Influence of Lighting Design on Marketing Communication

REFERENCES

• Aaker JL. 1997. Dimensions of brand personality. J Marketing Res. 34:347-356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Areni CS, Kim D. 1994. The influence of in-store lighting on consumers’ examination of merchandise in a wine store. International Journal of Research in Marketing. 11:117 -125.
   Google Scholar
• Aries MBC, Veitch JA, Newsham GR. 2010. Windows, view, and office characteristics predict physical and psychological discomfort. J Environ Psychol. 30:533 -541.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babin B. 2003. Color and shopping intentions: the intervening effect of price fairness and perceived affect. J Bus Res. 56:541 -551.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babin B, Hardesty DM, Suter TA. 2003. Color and shopping intentions: the intervening effect of price fairness and perceived affect. J Bus Res. 56:541 -551.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron RA, Rea MS, Daniels SG. 1992. Effects of indoor lighting (illuminance and spectral distribution) on the performance of cognitive tasks and interpersonal behaviors: the potential mediating role of positive affect. Motiv Emotion. 16:1 -33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartleson C, Grum F. 1984. Optical radiation measurements. Vol. 5, Visual measurements. New York (NY): Academic Press. p. 467-471.
   Google Scholar
• Beck U. 1986. Risk society. Frankfurt (Germany): Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Becker U, Nowak H. 1982. The everyday-life-approach as a new research perspective in opinion and marketing research. In: Esomar Congress (European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research). Vienna. p. 269 -288.
   Google Scholar
• Bellizzi JA, Crowley AE, Hasty RW. 1983. The effects of color in store design. J Retailing. 59:21 -45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birkigt K, Stadler MM, Funck HJ. 1980. Corporate identity: Basics, functions, case studies. München (Germany): Verlag Moderne Industrie.
   Google Scholar
• Bol E. 2009. The store as home of the brand. In: Schultz S, van Rossum-Willems M, editors. Powershop 2: new retail design; Volume 1 fashion. Amsterdam (The Netherlands): Frame Publishers. p. 10 -13.
   Google Scholar
• Boote AS. 1981. Reliability testing of psychographic scales. J Advertising Res. 21:53 -60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourdieu P. 1982. The subtle differences. Frankfurt (Germany): Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Boyce PR. 2003. Human factors in lighting. London (England): Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Brengman M, Geuens M. 2004. The four dimensional impact of color on shoppers’ emotions. Adv Consum Res. 31:122 -128.
   Google Scholar
• Briand G, Pras B. 2010. Lighting and perceived temperature: energy-saving levers to improve store evaluations? Adv Consum Res. 38:312 -318.
   Google Scholar
• Chang L. 1994. A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity. Appl Psych Meas. 18:205 -215.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cicchetti DV, Shoinralter D, Tyrer PJ. 1985. The effect of number of rating scale categories on levels of interrater reliability: a Monte Carlo investigation. Appl Psych Meas. 9:31 -36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman P. 2006. Shopping environments. Evolution, planning and design. Amsterdam (The Netherlands): Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Corbusier L. 1927. Towards a new architecture. London (England): Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cox EP. 1980. The optimal number of response alternatives for a scale: a review. J Marketing Res. 17:407 -422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crowley AE. 1993. The two-dimensional impact of color on shopping. Market Lett. 4:59 -69.
   Google Scholar
• Custers P, de Kort Y, IJsselsteijn W, de Kruiff M. 2010. Lighting in retail environments: atmosphere perception in the real world. Lighting Res Technol. 42:331 -343.
   Google Scholar
• Cuttle C. 2009. Towards the third stage of the lighting profession. Lighting Res Technol. 42:73 -93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuttle C, Brandston H. 1995. Evaluation of retail lighting. J Illum Eng Soc. 24:33 -49.
   Google Scholar
• de la Vega LEF, Arévalo OZ, Sánchez DC. 2013. Comparison of gender in the perception of the image and its relationship with the brand positioning. European Scientific Journal. 9:310 -324.
   Google Scholar
• DIAL. 2003. Light and human. The influence of lighting distribution on the acceptance of modern office workplaces. Lüdenscheid (Germany).
   Google Scholar
• Diaz-Bone R. 2004. Milieu models and milieu instruments in market research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 5(2), Art. 28, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0402289.
