CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 0Augmented Reality ApplicationsConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesConsumer Behavior and Marketing Influence

Seeing Is Believing, Experiencing Is Deciding: How Augmented Reality Attributes Drive Confidence in Choice and Willingness to Pay

Open access
Javeed, Syed, Rasool, Gowhar, Pathania, Anjali·2026·International Journal of Consumer Studies
DOI 10.1111/ijcs.70266
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Augmented reality (AR) now defines online retail, yet most research focuses on its usefulness and enjoyment rather than on how specific attributes shape consumer judgements. Drawing on the stimulus‐organism‐response (SOR) framework and self‐determination theory (SDT), this study examines how AR attributes (interactivity, vividness, novelty, and quality) relate to psychological need satisfaction (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) and in turn to confidence in choice and willingness to pay, comparing AR and non‐AR platforms among 468 shoppers using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS‐SEM) and fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Interactivity and novelty were the most consistent drivers of need satisfaction, whereas quality was associated with autonomy alone, and only marginally so, and vividness offered no consistent advantage over non‐AR displays, pointing to a ceiling effect in already‐immersive settings. Autonomy predicted willingness to pay, and competence and relatedness predicted confidence in choice, so decision certainty and price valuation followed distinct motivational routes. Mediation analysis indicates that need satisfaction transmits these effects, and product uncertainty weakens the autonomy and relatedness pathways but not the competence pathway. Configurational analysis revealed five equifinal combinations of attributes and needs, indicating that no single condition is sufficient on its own and that AR attributes can substitute for one another. The study therefore establishes need satisfaction as the mechanism through which AR attributes shape judgements, and it shows practitioners how to align specific attributes with the psychological need most relevant to the intended outcome rather than maximising visual richness.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Drawing on stimulus-organism-response and self-determination theory, this study shows that augmented reality attributes shape consumer judgements through psychological need satisfaction, but selectively rather than uniformly. Interactivity and novelty drive all three needs, while quality and vividness show weaker or inconsistent effects; autonomy predicts willingness to pay, whereas competence and relatedness predict confidence in choice.

Key findings

  • Among 468 shoppers, AR and non-AR platform attributes differed significantly on interactivity, quality, novelty, and vividness (Welch’s ANOVA p < 0.001 for all four), with AR means higher than non-AR means.
  • Interactivity and novelty were the most consistent drivers of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Quality was associated only with autonomy and only marginally within the AR group (p = 0.054); vividness predicted relatedness in the AR group but showed no significant group difference versus non-AR (pMGA = 0.562).
  • Autonomy predicted willingness to pay (β_AR = 0.358, p < 0.001) but not confidence in choice (p = 0.173); competence predicted confidence in choice (β_AR = 0.389, p < 0.001) but not willingness to pay (p = 0.091); relatedness predicted confidence in choice (β_AR = 0.385, p < 0.001) and willingness to pay within the AR group (p = 0.035), though the group difference was not significant (pMGA = 0.147).
  • Product uncertainty weakened three of six motivational paths: relatedness → confidence in choice (β = −0.180, p < 0.001), autonomy → willingness to pay (β = −0.237, p = 0.006), and relatedness → willingness to pay (β = −0.195, p = 0.002), but not competence paths. fsQCA found five equifinal configurations; no single condition was sufficient, interactivity appeared in every sufficient configuration, and novelty appeared in four of five.

Methods

  • Between-subjects mall-intercept survey: 720 approached, 503 agreed (69.9% response rate), 35 removed during cleaning, leaving 468 valid cases (AR n = 235; non-AR n = 233). Participants were randomly assigned to AR (Wanna Kicks virtual try-on) or non-AR (Flipkart standard e-commerce) conditions, explored for 5–10 min, then completed a 33-item, 7-point Likert questionnaire.
  • Analysis used PLS-SEM in SmartPLS 4.1 with bootstrapping of 10,000 resamples for structural and multi-group models, 5,000 bias-corrected resamples for parallel mediation, and latent interaction terms for product uncertainty. fsQCA calibrated PLS-SEM latent scores with anchors at 3, 0, and −3, using a frequency threshold of 3, raw consistency cut-off of 0.90, and PRI consistency below 0.75 coded as 0.

