Less is Better than More: Anthropomorphic App Icons With Small versus Large Tilt Angles Were Perceived as More Vivid

Abstract

In this study, we explored the impact of tilted designs of anthropomorphic app icons on users’ perceptions of icon vividness across three experiments. In Experiment 1, tilting with an angle of 45° to the left increased perceived icon vividness. In Experiment 2, sequential icon tilt angles at 30° intervals manipulation showed that small tilt angles (e.g., 30° to the left or right) enhanced participant perceptions of dynamism and vividness, and participants perceived greater vividness in anthropomorphic app icons with slight tilting, driven by this increased dynamism. In Experiment 3, we excluded the effect of the completeness of icons on these participants’ evaluations and affirmed that slightly tilting designs was an effective visual strategy for improving perceived vividness to attract users.

Keywords

icon anthropomorphism perceived vividness dynamism tilt

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aggarwal

McGill

A. L.

(2007). Is that car smiling at me? Schema congruity as a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(4), 468–479. https://doi.org/10.1086/518544

Backhaus

Trapp

A. K.

Thüring

(2018). Skeuomorph versus flat design: User experience and age-related preferences. In Design, user experience, and usability: Designing interactions: 7th international conference, DUXU 2018, held as part of HCI international 2018, Las Vegas, NV, USA, july 15-20, 2018, proceedings, Part II 7 (pp. 527–542). Springer International Publishing.

Bauerly

Liu

(2006). Computational modeling and experimental investigation of effects of compositional elements on interface and design aesthetics. International Jrounal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(8), 670–682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.01.002

Bauerly

Liu

(2008). Effects of symmetry and number of compositional elements on interface and design aesthetics. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24(3), 275–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310801920508

Blondé

Girandola

(2018). Are vidid (vs. Pallid) threats persuasive ? Examining the effects of threat vividness in heath communications. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 40(1), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2017.1412969ff.ffhal-02074366f

Bone

P. F.

Ellen

P. S.

(1992). The generation and consequences of communication-evoked imagery. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(1), 93–104.

Brasel

S. A.

Hagtvedt

(2016). Living brands: Consumer responses to animated brand logos. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(5), 639–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0449-2

Bryden

M. P.

(1973). Perceptual asymmetry in vision relation to handedness, eyedness, and speech lateralization. Cortex, 9(4), 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(73)80041-3

Burgers

Eden

de Jong

Buningh

(2016). Rousing reviews and instigative images: The impact of online reviews and visual design characteristics on app downloads. Mobile Media & Communication, 4(3), 327–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157916639348

10.

Cao

Proctor

R. W.

Ding

Duffy

V. G.

Zhang

(2022). Is an anthropomorphic app icon more attractive than a non-anthropomorphic one? A case study using multimodal measurement. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 20(4), 419–439. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMC.2022.10035579

11.

Cao

Zhang

Ding

Duffy

V. G.

Zhang

(2021). Is an anthropomorphic app icon more attractive? Evidence from neuroergonomomics. Applied Ergonomics, 97, 103545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103545

12.

Christman

S. D.

(2013). Handedness and ‘open-eardness’: Strong right-handers are less likely to prefer less popular musical genres. Psychology of Music, 41(1), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735611415751

13.

Christman

S. D.

(2022). The right hemisphere and ambiguity: A possible role of handedness in rorschach responsivity. Rorschachiana, 43(2), 151–167. https://doi.org/10.1027/1192-5604/a000152

14.

Cian

Krishna

Elder

R. S.

(2014). This logo moves me: Dynamic imagery from static images. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(2), 184–197. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0023

15.

Cian

Krishna

Elder

R. S.

(2015). A sign of things to come: Behavioral change through dynamic iconography. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(6), 1426–1446. https://doi.org/10.1086/680673

16.

Costa

Bitti

P. E. R.

(2000). Face-ism effect and head canting in one's own and others' photographs. European Psychologist, 5(4), 293–301. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.5.4.293

17.

