1. Online Pro perty Ma rketing :
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention
to Inspect Property Options
Jacqueline Baker / Mid-Candidature Review
Presentation sub heading to be
inserted here
Presenter’s Name, Department Title – xxth Month 2014
1

2. Presentation Agenda
1. Methodology & Conceptual Model
2. Survey
3. Analysis - Effects
4. Analysis Hypothesis 1
5. Analysis Hypothesis 2
6. Study 2
7. Expected Contributions
8. Timeline
9. References
2
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

3. Methodology & Conceptual Model
3
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

4. Where the study is positioned
4
Topics Domain Papers
Representation Marketing, Communication,
Education,
Architecture / Environmental
Design & Planning
Lurie, N. & Mason, C. (2007)
Orzechowski et al. (2005, 2012)
Oppewal, H. and M. Klabbers (2003)
Johnson (1998)
Online Marketing Marketing, Environmental
Psychology, Consumer
behaviour
Rohrmann, B. & Bishop, I. (2002)
Schlosser, A. (2006)
Housing choice Housing Research,
Real Estate, Property
Development
Iman et al. (2012).
Jansen et al. (2009)
Walker, B., et al. 2002
Cognitive style Psychology, Education Childers, Houston & Heckler (1985)
Mayer, R. E. & Massa, L. J. (2003)
Pacini, R., & Epstein, S. (1999)
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

5. • Stated Preference (SP) methods measure preference or choice for
intended behaviour (Louviere, Hensher & Swait, 2000)
• Underpinned by Information Integration Theory (Anderson, 1982, 1981,1970)
• 4 stages of evaluating and choosing
Stated Preference Methods
5
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

6. The research –
Two choice and preference studies
Two stages of the same conceptual model
6
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

7. Conceptual Model at
Confirmation
Independent
Variables
Spatial Layout
Price
Parking
Storey
Proximity to services
Dependent
Variables
Rating of property
Intention to visit
Moderated by Cognitive Style
& Experience
H3
7
Presentation
H1
Training
H2
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

8. Conceptual Model with
additional experimental
variables
Apartment
Features:
Size
Orientation
Dependent
Variables
Rating of
property
Intention to
visit
Moderated by:
Cognitive Style & Experience
H3
8
Presentation
Style
H1
Training
Type
Before/After
training
H2
C O N D I T I O N S
Needs
Type
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

9. Research Hypotheses: (Based on
Stated Preference Tasks)
9
HI
• visually presented spatial attributes will be more
important than verbal
H2
• after training, the verbal and the visual versions of
spatial attributes will generate greater similarity in
utilities
H3
• the more experienced individuals are with spatial
representations and the more visual an individual is,
the more the spatial attribute gains in importance
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

10. Survey
Presentation title 10

11. The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options
11
Four collections were carried out in the
Behavioural Lab, Building S, Monash University.
Collection 1: 19th - 20th September 2013
Collection 2: 31st March - 2nd April 2014
Collection 3: 7th - 9th May 2014
Collection 4: 28th – 29th August 2014
Data collection dates

12. Pilot Study
Collection
1
Main Study
Collection
2
Main Study
Collection
3
Main Study
Collection
4
Version 1 70 61 46 79
Version 2 18 71 36 66
Version 3 10 71 42 68
Version 4 27 74 30 63
Number of participants 118 277 154 276
Cases removed 7 7 7 11
Total together 118 270 147 265
% cases removed 5.6% 3.7%
Total sample size 800
12
Data collection numbers
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

13. Within subjects
variables
Level 1 Level 2
Size With dining
room
No dining
room
Orientation North-facing South-facing
Training Evaluations
Before
training
Evaluations
After training
Between subjects
variables
Level 1 Level 2
Presentation
Style
Visual Verbal
Needs Type Plenty of
Space
Good
Orientation
Training Type Size training Orientation
training

14. 14
Scenario:
Rental Property Search
Survey Flow
Assumed Needs:
Apartment needs to be sunny
OR needs to be spacious
Evaluate again
Training:
Either training about assessing orientation
Or Assessing size
Evaluate: Either evaluate
visual or verbal apartments
Questions:
Online search behaviour
Cognitive Style testingThe Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

15. Suppose you have graduated.
You have decided you want to live
alone.
You have decided you'll search for a
1 bedroom apartment on-line.
You have selected South Yarra in
Melbourne, Australia, as
your preferred location.
You have determined you can afford
to pay $350-$450 per week rent.
Now imagine that you enter your
search criteria on-line using a real
estate portal such as
realestate.com:
Property type: Apartment
Number of bedrooms: 1
Location: South Yarra (Melbourne,
Australia)
Price: $350 - $450 per week
15
We are interested in people's decision-making process when renting apartments.
For this study, please imagine the following:
Hypothetical Scenario
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

