Accepted Manuscript

Effects of color and lighting on retail impression and identity

Warakul Tantanatewin, Vorapat Inkarojrit

PII: S0272-4944(16)30034-2
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.04.015
Reference: YJEVP 1028

To appear in: Journal of Environmental Psychology

Received Date: 12 October 2015

Revised Date: 22 April 2016
Accepted Date: 28 April 2016

Please cite this article as: Tantanatewin, W., Inkarojrit, V., Effects of color and lighting on retail
impression and identity, Journal of Environmental Psychology (2016), doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.04.015.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Effects of color and lighting on retail impression and identity

Warakul Tantanatewin, Vorapat Inkarojrit*

Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Chulalongkorn University

254 Phayathai Rd., Patumwan, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand

PT
* Corresponding author

RI
Email: warakul@hotmail.com (W. Tantanatewin), vorapat.i@chula.ac.th (V. Inkarojrit)

C
US
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Effects of color and lighting on retail impression and identity

Abstract

In retail design, the use of color and light are important design techniques which aim

to attract customers and increase market opportunities. The objectives of this study were to

PT
examine the effects of color and lighting on impression and identity of a bank sub-branch in

RI
Thailand. In this study, 144 research participants evaluated six computer-generated scenes

with different color hues, lighting arrangements and correlated color temperatures using a

C
semantic differential scaling method. The results show that different color and lighting

US
conditions significantly affect both the impression of space and perception of retail identity.

The results indicate that bank sub-branch space with chromatic conditions, especially space
AN
with warm color tone and colored-light, received a higher positive score of impression and
M

identity. To fully understand the effect of color and lighting on space perception and retail

identity, this study suggests that other color properties should be examined.
D

Keywords: space impression, identity, color and light, retail lighting, bank branch
TE

1. Introduction

For the design of a retail environment, many techniques have been used to create a
EP

pleasant and unique consumer’s experience with the ultimate goal to motivate a customer’s
C

buying behavior. The design of interior elements such as lay out, sound, lighting and color
AC

can influence on customer’s emotion and behavior (Kotler, 1973-1974). Color and light have

been appraised as key interior design elements that affect space perception and emotion

(Bellizzi, Crowley & Hasty, 1983; Wadono, Hibino & Koyama, 2010; Yildirim, Capanoglu,

Cagatay & Hidayetoglu, 2012; Quartier, Vanrie & Cleempoel, 2014). For example, the use

of color and light was suggested that it can enhance brand awareness, recognition and quality

perception (Bellizzi & Hite, 1992; Babin, Hardesty & Suter, 2003; Brengman & Willems,

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
2009; Schielke & Leudesdorff, 2015). Lighting affected customers’ perception and provides

ambience illumination, enhances contrast and makes products interesting and attractive

(Areni & Kim, 1994; Custers, de Kort, IJsselsteijn & de Kruiff, 2010).

Commercial banking business is one of the fastest growing business sectors in

Thailand. Unlike other countries, the sub-branch of Thai commercial banks serves as an

PT
important channel to reach their target customers. As of January 2016, there are more than

RI
7,000 bank sub-branches scattered all over various parts of Thailand (Bank of Thailand,

2016). In order to increase the market share, most, if not all, banks exercise various

C
marketing strategies to attract new customers and maintain existing customers. As for

US
establishing brand identity, each Thai bank currently selects one main color and uses that

main color in its logo, promotional media, as well as interior decoration. From a preliminary
AN
survey of bank sub-branch design (see Figure1-2), it was found that the main color was used
M

on the walls of automatic teller machines (ATM) and exterior façade. The wall behind the

service counter of a sub-branch, the focal point of the interior space, was usually a large
D

surface covered with the bank’s main color. For lighting design, it was found that a wide
TE

variety of lighting elements were used.

While the creation of a unique corporate identity and consumer experience

EP

enhancement was believed to be strengthened through the use of color and light in the sub-
C

branch, unfortunately, the actual effect of color and light on space perception and retail
AC

identity has not been verified. Therefore, the purpose of the current research is to report on

the study that examines effects of color and lighting on retail impression and identity with an

emphasis on three design elements including: color usage, lighting arrangement and

correlated color temperature of light.

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
2. Literature review

2.1 Color and retail atmosphere

The use color plays an important role in retail environment which affects customers’

recognition, including perception, impression, classification and interpretation by

transmission of message and meaning (Valdez & Mehrabian, 1994; Eiseman, 2000; Söker,

PT
2009). The decision making could be motivated based on color perception (Bellizzi et al.,

RI
1983; Brengman, 2002; Babin et al., 2003; Chebat & Morrin, 2007).

The literature review showed that previous studies focused on examining the effects

C
of color hue tone on positive impression and motivation in various retail conditions. For

US
example, Bellizzi and Hite (1992) demonstrated that cool color could create positive image

and reliability, while warm color leads to excitement and longer time spent in a retail outlet.
AN
Brengman (2002) investigated color attributes in store and consumers’ affective and
M

approach/avoidance behavior. Yildirim, Baskaya and Hidayetoglu (2007) examined the

impact of semi warm cool tone (e.g., yellow, purple) and found that purple environment is
D

more positively perceived than yellow in café/restaurant environment. Söker (2009)

TE

investigated the classification of restaurant and suggested that warm color tone is more

pleasant and lower prices than cool color tone. Yildirim, Capanoglu, Cagatay and
EP

Hidayetoglu (2012) indicated that different color hues (e.g., cream, lilac, orange) on the walls
C

of hairdressing salons affect customers’ perceptions, lilac colored space was more positive
AC

than others. Moreover, Westerman, Sutherland, Gardner, Metcalfe, Nash, Palframan and

Woodburn (2012) suggested that an interface color affects customer’s decision making on

both product and retail environment. In summary, it was concluded that space with cool

color tones (e.g., blue, purple, green) have more positive effect than warm color tones (e.g.,

red, orange, yellow) (Bellizzi & Hite, 1992; Crowley, 1993; Babin et al., 2003; Yildirim et

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
al., 2007; Yildirim, et al., 2012). In general, cool color tones are associated with unaroused,

calm, restful, and spacious (Yildirim, Hidayetoğlu & Capanoğlu, 2011).