   Google Scholar
• Dikel EE, Burns GJ, Veitch JA, Mancini S, Newsham GR. 2014. Preferred chromaticity of color-tunable LED lighting. LEUKOS. 10:101 -115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiLaura D, Houser KW, Mistrick R, Steffy G. 2011. The lighting handbook. New York (NY): Illuminating Engineering Society of North America.
   Google Scholar
• DIN. 1990. DIN 5035 Beleuchtung mit künstlichem licht. Teil 1. Berlin (Germany): Beuth Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Eco U. 1972. Introduction to semiotics. München (Germany): Fink.
   Google Scholar
• Edmondson DR. 2005. Likert scales: a history. In: CHARM—the Conference on Historical Analysis and Research in Marketing. 2005 April 28-May 1; Long Beach, CA. p. 127 -133.
   Google Scholar
• Flynn JE. 1977. A study of subjective responses to low energy and nonuniform lighting systems. Light Design Appl. 7:6 -15.
   Google Scholar
• Focus. 1999. The market of automobiles. Data, facts, trends. <http://www.medialine.de/media/uploads/projekt/medialine/docs/bestellung_download/marktanalysen/2003/ma_automobile_1999_10.pdf > Accessed 2012 June 30.
   Google Scholar
• Fotios S, Atli D. 2012. Comparing judgments of visual clarity and spatial brightness through an analysis of studies using the category rating procedure. LEUKOS. 8:261 -281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganslandt R, Hofmann H. 1992. Handbook of lighting design. Braunschweig (Germany): Vieweg-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Goldstein BE. 1996. Psychology of perception. Heidelberg (Germany): Spektrum Akademischer Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Gröger M. 2011. Lifestyles and their impact on energy-related investment decisions. Low Carbon Economy. 2:107 -114.
   Google Scholar
• Harwood T, Jones M, Carreras A. 2013. Shedding light on retail environments. In: Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Eye Tracking South Africa—ETSA ’13. New York (NY): ACM Press. p. 2 -7.
   Google Scholar
• Herbst D. 1998. Corporate identity. Berlin (Germany): Cornelsen.
   Google Scholar
• Hesse DG. 1995. How corporate is design really? Design by Doing. 4 -9.
   Google Scholar
• Hopkinson RG. 1957. Assessment of brightness: what we see. Illum Eng. April: 211 -222.
   Google Scholar
• Hopkinson RG. 1963. Architectural physics lighting. London (England): Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• Houser K, Mossman M, Smet K, Whitehead L. 2015. Tutorial: color rendering and its applications in lighting. LEUKOS. doi:10.1080/15502724.2014.989802
   Google Scholar
• Houser KW, Tiller DK. 2003. Measuring the subjective response to interior lighting: paired comparisons and semantic differential scaling. Lighting Res Technol. 35:183 -198.
   Google Scholar
• Hradil S. 1992. Old terms and new structures. The milieu, subculture and lifestyle research in 80s. In: Zwischen bewußtsein und sein: die vermittlung “objektiver” lebensbedingungen und “subjektiver” lebensweisen. Opladen (Germany): Leske und Budrich. p. 15 -56.
   Google Scholar
• Itten J. 1974. Art of colour. New York (NY): Van Nostrand Reinhold.
   Google Scholar
• Julesz B. 1981. Textons, the elements of texture perception, and their interaction. Nature. 290:91 -97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan R, Kaplan S. 1989. The experience of nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly R. 1952. Light as an integral part of architecture. College Art Journal. 12:24 -30.
   Google Scholar
• Kirby A, Kent A. 2010. Architecture as brand: store design and brand identity. Journal of Product & Brand Management. 19:432 -439.
   Google Scholar
• Knez I. 2001. Effects of colour of light on nonvisual psychological processes. J Environ Psychol. 21:201 -208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knez I, Enmarker I. 1998. Effects of office lighting on mood and cognitive performance and a gender effect in work-related judgment. Environ Behav. 30:553 -567.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knez I, Kers C. 2000. Effects of Indoor lighting, gender, and age on mood and cognitive performance. Environ Behav. 32:817 -831.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konietzka D. 1995. Lifestyle in social structural context: A theoretical and empirical contribution for the analysis social structural inequalities. Opladen (Germany): Westdeutscher Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Kotler P. 2000. Marketing management. London (England): Prentice Hall International.
   Google Scholar
• Krautter M, Schielke T. 2009. Light perspectives between culture and technology. Lüdenscheid (Germany): ERCO.
