The Influence of the Centrality of Visual Website Aesthetics on Online User Responses: Measure Development and Empirical Investigation

  • Supavich Fone PengnateEmail author
  • Rathindra Sarathy
  • Todd J. Arnold


This study develops a scale to measure individual differences in the centrality of visual website aesthetics (CVWA) and then examines the impact of the CVWA on users’ responses. Drawing on the concept of individual differences in the centrality of product aesthetics (CVPA), we conducted a series of three experiments to examine the CVWA. In the first experiment, the CVPA measure was used to assess online users’ CVWA and test the CVWA’s effects on online user responses, which included perceived visual appeal, trust, and intention to use the websites. In the second experiment, the CVWA measure was developed and validated. Finally, in the third experiment, the effects of the CVWA were examined using the CVWA measure. Overall, our findings suggest that the moderating effects of the CVWA are strong when users interact with websites with a high level of visual appeal and when the CVWA is captured using the CVWA measure.


Centrality of visual website aesthetics Website design Visual appeal E-commerce 



  1. Arnold, H. J., & Feldman, D. C. (1981). Social desirability response bias in self-report choice situations. The Academy of Management Journal, 24(2), 377–385. Scholar
  2. Aztek. (2016). Why you should invest in a great website design. Accessed 15 August 2019.
  3. Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 421–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balzer, W. K. (1986). Biases in the recording of performance-related information: The effects of initial impression and centrality of the appraisal task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(3), 329–347. Scholar
  5. Bassili, J. N. (1996). The how and why of response latency measurement in telephone surveys Answering questions: Methodology for determining cognitive and communicative processes in survey research. (pp. 319–346). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  6. Bertamini, M., Makin, A., & Rampone, G. (2013). Implicit association of symmetry with positive valence, high arousal and simplicity. i-Perception, 4(5), 317–327. Scholar
  7. Bloch, P. H. (1995). Seeking the ideal form: Product design and consumer response. The Journal of Marketing, 59(3), 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bloch, P. H., Brunel, F. F., & Arnold, T. J. (2003). Individual differences in the centrality of visual product aesthetics: Concept and measurement. The Journal of Consumer Research, 29(4), 551–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bovee, M. W. (2004). A conceptual framework and empirical validation. (Ph.D. Dissertation), Unviersity of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.Google Scholar
  10. Chen, J. V., Yen, D. C., Pornpriphet, W., & Widjaja, A. E. (2015). E-commerce web site loyalty: A cross cultural comparison. Information Systems Frontiers, 17(6), 1283–1299. Scholar
  11. Chin, W. W., Gopal, A., & Salisbury, W. D. (1997). Advancing the theory of adaptive structuration: The development of a scale to measure faithfullness of appropriation. Information Systems Research, 8(4), 342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Corcione, D. (2017). 5 steps to designing an effective business website. Accessed 12 March 2019.
  13. Coursaris, C. K., & van Osch, W. (2016). A cognitive-affective model of perceived user satisfaction (campus): The complementary effects and interdependence of usability and aesthetics in is design. Information & Management, 53(2), 252–264. Scholar
  14. Cyr, D. (2008). Modeling web site design across cultures: Relationships to trust, satisfaction, and e-loyalty. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(4), 47–72. Scholar
  15. Cyr, D., & Bonanni, C. (2005). Gender and website design in e-business. International Journal of Electronic Business, 3(6), 565–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cyr, D., Head, M., & Ivanov, A. (2006). Design aesthetics leading to m-loyalty in mobile commerce. Information & Management, 43(8), 950–963. Scholar
  17. Cyr, D., Head, M., & Larios, H. (2010). Colour appeal in website design within and across cultures: A multi-method evaluation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(1–2), 1–21. Scholar
  18. Cyr, D., Head, M., Larios, H., & Pan, B. (2009). Exploring human images in website design: A multi-method approach. MIS Quarterly, 33(3), 539–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Deng, L., & Poole, M. S. (2010). Affect in web interfaces: A study of the impacts of web page visual complexity and order. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 711–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Éthier, J., Hadaya, P., Talbot, J., & Cadieux, J. (2006). B2c website quality and emotions during online shopping episodes: An empirical study. Information & Management, 43, 627–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Éthier, J., Hadaya, P., Talbot, J., & Cadieux, J. (2008). Interface design and emotions experienced on b2c web sites: Empirical testing of a research model. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2771–2791. Scholar