16. 16
1
Four apartment options match your search
criteria. The four apartments are presented
over the following pages.
When considering each apartment option, you
decide to check whether they can
accommodate your further
requirements. Imagine that you specifically
want:
To dry clothes on a clothes airer
Natural warmth in winter
A separate foyer
A compact laundry
2
Four apartment options match your search
criteria. The four apartments are presented
over the following pages.
When considering each apartment option, you
decide to check whether they can
accommodate your further
requirements. Imagine that you specifically
want:
To hold dinner parties for 6 people
Room for friends to sleepover
A separate foyer
A compact laundry
Assumed spatial needs:
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

17. Apartment Evaluations
Respondents were asked to evaluate 4 different apartments
Apartments were represented by either floor-plans or content-equivalent text
descriptions (not both)
Respondents were either asked to evaluate the apartment for either their space
related or orientation related needs (not both)
Scale 1 (dislike extremely) – 5 (like extremely)
17
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

18. 18
Apartment 1
Given your needs, how much do you like this apartment?
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

19. Apartment 1
19
Apartment 1
• Total floor-space 60m2
• 8.5m x 3.5m open plan living, dining
and kitchen
• Built-in robe in bedroom
• Large windows and all-day direct sun
• Dining room seats 6
• Compact laundry in cupboard
Given your needs, how much do you like this apartment?
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

20. Apartments – Visual Presentation Style
20
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

21. Apartments: Verbal Presentation Style
21
Apartment 2
•Total floor-space 50m2
•5.9m x 3.5m open plan living and
kitchen
•Built-in robe in bedroom
•Large windows and all-day direct sun
•No dining room
• Compact laundry in cupboard
Apartment 1
•Total floor-space 60m2
•8.5m x 3.5m open plan living, dining and
kitchen
•Built-in robe in bedroom
•Large windows and all-day direct sun
•Dining room seats 6
•Compact laundry in cupboard
Apartment 3
•Total floor-space 60m2
•8.5m x 3.5m open plan living, dining and
kitchen
•Built-in robe in bedroom
•Large windows but no direct sun
•Dining room seats 6
•Compact laundry in cupboard
Apartment 4
•Total floor-space 50m2
•5.9m x 3.5m open plan living and
kitchen
•Built-in robe in bedroom
•Large windows but no direct sun
•No dining room
•Compact laundry in cupboard
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

22. Training sheet:
“Understanding Property Descriptions”
22
When assessing the position of property in relation to the sun, check
the direction of the North Point adjacent to the floorplan.
North indicates roughly the direction of the sun at midday. The sun rises to
the east of north and sets to the west of north.
Knowing the direction of north can assist in checking whether direct
sunlight will penetrate any of the window openings on the outside walls of
the apartment.
If the windows of the apartment are located to the east or west of
north and/or directly north, this tells you that the apartment is well
positioned in relation to North.
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

23. Analysis – Effects
23
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

24. Significance Partial
Eta
Squared
1 Size 0.000 .583
2 Size * Needs Type 0.000 .130
3 Orientation * Presentation Style 0.000 .103
4 Size * Presentation Style 0.000 .086
5 Orientation 0.000 .081
6 Orientation * Needs Type 0.000 .060
7 Orientation * Presentation Style * Needs Type 0.000 .031
8 Orientation * Training Type 0.000 .028
9 Presentation Style 0.000 .023
10 BeforeAfter * Orientation * Training Type 0.000 .020
11 BeforeAfter * Size 0.003 .013
12 BeforeAfter * Orientation 0.004 .012
13 Size * Presentation Style * Needs Type 0.007 .011
14 BeforeAfter * Orientation * Needs Type 0.008 .010
15 BeforeAfter * Orientation * Presentation Style * Needs Type 0.064 .005
16 Size * Needs Type * Training Type 0.072 .005
17 BeforeAfter * Orientation * Presentation Style * Needs Type * Training Type 0.048 .006
Significant Effects
24
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

25. 25
1. Size
2. Size* Needs type
3. Orientation*
Presentation
Style
4. Size*Presentaion Style
5. Orientation
1. Size
2. Size* Needs type
3. Orientation* Presentation Style
4. Size*Presentaion Style
5. Orientation
6. Orientation* Needs type
7. Orientation* Presentation Style*Needs
Type
8. Orientation* Training Type
9. Presentation Style
10. BeforeAfter*Orientation* Training Type
11. BeforeAfter*Size
12. BeforeAfter*Orientation
13. Size*Presentation Style*Needs Type
14. BeforeAfter*Orientation* Needs Type
15. Size*Needs Type*Training Type
16. BeforeAfter*Orientation* Presentation
Style * Needs Type
Relative Effect sizes
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