2.2 Retail lighting

The main functions of retail lighting are to provide ambience illumination, attract

attention and accentuate merchandise. In general, lighting arrangement, brightness level,

PT
light source property, uniformity and contrast are important factors to be considered in retail

RI
lighting design (Rea & Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, 2000; Boyce &

Raynham, 2009).

C
Base on literature review, previous research examined the effects of various retail

US
lighting configurations on space perception, emotion and customer response. For example,

Areni and Kim (1994) examined dim lighting and bright lighting on customer responses (e.g.,
AN
time spending, number of products) in a wine store. Summers and Hebert (2001)
M

demonstrated that lighting plays an important role in increasing behavioral intentions in

store’s atmosphere. Additional accent lighting was found to be more time spending, product
D

touching and picking up. Park & Farr (2007) examined the color rendering index (CRI) and
TE

correlated color temperature (CCT) on emotional responses and found that warmer lighting is

more arousal and clarity than cooler lighting. While, Durak, Olguntürk, Yener, Güvenç and
EP

Gürçınar (2007) and Baumstarck and Park (2010) suggested that lighting arrangements and
C

lighting levels may affects space impression and emotion. Schielke (2010) suggested that
AC

colored light could convert identity of retail space, such as price level, style, expressiveness

and attractiveness. Quartier, Vanrie and Cleempoel (2014) stated that lighting could be

engaged to change the atmosphere within a commercial environment and help creating a

specific store experience. Schielke and Leudesdorff (2015) suggested that store types and

lighting arrangements could affect a store’s brand image in which that decorating lighting

(e.g., accent lighting, wallwashing, grazing lighting) could increase positive emotions and

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
enhance retail identity. In summary, lighting arrangement with additional accent lighting

should be beneficial effect for retailing. The warm white light is more positively perceived

than cool white light (Knez & Kers, 2000; Knez, 2001; Park & Farr, 2007; Hidayetoglu,

Yildirim & Akalin, 2012).

2.3 Identifying consumer perception

PT
The effect of store atmosphere on customer perception and behavior has been

RI
investigated in several previous studies. The physical environment plays an important role to

create the retail’s image and internal perception (Kotler, 1973-1974; Donovan & Rossiter,

C
1982; Turley & Milliman, 2000; Kusumowidagdo, Sachari, & Widodo, 2012; Marque,

US
Cardoso & Palma, 2013). To explain the effects of physical environment on internal state

and behavior, Mehrabian and Russell (1974) proposed the Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-
AN
O-R) Model. A conceptual framework of the S-O-R Model has been used to provide linkage
M

between environmental stimuli (S), emotional response (O) and behavioral response (R). In

retail study, store design elements (stimulus) are believed to affect consumer’s emotional
D

state and the formation of retail identity. Pairs of adjectives with positive/negative meaning
TE

such as pleasant-unpleasant, cheerful-depressing, relaxed-dramatic, attractive-unattractive,

roomy-cramped were used to measure consumers’ emotions. In general, the positive

EP

emotional response is beneficial in motivate purchase intention including a retail identity, for
C

example, price image and brand image (Erdil, 2015).

AC

The S-O-R Model has been used in the many studies of consumer perception and

behavior to examine the effects of retail atmosphere (e.g., architecture, ambience, music,

scent, color and light) on shopping intention. (Baker, Grewal & Levy, 1992; Bellizzi & Hite,

1992; Sherman, Mathur & Smith, 1997; Doucé & Janssens, 2013; Quartier et al., 2014). For

example, Baker, Grewal, and Parasurman (1994) explored components of a store’s

environment which affect the image of the store, and consumer’s evaluation toward the

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
quality of the merchandise. Murray (2012) investigated store environment stimulus and brand

expressions based on S-O-R Model. Kumar and Kim (2014) demonstrated that store

atmosphere (e.g., social, design, ambient factors) and merchandise factors influence on

internal evaluations and approach behavior. The previous studies focused to understand the

appearance of retail environment to provide a positive impression and retail uniqueness

PT
design.

RI
Based on the literature review, it was found that while other types of retail space had

been examined, commercial bank sub-branch had not been investigated in term of use of

C
color and lighting of their interior space. Moreover, while previous studies focused on the

US
effect of lighting arrangements on space perception, the use of color had not been thoroughly

investigated. Therefore, the main objective of this research was to examine the effect of
AN
color and lighting on Thai consumer perception of the impression and identity of bank
M

branches in Thailand. The research framework based on the S-O-R Model demonstrates

linkage between the environmental design factors (color and light) and customers’ perception
D

(retail impression and identity) is shown in Figure 3.

TE

3. Method

To examine the effects of color and lighting on impression and identity of a

EP

commercial bank branch, the experiment was conducted with a semantic differential scaling
C

method to evaluate computer-generated scenes with different color hues, lighting

AC

arrangements and correlated color temperatures.