  23. Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., & Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(6), 1013–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  25. Flavián, C., & Guinalíu, M. (2006). Consumer trust, perceived security and privacy policy: Three basic elements of loyalty to a web site. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 106(5), 601–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M., & Gurrea, R. (2006). The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information & Management, 43(1), 1–14. Scholar
  27. Fogg, B. J., Soohoo, C., Danielson, D. R., Marable, L., Stanford, J., & Tauber, E. R. (2003). How do users evaluate the credibility of web sites? A study with over 2,500 participants. Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Designing for User Experiences, San Francisco, California.Google Scholar
  28. Friborg, O., Martinussen, M., & Rosenvinge, J. H. (2006). Likert-based vs. semantic differential-based scorings of positive psychological constructs: A psychometric comparison of two versions of a scale measuring resilience. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(5), 873–884. Scholar
  29. Furnham, A. (1986). Response bias, social desirability and dissimulation. Personality and Individual Differences, 7(3), 385–400. Scholar
  30. Gefen, D. (2000). E-commerce: The role of familiarity and trust. Omega, 28(6), 725–737. Scholar
  31. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and tam in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Geissler, G. L., Zinkhan, G. M., & Watson, R. T. (2001). Web home page complexity and communication effectiveness. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2(1).Google Scholar
  33. Geissler, G. L., Zinkhan, G. M., & Watson, R. T. (2006). The influence of home page complexity on consumer attention, attitudes, and purchase intent. Journal of Advertising, 35(2), 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Giese, J. L., Malkewitz, K., Orth, U. R., & Henderson, P. W. (2014). Advancing the aesthetic middle principle: Trade-offs in design attractiveness and strength. Journal of Business Research, 67(6), 1154–1161. Scholar
  35. Golander, G. K., Tractinsky, N., & Kabessa-Cohen, I. (2012). Trends in website design. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(3), 169–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480. Scholar
  37. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Uppder Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  38. Hair, J. F., Tatham, R. L., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  39. Hampton-Sosa, W., & Koufaris, M. (2005). The effect of web site perceptions on initial trust in the owner company. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 10(1), 55–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hassanein, K. S., & Milena, H. M. (2004). Building online trust through socially rich web interfaces. Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada.Google Scholar
  41. Hassanein, K. S., & Milena, H. M. (2007). Manipulating perceived social presence through the web interface and its impact on attitude towards online shopping. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(8), 689–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hassenzahl, M. (2004). The interplay of beauty, goodness, and usability in interactive products. Human Computer Interaction, 19(4), 319–349. Scholar
  43. Hoegg, J., Alba, J. W., & Dahl, D. W. (2010). The good, the bad, and the ugly: Influence of aesthetics on product feature judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(4), 419–430. Scholar
  44. Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Holsapple, C. W., & Wu, J. (2008). Building effective online game websites with knowledge-based trust. Information Systems Frontiers, 10(1), 47–60. Scholar
  46. Hwang, Y., & Kim, D. J. (2007). Customer self-service systems: The effects of perceived web quality with service contents on enjoyment, anxiety, and e-trust. Decision Support Systems, 43(3), 746–760. Scholar
  47. Jacobsen, T. (2010). Beauty and the brain: Culture, history and individual differences in aesthetic appreciation. Journal of Anatomy, 216(2), 184–191. Scholar
  48. Jacobsen, T., & Höfel, L. (2003). Descriptive and evaluative judgment processes: Behavioral and electrophysiological indices of processing symmetry and aesthetics. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 3(4), 289–299. Scholar
  49. Jeffries, F. L., & Reed, R. (2000). Trust and adaptation in relational contracting. The Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 873–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Jiang, Z., Wang, W., Tan, B. C. Y., & Yu, J. (2016). The determinants and impacts of aesthetics in users’ first interaction with websites. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33(1), 229–259. Scholar