Limitations

  • Stated by the paper: the study compared only two platforms (Wanna Kicks and Flipkart), did not distinguish consumer segments, used a cross-sectional single-session design, and the platforms differed in brand familiarity, interface design, and product range. The model examined only four AR attributes and three psychological needs, and the five fsQCA configurations were not tested across product categories differing in purchase risk and sensory involvement.
  • Evident in the text: the measurement model showed high HTMT between confidence in choice and willingness to pay (0.898), acknowledged as a limitation; SRMR was 0.098, described as adequate but above the conservative 0.08 criterion. The sample was predominantly female (64.5%), aged 21–30 (56.8%), earning under $10,000 annually (50.2%), and recruited via mall intercept, with prior AR familiarity, age, gender, and shopping frequency not entered as statistical controls.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ijcs.70266

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

5 of 29 cited sources checked · 2 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Findingcitation

    Several equifinal configurations were found.

    “Several equifinal configurations were found”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bawack et al. 2021 source
  • Interpretationown data

    Price premium judgements depend on more than need satisfaction alone.

    “implying that price premium judgements depend on more than need satisfaction alone”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Fan et al. 2020

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Hoffmann and Mai 2022 source

      The Consumer models section mentions a price-value trade-off as a moderator of augmented reality’s effectiveness, and the integrative framework discusses benefits and costs in decisions about using the technology (pages unavailable). Neither passage addresses price-premium judgments or their relationship to need satisfaction; searches for those terms and willingness to pay found no passage that does. (LLM, conf=0.70)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Sun et al. 2022 source
  • Findingown data

    All endogenous variables had R2 values between 0.406 and 0.581.

    “Results indicated that all endogenous variables had R 2 values between 0.406 and 0.581”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Product uncertainty weakens the relationship between autonomy and willingness to pay (β = -0.237, t = 2.739, p = 0.006).

    “Table 6 indicates that product uncertainty weakens the relationship between relatedness and confidence in choice (β = -0.180,t = 3.732, p < 0.001), autonomy and willingness to pay (β = -0.237,t = 2.739, p = 0.006), and relatedness and willingness to pay (β = -0.195,t = 3.045, p = 0.002).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Product uncertainty exerted a larger effect on consumer judgements in the non-AR condition (f2=0.14).

    “Product uncertainty exerted a larger effect on consumer judgements in the non-AR condition (f 2 = 0.14).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 11
  • May combine two claims. 50
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 6

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    PLS-SEM path significance was tested by bootstrapping with 10,000 resamples; mediation used 5000 bias-corrected resamples.

    “Path significance in the structural and multi-group models was tested by bootstrapping with 10,000 resamples, whereas the parallel mediation analysis reported in Section 5.6 used 5000 bias-corrected resamples following Preacher and Hayes (2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Preacher and Hayes (2008) source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Relative to static online displays, AR raises product attitudes, purchase intention, and willingness to pay, with gains large enough to register in real sales data.

    “A substantial body of work confirms that, relative to static online displays, AR raises product attitudes, purchase intention, and willingness to pay, and that these gains are large enough to register in real sales data (Heller et al. 2019;Yim et al. 2017).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Heller et al. 2019 source

      The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that sensory touch control significantly increased willingness to pay for a product inspected in multi-sensory AR. But the Empirical Studies section compares touch control with voice control within AR, not AR with static online displays. The cited results do not establish higher product attitudes or purchase intention, or gains observed in real sales data; Study 3 used an incentivised willingness-to-pay measure. (LLM, conf=0.90)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Yim et al. 2017 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    AR can strengthen confidence in choice and willingness to pay by simulating tangibility and enabling virtual product testing, reducing online purchase uncertainty.

