Key Factors for Evaluating Visual Perception Responses to Social Media Video Communication

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the key factors for creating a positive visual perception response evaluation for social media video communication. The aim of this study was to determine what factors of light sources impact visual perception to increase the interactions in social media video communication. First, the key factors of visual perception and response evaluation of visual effects in social media video communication were summarized and analyzed through an interview consultation panel of experts and scholars. Key factors were compiled into four dimensions (48 sub-dimensions), including (1) visual perception, with 12 sub-dimensions; (2) emotional perception, with 12 sub-dimensions; (3) preference perception, with 11 sub-dimensions; and (4) shape perception, with 13 sub-dimensions. Second, 12 experts and scholars were invited to form a panel to develop the Delphi technique questionnaire. After three Delphi technique questionnaires were conducted, the mean (M), mode (Mo), and standard deviation (SD) of each response were statistically analyzed, and the one-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to analyze the appropriateness and consistency of the Delphi technique survey results. The results of this study indicate that 15 sub-dimensions met the criteria of appropriateness and consistency, which were used to establish 15 key factors for evaluating visual perception responses to social media visual communication. This study will provide a technical reference for the visual perception of digital messages in social media to improve the quality of visual perception of digital communication.

Evaluation of Key Success Factors in the Visual Optimization of the 3D Forming of Soil-Shaping Ability

“…In the results of the first Delphi study, (1) the mode was above 4; (2) the criteria for the appropriateness test, mean ≥ 3.5; and (3) the medium criteria for the consistency test, standard deviation ≤ 1 [44]. There were 43 sub-dimensions meeting the three conditions.…”

“…When the quartile deviation is lower than or equal to 0.50, the group members have reached a high degree of consistency and consensus, as proposed by Hollden and Wedman [48]. In general, when the criterion of the quartile deviation is lower, the required consistency is higher and it is more difficult to achieve consistency [44].…”

“…The expert group members fully express concepts or techniques and positions based on their professional knowledge and practical experience, without external influence. Subsequently, the researchers organize, summarize, analyze, and revise the data to construct evaluation dimensions for the next round [44].…”

“…Finally, the experts and scholars selected the key factors. Based on expert opinion, the evaluation dimensions were analyzed, compiled, and classified [45] and the structure of the preliminary evaluation factors was established [44]. A Likert scale was adopted to evaluate the dimension items.…”

“…We evaluated the consistency of the opinions of the experts and scholars (reaching a significance level). We then deleted the inconsistent dimension indexes that did not reach the significance level among the evaluation dimensions [44].…”