2220 
1557如何缓解在线零售中的触觉障碍所导致的负面后果是电子商务领域共识性的难题。现有研究仅聚焦于在线零售商对在线产品自身的展示图片与介绍文字的优化设计，而忽视了展示图片中产品之外的其他视觉元素对消费者的影响，如相关触觉线索的触觉补偿效应。鉴于此，本文基于触觉移情效应以及心理模拟理论，通过二手网购数据分析和两项情景模拟实验发现，在线产品展示图片中的触觉线索的确可以产生触觉移情效应，从而向消费者传达产品触觉属性信息。具体来说，在触觉体验型产品（触觉功能型产品）展示中使用手部（物品）线索能使消费者产生积极的购买意愿，过程模拟（结果模拟）在此过程中起中介作用。本文发现了手部和物品等触觉线索的触觉移情效应，不仅进一步丰富了在线产品不能触摸的弥补策略研究，同时也为电商企业提高在线产品展示的有效性、实施在线感官营销策略等提供了管理启示。
“触类旁通”能实现“感同身受”吗？在线产品图片展示中触觉线索的触觉移情效应研究
摘要
参考文献
1 黄静, 刘洪亮, 刘如建. 物质属性产品图片的展示距离对产品评价的影响——虚拟触觉感知视角[J]. 珞珈管理评论, 2020, (4): 113-129.
2 冷雄辉, 周小榆, 熊立. 触不可及还能感同身受吗?——在线产品隐喻文本描述的触觉补偿效应研究[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2022, 44(10): 87-103. DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.20220722.302
5 Banissy M J, Ward J. Mirror-touch synesthesia is linked with empathy[J]. Nature Neuroscience, 2007, 10(7): 815-816. DOI:10.1038/nn1926
6 Barsalou L W. Grounded cognition[J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 2008, 59(1): 617-645. DOI:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639
7 Basso F, Petit O, Le Bellu S, et al. Taste at first (person) sight: Visual perspective modulates brain activity implicitly associated with viewing unhealthy but not healthy foods[J]. Appetite, 2018, 128: 242-254. DOI:10.1016/j.appet.2018.06.009
8 Baumgartner H, Sujan M, Bettman J R. Autobiographical memories, affect, and consumer information processing[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1992, 1(1): 53-82. DOI:10.1016/S1057-7408(08)80045-9
9 Biswas D, Szocs C. The smell of healthy choices: Cross-modal sensory compensation effects of ambient scent on food purchases[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2019, 56(1): 123-141. DOI:10.1177/0022243718820585
10 Brasel S A, Gips J. Tablets, touchscreens, and touchpads: How varying touch interfaces trigger psychological ownership and endowment[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2014, 24(2): 226-233. DOI:10.1016/j.jcps.2013.10.003
11 Cano M B, Perry P, Ashman R, et al. The influence of image interactivity upon user engagement when using mobile touch screens[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2017, 77: 406-412. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.042
12 Castaño R, Sujan M, Kacker M, et al. Managing consumer uncertainty in the adoption of new products: Temporal distance and mental simulation[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2008, 45(3): 320-336. DOI:10.1509/jmkr.45.3.320
13 Chang C. Imagery fluency and narrative advertising effects[J]. Journal of Advertising, 2013, 42(1): 54-68. DOI:10.1080/00913367.2012.749087
14 Cornil Y, Chandon P. Pleasure as a substitute for size: How multisensory imagery can make people happier with smaller food portions[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2016, 53(5): 847-864. DOI:10.1509/jmr.14.0299
15 Daugherty T, Li H R, Biocca F. Consumer learning and the effects of virtual experience relative to indirect and direct product experience[J]. Psychology & Marketing, 2008, 25(7): 568-586.
16 Donato C, Raimondo M A. The effects of online tactile information source for low-touch products on consumer responses[J]. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 2021, 38(4): 364-373. DOI:10.1108/JCM-08-2019-3367
17 Elder R S, Krishna A. The “visual depiction effect” in advertising: Facilitating embodied mental simulation through product orientation[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2012, 38(6): 988-1003. DOI:10.1086/661531
18 Escalas J E, Luce M F. Process versus outcome thought focus and advertising[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2003, 13(3): 246-254. DOI:10.1207/S15327663JCP1303_06