   Google Scholar
• Kutlu R, Manav B, Klanc R. 2013. Retail design: color-light influence on brand identity—image perception. World Applied Sciences Journal. 23:598 -606.
   Google Scholar
• Lam WMC. 1977. Perception and lighting as formgivers for architecture. New York (NY): McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Lee E, Park N-K, Han JH. 2013. Gender difference in environmental attitude and behaviors in adoption of energy-efficient lighting at home. J Sust Develop. 6:36-50.
   Google Scholar
• Leudesdorff M, Schielke T. 2012. Impact of lighting design on brand image. In: de Kort Y, Aarts MPJ, Beute F, Haans A, IJsselsteijn W, Lakens D, Smolders K, van Rijswijk L, editors. Experience Light 2012: International Conference on the Effects of Light on Wellbeing. Eindhoven (The Netherlands): Eindhoven University of Technology. p. 1-4.
   Google Scholar
• Likert R. 1932. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology. 140:1 -55.
   Google Scholar
• Loe DL, Mansfield KP, Rowlands E. 1994. Appearance of lit environment and its relevance in lighting design: experimental study. Lighting Res Technol. 26:119 -133.
   Google Scholar
• Loe DL, Mansfield KP, Rowlands E. 2000. A step in quantifying the appearance of a lit scene. Lighting Res Technol. 32:213 -222.
   Google Scholar
• Loe DL, Rowlands E. 1996. The art and science of lighting: a strategy for lighting design. Lighting Res Technol. 28:153 -164.
   Google Scholar
• Madden TJ, Hewett K, Roth MS. 2000. Managing images in different cultures: a cross-national study of color meanings and preferences. J Int Marketing. 8:90 -107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mäder R. 2005. Measurement and control of brand personality: Development of a measurement instrument and application in advertising with prominent testimonials. Wiesbaden (Germany): Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Markin RJ, Lillis CM, Narayana CL. 1976. Social–psychological significance of store space. J Retailing. 52:43 -54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCandless S. 1939. A method of lighting the stage. New York (NY): Theatre Arts Inc.
   Google Scholar
• McCloughan CLB, Aspinall PA, Webb RS. 1999. The impact of lighting on mood. Lighting Res Technol. 31:81 -88.
   Google Scholar
• Meggs P. 1983. A history of graphic design. London (England): Allen Lane.
   Google Scholar
• Mehrabian A, Russell JA. 1974. An approach to environmental psychology. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Melewar TC. 2008. Facets of corporate identity, communication and reputation. New York (NY): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Messedat J. 2005. Corporate architecture: entwicklung, konzepte, strategien = development, concepts, strategies. Ludwigsburg (Germany): AV Edition.
   Google Scholar
• Morin M. 1998. Retail sellout. Light Design Appl. 6:66 -69.
   Google Scholar
• Niesel, M. 2008. Magazines: Progressive differentiation of media repertoires? Hans-Bredow-Institut. <http://www.hans-bredow-institut.de/webfm_send/225 > Accessed 2012 June 30.
   Google Scholar
• Nöth W. 1985. Handbook of semiotics. Stuttgart (Germany): Metzler.
   Google Scholar
• Ohno Y. 2014. Practical use and calculation of CCT and Duv. LEUKOS. 10:47 -55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preston CC, Colman AM. 2000. Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences. Acta Psychol. 104:1 -15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quartier K, Vanrie J, Van Cleempoel K. 2014. As real as it gets: what role does lighting have on consumer’s perception of atmosphere, emotions and behaviour? J Environ Psychol. 39:32 -39.
   Google Scholar
• Raffelt U. 2012. Architectural branding—understanding and measuring its relevance for brand communication. München (Germany): FGM-Verlag, Verl. der Fördergemeinschaft Marketing e.V.
   Google Scholar
• Royer MP, Houser KW. 2012. Spatial brightness perception of trichromatic stimuli. LEUKOS. 9:89 -108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheer T. 2001. The Volkswagen architecture: Identity and flexibility as a concept. Ostfildern (Germany): Hatje Cantz.
   Google Scholar
• Schielke T. 2010. Light and corporate identity: using lighting for corporate communication. Lighting Res Technol. 42:285 -295.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schielke T. 2011. Luminous automotive brands. Zeitschrift für die gesamte Wertschöpfungskette Automobilwirtschaft. 1:35 -40.