    “In digital retailing, AR can strengthen both judgements by simulating tangibility and enabling virtual product testing, which reduces the uncertainty that ordinarily attends online purchases (Rauschnabel et al. 2018;Scholz and Duffy 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Rauschnabel et al. 2018 source
    • cites Scholz and Duffy 2018 source

      The Introduction (p. 3) describes virtual product tryouts, and section 2.1 (pp. 8–10) says AR apps can help consumers make purchase decisions more confidently and reduce uncertainty about a potential purchase. These passages support the virtual-testing and uncertainty parts of the claim, but they do not establish simulated tangibility or greater willingness to pay; willingness to buy is a different outcome. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Interactivity appeared in every sufficient configuration and novelty in four of the five.

    “Interactivity appeared in every sufficient configuration and novelty in four of the five”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For confidence in choice, overall solution consistency was 0.902 and coverage was 0.858.

    “For confidence in choice, overall solution consistency = 0.902 and coverage = 0.858.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For confidence in choice, competence and relatedness transmitted the effects of all four AR attributes, whereas autonomy did not mediate any path.

    “For confidence in choice, competence and relatedness transmitted the effects of all four AR attributes, whereas autonomy did not mediate any path.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For ARV → AU, the significant difference reflects a positive coefficient in the non-AR group and a nonsignificant negative coefficient in the AR group, not an AR advantage.

    “For ARV → AU, the significant difference reflects a positive coefficient in the non-AR group alongside a nonsignificant negative coefficient in the AR group, so it does not indicate an AR advantage.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Solution 2: interactivity + quality + novelty + autonomy + competence produced confidence = 0.982 and willingness = 0.977.

    “Solution 2: interactivity + quality + novelty + autonomy + competence → confidence = 0.982, willingness = 0.977”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For willingness to pay, overall consistency was 0.886 and coverage was 0.843.

    “For willingness to pay, overall consistency = 0.886 and coverage = 0.843.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Vividness was not uniformly beneficial in the AR condition and was sometimes stronger in the non-AR setting.

    “vividness was not uniformly beneficial in the AR condition and was sometimes stronger in the non-AR setting”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    The AR and non-AR groups differ significantly on 12 paths: ARI->AU, ARI->CP, ARI->RE, ARN->AU, ARN->CP, ARN->RE, ARQ->AU, ARV->AU, AU->CIC, AU->WTP, CP->CIC, and RE->CIC.

    “Results showed 12 paths”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Solution 3: interactivity + novelty + vividness + autonomy + relatedness produced confidence = 0.979 and willingness = 0.972.

    “Solution 3: interactivity + novelty + vividness + autonomy + relatedness → confidence = 0.979, willingness = 0.972”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Solution 1: interactivity + novelty + vividness + competence produced confidence = 0.969 and willingness = 0.956.

    “Solution 1: interactivity + novelty + vividness + competence → confidence = 0.969, willingness = 0.956”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Two HTMT values exceeded the conservative threshold of 0.85: interactivity with quality (0.857) and confidence in choice with willingness to pay (0.898).

    “Two values exceeded the conservative threshold of 0.85, namely interactivity with quality (0.857) and confidence in choice with willingness to pay (0.898).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Configurational analysis revealed five equifinal combinations of AR attributes and needs that predict positive consumer judgements.

    “Configurational analysis revealed five equifinal combinations of attributes and needs”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    AR quality's only association was with autonomy, and that path was marginal (p = 0.054).

    “Its only association was with autonomy, and that path was marginal (p = 0.054)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For willingness to pay, autonomy was the primary mediator, with significant indirect effects for interactivity, quality, and novelty.

    “For willingness to pay, autonomy was the primary mediator, with significant indirect effects for interactivity, quality, and novelty.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Hypothesis 3a is not supported: the AU → CIC path is non-significant within the AR group (p = 0.173).

    “| Hypothesis 3a | AU → CIC | Path coefficients | Non-significant within the | Not Supported |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Hypothesis 3d is not supported: the CP → WTP path is positive but non-significant (p = 0.091).

    “| Hypothesis 3d | CP → WTP | Path coefficients | Positive but non-significant (p = 0.091) | Not Supported |”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The moderation effect of product uncertainty (PU) on the RE → WTP relationship is significant (β = -0.195, t = 3.045, p = 0.002) and is supported.