19 Hayes A F. An introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach[M]. New York: Guilford Press, 2013.
20 Hung I W, Wyer Jr R S. Differences in perspective and the influence of charitable appeals: When imagining oneself as the victim is not beneficial[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2009, 46(3): 421-434. DOI:10.1509/jmkr.46.3.421
21 Keysers C, Kaas J H, Gazzola V. Somatosensation in social perception[J]. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2010, 11(6): 417-428. DOI:10.1038/nrn2833
22 Keysers C, Wicker B, Gazzola V, et al. A touching sight: SII/PV activation during the observation and experience of touch[J]. Neuron, 2004, 42(2): 335-346. DOI:10.1016/S0896-6273(04)00156-4
23 Krishna A, Elder R S, Caldara C. Feminine to smell but masculine to touch? Multisensory congruence and its effect on the aesthetic experience[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2010, 20(4): 410-418. DOI:10.1016/j.jcps.2010.06.010
24 Kuehn E, Haggard P, Villringer A, et al. Visually-driven maps in area 3b[J]. The Journal of Neuroscience, 2018, 38(5): 1295-1310. DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0491-17.2017
25 Larsen V, Luna D, Peracchio L A. Points of view and pieces of time: A taxonomy of image attributes[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2004, 31(1): 102-111. DOI:10.1086/383427
26 Lederman S J, Klatzky R L. Hand movements: A window into haptic object recognition[J]. Cognitive Psychology, 1987, 19(3): 342-368. DOI:10.1016/0010-0285(87)90008-9
27 Lee W, Gretzel U. Designing persuasive destination websites: A mental imagery processing perspective[J]. Tourism Management, 2012, 33(5): 1270-1280. DOI:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.10.012
28 Liu Y, Zang X L, Chen L H, et al. Vicariously touching products through observing others’ hand actions increases purchasing intention, and the effect of visual perspective in this process: An fMRI study[J]. Human Brain Mapping, 2018, 39(1): 332-343. DOI:10.1002/hbm.23845
29 Luangrath A W, Peck J, Hedgcock W, et al. Observing product touch: The vicarious haptic effect in digital marketing and virtual reality[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2022, 59(2): 306-326. DOI:10.1177/00222437211059540
30 Lv X Y, Li H F, Xia L. Effects of haptic cues on consumers’ online hotel booking decisions: The mediating role of mental imagery[J]. Tourism Management, 2020, 77: 104025. DOI:10.1016/j.tourman.2019.104025
31 Maier E, Dost F. Fluent contextual image backgrounds enhance mental imagery and evaluations of experience products[J]. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2018, 45: 207-220. DOI:10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.09.006
32 Maille V, Morrin M, Reynolds-McIlnay R. On the other hand..: Enhancing promotional effectiveness with haptic cues[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2020, 57(1): 100-117. DOI:10.1177/0022243719878390
33 McCabe D B, Nowlis S M. The effect of examining actual products or product descriptions on consumer preference[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2003, 13(4): 431-439. DOI:10.1207/S15327663JCP1304_10
34 McGlone F, Wessberg J, Olausson H. Discriminative and affective touch: Sensing and feeling[J]. Neuron, 2014, 82(4): 737-755. DOI:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.05.001
35 Murphy D H, Huckins S C, Rhodes M G, et al. The effect of perceptual processing fluency and value on metacognition and remembering[J]. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2022, 29(3): 910-921.
36 Northey G, Chan E Y. Political conservatism and preference for (a)symmetric brand logos[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2020, 115: 149-159. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.04.049
37 Park M, Yoo J. Effects of perceived interactivity of augmented reality on consumer responses: A mental imagery perspective[J]. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2020, 52: 101912. DOI:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101912
38 Petit O, Velasco C, Spence C. Digital sensory marketing: Integrating new technologies into multisensory online experience[J]. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 2019, 45(1): 42-61.
39 Pino G, Amatulli C, Nataraajan R, et al. Product touch in the real and digital world: How do consumers react?[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2020, 112: 492-501. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.002
40 Ranaweera A T, Martin B A S, Jin H S. What you touch, touches you: The influence of haptic attributes on consumer product impressions[J]. Psychology & Marketing, 2021, 38(1): 183-195.
41 Silva S C, Rocha T V, De Cicco R, et al. Need for touch and haptic imagery: An investigation in online fashion shopping[J]. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2021, 59: 102378. DOI:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102378
42 Singh J P, Irani S, Rana N P, et al. Predicting the “helpfulness” of online consumer reviews[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2017, 70: 346-355. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.008
43 Xie H, Minton E A, Kahle L R. Cake or fruit? Influencing healthy food choice through the interaction of automatic and instructed mental simulation[J]. Marketing Letters, 2016, 27(4): 627-644. DOI:10.1007/s11002-016-9412-3
44 Yazdanparast A, Kukar-Kinney M. The effect of product touch information and sale proneness on consumers’ responses to price discounts[J]. Psychology & Marketing, 2023, 40(1): 146-168.
45 Yim M Y C, Yoo C Y. Are digital menus really better than traditional menus? The mediating role of consumption visions and menu enjoyment[J]. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 2020, 50: 65-80. DOI:10.1016/j.intmar.2020.01.001
46 Yoganathan V, Osburg V S, Akhtar P. Sensory stimulation for sensible consumption: Multisensory marketing for e-tailing of ethical brands[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2019, 96: 386-396. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.06.005
47 Yoo J, Kim M. The effects of online product presentation on consumer responses: A mental imagery perspective[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2014, 67(11): 2464-2472. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.03.006
48 Zhang J Z, Chang C W, Neslin S A. How physical stores enhance customer value: The importance of product inspection depth[J]. Journal of Marketing, 2022, 86(2): 166-185. DOI:10.1177/00222429211012106
49 Zhao M, Hoeffler S, Zauberman G. Mental simulation and product evaluation: The affective and cognitive dimensions of process versus outcome simulation[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2011, 48(5): 827-839. DOI:10.1509/jmkr.48.5.827
50 Zhao X S, Lynch Jr J G, Chen Q M. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2010, 37(2): 197-206. DOI:10.1086/651257
51 Zhu Y, Meyer J. Getting in touch with your thinking style: How touchscreens influence purchase[J]. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2017, 38: 51-58. DOI:10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.05.006
引用本文
冷雄辉, 周小榆. “触类旁通”能实现“感同身受”吗？在线产品图片展示中触觉线索的触觉移情效应研究[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2023, 45(12): 118-136.
导出参考文献，格式为：