3.1. Research participants

A total of 144 Thai undergraduate (90%) and graduate (10%) students from the

Department of Architecture and Interior Architecture, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok,

Thailand were recruited to participate in this study.. There were 69 males (48%) and 75

females (52%) among the participants. The ages of participants ranged from 18 to 29 with

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
the average age of 22 years old. Prior to the experiment, each participant was inspected for

color blindness using the Ishihara Color Vision Test. The total number of surveys was 864

(144 participants x 6 simulated scenes).

3.2. Instrument and procedure

A 3D realistic computer rendering tool was chosen as the method to generate realistic

PT
interior perspective of interior space. This method had been used in previous studies

RI
(Brengman, 2002; Wardono et al., 2010; Kernsom & Sahachaisaeree, 2010; Hidayetoglu et

al., 2012; Braid Decreˊ & Pras, 2013; Schielke & Leudesdorff, 2015) and it had been verified

C
for its accuracy in representing the actual scene (Engelke, Stokkermas & Murdoch, 2013).

US
In this study, the scenes of a bank branch with various color and lighting

arrangements were simulated using a 3D realistic computer rendering program that projected
AN
images of a typical bank branch in a department store (10 x 15 x 3 m³, a total area 150 m²),
M

the scene of frontage included a main entrance, a waiting area and a service counter (see

Figure 4). Based on a preliminary field survey of bank sub-branch lighting design, the
D

illuminance level in the generated scenes was set to 500 lux for the general lighting scenes,
TE

and 600 lux for the general and accent lighting scenes.

Key variables in this study included color hues (neutral, yellow, blue and purple),
EP

lighting arrangements (general lighting and general lighting + accent lighting) and correlated
C

color temperatures (daylight and warm white). In addition, electrical plan setting for
AC

different lighting arrangements is shown in Figure 4, the color specification in CIELAB (L*,

a*, b*) and lighting details of all simulated scenes are shown in Table 1 and Figure 5. All of

the above variables could be found in the sub-branches of the leading commercial banks in

Thailand. The hue samples (e.g., blue, yellow, purple) were randomly selected from

identification colors of the leading commercial banks in Thailand. The viewing position of

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
all generated scenes, the central perspective from frontage of the entrance to look into the

room was presented.

To evaluate the perceptual responses of a retail environment, 11 adjective pairs based

on the study of Schielke (2010) were selected and regrouped for the identification of a bank

space’s impression and a bank’s identity. The impression was measured via seven adjective

PT
pairs, as follows: “attractive-unattractive” (P01), “relaxed-dramatic” (P02), “spacious-

RI
confined” (P03), “uniform-differentiated” (P04), “bright-dark” (P05), “warm-cool” (P06) and

“diffused-contrast lighting” (P07). An identity was evaluated by four adjective pairs:

C
“technical-natural” (P08), “modern-traditional” (P09), “high class-low budget” (P10) and

US
“expressive-unobtrusive” (P11).

The Likert seven-point scale (1 to 7) in the semantic differential method was used to
AN
evaluate the computer generated scenes of the simulated bank branch with different color and
M

lighting conditions for each question. All adjectives were translated into Thai language.

Words which were considered to obtain positive image of a commercial bank business were
D

set to obtain a higher score. All adjective pairs were pre-tested with a sample generated
TE

scene to ensure that all of them clearly represented characteristics of the bank branch

environment.
EP

Table 2 shows the correlation coefficients between 11 adjective pairs for all six
C

scenes. Relationships between the subjective perceptual responses were analyzed by

AC

Pearson’s correlation. For the scenes with different color conditions, data analysis showed

that only six adjective pairs were above moderately (r>.40) to substantially related (r>.50) in

a positive linear correlation. Moderate to substantial correlations found between bipolar

adjective pairs included the scales of “attractive-spacious” (P01-P03; r=.447), “spacious-

uniform” (P03-P04; r=.504), “attractive-bright” (P01-P05; r=.422), “spacious-bright” (P03-

P05; r=.530), “uniform-bright” (P04-P05; r=.503) and “high class-expressive” (P10-P11;

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
r=.435). It should be noted that the correlation between “high class-low budget” (P10) and

“expressive-unobtrusive” (P11) scales was moderate. In addition, for the scenes with

different lighting conditions, data analysis showed that only three adjective pairs were above

moderately to substantially related in a positive linear correlation; the scales of “spacious-

uniform” (P03-P04; r=.489), “spacious-bright” (P03-P05; r=.503) and “uniform-bright”

PT
(P04-P05; r=.433).

RI
The results showed that the impression variables (P1-P7) were unrelated to the

identity variables (P8-P11). It was also found that the impression variables were moderately

C
correlated with each other. Thus, it was concluded that all perceptual responses variables

US
were appropriate to measure what could be measured in different dimensions.

The experiment was conducted in a small-size classroom (6 x 8 x 3.5 m³, a total area
AN
48 m²) at the Faculty of Architecture, Chulalongkorn University. Each window was covered
M

with a black-out shade to minimize the impact of natural light. The simulated scenes were

randomly projected on a projector screen (2.5 x 1.9 m) with a LED projector (Sony VPL-
D

EX100 Projector XGA, 1024 x 768 pixel resolution), the maximum luminance on screen was
TE

120 cd/m² (see Figure 6).

At the beginning of the experimental session, each research participant was asked to
EP

look at a black blank screen for 5 minutes for eye adaptation. Then each participant was
C

instructed to look at the simulated scenes for 45 seconds and rate his/her perceptual response
AC

on a paper-based questionnaire. Between each simulated scene a black blank screen was

shown to research participants for 15 seconds. The session took about 15-20 minutes to

complete. All sessions were tested in January - March 2014 under ambience illumination at

100 lux.