Coyle

J. R.

Thorson

(2001). The effects of progressive levels of interactivity and vividness in web marketing sites. Journal of Advertising, 30(3), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2001.10673646

18.

De Bondt

Van Kerckhove

Geuens

(2018). Look at that body! How anthropomorphic package shapes systematically appeal to consumers. International Journal of Advertising, 37(5), 698–717. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2018.1470919

19.

Deng

Zhang

Zhou

Liu

(2022). Effects of App icon border form and interface background color saturation on user visual experience and search performance. Advances in Multimedia, 2022, 1166656–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1166656

20.

Dondis

D. A.

(1974). A primer of visual literacy. The MIT Press.

21.

Epley

Waytz

Cacioppo

J. T.

(2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864–886. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864

22.

Fortin

D. R.

Dholakia

R. R.

(2005). Interactivity and vividness effects on social presence and involvement with a web-based advertisement. Journal of Business Research, 58(3), 387–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00106-1

23.

Gelin

Bugaiska

Méot

Vinter

Bonin

(2019). Animacy effects in episodic memory: Do imagery processes really play a role? Memory, 27(2), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2018.1498108

24.

Gilly

M. C.

Zeithaml

V. A.

(1985). The elderly consumer and adoption of technologies. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 353–357. https://doi.org/10.1086/208521

25.

Grobert

Cuny

Fornerino

(2016). Surprise! We changed the logo. The Journal of Product and Brand Management, 25(3), 239–246. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-06-2015-0895

26.

Gvili

Tal

Amar

Hallak

Wansink

Giblin

Bommelaer

(2015). Fresh from the tree: Implied motion improves food evaluation. Food Quality and Preference, 46, 160–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.07.015

27.

Hagtvedt

(2011). The impact of incomplete typeface logos on perceptions of the firm. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 86–93. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.4.86

28.

Hatcher

E. P.

(1989). Visual metaphors: A methodological study in visual communication. University of New Mexico Press.

29.

Hayakawa

Keysar

(2018). Using a foreign language reduces mental imagery. Cognition, 173, 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.12.010

30.

C. H.

Hou

K. C.

(2015). Exploring the attractive factors of app icons. Ksii Transactions on Internet & Information Systems, 9(6), 2251–2270. https://doi.org/10.3837/tiis.2015.06.016

31.

Hoehle

Venkatesh

(2015). Mobile application usability: Conceptualization and instrument development. Social Science Electronic Publishing.

32.

Jylhä

Hamari

(2019). An icon that everyone wants to click: How perceived aesthetic qualities predict app icon successfulness. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 130, 73–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2019.04.004

33.

Jylhä

Hamari

(2020). Development of measurement instrument for visual qualities of graphical user interface elements (VISQUAL): A test in the context of mobile game icons. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 30(5), 949–982. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-020-09263-7

34.

Kamarulzaman

N. A.

Fabil

Zaki

Z. M.

Ismail

(2020). Comparative study of icon design for mobile application. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1551(1), 012007. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1551/1/012007

35.

Keller

P. A.

Block

L. G.

(1997). Vividness effects: A resource-matching perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(3), 295–304. https://doi.org/10.1086/209511

36.

Ketron

Naletelich

(2019). Victim or beggar? Anthropomorphic messengers and the savior effect in consumer sustainability behavior. Journal of Business Research, 96, 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.004

37.

Kim

Lakshmanan

(2015). How kinetic property shapes novelty perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 79(6), 94–111. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.14.0284

38.

Kim

McGill

A. L.

(2011). Gaming with Mr. Slot or gaming the slot machine? Power, anthropomorphism, and risk perception. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(1), 94–107. https://doi.org/10.1086/658148

39.

Kourtzi

Kanwisher

(2000). Activation in human MT/MST by static images with implied motion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1162/08989290051137594

40.

Kreitler

(1972). Psychology of the arts. Duke University Press.

41.