26. Analysis – Hypothesis 1
In a SP task, visually presented spatial attributes will be
more important than verbal
26

27. • Participants don’t appear to understand the floorplan – or perhaps people from the Northern
hemisphere were confused by “North-facing”?
27
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

28. • Verbal version more important, this is the opposite of what was expected
28
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

29. • Orientation related Needs/ orientation
attribute = verbal more important and floor-
plan not understood in visual condition
29
Space related Needs/ orientation attribute = verbal
more important. Haven’t understood floor-plan
in visual condition. Once again south-facing
scores higher. Floor-plans score highly perhaps
because they are pictures?
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

30. Analysis – Hypothesis 2
Visually presented apartments will be more important than
verbal, conditional on training
30
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

31. • Orientation a fairly large effect before training
• Note there is no significant effect between Presentation Style and before/after training
31
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

32. • After training, those who received “space training” rated north-facing and south-facing much the same but
for those who received “orientation training,” there is an increased effect after training.
32
The Effect of Presentation Style on Consumer Intention to
Inspect Property Options

33. Study 2
Presentation title 33

34. Study 2
• Consumers looking to buy off-the-plan apartments
• Missing from the first study is participants with experience with floor-plans or other visual
styles of spatial representations. These consumers are expected to be much more
experienced with reading floor-plans (they could be screened)
• Recruitment – approach developer & request access to their contact list of buyers in the
market to purchase off-the-plan.
• Contacts could be sent an email with a link to the survey.
• It is proposed that the survey is much simpler and shorter. Some of the conditions developed
for study 1 won’t be necessary, such as “Needs Type, “Training”, “Training Type” however of
particular interest will be “presentation style” as we would like to test the original hypotheses
and compare results with the rental study.
• It is expected that participants will have experience with floor-plans and so we will not be
measuring evaluations before and after training.
• It is proposed that the study may use stated preference methods such as conjoint/ choice/
best worst scaling 34

35. Research contributions
35
• New visualization tool (focusing on
spatial needs) for products difficult
to explain
• Insight into whether training is
helpful for this tool
• Insights into inconsistencies in past
studies
• Insights into the effect of Cognitive
Style preference on SP experiments
• Insights into the effect of experience
on SP spatial studies
Theory
• Insight on whether inclusion of
floor plans will increase likelihood
of visits to property
• Understanding how expert visual
tools can be modified for lay-
people
• Insights for marketing
communication design
Industry

36. Timeline
36
Weeks Start date Task
4 2nd January –2nd March Perform key (only) analysis on Main Data
Prepare for Mid-Candidature Review
3 2nd March – 23rd March Prep. For AP-ACR conference (if successful) Design and Prepare Poster
5 23rd March – 27th April Completely analyse and write up Pilot (Rent) study analyses & findings
3 27th April – 18th May Completely analyse and write up results into thesis for Main (Rent) study
4.5 18th May – 18th June Prepare survey for second study, prepare pilot study
1 Go to HK 18-24 June
19 – 21 June AP-ACR
Poster session
2.5 25th June – 13th July Journal Paper– prepare outline for Rent data (Off-the-plan later in the year)
3 13th July- 3rd August Administer pilot for second survey, analyze and make changes
4 3rd August –31st August Data collection second study (Off-The-Plan). Continue writing Journal paper
8 31st August –26 October Analyse 2nd study
5 26 October –30 Nov Write-up results 2nd study
3 March 2016 Pre-Submission Milestone
June 30 2016 Submit

