The Effect of VR and Haptic Feedback Devices on Online Consumer Decision-Making

Related Publication: The Effect of VR and Haptic Feedback Devices on Online Consumer Decision-Making

Conference Abstract

This blog post describes research presented at the 31st Recent Advances in Retailing & Consumer Science (RARCS) Conference. Co-authored with Lieve Douce, Stephanie Van De Sanden, Kim Willems, Davy Vanacken, and Gustavo Rovelo Ruiz.

What We Did

This research examined whether Virtual Reality (VR) and haptic feedback can help consumers make better-informed decisions when evaluating products online, especially for products whose qualities are difficult to judge before purchase.

The core problem is that many products are experience products: consumers need to interact with them to properly assess them. In the pre-purchase stage, this is often difficult or impossible. That is especially true when decision-making happens online, where sensory information is limited. In our work, we focused on windows as a concrete example. When building or renovating a house, consumers may struggle to anticipate:

• how smoothly and ergonomically a sliding window opens, and
• whether investing in more insulating glazing will improve indoor comfort enough to justify the extra cost.

The research question was whether combining richer visual information through VR with tactile input through haptic feedback could reduce this uncertainty and improve evaluation, confidence, and satisfaction.

This matters for e-commerce and digital product experiences because online interfaces are often visually rich but sensorily poor. From an HCI perspective, the study explores how multisensory interfaces can support better user judgment by helping people form more vivid and realistic mental representations of products before they buy.

How We Did It

We conducted two experimental lab studies on consumer decision-making about windows. The studies were grounded in mental imagery theory, which suggests that richer sensory input helps consumers form more vivid mental images of a product, making it easier to understand how it would function in real life.

Research Design

Both experiments used a between-subjects 2×2 design:

1. Visual Information

   • Video
   • VR

2. Haptic Information

   • No haptic feedback
   • Simulated haptic feedback

This created four conditions in each experiment, allowing us to compare the separate and combined effects of immersive visualization and touch-based feedback.

The two use cases were:

1. Sliding window system

   • Participants evaluated different window sliding mechanisms.
   • The haptic feedback was delivered through a mechanical force-feedback instrument built to simulate the amount of force needed to open a sliding window.

2. Window glazing insulation

   • Participants evaluated different glazing options, specifically double vs. triple glazing.
   • The haptic feedback was delivered through an off-the-shelf haptic glove, which simulated differences in insulation value.

Study Protocol

Participants were placed in a scenario where they had to evaluate two alternatives:

• either two types of window sliding systems, or
• two types of window glazing.

The total sample consisted of 159 consumers in Belgium:

• Average age: 39.77 years
• SD: 12.34
• Female participants: 100 out of 159 (62.9%)

After interacting with the assigned condition, participants completed measures related to both the medium and the product.

We collected data on:

• mental imagery
• ease of evaluation
• perceived informativeness
• multiple customer experience dimensions
• processing fluency
• satisfaction
• preference

In addition, eye-tracking data were logged during the experiments.

By comparing video versus VR and no haptics versus simulated haptics, we could isolate the contribution of each modality and their combined effect on consumer decision-making.

Technical Implementation

The technical setup included:

• Visual platform: a comparison between standard video-based presentation and immersive VR

• Haptic devices:

  • a custom mechanical force-feedback device for the sliding-window scenario
  • an off-the-shelf haptic glove for the glazing-insulation scenario
• Virtual environment: product evaluation scenarios designed to help participants compare realistic window alternatives
• Data collection: self-report survey measures combined with eye-tracking logs

Rather than simulating a generic virtual store, the system was tailored to realistic home-building and renovation decisions, where consumers must judge functional product characteristics that are hard to assess from standard online content alone.

Results

The results showed clear positive effects of enhanced visual and haptic input on consumer decision-making.

Main Findings

1. Mental Imagery and Understanding

   • VR and haptic feedback improved participants’ ability to form vivid mental images of the product.
   • Richer sensory input made it easier for participants to imagine how the product would work in real life.

2. Ease of Evaluation and Informativeness

   • Participants found the products easier to evaluate when more sensory information was available.
   • VR and haptic feedback increased the perceived informativeness of the experience.

3. Customer Experience and Processing Fluency

   • Enhanced visual and tactile input improved overall customer experience.
   • Participants processed the information more fluently, suggesting that multisensory interaction made the decision task feel more natural and intuitive.

4. Satisfaction

   • Consumers reported greater satisfaction with their decision-making experience when VR and haptic feedback were included.

5. Higher-Investment Choices

   • For more expensive or higher-stakes options—such as triple-glazed windows or advanced sliding systems—haptic feedback played a particularly important role.
   • In these cases, touch-based simulation was more influential in persuading consumers to invest in options that improve comfort, such as smoother sliding mechanisms or better indoor climate performance.

Implications for E-Commerce

The findings suggest that VR and haptic feedback can:

• provide richer product information before purchase
• improve consumers’ ability to evaluate experience products online
• reduce uncertainty in higher-stakes purchase decisions
• increase confidence and satisfaction in digital buying journeys

These technologies appear especially valuable for products where functionality, comfort, or physical interaction matter more than appearance alone. In such cases, adding haptic feedback may be more impactful than visual enhancement alone.

For e-commerce, this points to a future where multisensory interfaces are not just novel experiences, but practical tools for helping consumers make better decisions.

Conclusion

This research demonstrates that combining VR and haptic feedback can meaningfully improve online consumer decision-making by giving consumers richer sensory information before purchase.

Key Takeaways:

1. VR and haptic feedback improve mental imagery, ease of evaluation, perceived informativeness, processing fluency, customer experience, and satisfaction.
2. Haptic feedback is especially important for higher-investment or comfort-related product decisions.
3. Multisensory interaction can help bridge the gap between online and offline product evaluation.

From an HCI perspective, the work reinforces the importance of designing systems that go beyond visual presentation alone. When people can better simulate interaction with a product, they can make more informed, confident, and satisfying choices.

Future Directions:

• Investigating long-term adoption of VR shopping
• Exploring more sophisticated haptic feedback (temperature, texture variation)
• Studying different product categories and consumer segments
• Examining the role of social presence in VR shopping environments
• Cost-effectiveness analysis for e-commerce businesses

This blog post is based on research presented at the 31st RARCS Conference, 2025. For details, see the conference abstract.