Mishra, A.Shukla, A.Rana, Nripendra P.Dwivedi, Y.K.2020-11-132020-11-172020-11-132020-11-172021-03Mishra A, Shukla A, Rana NP et al (2021) From ‘touch’ to a ‘multisensory’ experience: The impact of technology interface and product type on consumer responses. Psychology and Marketing. 38(3): 385-396.RMSID:212599662http://hdl.handle.net/10454/18169YesOnline retailers are increasingly using augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technologies to solve mental and physical intangibility issues in a product evaluation. Moreover, the technologies are easily available and accessible to consumers via their smartphones. The authors conducted three experiments to examine consumer responses to technology interfaces (AR/VR and mobile apps) for hedonic and utilitarian products. The results show that AR is easier to use (vs. app), and users find AR more responsive when buying a hedonic (vs. utilitarian) product. Touch interface users are likely to have a more satisfying experience and greater recommendation intentions, as compared to AR, for buying utilitarian products. In contrast, a multisensory environment (AR) results in a better user experience for purchasing a hedonic product. Moreover, multisensory technologies lead to higher visual appeal, emotional appeal, and purchase intentions. The research contributes to the literature on computer-mediated interactions in a multisensory environment and proposes actionable recommendations to online marketers.en© 2020 Wiley This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Mishra A, Shukla A, Rana NP et al (2021) From ‘touch’ to a ‘multisensory’ experience: The impact of technology interface and product type on consumer responses. Psychology and Marketing. 38(3): 385-396, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21436. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.Multisensory technologiesAugmented reality (AR)Virtual reality (VR)Mobile appsHaptic interfaceEmotional appealVisual appealArticlehttps://doi.org/10.1002/mar.214362020-11-13