    “PU × RE-> WTP -0.195 3.045 0.002 | Supported”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Interactivity and novelty were the most consistent drivers of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the AR condition, whereas quality and vividness played more selective and, in some cases, counterintuitive roles.

    “Interactivity and novelty were the most consistent drivers of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the AR condition, whereas quality and vividness played more selective and, in some cases, counterintuitive roles.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For ARI, the AR group mean (6.3461) is higher than the non-AR group mean (2.9814), with Welch's F = 1213.318, df1 = 1, df2 = 253.476, p < 0.001.

    “ARI-average welch | 6.3461/2.9814 | 1213.318 | 1 | 253.476 | < 0.001”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Vividness significantly predicted relatedness in the AR condition, but its paths to competence and autonomy were not significant, and the multi-group differences on these paths were negligible.

    “vividness significantly predicted relatedness in the AR condition, but its paths to competence and autonomy were not significant, and the multi-group differences on these paths were negligible.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For ARQ, the AR group mean (6.2340) is higher than the non-AR group mean (3.5093), with Welch's F = 543.174, df1 = 1, df2 = 273.810, p < 0.001.

    “ARQ-average welch | 6.2340/3.5093 | 543.174 | 1 | 273.810 | < 0.001”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Hypothesis 2d is not supported: ARV has a significant RE path within the AR group (p = 0.005) but no significant group difference (pMGA = 0.562), and the AU and CP paths are non-significant.

    “| Hypothesis 2d | ARV → AU | Path coefficients | RE path significant within the AR group | Not Supported |”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The moderation effect of product uncertainty (PU) on the RE → CIC relationship is significant (β = -0.180, t = 3.732, p = 0.000) and is supported.

    “PU × RE-> CIC | -0.180 3.732 0.000 | Supported”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For ARN, the AR group mean (6.2227) is higher than the non-AR group mean (3.4607), with Welch's F = 572.703, df1 = 1, df2 = 289.452, p < 0.001.

    “ARN-average Welch | 6.2227/3.4607 | 572.703 | 1 | 289.452 | < 0.001”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The moderation effect of product uncertainty (PU) on the AU → WTP relationship is significant (β = -0.237, t = 2.739, p = 0.006) and is supported.

    “PU × AU-> WTP -0.237 2.739 0.006 | Supported”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Hypothesis 2b is not supported: ARQ has a marginal AU path within the AR group (p = 0.054) despite a significant group difference, and the CP and RE paths are non-significant.

    “| Hypothesis 2b | ARQ → AU | Path coefficients | AU path marginal within the AR group | Not Supported |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Hypothesis 4 is partially supported: Hypotheses 4b, 4e, and 4f are supported, while Hypotheses 4a, 4c, and 4d are non-significant.

    “| Hypothesis 4a-f PU × (AU, CP, | Moderation effects | Hypothesis 4b,e,f supported. | Partially Supported |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Interactivity emerged as the strongest and most consistent predictor across all three motivational needs, appearing in every high-outcome fsQCA configuration.

    “Interactivity emerged as the strongest and most consistent predictor across all three motivational needs, appearing in every high-outcome fsQCA configuration.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Relatedness showed a significant path to willingness to pay within the AR group, although this effect did not differ significantly from the non-AR group in the multi-group analysis.

    “Relatedness also showed a significant path to willingness to pay within the AR group, although this effect did not differ significantly from the non-AR group in the multi-group analysis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Hypothesis 3f is not supported: the RE → WTP path is significant within the AR group (p = 0.035) but has no significant group difference (pMGA = 0.147).

    “| Hypothesis 3f | RE → WTP | Path coefficients | Significant within the AR group | Not Supported |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For ARV, the AR group mean (6.2610) is higher than the non-AR group mean (3.4578), with Welch's F = 711.610, df1 = 1, df2 = 288.808, p < 0.001.

    “ARV-average welch | 6.2610/3.4578 | 711.610 | 1 | 288.808 | < 0.001”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Autonomy predicted willingness to pay but not confidence in choice.