   Google Scholar
• Schielke T. 2013. Tutorial: rationale, concepts, and techniques for lighting vertical surfaces. LEUKOS. 9:223 -243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schielke T. 2014. Corporate lighting: methods and techniques of architectural lighting for brand communication. Doctoral thesis. Department: Faculty of Architecture. University: Darmstadt University of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Schielke T, Leudesdorff M. 2014. Impact of lighting design on brand image for fashion retail stores. Lighting Res Technol. doi:10.1177/1477153514541831
   Google Scholar
• Schoegel K, Koob C. 2008. Media usage for inter media comparison. Impact zoom. <http://www.publisuisse.ch/mm/mm001/77479_IMPACT_ZOOM_Sept_08_de.pdf > Accessed 2012 June 30.
   Google Scholar
• Schulze G. 1995. Event-society: Cultural sociology in the present age. Frankfurt (Germany): Campus-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Schwanzer B. 1985. The relevance of architecture for corporate identity of a company. Wien (Germany): Service, Fachverlag an der Wirtschaftsuniversität.
   Google Scholar
• Smith FK, Bertolone FJ. 1986. Bringing interiors to light. The principles and practices of lighting design. New York (NY): Whitney Library of Design.
   Google Scholar
• Tan TM, Su-Mae T, Lee W, Ong MBF, Liew TW. 2012. Does gender contribute moderating effect in brand equity model? International Journal of Research in Management. 3:1 -15.
   Google Scholar
• Tiller DK, Rea MS. 1992. Semantic differential scaling: prospects in lighting research. Lighting Res Technol. 24:43 -51.
   Google Scholar
• Treisman A. 1986. Properties, parts, and objects. In: Boff KR, Kaufman L, Thomas FP, editors. Handbook of perception and human performance. New York (NY): Wiley. p. 1-70.
   Google Scholar
• van den Bosch ALM, de Jong MDT, Elving WJL. 2005. How corporate visual identity supports reputation. Corporate Communications: An International Journal. 10:108 -116.
   Google Scholar
• Veitch J. 2001. Psychological proceses influencing lighting quality. J Illum Eng Soc. 30:124 -140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veitch JA, Newsham GR. 2000. Preferred luminous conditions in open-plan offices: research and practice recommendations. Lighting Res Technol. 32:199 -212.
   Google Scholar
• Vester M. 1993. Social milieus in the social structural change: Between integration and exclusion. Köln (Germany): Bund-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Vogels I. 2008. Atmosphere metrics. In: Westerink JHDM, Ouwerkerk M, Overbeek TJM, Pasveer WF, Ruyter B, editors. Probing experience. Vol. 8. Philips Research Book Series. (The Netherlands): Springer. p. 25 -41.
   Google Scholar
• Waldram JM. 1954. Studies in interior lighting. Trans Illum Eng Soc. 19:95 -133.
   Google Scholar
• Wei M, Houser KW, Allen GR, Beers WW. 2014. Color preference under LEDs with diminished yellow emission. LEUKOS. 10:119 -131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wieland D. 2002. Individualisation and social structure – objective and subjective dimensions of social inequality. Doctoral thesis. University: Universität Kassel.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson GD. 1966. Arousal properties or red versus green. Percept Motor Skill. 23:947 -949.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye L, Robertson TMA. 2012. Gender identity: does it matter for consumers’ perceptions? Journal of Business Diversity. 12:81 -92.
   Google Scholar
• Zaikina V, Matusiak BS, Klöckner CA. 2014. Luminance-based measures of contour distinctness of 3D objects as a component of light modeling. LEUKOS. 11:31 -45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaikina V, Matusiak BS, Klöckner CA. 2015 , in press. Luminance-based measures of shape and details distinctness of 3D objects as important predictors of light modelling concept. Results of a full-scale study pairing proposed measures with subjective responses. LEUKOS.
   Google Scholar
• Zentes J, Morschett D, Schramm-Klein H. 2008. Brand personality of retailers—an analysis of its applicability and its effect on store loyalty. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research. 18:167 -184.
   Google Scholar
• Zielke S, Schielke T. 2011. How store lighting influences store atmosphere, price and quality perceptions and shopping intention. In: European Marketing Academy 40th Conference. Ljubljana, Slovenia. European Marketing Academy. 7 pp.
   Google Scholar