  51. John, O. P., & Robins, R. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(1), 206–219. Scholar
  52. Karimov, F. P., Brengman, M., & Van Hove, L. (2011). The effect of website design dimensions on initial trust: A synthesis of the empirical literature. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 12(4), 272–280,282–301.Google Scholar
  53. Karumur, R. P., Nguyen, T. T., & Konstan, J. A. (2018). Personality, user preferences and behavior in recommender systems. Information Systems Frontiers, 20(6), 1241–1265. Scholar
  54. Karvonen, K. (2000). The beauty of simplicity. Proceedings of the 2000 conference on Universal Usability, ArlingtonVirginia, United States.Google Scholar
  55. Kim, J., & Moon, J. Y. (1998). Designing towards emotional usability in customer interfaces--trustworthiness of cyber-banking system interfaces. Interacting with Computers, 10(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kim, D. J., & Hwang, Y. (2012). A study of mobile internet user’s service quality perceptions from a user’s utilitarian and hedonic value tendency perspectives. Information Systems Frontiers, 14(2), 409–421. Scholar
  57. Kimball, M. A. (2013). Visual design principles: An empirical study of design lore. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 43(1), 3–41. Scholar
  58. Langer, E. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2008). International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Gainesville: University of Florida.Google Scholar
  59. Lavie, T., & Tractinsky, N. (2004). Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of web sites. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60(3), 269–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Lewicki, P. (1983). Self-image bias in person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 384–393. Scholar
  61. Lim, K., Sia, C., Lee, M., & Benbasat, I. (2006). Do i trust you online, and if so, will i buy? An empirical study of two trust-building strategies. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(2), 233–266. Scholar
  62. Lim, Y.-K., Stolterman, E., Jung, H., & Donaldson, J. (2007). Interaction gestalt and the design of aesthetic interactions. Proceedings of The 2007 Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
  63. Lin, A. C. H., Fernandez, W. D., & Gregor, S. (2012). Understanding web enjoyment experiences and informal learning: A study in a museum context. Decision Support Systems, 53(4), 846–858. Scholar
  64. Lin, X., Featherman, M., Brooks, S. L., & Hajli, N. (2019). Exploring gender differences in online consumer purchase decision making: An online product presentation perspective. Information Systems Frontiers, 21(5), 1187–1201. Scholar
  65. Lindgaard, G., Dudek, C., Sen, D., Sumegi, L., & Noonan, P. (2011). An exploration of relations between visual appeal, trustworthiness and perceived usability of homepages. ACM Transactions Computer Humam Interaction, 18(1), 1–30. Scholar
  66. Lindgaard, G., Fernandes, G., Dudek, C., & Browñ, J. (2006). Attention web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression! Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(2), 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Liu, Y., & Salvendy, G. (2009). Effects of measurement errors on psychometric measurements in ergonomics studies: Implications for correlations, anova, linear regression, factor analysis, and linear discriminant analysis. Ergonomics, 52(5), 499–511. Scholar
  68. Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2007). Webqual: An instrument for consumer evaluation of web sites. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 11(3), 51–87. Scholar
  69. Loken, B. (2006). Consumer psychology: Categorization, inferences, affect, and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology, 57(1), 453–485. Scholar
  70. McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24–59.Google Scholar
  71. McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the modern racism scale. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 91–125). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  72. McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 334–359. Scholar
  73. McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. The Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 473–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. McKnight, D. H., Kacmar, C. J., & Choudhury, V. (2004). Shifting factors and the ineffectiveness of third party assurance seals: A two-stage model of initial trust in a web business. Electronic Markets, 14(3), 252–266. Scholar
  75. McLeod, B. (2016). 34 game-changing small business digital marketing statistics (2017). Accessed 10 May 2019.
  76. Moshagen, M., & Thielsch, M. T. (2010). Facets of visual aesthetics. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(10), 689–709. Scholar