    “Autonomy predicted willingness to pay but not confidence in choice, while competence and relatedness predicted confidence in choice.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Vividness was not uniformly stronger in the AR condition, and was sometimes more effective in non-AR settings.

    “The finding that vividness was not uniformly stronger in the AR condition, and was sometimes more effective in non-AR settings”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Participants were randomly assigned in equal proportion to AR or non-AR conditions, with assignment determined by randomised QR code rather than interviewer.

    “Eligible participants were then randomly assigned in equal proportion to one of two conditions, with assignment determined by the randomised QR code they received rather than by the interviewer”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    In the SOR model, environmental stimuli act on a consumer's internal states, which in turn drive approach or avoidance responses.

    “In the SOR model, environmental stimuli act on a consumer's internal states, which in turn drive approach or avoidance responses (Mehrabian and Russell 1974;Russell and Pratt 1980).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Mehrabian and Russell 1974

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Russell and Pratt 1980 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    SDT explains motivated behaviour through fulfilment of three innate needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

    “It explains motivated behaviour through the fulfilment of three innate needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci and Ryan 2000)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Deci and Ryan 2000 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    fsQCA variables were calibrated using the direct method with anchors at 3, 0, and -3.

    “fsQCA variables were calibrated using the direct method of Rasoolimanesh et al. (2021), with anchors at 3 (full membership), 0 (crossover), and -3 (full non-membership).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rasoolimanesh et al. (2021) source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The final instrument contained 33 items rated on a 7-point Likert scale adapted from validated measures.

    “The final instrument contained 33 items rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree), adapted from validated measures (see Table 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    When the three needs are satisfied, behaviour becomes intrinsically motivated, and intrinsic motivation is associated with deeper engagement, greater satisfaction, and stronger persistence than behaviour driven by external rewards.

    “When the three needs are satisfied, behaviour becomes intrinsically motivated, and intrinsic motivation is associated with deeper engagement, greater satisfaction, and stronger persistence than behaviour driven by external rewards (Gagné and Deci 2005;Vallerand 1997).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Gagné and Deci 2005 source
    • cites Vallerand 1997 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Need satisfaction transmits the effects of AR attributes on consumer judgements, though not uniformly.

    “Need satisfaction therefore transmits the effects of AR attributes on consumer judgements, though not uniformly”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The pilot study indicated satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > 0.80).

    “The pilot indicated satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > 0.80).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The final sample (N=468) exceeded recommended thresholds for both SEM and fsQCA, ensuring sufficient power and generalisability.

    “The final sample (N = 468) exceeded recommended thresholds for both SEM (Kock and Hadaya 2016) and fsQCA (Pappas and Woodside 2021), ensuring sufficient power and generalisability.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Kock and Hadaya 2016

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Pappas and Woodside 2021 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationown data

    The model fit should be read as adequate rather than strong.

    “so the model fit should be read as adequate rather than strong.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Henseler et al. (2014) source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The high correlation between confidence in choice and willingness to pay is a limitation of the measurement model.

    “The high correlation between confidence in choice and willingness to pay is acknowledged as a limitation of the measurement model.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Of 720 approached, 503 agreed (69.9%), 35 removed, leaving 468 valid cases.

    “Of the 720 individuals approached, 503 agreed to participate, a response rate of 69.9%.”
    • Also stated in: § 4.2 | Measures and Data Collection · plain
      “This left 468 valid cases for analysis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    All HTMT values were below the liberal threshold of 0.90, and discriminant validity was judged adequate.

    “As shown in Table 3, all HTMT values were below the liberal threshold of 0.90.”
    • Also stated in: § 5.1 | Assessment of Measurement Model, Reliability and Validity Testing · plain
      “discriminant validity is judged adequate.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Reliability and validity met accepted thresholds (CR > 0.70, AVE > 0.50).

    “Reliability and validity met accepted thresholds (composite reliability [CR] > 0.70, AVE > 0.50; Hair et al. 2019).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hair et al. 2019 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    These results confirm causal asymmetry, meaning that different patterns of presence or absence can yield similar outcomes.