3.3. Data analysis

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
All data was analyzed and displayed using descriptive and inferential statistical

methods. First, reliability testing of data was determined with the Cronbach’s Alpha

coefficient method. The mean scores of the generated scenes were compared using the one-

way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test at .05 significance level. The Tukey’s HSD test

was used to determine the post hoc comparisons. For the post hoc test, the significance levels

PT
were adjusted to .008 for comparison of scenes with different color conditions and .017 for

RI
comparison of scenes with different lighting conditions.

4. Data analysis and results

C
The average reliability of the dependent variables was obtained using the Cronbach’s

US
Alpha coefficient method. The reliability coefficient for the semantic differential scaling of

the 11 adjective pairs was 0.73. According to the previous studies (Kim & Jin, 2001;
AN
Hidayetoglu et al., 2012; Yildirim et al., 2007; Hosseini & Jayashree, 2014; Quartier et al.,
M

2014) the alpha reliability coefficients for all items was accepted as reliable when the value

exceeded 0.70. Therefore, it was concluded that the semantic scaling of the 11 adjective
D

pairs in this study was reliable.

TE

Table 3 and 4 show descriptive statistics and ANOVA results of perceptual responses

from the simulated scenes. Mean values of perceptual evaluation among bank branch space
EP

with different color and lighting conditions are represented in Figure 7 and Figure 8
C

respectively.
AC

4.1. Influence of color on space perceptions

The effects of color on space perception was determined by one-way ANOVA

(significant, p<.05) and compared means of variable significances by the Post-hoc Tukey’s

HSD test (significant, p<.008). The evaluation of four different colors, Table 3 displays

ANOVA results for scenes with different color hues on the wall behind the service counter,

including neutral (L1), yellow (L1a), blue (L1b) and purple (L1c). The results showed that

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
the scene with yellow color backdrop received the highest score for “spacious” (p=.000)

variables. The scene with yellow color also received higher score for “uniform” (p=.022),

“warm” (p=.000), “technical” (p=.000), “high class” (p=.000) and “expressive” (p=.000)

variables than neutral color scene. In addition, the scene with neutral color backdrop

received lowest score for “spacious” (p=.000), “uniform” (p=.002), “technical” (p=.001),

PT
“high class” (p=.000) and “expressive” (p=.000) when compared with yellow one.

RI
Moreover, the comparison between scenes with chromatic condition (L1a, L1b &

L1c) and achromatic condition (L1) showed that the scenes with colors received significantly

C
higher identity score than the scenes without color. Impression variables were observed for

US
“uniform” (p=.022), additionally, identity variables were observed for “technical” (p=.000),

“high class” (p=.000) and “expressive” (p=.000).

AN
4.2. Influence of lighting on space perception
M

To determine the effects of lighting we used one-way ANOVA (significant, p<.05)

and compared means of variable significances by the Post-hoc Tukey’s HSD test (significant,
D

p<.017). The evaluation of three different lighting conditions, Table 4 displays the scores for
TE

spaces with general lighting (L1) and space with added accent lighting (L2), including space

with accent lighting with warm white color (L3). The results showed that the scene with
EP

general lighting (L1) received higher score for “relaxed” (p=.000) than other conditions.
C

While, spaces with general and accent lighting with daylight color (L2) received higher score
AC

for “attractive” (p=.000) and “technical” (p=.000). By contrast, this condition received lower

score for “relaxed” (p=.000) and “diffused lighting” (p=.000). In addition, the scene with

accent lighting with warm white color (L3) received the highest score for identity variables

of “high class” (p=.000) and “expressive” (p=.000).

The comparison of space with different lighting arrangements between spaces with

general lighting (L1) and space with added accent lighting (L2) showed that the space with

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
general and accent lighting received higher score for some impression variables. Spaces with

only general lighting received higher score for “relaxed” (p=.000) and “diffused lighting”

(p=.000). On the contrary, space with accent lighting addition was found to be more

“attractive” (p=.001), “spacious” (p=.000), “uniform” (p=.002) and “technical” (p=.002).

Moreover, the comparison of space with different correlated color temperatures

PT
between accent lighting space with daylight color (L2) and warm white color (L3) showed

RI
that the space with warm white color received higher score for both impression and identity

in which the space was found to be more “relaxed” (p=.000), “warm” (p=.000), “diffused

C
lighting” (p=.004), “high class” (p=.000) and “expressive” (p=.002). By contrast, space with

US
daylight color received a higher score for “attractive” (p=.000) and “technical” (p=.000),

5. Discussion
AN
5.1. Impression
M

The state of impression was analyzed through seven adjective pairs, including:

“attractive-unattractive”, “relaxed-dramatic”, “spacious-confined”, “uniform-differentiated”,

D

“bright-dark”, “warm-cool” and “diffused-contrast lighting”.

TE

Space impression was found to be mainly affected by color usage. Chromatic space

was more positively perceived than space without color/achromatic color. In addition, space
EP

with warm color tone (e.g., yellow) affected more positively than cool color tone (e.g., blue,
C

purple) that differed from previous studies (Bellizzi & Hite, 1992; Babin et al., 2003;
AC

Yildirim et al., 2007). The comparison of space with different color hues showed that

yellow-colored space was perceived to be more spacious and brighter than others. This

finding was found to be similar to what previous literature (Yildirim, 2007; Yildirim, et al.,

2012) had suggested.