  77. Nielsen, J. (2005). Ten usability heuristics. Accessed 12 September 2018.
  78. Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 250–256. Scholar
  79. Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York: Basic Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  81. Papachristos, E., & Avouris, N. (2011). Are first impressions about websites only related to visual appeal. In P. Campos, N. Graham, J. Jorge, N. Nunes, P. Palanque, & M. Winckler (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2011 (Vol. 6946, pp. 489–496, Lecture Notes in Computer Science): Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  82. Pennington, R., Wilcox, H. D., & Grover, V. (2003). The role of system trust in business-to-consumer transactions. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(3), 197–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Pengnate S., Sarathy, R., & Lee, J. (2018). The engagement of website initial aesthetic impressions: an experimental investigation. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35(16), 1517–1531.Google Scholar
  84. Pham, M. T., Cohen, J. B., Pracejus, J. W., & Hughes, G. D. (2001). Affect monitoring and the primacy of feelings in judgment. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(2), 167–188. Scholar
  85. Phillips, C. M. (2007). The influence of aesthetics on website user perceptions. Doctoral dissertation, Wichita State University.Google Scholar
  86. Reinecke, K., & Bernstein, A. (2013). Knowing what a user likes: A design science approach to interfaces that automatically adapt to culture. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 427–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Reinecke, K., Yeh, T., Miratrix, L., Mardiko, R., Zhao, Y., Liu, J., & Gajos, K. Z. (2013). Predicting users' first impressions of website aesthetics with a quantification of perceived visual complexity and colorfulness. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  88. Robins, D., & Holmes, J. (2008). Aesthetics and credibility in web site design. Information Processing & Management, 44(1), 386–399. Scholar
  89. Roseman, I. J., Antoniou, A. A., & Jose, P. E. (1996). Appraisal determinants of emotions: Constructing a more accurate and comprehensive theory. Cognition and Emotion, 10(3), 241–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Schepers, J., & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management, 44(1), 90–103. Scholar
  91. Schlosser, A. E., White, T. B., & Lloyd, S. M. (2006). Converting web site visitors into buyers: How web site investment increases consumer trusting beliefs and online purchase intentions. Journal of Marketing, 70, 133–148. doi:citeulike-article-id:892550.Google Scholar
  92. Schmitt, B., & Simonson, A. (1997). Marketing aesthetics: The strategic management of brands, identity and image. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  93. Schwarz, N. (1986). Feelings as information: Informational and motivational functions of affective states. In T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (pp. 527–561). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  94. Straub, D. W. (1989). Validating instruments in mis research. MIS Quarterly, 13(2), 147–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Tractinsky, N., Cokhavi, A., Kirschenbaum, M., & Sharfi, T. (2006). Evaluating the consistency of immediate aesthetic perceptions of web pages. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(11), 1071–1083. Scholar
  96. Tractinsky, N., & Lowengart, O. (2007). Web-store aesthetics in e-retailing: A conceptual framework and some theoretical implications. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 11(1).Google Scholar
  97. Turkyilmaz, C. A., Erdem, S., & Uslu, A. (2015). The effects of personality traits and website quality on online impulse buying. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 175(Supplement C), 98–105. Scholar
  98. Vance, A., Elie-Dit-Cosaque, C., & Straub, D. W. (2008). Examining trust in information technology artifacts: The effects of system quality and culture. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(4), 73–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Varma, A., Denisi, A. S., & Peters, L. H. (1996). Interpersonal affect and performance appraisal: A field study. Personnel Psychology, 49(2), 341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Wang, Y. D., & Emurian, H. H. (2005). Trust in e-commerce: Consideration of interface design factors. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 3(4), 42–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Wani, M., Raghavan, V., Abraham, D., & Kleist, V. (2017). Beyond utilitarian factors: User experience and travel company website successes. Information Systems Frontiers, 19(4), 769–785. Scholar
  102. Yang, Z., & Peterson, R. T. (2004). Customer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: The role of switching costs. Psychology & Marketing, 21(10), 799–822. Scholar
  103. Ye, Q., Law, R., & Gu, B. (2009). The impact of online user reviews on hotel room sales. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(1), 180–182. Scholar
  104. Yoo, J., & Kim, M. (2014). The effects of home page design on consumer responses: Moderating role of centrality of visual product aesthetics. Computers in Human Behavior, 38, 240–247. Scholar
  105. Zhang, X., Prybutok, V. R., Ryan, S., & Pavur, R. (2009). A model of the relationship among consumer trust, web design and user attributes. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 21(2), 44–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Zhang, Y. G., Dang, M. Y., & Chen, H. (2019). An explorative study on the virtual world: Investigating the avatar gender and avatar age differences in their social interactions for help-seeking. Information Systems Frontiers.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Supavich Fone Pengnate
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rathindra Sarathy
    • 2
  • Todd J. Arnold
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Accounting and Information Systems, College of BusinessNorth Dakota State UniversityFargoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Management Science and Information Systems, Spears School of BusinessOklahoma State UniversityStillwaterUSA
  3. 3.Department of Marketing, Spears School of BusinessOklahoma State UniversityTulsaUSA

Personalised recommendations