    “These results confirm causal asymmetry, meaning that different patterns of presence or absence can yield similar outcomes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Neither interactivity nor novelty produced favourable judgements without other conditions present.

    “but neither produced favourable judgements without other conditions present.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Hypothesis 2c is supported: ARN positively influences autonomy, competence, and relatedness in AR platforms.

    “Hypothesis 2c was also supported”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    AR already renders products highly vivid, so additional vividness offers diminishing returns, whereas in a non-AR display the same richness fills a real perceptual gap.

    “The likely reason is that AR already renders products highly vivid, so additional vividness offers diminishing returns, whereas in a non-AR display the same richness fills a real perceptual gap.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Better information supports consumers' sense of independent decision-making (autonomy) but does not necessarily make them feel more skilled (competence) or more emotionally connected (relatedness).

    “The present data suggest a more conditional relationship, in which better information supports consumers' sense of independent decision-making (autonomy) but does not necessarily make them feel more skilled (competence) or more emotionally connected (relatedness).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Hypothesis 2a is supported: ARI positively influences autonomy, competence, and relatedness in AR platforms.

    “supporting Hypothesis 2a.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Interactivity and novelty frequently cooccur in high-outcome configurations, suggesting that the two attributes may reinforce each other.

    “The fsQCA results confirmed that interactivity and novelty frequently cooccur in high-outcome configurations, suggesting that the two attributes may reinforce each other”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Interactivity specifically activates autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

    “It specifically activates autonomy (by enabling self-directed product exploration), competence (by giving consumers the tools to make more informed evaluations), and relatedness (by creating a sense of personal connection with the AR environment).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
58 of 58

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Random assignment to the AR and non-AR conditions balanced prior familiarity with AR, age, gender, and online-shopping frequency across the two groups.

    “These characteristics were not entered as statistical controls, since random assignment to conditions was relied on to balance them across the two groups.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The PLS-SEM model assumes a single optimal specification.

    “Equifinality Not captured, as the model assumes a single optimal specification.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The PLS-SEM model assumes symmetry in effects.

    “Causal Asymmetry Not addressed, as the model assumes symmetry in effects.”
3 of 3

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Interactivity is called the strongest driver despite a larger novelty effect

    Minor

    The practical recommendation calls interactivity the strongest driver of all three needs, but the paper reports a larger effect of novelty than interactivity on competence.

  • Vividness group difference is described as negligible despite a significant result

    Minor

    The discussion says the group differences for vividness-to-autonomy and vividness-to-competence paths were negligible. Table 5 reports a substantial vividness-to-autonomy coefficient difference of 0.303 with a permutation p-value of 0.006.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Deci E. L., 1985, Perspectives in Social Psychology
  2. Hazan E., 2022, Marketing in the Metaverse: An Opportunity for Innovation and Experimentation, McKinsey Quarterly
  3. Mehrabian A., 1974, An Approach to Environmental Psychology
  4. Milgram P., 1994, A Taxonomy of Mixed Reality Visual Displays, IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems E77‐D, 12, 1321
  5. Ragin C. C., 2008, The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, 174
  6. Research Dive, 2022, Global Augmented Reality Market Predicted to Garner a Revenue of $65,323.4 Million in the 2020 to 2028 Timeframe, Growing at a Healthy CAGR of 30.9%, 218

Cited by

Still being checked.

Related

Authors
Javeed, S., Rasool, G., & Pathania, A.
Affiliations
Central University of Jammu (IN)
Corresponding author
Rasool, Gowhar
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Consumer Studies
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2026-10-04
Volume
50
Issue
6
ISSN
  • 1470-6423 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-6431
DOI
10.1111/ijcs.70266
OpenAlex
W7219780211
Cited by
0
References
83
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
International Journal of Consumer Studies (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Augmented Reality Applications
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Retail Behavior Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
Keywords
augmented reality, interactivity, vividness, novelty, quality, self-determination theory, psychological need satisfaction, autonomy, competence, relatedness, willingness to pay, product uncertainty, online retail, purchase decision, stimulus-organism-response model

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-11-02.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-11-02.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review