed that the study may use stated preference methods such as conjoint/ choice/ best worst scaling 34
  35. 35. Research contributions 35 • New visualization tool (focusing on spatial needs) for products difficult to explain • Insight into whether training is helpful for this tool • Insights into inconsistencies in past studies • Insights into the effect of Cognitive Style preference on SP experiments • Insights into the effect of experience on SP spatial studies Theory • Insight on whether inclusion of floor plans will increase likelihood of visits to property • Understanding how expert visual tools can be modified for lay- people • Insights for marketing communication design Industry
  36. 36. Timeline 36 Weeks Start date Task 4 2nd January –2nd March Perform key (only) analysis on Main Data Prepare for Mid-Candidature Review 3 2nd March – 23rd March Prep. For AP-ACR conference (if successful) Design and Prepare Poster 5 23rd March – 27th April Completely analyse and write up Pilot (Rent) study analyses & findings 3 27th April – 18th May Completely analyse and write up results into thesis for Main (Rent) study 4.5 18th May – 18th June Prepare survey for second study, prepare pilot study 1 Go to HK 18-24 June 19 – 21 June AP-ACR Poster session 2.5 25th June – 13th July Journal Paper– prepare outline for Rent data (Off-the-plan later in the year) 3 13th July- 3rd August Administer pilot for second survey, analyze and make changes 4 3rd August –31st August Data collection second study (Off-The-Plan). Continue writing Journal paper 8 31st August –26 October Analyse 2nd study 5 26 October –30 Nov Write-up results 2nd study 3 March 2016 Pre-Submission Milestone June 30 2016 Submit
  37. 37. References 37 COHEN J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates. HALL, S. 1997. Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices, Sage Publications Limited. IMAN, A. H. M., PIENG, F. Y. & GAN, C. 2012. A Conjoint Analysis of Buyers’ Preferences for Residential Property. International Real Estate Review, 15, 73-105. JANSEN, S., BOUMEESTER, H., COOLEN, H., GOETGELUK, R. & MOLIN, E. 2009. The impact of including images in a conjoint measurement task: evidence from two small-scale studies. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 24, 271-297. JANSEN, S., COOLEN, H. & GOETGELUK, R. E. 2011. The measurement and analysis of housing preference and choice, Netherlands, Springer Netherlands. JOHNSON, S. 1998. What's in a representation, why do we care, and what does it mean? Examining evidence from psychology. Automation in Construction, 8, 15-24. MAYER, R. E. & MASSA, L. J. 2003. Three Facets of Visual and Verbal Learners: Cognitive Ability, Cognitive Style, and Learning Preference. Journal of educational psychology, 95, 833. Oppewal, H. and M. Klabbers (2003). Compromising between information completeness and task simplicity: a comparison of self- explicated, hierarchical information integration, and full-profile conjoint methods. Advances in Consumer Research 30: 298-304. ORZECHOWSKI, M., ARENTZE, T., BORGERS, A. & TIMMERMANS, H. 2005. Alternate methods of conjoint analysis for estimating housing preference functions: Effects of presentation style. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 20, 349-362. ORZECHOWSKI, M., ARENTZE, T., BORGERS, A. & TIMMERMANS, H. 2012. The effects of pre-experimental training on the validity and reliability of conjoint analysis: the case of housing preference. Journal of Land Use Science 8.2 (2013): 224-233. ROHRMANN, B. & BISHOP, I. 2002. Subjective Responses to Computer Simulations of Urban Environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22, 319-331. SCHLOSSER, A. 2006. Learning through Virtual Product Experience: The Role of Imagery on True versus False Memories. Journal of consumer research, 33, 377-383. WALKER, B., MARSH, A., WARDMAN, M. & NINER, P. 2002. Modelling tenants' choices in the public rented sector: a stated preference approach. Urban Studies, 39, 665-688.
  38. 38. jacqueline.baker@monash.edu
  39. 39. Presentation title 39
  40. 40. Literature: Housing themes Themes Author(s) Stimulus 1 Tenant preferences Walker Marsh, Wardman & Niner, 2002 Oppewal, Poria, Ravenscroft & Speller 2005 Verbal 2 Dwelling design Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers & Timmermans, 2005 Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers & Timmermans, 2012 Oppewal & Klabbers, 2003 Visual & verbal Visual & verbal Verbal 3 Transport options Borgers, Snellen, Poelman Timmermans, 2008 Katoshevski & Timmermans, 2001 Verbal Verbal 4 Type of dwelling Iman Pieng, Gan, 2012 Wang & Li, 2006 Verbal Verbal 5 Neighbourhood location Kim, Pagliara & Preston, 2003 Verbal 6 Intention to move Kim, Pagliara & Preston, 2005 Jansen, Boumeester, Coolen, Goetgeluk & Molin, 2009 Verbal Visual & verbal 13
  41. 41. Literature: Comparison Stimulus Presentation 41 Author Field Stimulus Result Louviere, Schroeder, Louviere & Woodworth, 1987 Park choice Photo versus verbal No substantial difference Jaeger, Hedderley & Macfie, 2001 New product packaging Photo versus prototype No substantial difference Vriens, Loosschilder, Rosbergen & Wattink, 2003 New products Photo versus verbal Difference Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers & Timmermans, 2005 House design VR versus verbal No substantial difference Mueller, Lockshin, Louviere & Hackman, 2007 Choosing wine Photo versus verbal No substantial difference Jansen, Boumeester, Coolen, Goetgeluk & Molin, 2009 Housing choice Photo versus verbal Difference Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers & Timmermans, 2012 House design VR versus verbal No substantial difference
  42. 42. Literature: Three key papers Comparison Stimulus Presentation, Housing Steps 1 Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers & Timmermans, 2005 2 Jansen, Boumeester, Coolen, Goetgeluk & Molin, 2009 3 Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers & Timmermans, 2012 1 Model Part-worth model Part-worth model Part-worth model 2 Data collection Computer Computer Computer 3 Stimulus set construction 96 profiles, 32 sets 24 profiles, 12 sets 48 profiles, 16 sets 4 Stimulus presentation One of: 1.verbal experiment 2. VR experiment All of: 1. verbal + colour photos 2. verbal + b&w photos 1. VR pre + verbal exp 2. VR pre- + VR exp 3. verbal exp + VR post 4. VR exp+ VR post 5 DV measure scale Discrete choice (which one) for set of 3 scale 1-10 + Discrete choice (yes/no) for 2 Discrete choice (which one) for set of 3 6 Estimation method Multinomial logit model Rating: Ordinary Least Squares regression Choice: Binomial Logit Multinomial logit model 13

×