Krumhuber

Manstead

A. S. R.

Kappas

(2007). Temporal aspects of facial displays in person and expression perception: The effects of smile dynamics, head-tilt, and gender. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 31(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-006-0019-x

42.

Labroo

A. A.

Dhar

Schwarz

(2008). Of frog wines and frowning watches: Semantic priming, perceptual fluency, and brand evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(6), 819–831. https://doi.org/10.1086/523290

43.

Lai

C.-Y.

Chen

P.-H.

Shih

S.-W.

Liu

Hong

J.-S.

(2010). Computational models and experimental investigations of effects of balance and symmetry on the aesthetics of text-overlaid images. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(1-2), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.08.008

44.

Lee

A. Y.

Labroo

A. A.

(2004). The effect of conceptual and perceptual fluency on brand evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(2), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.41.2.151.28665

45.

Lee

G. M.

Lee

Whinston

A. B.

(2020). Matching mobile applications for cross-promotion. Information Systems Research, 31(3), 865–891. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2020.0921

46.

Liu

Zhou

(2020). Diagonal or vertical? An empirical study of the impact of food brand logo orientation on consumers’ food perception and food attitude. Food Quality and Preference, 86, 103985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.103985

47.

Liu

Cao

Proctor

R. W.

(2021). How do app icon color and border shape influence visual search efficiency and user experience? Evidence from an eye-tracking study. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 84, 103160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2021.103160

48.

Malloy

(2015). The art of theatrical design: Elements of visual composition, methods and practice. Focal Press.

49.

Mara

Appel

(2015). Effects of lateral head tilt on user perceptions of humanoid and android robots. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 326–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.025

50.

Marks

D. F.

(1972). Individual differences in the vividness of visual imagery and their effects on function. In Sheehan

P. W.

(Ed.), The function and nature of imagery (pp. 83–108). Academic Press.

51.

Marks

D. F.

(1989). Construct validity of the vividness of visual imagery questionnaire. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69(2), 459–465. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1989.69.2.459

52.

McKelvie

S. J.

(1995). The VVIQ and beyond: Vividness and its measurement. Journal of Mental Imagery, 19(3-4), 197–252.

53.

Mead

J. A.

Richerson

(2020). Dynamic right-slanted fonts increase the effectiveness of promotional retail advertising. Journal of Retailing, 96(2), 282–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2019.10.002

54.

Mitchell

A. A.

Olson

J. C.

(1981). Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude? Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 318–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800306

55.

Montoya

A. K.

Hayes

A. F.

(2017). Two-condition within-participant statistical mediation analysis: A path-analytic framework. Psychological Methods, 22(1), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000086

56.

Mourey

J. A.

Elder

R. S.

(2019). Dynamic by design: How incorporating dynamism in advertising affects evaluations. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 4(4), 422–435. https://doi.org/10.1086/705035

57.

Mourey

J. A.

Olson

J. G.

Yoon

(2017). Products as pals: Engaging with anthropomorphic products mitigates the effects of social exclusion. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 414–431. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucx038

58.

Nachshon

(1985). Directional preferences in perception of visual stimuli. International Journal of Neuroscience, 25(3-4), 161–174. https://doi.org/10.3109/00207458508985369

59.

Nisbett

R. E.

Ross

(1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Prentice-Hall.

60.

Nowak

K. L.

Rauh

(2005). The influence of the avatar on online perceptions of anthropomorphism, androgyny, credibility, homophily, and attraction. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(1), 153–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.tb00308.x

61.

Nowlis

S. M.

Mandel

McCabe

D. B.

(2004). The effect of a delay between choice and consumption on consumption enjoyment. Journal of Consume Research, 31(3), 502–510. https://doi.org/10.1086/425085

62.

Osgood

C. E.

Suci

G. J.

Tannenbaum

P. H.

(1957). The measurement of meaning. University of Illinois press.

63.

Peracchio

L. A.

Meyers Levy

(2005). Using stylistic properties of ad pictures to communicate with consumers. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1086/429599

64.