37. References
37
COHEN J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates.
HALL, S. 1997. Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices, Sage Publications Limited.
IMAN, A. H. M., PIENG, F. Y. & GAN, C. 2012. A Conjoint Analysis of Buyers’ Preferences for Residential Property. International Real Estate
Review, 15, 73-105.
JANSEN, S., BOUMEESTER, H., COOLEN, H., GOETGELUK, R. & MOLIN, E. 2009. The impact of including images in a conjoint
measurement task: evidence from two small-scale studies. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 24, 271-297.
JANSEN, S., COOLEN, H. & GOETGELUK, R. E. 2011. The measurement and analysis of housing preference and choice, Netherlands,
Springer Netherlands.
JOHNSON, S. 1998. What's in a representation, why do we care, and what does it mean? Examining evidence from psychology.
Automation in Construction, 8, 15-24.
MAYER, R. E. & MASSA, L. J. 2003. Three Facets of Visual and Verbal Learners: Cognitive Ability, Cognitive Style, and Learning
Preference. Journal of educational psychology, 95, 833.
Oppewal, H. and M. Klabbers (2003). Compromising between information completeness and task simplicity: a comparison of self-
explicated, hierarchical information integration, and full-profile conjoint methods. Advances in Consumer Research 30: 298-304.
ORZECHOWSKI, M., ARENTZE, T., BORGERS, A. & TIMMERMANS, H. 2005. Alternate methods of conjoint analysis for estimating housing
preference functions: Effects of presentation style. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 20, 349-362.
ORZECHOWSKI, M., ARENTZE, T., BORGERS, A. & TIMMERMANS, H. 2012. The effects of pre-experimental training on the validity and
reliability of conjoint analysis: the case of housing preference. Journal of Land Use Science 8.2 (2013): 224-233.
ROHRMANN, B. & BISHOP, I. 2002. Subjective Responses to Computer Simulations of Urban Environments. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 22, 319-331.
SCHLOSSER, A. 2006. Learning through Virtual Product Experience: The Role of Imagery on True versus False Memories. Journal of
consumer research, 33, 377-383.
WALKER, B., MARSH, A., WARDMAN, M. & NINER, P. 2002. Modelling tenants' choices in the public rented sector: a stated preference
approach. Urban Studies, 39, 665-688.

38. jacqueline.baker@monash.edu

39. Presentation title 39

40. Literature: Housing themes
Themes Author(s) Stimulus
1 Tenant
preferences
Walker Marsh, Wardman & Niner, 2002
Oppewal, Poria, Ravenscroft & Speller 2005
Verbal
2 Dwelling design Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers & Timmermans, 2005
Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers & Timmermans, 2012
Oppewal & Klabbers, 2003
Visual & verbal
Visual & verbal
Verbal
3 Transport options Borgers, Snellen, Poelman Timmermans, 2008 Katoshevski
& Timmermans, 2001
Verbal
Verbal
4 Type of dwelling Iman Pieng, Gan, 2012
Wang & Li, 2006
Verbal
Verbal
5 Neighbourhood
location
Kim, Pagliara & Preston, 2003 Verbal
6 Intention to move Kim, Pagliara & Preston, 2005
Jansen, Boumeester, Coolen, Goetgeluk & Molin, 2009
Verbal
Visual & verbal
13

41. Literature: Comparison Stimulus Presentation
41
Author Field Stimulus Result
Louviere, Schroeder, Louviere &
Woodworth, 1987
Park choice Photo versus verbal No substantial
difference
Jaeger, Hedderley & Macfie, 2001 New product
packaging
Photo versus
prototype
No substantial
difference
Vriens, Loosschilder, Rosbergen &
Wattink, 2003
New products Photo versus verbal Difference
Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers &
Timmermans, 2005
House design VR versus verbal No substantial
difference
Mueller, Lockshin, Louviere &
Hackman, 2007
Choosing wine Photo versus verbal No substantial
difference
Jansen, Boumeester, Coolen,
Goetgeluk & Molin, 2009
Housing choice Photo versus verbal Difference
Orzechowski, Arentze, Borgers &
Timmermans, 2012
House design VR versus verbal No substantial
difference

42. Literature: Three key papers
Comparison Stimulus Presentation, Housing
Steps
1
Orzechowski, Arentze,
Borgers &
Timmermans, 2005
2
Jansen, Boumeester,
Coolen, Goetgeluk &
Molin, 2009
3
Orzechowski,
Arentze, Borgers &
Timmermans, 2012
1 Model Part-worth model Part-worth model Part-worth model
2 Data collection Computer Computer Computer
3 Stimulus set
construction
96 profiles, 32 sets 24 profiles, 12 sets 48 profiles, 16 sets
4 Stimulus
presentation
One of:
1.verbal experiment
2. VR experiment
All of:
1. verbal + colour photos
2. verbal + b&w photos
1. VR pre + verbal exp
2. VR pre- + VR exp
3. verbal exp + VR post
4. VR exp+ VR post
5 DV measure
scale
Discrete choice (which
one) for set of 3
scale 1-10 + Discrete choice
(yes/no) for 2
Discrete choice (which
one) for set of 3
6 Estimation
method
Multinomial logit model Rating: Ordinary Least
Squares regression
Choice: Binomial Logit
Multinomial logit model
13