Moreover, the comparison of different lighting arrangement showed that the space

with general and accent lighting was perceived to be more attractive, spacious, uniform, and

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
brighter than the space with only general lighting. Similar to previous studies (Summers &

Hebert, 2001; Schielke & Leudesdorff, 2015), this study found that lighting arrangement

affected perceived impression. The results also found that correlated color temperature had

significant effect on space impression. A bank branch with warm-white light was more

attractive, relaxed, bright, warm and diffused than the space with cool color light. This

PT
supported finding from previous studies (Knez & Kers, 2000; Knez, 2001; Park & Farr,

RI
2007; Hidayetoglu, et al., 2012) that warm white light is more positively perceived than cool

white light.

C
5.2. Identity

US
Four adjective pairs were used to evaluate the perception of identity, including:

“technical- natural”, “modern-traditional”, “high class-low budget” and “expressive-

AN
unobtrusive”.
M

In this research, color was found to play an essential role in creating a store’s

identity. Chromatic spaces were found to be more technical, high class and expressive than
D

neutral colored spaces. A space with cool color tone (e.g., blue, purple) was found to be
TE

more technical, while a space with warm color tone (e.g., yellow) was perceived to be more

exclusive and expressive. This suggested that color hue affects perceived merchandise price
EP

(e.g., high-low, imposing-poor looking) under warm color than under cool color. In contrast
C

to Soker (2009), the results showed that space with warm color tone were perceived to rank
AC

in a higher class than space with cool color tone. Nevertheless, “modern-traditional” scale

was not found affect both perceived space impression and identity.

The results also showed that a bank branch space with accent lighting affect perceived

space identity, but the effect was limited to the perception of technical-natural. The color of

light strongly affected the perception of retail categories in which a space with warm color

light was perceived to be more expressive and more exclusive (high-end), while cool color

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
light was perceived to be more technique. The above-mentioned results are similar to

suggestions from previous researches and design recommendations (Rea, 2000; Boyce &

Raynham, 2009; Schielke, 2010; Schielke & Leudesdorff, 2015).

In summary, this research concludes that color hue, lighting arrangement and

correlated color temperature affect the perception of impression and identity. Color and

PT
colored-light used in the space affect perception of store identity. Spaces with warm color

RI
and warm color light used are found to be more “high class”, “bright” and “expressive” than

spaces with cool/neutral color and bluish light. By contrast, spaces with cool color and cool

C
colored-light light will be perceived as more ‘technical’. Moreover, the space with general

US
and accent lighting is perceived to be higher “attractive”, “dramatic”, “spacious” and

“uniform” than general lighting.

AN
The data analysis suggested that the color used is a more effective tool than lighting
M

arrangement for creating a store’s or a brand’s identity. This effect may be due to the fact

that changes in color were perceptually greater than the changes in lighting arrangement from
D

the provided test conditions. While dramatic lighting system may have led to a larger retail’s
TE

identity and brand recognition, dramatic lighting is rarely seen in the lighting design of a

bank sub-branch. For a bank sub-branch lighting design, high-level of illuminance uniformity
EP

is preferred to provide appropriate lighting condition. Therefore, this research concludes that
C

for a bank sub-branch design, color hue and colored light should be used to create positive
AC

retail identity and lighting arrangement should be considered as a secondary factor.

6. Suggestions

Traditionally, the criteria for using color and light have been limited to aesthetic

consideration. In retail design, the use of color and light are important design techniques

which aim to attract customers and increase market opportunities. While previous research

has suggested that color and lighting affected the perception of space, this study extends

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
knowledge on the use of color and lighting as an element for marketing strategies. The

perception of impression and identity for a bank sub-branch with different lighting

arrangements and color usage was examined.

The results show that lighting arrangement highly impact space impression but not on

identity, while, the use of color and colored lighting significantly affects space impression as

PT
well as retail identity. Through subjective assessment, the comparison of space with different

RI
color and lighting reveals that different color and lighting arrangements deliver different

marketing messages.

C
While the subjective assessment method has often been used in marketing research,

US
the data analysis from this study suggests that a few adjective pairs were not suitable when

translated into local language. For example, the notion of “warm-cool”, can have a positive
AN
or negative impact depending on the location of the country. For Thailand, the word ‘cool’ is
M

usually associated with positive environment, while ‘warm’ is usually associated with

negative environment. For colder climates, this language usage could produce different
D

results. In addition, this research also found that a few adjective pairs were not suitable for
TE

subjective evaluation of a certain type of space, such as a bank branch. This could be due to

the space’s function, which was different from previous research (retail store). It is
EP

suggested that further studies should carefully select the words that best represent the space
C

perception which depends largely on the function of the space.

AC

Finally, this research concludes that further studies should be conducted to provide a

better understanding of the effect of color and lighting on space perception. Further studies

should examine the effect of color and light properties such as color lightness, color

saturation, color harmony, brightness, and colored light. The effect of color preference and

brand familiarity on space perception should be examined. The age group of the research

participants could be extended to cover older customers. Lastly, this research suggests that

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
the interaction of color and lighting could be examined together to provide a clearer

understanding of their combined effect on corporate communication through atmosphere

design.

References

Areni, C. S., & Kim, D. (1994). The influence of in-store lighting on consumers' examination

PT
of merchandise in a wine store. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 11, 117-

RI
125.

Babin, J. B., Hardesty, D. M., & Suter, T. A. (2003). Color and shopping intentions: The

C
intervening effects of price fairness and perceived affect. Journal of Business Research,

US
56(7), 541-551.

