In previous articles, I gave some background information about the research project as such.
Now is time for three more images.
This is a non-academic publication, based on my personal reflections on a highly interesting research project that I have been partly involved in.
Here are three new images with analysis and data that emerged under the leadership of including Siv Lindberg and Annika Lindström at Innventia in Stockholm.
The original pictures used for the test were provided by IKEA and are copyright Inter IKEA Systems B.V.
Continuing on the theme: Where do the test persons focus their gaze, and the main issues were;
– Is there a difference of attention when an image is presented on paper or on a screen.
– Has the presence of a person in an image influence on the amount of attention you give the image.
Picture 4, with people.
Original pictures copyright Inter IKEA Systems B.V.
Picture 4. A kitchen picture that got medium interest of the twelve regarding attention value; place six.
The picture has cold tones, is rather dark, has a clear perspective, people are barely visible, it has many elements, it has dark shadows, the focus is on the kitchens island in the middle of the image.
The picture got higher values than I expected, especially in the version with people presented on paper, where it reached the second position of the twelve.
The version without people on screen (pictured below), got second highest attention value.
Meanwhile, the corresponding image without people, printed on paper, got the next lowest position of twelve.
In other words, some contradictory results.
The total amount of attention for this picture is 2229, place 6 out of 12.
The version with people printed on paper 988, while the screen version got 325, down to 33% for the screen version.
The version without people on paper, 580, and 336 for the version presented on screen, down to 58%.
Picture 4, without persons.
The picture without people presented on display, stands out as it gets the second best place in that particular group (without people, on a screen).
My expectation was that the picture, amongst other, depending on its darkness would be less popular. But maybe the light areas in the darkness, like the dining area, creates a positive contrast.
Picture 2, with a mother and a baby.
Figure 2. This image is also found in the middle of popularity regarding the total value of attention.
The picture is bright, has warm tones, has a central perspective, has a more visible person with a baby. The picture, however, contains many elements, and it has not such a clear focus, i.e, it simultaneously displays various kind of rooms, such as bedroom, living room and kitchen. It got unexpectedly low attention figures given the character of the picture; visible person carrying a baby in a warm and light atmosphere.
One can speculate that this single picture is taken out of context. In a layout it is probably complemented by headlines and text about compact living, which might render it more logical.
The total amount of attention for this picture is 2216, position 7 out of 12.
The version with people printed on paper 1139, while the screen version got 470, down to 24%.
The version without people on paper, 476, and 131 for the version presented on screen, down to 36%.
Picture 2, without people.
The picture without people.
I find it even more unexpected when I check the figures of this version, without people; in both cases (screen and paper) the pictures lands on the last or second last position of all the pictures in terms of attention value.
The picture is characterised, among others, of light and warmth. Maybe it would benefit of better support from headlines and text explaining compact living.
Picture 12, with people.
This image reached the third best place in terms of total amount of attention.
It has more neutral tones, exposes much person (the child), has a strong perspective, the products are barely visible in the version with the child, and there are few elements in the picture.
The second variant, without the child, has a clearer view of the product. It got unexpectedly high attention value in the version without people, on paper, position 1 of 12. Even in the version without the people on screen, it reached the first position.
The version with people have very strong focus on the child, and the picture is more of a portrait which naturally should give high attention.
The total amount of attention for this picture is 3303, position 3 out of 12.
The version with people printed on paper 1219, while the screen version got 768, down to 63%.
The version without people on paper, 857, and 463 for the version presented on screen, down to 54%.
Picture 12, without the person.
The picture without people.
A bright and clear display of product with unexpectedly high attention value. The versions without people are on first position.
The product is separated from other elements in the image which can contribute to its relatively high response in this version where there are no people in the picture.