MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012298168 · doi:10.3390/mti4010008

The Effect of Layout and Colour Temperature on the Perception of Tourism Websites for Mobile Devices

2020· article· en· W3012298168 on OpenAlexafffund
Kiemute Oyibo, Julita Vassileva

Bibliographic record

VenueMultimodal Technologies and Interaction · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsTourismPerceptionContext (archaeology)Website designMobile deviceComputer scienceInterface designBridge (graph theory)Mobile commerceGridAdvertisingWorld Wide WebMultimediaHuman–computer interactionBusinessPsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In e-commerce, the user interface design of a website is critical to its success. However, there is limited research on how colour and layout design elements influence the perception of e-commerce websites for mobile devices. To bridge this gap, we conducted an empirical study to investigate, how the layout of information and colour temperature of an e-commerce tourism website for mobile device influence essential Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) user experience (UX) design attributes and intention to use the website. The results of our Partial Least Square Path Modelling (PLSPM) showed that both interface design elements significantly influence perceived aesthetics, perceived enjoyment, perceived usefulness and intention to use. Specifically, layout (list = 0 and grid = 1) positively influences perceived aesthetics and perceived enjoyment, while colour temperature negatively influences perceived usefulness and intention to use. The first finding suggests that in tourism website design for mobile devices, a grid layout of products and services provides a better hedonic user experience than a list layout. Moreover, the second finding suggests that cooler-temperature (blue and green) tourism websites are viewed by users as more useful than warmer-temperature (orange and red) tourism websites. We discuss the implications of these findings in the context of website UX design for mobile devices in the tourism domain.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultimodal Technologies and InteractionSame topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207