Baker, J., Levy, M., & Grewal, D. (1992). An experimental approach to making retail store
AN
environmental decisions. Journal of Retailing, 68(4), 445-460.
M

Baker, J., Grewal, D., & Parasuraman, A. (1994). The influence of store environment on

quality inferences and store image. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22,
D

328-339.
TE

Bank of Thailand (2016, January 30). The total number of branch banking system. Revised

from http://www2.bot.or.th/statistics/ReportPage.aspx?reportID=802
EP

Baumstarck, A., & Park, N. (2010). The effects of dressing room lighting on customers'
C

perceptions of self and environment. Journal of Interior Design, 35(2), 37-49.

AC

Bellizzi, J. A., Crowley, A. E., & Hasty, R.W. (1983). The effects of color in store design.

Journal of Retailing, 59, 21-45.

Bellizzi, J. A., & Hite, R. E. (1992). Environmental color, consumer feelings, and purchase

likelihood. Psychology & Marketing, 9(5), 347-363.

Boyce, P. R., & Raynham, P. (2009). The SLL Lighting Handbook. London: Chartered

Institution of Building Services Engineers.

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Brengman, M. (2002). The impact of colour in the store environment. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation. Brussels, Belgium: Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

Brengman, M., & Willems, K. (2009). Determinants of fashion store personality: A

consumer perspective. Journal of Product & Brand Management. 18(5), 346-355.

Briand Decré, G., & Pras, B. (2013). Simulating in-store lighting and temperature with visual

PT
aids: Methodological propositions and S-O-R effects. International Review of Retail,

RI
Distribution & Consumer Research, 23(4), 363-393.

Chebat, J., & Morrin, M. (2007). Colors and cultures: Exploring the effects of mall décor on

C
consumer perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 60(3), 189-196.

US
Crowley, A. E. (1993). The two-dimensional impact of color on shopping. Marketing Letter,

4, 59-69.
AN
Custers, P. J. M., de Kort, Y. W. A., IJsselsteijn, W. A., & de Kruiff, M. E. (2010). Lighting
M

in retail environments: Atmosphere perception in the real world. Lighting Research and

Technology, 42, 331–343.

D

Donovan, R. J., & Rossiter, J. R. (1982). Store atmosphere: An environmental psychology

TE

approach. Journal of Retailing, 58(1), 34-57.

Doucé, L., & Janssens, W. (2013). The presence of a pleasant ambient scent in a fashion
EP

store: The moderating role of shopping motivation and affect intensity. Environment and
C

Behavior, 45(2), 215-238.

AC

Durak, A., Olguntürk, N. C., Yener, C., Güvenç, D., & Gürçınar, Y. (2007). Impact of

lighting arrangements and illuminances on different impressions of a room. Building and

Environment, 42(10), 3476-3482.

Eisemann, L. (2000). Pantone's Guide to Communicating with Color. Cincinnati, OH: North

Light Books.

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Engelke, U., Stokkermans, M. G. M., & Murdoch, M. J. (2013). Visualizing lighting with

images: Converging between the predictive value of renderings and photographs. Paper

published in the proceedings of SPIE 8651 Human Vision and Electronic Imaging

XVIII. Burlingame, California: SPIE.

Erdil, T. S. (2015). Effects of customer brand perceptions on store image and purchase

PT
intention: An application in apparel clothing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,

RI
207, 196-205.

Hidayetoglu, M. L., Yildirim, K., & Akalin, A. (2012). The effects of color and light on

C
indoor wayfinding and the evaluation of the perceived environment. Journal of

US
Environmental Psychology, 32, 50-58.

Hosseini, Z., & Jayashree, S. (2014). Influence of the store ambiance on customers’
AN
behavior-apparel stores in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Management,
M

9(10), 62-69.

Kernsom, T., & Sahachaisaeree, N. (2010). Determinant of design elements and

D

compositional settings of window display on the corporate strategic merchandising of

TE

large scale department store: A case of central world department store. Procedia - Social

and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 1351-1356.

EP

Kim, J. O., & Jin, B. (2001). Korean customers’ patronage of discount stores: Domestic vs
C

multinational discount store shoppers’ profiles. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18,

AC

236-255.

Knez, I. (2001). Effects of color of light on nonvisual psychological processes. Journal of

Environmental Psychology, 21, 201-208.

Knez, I., & Kers, C. (2000). Effects of indoor lighting, gender, and age on mood and

cognitive performance. Environment and Behavior, 32, 817-831.

Kotler, P. (1973-1974). Atmospherics as a marketing tool. Journal of Retailing, 49, 48-64.

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Kumar, A., & Kim, Y. (2014). The store-as-a-brand strategy: The effect of store environment

on customer responses. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(5), 685-695.

Kusumowidagdo, A., Sachari, A., & Widodo, P. (2012). The Impact of Atmospheric Stimuli

of Stores on Human Behavior. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35, 564-571.

Marques, S. H., Cardoso, M. M., & Palma, A. P. (2013). Environmental factors and

PT
satisfaction in a specialty store. International Review of Retail, Distribution & Consumer

RI
Research, 23(4), 456-474.

Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology.

C
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

US
Murray, J. (2012). Towards a better specification of the store environment stimulus: An

augmented stimulus-organism-response (SOR) model that captures brand

AN
expressiveness. British Academy of Management, Cardiff, Conference Proceedings. 13
M

Sept 2012.

Park, N. K., & Farr, C. A. (2007). The effects of lighting on consumers’ emotions and
D

behavioral intentions in a retail environment: A cross cultural comparison. Journal of

TE

Interior Design, 33(1), 17-32.