Petit

Zago

Mellet

Jobard

Crivello

Joliot

Tzourio Mazoyer

(2015). Strong rightward lateralization of the dorsal attentional network in left handers with right sighting eye: An evolutionary advantage. Human Brain Mapping, 36(3), 1151–1164. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22693

65.

Pocheptsova

Novemsky

(2010). When do incidental mood effects last? Lay beliefs versus actual effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(6), 992–1001. https://doi.org/10.1086/644760

66.

Prichard

Propper

R. E.

Christman

S. D.

(2013). Degree of handedness, but not direction, is a systematic predictor of cognitive performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00009

67.

Richardson

(1994). Individual differences in imaging: Their measurement, origins, and consequences. Baywood.

68.

Rossiter

J. R.

Percy

(1980). Attitude change through visual imagery in advertising. Journal of advertising, 9(2), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1980.10673313

69.

Schlosser

A. E.

Rikhi

R. R.

Dagogo Jack

S. W.

(2016). The ups and downs of visual orientation: The effects of diagonal orientation on product judgment. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(4), 496–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2016.01.003

70.

Shen

Shi

Gao

(2018). Beyond the food label itself: How does color affect attention to information on food labels and preference for food attributes? Food Quality and Preference, 64, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.10.004

71.

Sundar

S. S.

Kim

(2005). Interactivity and persuasion: Influencing attitudes with information and involvement. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 5(2), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2005.10722097

72.

Theben

Gerards

Folkvord

(2020). The effect of packaging color and health claims on product attitude and buying intention. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(6), 1991. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17061991

73.

Tong

Feng

Zhang

(2020). Using images of eyes to enhance green brand purchase intentions through green brand anthropomorphism strategies: The moderator role of facial expression. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 568595. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.568595

74.

Wang

Zhu

Wang

(2021). The effect of product image dynamism on purchase intention for online aquatic product shopping: An EEG study. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 14, 759–768. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S313742

75.

Wang

(2017). Effects of the aesthetic design of icons on app downloads: Evidence from an android market. Electronic Commerce Research, 17(1), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-016-9245-4

76.

Wei

Kim

Miao

Behnke

Almanza

(2018). Consumer inferences of corporate social responsibility (CSR) claims on packaged foods. Journal of Business Research, 83, 186–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.046

77.

Westerman

D. L.

Lanska

Olds

J. M.

(2015). The effect of processing fluency on impressions of familiarity and liking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(2), 426–438. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038356

78.

Westerman

S. J.

Gardner

P. H.

Sutherland

E. J.

White

Jordan

Watts

Wells

(2012). Product design: Preference for rounded versus angular design elements. Psychology and Marketing, 29(8), 595–605. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20546

79.

Williams

J. D.

Rippon

Stone

B. M.

Annett

(1995). Psychophysiological correlates of dynamic imagery. British Journal of Psychology, 86(2), 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1995.tb02562.x

80.

Wooldridge

Schneider

(2011). Your iOS App is your most powerful marketing tool. In Wooldridge

Schneider

(Eds.), The business of iPhone and iPad app development (pp. 61–96). Apress. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4302-3301-5_4

81.

Yoo

C. Y.

Kim

(2005). Processing of animation in online banner advertising: The roles of cognitive and emotional responses. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(4), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20047

82.

Zhang

Liu

Tong

Zhou

(2020). The impact of incomplete faces of spokes-characters in mobile application icon designs on brand evaluations. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1495. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01495

83.

Zhang

Zheng

M. Z.

(2016). Facial attractiveness in the eye of the beholder: One eye movement research of the angle effect. Studies of Psychology and Behavior (In Chinese), 14(4), 459–464.

84.

Zhou

Huang

(2019). Upright or inclining? An empirical study of the impact of brand logo shapes on the consumer product evaluation (in Chinese). Foreign Economics & Management, 41(2), 84–98. https://doi.org/10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2019.02.007