Quartier, K., Vanrie, J., & Van Cleempoel, K. (2014). As real as it gets: What role does
EP

lighting have on consumer's perception of atmosphere, emotions and behavior? Journal

C

of Environmental Psychology, 39, 32-39.

AC

Rea, M. S., & Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (2000). The IESNA

lighting handbook: Reference & application. New York, NY: Illuminating Engineering

Society of North America.

Schielke, T. (2010). Light and corporate identity: Using lighting for corporate

communication. Lighting Research and Technology, 42, 285–295.

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Schielke, T., & Leudesdorff, M. (2015). Impact of lighting design on brand image for fashion

retail stores. Lighting Research and Technology, 47, 672–692.

Sherman, E., Mathur, A., & Smith, R. B. (1997). Store environment and consumer purchase

behavior: Mediating role of consumer emotions. Psychology & Marketing, 14(4), 361-

378.

PT
Söker, M. B. (2009). The role of color on the assessment of retail space: Restaurant

RI
atmospherics. Unpublished master thesis. Turkey: Bilkent University.

Summers, T. A., & Hebert, P. R. (2001). Shedding some light on store atmospherics:

C
Influence of illumination on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 54(2),

US
145-150.

Turley, L. W., & Milliman, R. E. (2000). Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: A

AN
review of the experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research, 49(2), 193-211.
M

Valdez, P., & Mehrabian, A. (1994). Effects of color on emotion. Journal of Environmental

Psychology, 123(4), 394-409.

D

Wardono, P., Hibino, H., & Koyama, S. (2012). Effects of interior colors, lighting and decors
TE

on perceived sociability, emotion and behavior related to social dining. Procedia - Social

and Behavioral Sciences, 38, 362-372.

EP

Westerman, S. J., Sutherland, E. J., Gardner, P. H., Metcalfe, R., Nash, J., Palframan, S., &
C

Woodburn, N. (2012). Ecommerce interface colour and consumer decision making: Two
AC

routes of influence. Color Research & Application, 37(4), 292-301.

Yildirim, K., Akalin-Baskaya, A., & Hidayetoğlu, M. L. (2007). Effects of indoor color on

mood and cognitive performance. Building and Environment, 42(9), 3233-3240.

Yıldırım, K., Hidayetoğlu, M.L., & Capanoğlu, A. (2011). Effects of interior colors on mood

and preference: Comparisons of two living rooms. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 112 (2),

1-16.

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Yildirim, K., Capanoglu, A., Cagatay, K., & Hidayetoğlu, M. L. (2012). Effect of wall colour

on the perception of hairdressing salons. Journal of the International Colour

Association, 7, 51-63.

PT
C RI
US
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a grant awarded by Chulalongkorn University under the
th
90 Anniversary of Chulalongkorn University Fund (Ratchadaphiseksomphot Endowment
Fund).

PT
C RI
US
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 1
Key variables in the simulation scenes.
Lighting conditions Color conditions
Scene Lighting arrangement CCT Hue CIELAB (L*a*b*)
L1 General lighting Daylight (5000 K) Grey 60, 0, 3
L2 General + accent lighting Daylight (5000 K) Grey 60, 0, 3
L3 General + accent lighting Warm white (2700 K) Grey 44, 17, 7
L1a General lighting Daylight (5000 K) Yellow 83, 13, 69
L1b General lighting Daylight (5000 K) Blue 34, 4, -47

PT
L1c General lighting Daylight (5000 K) Purple 36, 40, -40
Note: Illuminance level of general lighting scenes = 500 lux
Illuminance level of general and accent lighting scenes = 600 lux

RI
Table 2

C
Correlations (r) between subjective perceptions for different color (n=576) and lighting
conditions (n=432)

US
The scenes with different color conditions (Scene L1, L1a, L1b and L1c)
P01 P02 P03 P04 P05 P06 P07 P08 P09 P10
P01 1.000
AN
P02 -0.247** 1.000
P03 0.447** -0.236** 1.000
P04 0.395** -0.227** 0.504** 1.000
P05 0.422** -0.254** 0.530** 0.503** 1.000
M

P06 0.149** -0.062 0.223** 0.229** 0.228** 1.000

P07 -0.029 0.203** -0.001 -0.098* 0.032 0.203** 1.000
** ** ** ** **
P08 0.301 -0.297 0.340 0.397 0.316 0.122** -0.135** 1.000
D

P09 -0.129** 0.130** -0.050 -0.007 -0.025 -0.022 0.170** 0.073 1.000
P10 -0.277** 0.244** -0.103* -0.138** -0.167** 0.047 0.099* -0.065 0.269** 1.000
TE

P11 -0.172** 0.057 0.033 -0.033 0.009 0.095* 0.043 0.015 0.221** 0.435**
The scenes with different lighting conditions (Scene L1, L2 and L3)
P01 P02 P03 P04 P05 P06 P07 P08 P09 P10
EP

P01 1.000
P02 -0.209** 1.000
P03 0.369** -0.254** 1.000
P04 0.351** -0.228** 0.489** 1.000
C

P05 0.294** -0.241** 0.503** 0.433** 1.000

P06 0.076 0.002 0.244** 0.151** 0.266** 1.000
AC

**
P07 -0.058 0.216 0.044 -0.071 0.077 0.233** 1.000
** ** ** ** **
P08 0.331 -0.257 0.247 0.389 0.222 0.002 -0.194** 1.000
P09 -0.046 0.133** -0.080 -0.021 -0.044 -0.091 0.202** 0.176** 1.000
P10 -0.208** 0.146** -0.031 -0.071 -0.026 0.192** 0.164** -0.045 0.217** 1.000
P11 -0.142** 0.077 0.053 0.104* 0.091 0.092 0.075 -0.007 0.155** 0.356**
Note: * = p<.05, ** = p<.01

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 3
ANOVA results of perceptions among different color conditions (L1, L1a, L1b and L1c).
Scene L1 L1a L1b L1c
Perceptual responses M SD M SD M SD M SD F(3,572) p Tukey’s HSD test

PT
Impression
Attractive-Unattractive 3.16 1.45 3.39 1.85 3.47 1.74 3.14 1.68 1.40 .242 -

RI
Relaxed-Dramatic 4.32 1.61 3.99 1.53 4.47 1.67 4.22 1.39 2.43 .065 -
Spacious-Confined 3.12 1.73 4.01 1.46 3.49 1.79 3.57 1.53 7.21 .000* L1a>(L1,L1b,L1c)**
Uniform-Differentiated 3.31 1.54 3.83 1.54 3.49 1.73 3.72 1.52 3.23 .022* (L1a,L1b,L1c)>L1**

SC
Bright-Dark 3.31 1.82 4.47 1.54 2.85 1.64 3.03 1.60 8.20 .000* L1a>L1c>L1b**
Warm-Cool 3.54 1.55 4.26 1.68 3.31 1.49 4.19 1.61 12.65 .000* (L1a,L1c)>L1>L1b**

U
Diffused-Contrast 4.13 1.50 3.69 1.64 3.94 1.52 3.78 1.54 2.21 .086 -
Identity

AN
Technical-Natural 3.75 1.64 4.47 1.54 4.22 1.78 4.64 1.53 8.11 .000* (L1a,L1b,L1c)>L1**
Modern-Traditional 4.70 1.43 4.97 1.48 4.80 1.26 4.60 1.35 1.86 .135 -
High class-Low budget 4.13 1.59 4.92 1.42 4.63 1.44 4.86 1.37 8.75 .000* (L1a>L1), (L1c)>L1**

M
Expressive-Unobtrusive 4.01 1.45 5.10 1.55 4.56 1.47 5.02 1.49 16.35 .000* (L1a,L1c)>L1**
Note: M = Mean value ranged from 1 to 7 (negative to positive), SD = Standard deviation

D
* = p<.05, Mean differences by one-way ANOVA

TE
** = p<.008, Homogeneity differences between group based on Tukey’s HSD test
EP
C
AC

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 4
ANOVA results of perceptions among different lighting conditions (L1, L2 and L3).
Scene L1 L2 L3
Perceptual responses M SD M SD M SD F(2,429) p Tukey’s HSD test
Impression
Attractive-Unattractive 3.16 1.45 3.83 1.64 2.84 1.38 16.370 .000* L2>(L1,L3)**
Relaxed-Dramatic 4.32 1.61 3.61 1.50 4.06 1.46 7.940 .000* (L1,L3)>L2**
Spacious-Confined 3.12 1.73 3.78 1.61 3.90 1.48 9.748 .000* (L2,L3)>L1**
Uniform-Differentiated 3.31 1.54 3.92 1.69 3.83 1.48 6.577 .002* (L2,L3)>L1**

PT
Bright-Dark 3.31 1.82 3.45 1.69 3.90 1.68 4.536 .011* L3>(L1)**
Warm-Cool 3.54 1.55 3.34 1.47 4.72 1.59 33.548 .000* L3>(L1,L2)**
Diffused-Contrast 4.13 1.50 3.42 1.58 4.01 1.61 8.475 .000* (L1,L3)>L2**

RI
Identity
Technical-Natural 3.75 1.64 4.80 1.63 3.84 1.62 18.275 .000* L2>(L1,L3)**
Modern-Traditional 4.70 1.43 4.65 1.36 4.48 1.32 1.048 .352 -

C
High class-Low budget 4.13 1.59 4.40 1.38 5.35 1.27 29.044 .000* L3>(L1,L2)**
Expressive-Unobtrusive 4.01 1.45 4.38 1.50 4.95 1.31 15.904 .000* L3>(L1,L2)**

US
Note: M = Mean value ranged from 1 to 7 (negative to positive), SD = Standard deviation
* = p<.05, Mean differences by one-way ANOVA
** = p<.017, Homogeneity differences between group based on Tukey’s HSD test
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
Figure 1. Example of banking zone in the department store with various bank sub-branches.

C RI
US
AN
M

Figure 2. Examples of color and lighting arrangement employed in bank sub-branches.

D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 3. Conceptual framework based on S-O-R Model to link the investigated variables.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
Figure 4. Plan of a typical bank branch in a department store (a) and electrical plan setting for

C
different lighting arrangements (b, c) of the simulated scenes.

US
AN
M
D
TE
EP

Figure 5. Six computer-generated scenes of bank sub-branch with different color and lighting

conditions.
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
C RI
Figure 6 An experimental setting (a) in controlled classroom environment (b)

US
AN
M
D
TE
EP

Figure 7 Mean values of perceptual evaluations among bank branch spaces with different
color conditions.
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
C RI
Figure 8 Mean values of perceptual evaluations among bank branch spaces with different
lighting conditions.

US
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Highlights

• Color and lighting affect perception of space impression and retail identity.
• Chromatic space conditions received more positive score of impression and identity.
• Warm color tone and colored-light significantly enhance space identity.
• Lighting arrangement is a secondary factor in enhancing retail identity.

PT
C RI
US
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC