Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Maksim Godovykh
 + 2092 word(s) 2092 2022-02-24 09:34:54 |
2 formating
Jason Zhu
 -13 word(s) 2079 2022-03-15 11:06:47 | |
3 Updated references
Salvatore Monaco
-2 word(s) 2077 2023-03-11 19:50:49 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Godovykh, M.; Monaco, S. Virtual Travel. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/20546 (accessed on 17 May 2024).
Godovykh M, Monaco S. Virtual Travel. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/20546. Accessed May 17, 2024.
Godovykh, Maksim, Salvatore Monaco. "Virtual Travel" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/20546 (accessed May 17, 2024).
Godovykh, M., & Monaco, S. (2022, March 14). Virtual Travel. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/20546
Godovykh, Maksim and Salvatore Monaco. "Virtual Travel." Encyclopedia. Web. 14 March, 2022.
Virtual Travel
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/tourhosp3010018

Virtual experience in tourism and hospitality can be broadly described as the totality of tourists’ affective, cognitive, and sensorial responses before, during, and after interaction with the virtual environment (VR). VR is traditionally defined as a computer-generated environment where the user has an opportunity to immerse, look around, and control the experience. Technologies represented in virtual reality range from 360° videos, VR, AR, and virtual meetings to the digital world as a persistent virtual environment, which can be broadly classified based on the levels of immersion, presence, and complexity. The levels of immersion can be defined as non-immersive (e.g., computer, display, mice), semi-immersive (e.g., high-resolution displays, projectors, hard simulators), and fully immersive (e.g., VR glasses, head mount display), based on the type of simulation and degree of user’s abstraction from the real world.

VR virtual experience tourism virtual reality

1. Virtual Tourism Experience

The topic of virtual experience is not new in the tourism context. Although virtual reality and virtual experience are often used interchangeably in tourism and hospitality research, there is a difference between these terms. VR is traditionally defined as a computer-generated environment where the user has an opportunity to immerse, look around, and control the experience [1]. Technologies represented in virtual reality range from 360° videos, VR, AR, and virtual meetings to the digital world as a persistent virtual environment, which can be broadly classified based on the levels of immersion, presence, and complexity [2]. The levels of immersion can be defined as non-immersive (e.g., computer, display, mice), semi-immersive (e.g., high-resolution displays, projectors, hard simulators), and fully immersive (e.g., VR glasses, head mount display), based on the type of simulation and degree of user’s abstraction from the real world [3]. Immersive qualities may differ based on the transparency of the media; more transparent media allows an individual to focus on the content, unlike in hypermediated spaces, where the interface is continuously apparent [4]. The level of presence (the perception of being in and feeling connected to the virtual environment) is related to the processing of virtual stimuli by the human sensory system and depends on external stimuli, subjective components of experience, and the user’s individual characteristics [5][6]. The complexity of the experience and the capabilities of the technology also make a difference in immersive qualities and the likelihood of adoption by destinations.
At the same time, virtual experience in tourism and hospitality can be broadly described as the totality of tourists’ affective, cognitive, and sensorial responses before, during, and after interaction with the virtual environment [7]. Applications of experience in tourism research include visiting virtual destinations, hotels, attractions, and artifacts that make it possible to examine and interact with them. Virtual tours of historic sites and attractions were especially common during the pandemic with ancient Egyptian sites, Petra, the British Museum, the Louvre Museum, Frida Kahlo’s house, the White House, and others [8]. Ancient sites that no longer exist (e.g., ancient Roman spaces and traditions) and extant or extinct museum exhibits (e.g., the world’s first photographic exhibit) can be recreated with these technologies [9][10]. Many applications allow for marketing a location or providing experience to those who cannot attend[11]. For example, several of the pavilions at Expo 2020 Dubai, the most recent world exposition, are available in 360° videos, walkthroughs, video tours, and other online presentations due to the persistence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Tethered and untethered VR experiences using popular apparatuses are applied in destinations, with some using expensive equipment and others requiring only an application download for a mobile device [12]. AR experiences and holograms, both of which may superimpose digital images on physical space, have been expanding in several industries, including tourism [13]. Three-dimensional virtual worlds such as Second Life have also been considered in research, with functions such as marketing, virtual tours, and hosting virtual embassies [14][15].
There are notable limitations of virtual experience. In some cases, virtual techniques are used to augment visitor experience at the site, for example, adding a multi-sensory VR presentation in a wine tourism location [16]. However, certain aspects of sensory experience (particularly gustatory and olfactory dimensions) are much more difficult to reproduce than visual, auditory, and occasionally tactile VR offerings, making the experience less complete. There is concern that VR experiences may be less personal than traditional tourism [16]. One study [17] found that virtual tourism can bring positive outcomes such as learning and intent to visit, but it can also intensify negative emotions elicited in things such as dark tourism sites, which then leads to a decrease in visit intention. It is easier to mediate emotions in a physical setting by tactfully structuring experiences. In addition, virtual tourism is often conceptualized as a substitute for experience rather than the experience itself or is viewed as less authentic [18]. Deng et al. [19] found that VR websites might negatively influence visit intentions. The notion that virtual travel not only has advantages to traditional travel but that it poses a threat to tourism because it will completely displace physical travel [20] echoes the concerns of postmodern critics that simulation is more appealing than reality [21][22].
Nonetheless, virtual experiences have been found to be advantageous. Virtual experiences, especially those with immersive and social interaction features, can increase guest satisfaction and loyalty [23]. Flavián et al. [24] suggested that virtual experience brings additional value to the customer purchase journey. A recent study by Bogicevic et al. [25] found that pre-visit virtual experience leads to higher levels of tourism brand experience. Di Franco et al. [26] determined that virtual replicas in museum settings evoke more reactions than real artifacts. This aligns with previous work that observes in situ display (with dioramas, environmental design, immersion, etc.) is often more impactful than “in context” display or the traditional technique of artifacts arranged in a curated taxonomy [27][28]. In another study [29], telepresence (allowing one to feel present in a place that is not the physical location one is in) can predict one’s user experience with virtual environments still giving the perception of “being there”. Importantly, no significant differences between physical presence and virtual experience were found for tourists’ emotional engagement, spatial presence, and behavioral intentions [30][31]. Travelers can be fully immersed by the virtual experience, detached from the real-world environment, partake in the realism of virtual scenarios, and report intentions of revisiting similar to experiencing the actual physical destination.

2. Conceptual Model

The main antecedents of virtual experience in tourism include quality factors, technology acceptance factors, information-related factors, and affective factors (Figure 1). The quality factors are associated with VR content quality, functional quality, and system quality. Among the previously described technology acceptance factors are perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. The information factors include the type of virtual stimuli and the type of presented information. Affective antecedents are related to the level of immersion, presence, the intensity of virtual experience, emotional arousal, and the valence of emotions.
Attitudes and behavioral intentions are introduced as the main outcomes in the proposed model. Virtual experience in tourism settings might affect the image of the destination, perceived value, destination attachment, and different components of attitudinal loyalty. The behavioral intentions influenced by virtual experience include intentions to visit a destination, as well as purchase and travel intentions. The effects of quality factors, technology acceptance factors, information-related factors, and affective factors on virtual experience, attitudes, and behavioral intentions are moderated by users’ individual characteristics, including age, gender, sociodemographic, personality traits, prior experience, etc.

3. Future Research Directions

The virtual tourism research agenda should include using types of computer-generated travel experiences that provide tourists an opportunity to view, immerse, and control the environment. Considering the level of immersion into a virtual environment and the degree of realism, it is suggested that tourists can receive affective, cognitive, and sensorial experiences from visiting virtual attractions, choosing travel transportation and accommodation, admiring landscapes, and interacting with other virtual tourism providers and tourists. Concepts of co-creation and participation can be assessed to determine whether design merits more agency and interactive features, as one study noted that multiple technology usage could lead to value co-creation in each phase of the visit [32]. Researchers might conduct cross-sectional and longitudinal research by using VR, collecting data from smartphones and wearable sensors, as well as manipulating different experimental scenarios, stimuli, and interventions. The current adoption level of mobile and web-based applications makes it possible for participants to visit virtual destination scenarios by using smartphones and personal computers, VR headsets, and other extended-reality technologies. Virtual travel experience scenarios can also include pre-trip, on-site, and post-trip components. There are myriad opportunities for meaningfully reassessing the presence of contemporary technologies in the tourism sector.
The main difference between virtual experience and the traditional hypothetical experimental scenarios is the participants’ motivation to receive virtual travel experiences that they cannot receive in real life and the levels of immersion in virtual destination scenarios. Additionally, using mobile technologies makes it possible to design different travel scenarios and collect objective data from wearable sensors and smartphone applications (geospatial position, heart rate, blood pressure, galvanic skin response, acceleration, etc.). One of the successful examples from the medical field is the Eureka health research platform, which helps to collect data from mobile applications for many health-related studies with hundreds of thousands of volunteers worldwide [33]. The pandemic has made technology interaction more common, with consumer purchases of VR and AR headsets up more than 50% [34]; thus, this is an ideal time to consider innovative data collection and technology adoption in tourism.

4. Implications for Research and Practice

Using virtual tourism experience can contribute to tourism research in several ways. First, it will ensure ideal intangible experiences, which are hard to provide in real settings. It will also facilitate the objective measurement of the temporal dimensions of the tourism experience at different time points before, during, and after the virtual trip. Next, it will make possible the study of subjects in natural virtual environments, taking into account the levels of immersion and realism of virtual scenarios. Finally, it will help prevent self-report biases by observing the real behavior of tourists and collecting sensor and mobile-based psychophysiological responses. Virtual reality scenarios make it possible for investigators to design and test outcomes of different destination situations by placing peak experiences at different time points [35][36], segmenting visitors by sociodemographic and personality characteristics [37], and introducing the effects of different affective stimuli before, during, and after the visit [38]. The further development of virtual destinations might make it possible to test different pricing models, including pay-what-you-want strategies, which currently remain underexplored in tourism research [39]. In the case of virtual destinations, the online environment will not be a limitation of the research since people will behave in real, immersive destinations in a virtual experience, perceiving realism and subsequently becoming detached from the real-world environment[40]Mo.
Introducing virtual destinations will also have promising implications for destination marketing and management, tourism providers, and tourists. First, virtual destination scenarios can be used by governments and DMOs to pre-test new programs, policies, and marketing campaigns for existing and emerging destinations. Second, virtual destinations will help to control visitation to the overdeveloped destinations by providing opportunities to receive alternative virtual experiences. Next, virtual tourism will provide new business opportunities for tourism providers in challenging times as well as create new niches markets for distinct customer segments. Virtual destinations can provide opportunities for people who cannot visit the real destinations or vulnerable categories of people, including low-income categories, people with disabilities [8], or the elderly [41]. Lastly, virtual destinations will satisfy tourists’ need for travel experiences during crises, outbreaks, and potentially increase the resilience of travel destinations.
Virtual destinations will likewise bring important implications for the management of emerging, existing, and overdeveloped destinations, tourism businesses, and tourists. The COVID-19 pandemic creates opportunities for developing new tourism systems. The current period of time is ideal for inviting people to visit virtual destinations, which combine advantages of realism and immersion with opportunities to design new travel scenarios and apply different subjective and objective measures of the visitor experience [42]. One more promising direction of future interdisciplinary research in using virtual tourism experience is the exploration of important health [43], transformation [44][45], and wellbeing outcomes [46][47] of tourism activities. Modern mobile technologies make it possible to capture important indicators of positive feelings and health (e.g., cardiac vagal tone, electrodermal activity, and facial expressions), which can be used as proxies of tourists’ wellbeing as highly desirable outcomes post-COVID-19. Crises can provide a “transformative opportunity” for rethinking industry and academic work, driving change, and sparking paradigm shifts [48]. In this case, the pandemic has instructed that one way to move forward is to move to the virtual realm.

References

  1. Yung, R.; Khoo-Lattimore, C. New realities: A systematic literature review on virtual reality and augmented reality in tourism research. Curr. Issues Tour. 2019, 22, 2056–2081.
  2. Beck, J.; Egger, R. Emotionalise me: Self-reporting and arousal measurements in virtual tourism environments. In Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism; Stangl, B., Pesonen, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; pp. 3–15.
  3. Bafadhal, A.S.; Hendrawan, M.R. Exploring the Immersion and Telepresence in Gamified Virtual Tourism Experience toward Tourist’s Behaviour. In Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of Business and Public Administration (AICoBPA 2018), Malang, Indonesia, 28–29 November 2018; Atlantis Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 53–56.
  4. Bolter, J.D.; Grusin, R. Remediation: Understanding New Media; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1999.
  5. Berkman, M.I.; Akan, E. Presence and immersion in virtual reality. In Encyclopedia of Computer Graphics and Games; Lee, N., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019.
  6. McCreery, M.P.; Schrader, P.G.; Krach, S.K.; Boone, R. A sense of self: The role of presence in virtual environments. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2013, 29, 1635–1640.
  7. Godovykh, M.; Tasci, A.D. Customer experience in tourism: A review of definitions, components, and measurements. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2020, 35, 1–10.
  8. El-Said, O.; Aziz, H. Virtual tours a means to an end: An analysis of virtual tours’ role in tourism recovery post COVID-19. J. Travel Res. 2021, 61, 528–548.
  9. Tennent, P.; Martindale, S.; Benford, S.; Darzentas, D.; Brundell, P.; Collishaw, M. Thresholds: Embedding virtual reality in the museum. ACM J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 2020, 13, 12–35.
  10. Trunfio, M.; Lucia, M.D.; Campana, S.; Magnelli, A. Innovating the cultural heritage museum service model through virtual reality and augmented reality: The effects on the overall visitor experience and satisfaction. J. Herit. Tour. 2021, 17, 1–19.
  11. Monaco S.. Tourism, Safety and COVID-19 Security, Digitization and Tourist Behaviour; Routledge: New York, 2021; pp. 182.
  12. Tussyadiah, I.P.; Wang, D.; Jung, T.H.; tom Dieck, M.C. Virtual reality, presence, and attitude change: Empirical evidence from tourism. Tour. Manag. 2018, 66, 140–154.
  13. Rahim, N.Z.A.; Nasaruddin, N.I.S.; Shah, N.B.A.; Halim, F.H.; Samah, K.A.F.A.; Saman, F.I.; Rum, S.F.M. Aftermath of pandemic Covid-19 on tourism industry: A review on virtual tourism platform. In AIP Conference Proceedings; AIP Publishing LLC: Melville, NY, USA, 2021; Volume 2347, p. 020173.
  14. Huang, Y.C.; Backman, S.J.; Backman, K.F. Exploring the impacts of involvement and flow experiences in Second Life on people’s travel intentions. J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2012, 3, 4–23.
  15. Mascho, E.; Singh, N. Virtual tourism: Use of “second life” for destination marketing. Anatolia—Int. J. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2014, 25, 140–143.
  16. Martins, J.; Gonçalves, R.; Branco, F.; Barbosa, L.; Melo, M.; Bessa, M. A multisensory virtual experience model for thematic tourism: A Port wine tourism application proposal. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2017, 6, 103–109.
  17. Zheng, C.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Guo, Y. Does vivid imagination deter visitation? The role of mental imagery processing in virtual tourism on tourists’ behavior. J. Travel Res. 2021, 00472875211042671.
  18. Jung, T.H.; tom Dieck, M.C.; Lee, H.; Chung, N. Effects of virtual reality and augmented reality on visitor experiences in museums. In Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism; Inversini, A., Schegg, R., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 621–635.
  19. Deng, X.; Unnava, H.R.; Lee, H. “Too true to be good?” when virtual reality decreases interest in actual reality. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 100, 561–570.
  20. Cheong, R. The virtual threat to travel and tourism. Tour. Manag. 1995, 16, 417–422.
  21. Baudrillard, J. Simulacrum and Simulation; Glaser, S.F., Translator; University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1994.
  22. Turkle, S. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet; Simon & Schuster: New York, NY, USA, 1995.
  23. Hudson, S.; Matson-Barkat, S.; Pallamin, N.; Jegou, G. With or without you? Interaction and immersion in a virtual reality experience. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 100, 459–468.
  24. Flavián, C.; Ibáñez-Sánchez, S.; Orús, C. The impact of virtual, augmented and mixed reality technologies on the customer experience. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 100, 547–560.
  25. Bogicevic, V.; Seo, S.; Kandampully, J.A.; Liu, S.Q.; Rudd, N.A. Virtual reality presence as a preamble of tourism experience: The role of mental imagery. Tour. Manag. 2019, 74, 55–64.
  26. Di Franco, P.D.G.; Matthews, J.L.; Matlock, T. Framing the past: How virtual experience affects bodily description of artefacts. J. Cult. Herit. 2016, 17, 179–187.
  27. Baker, C. The use of themed entertainment design in museums and heritage sites. Mus. Rev. 2018, 3.
  28. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. Destination Culture: Tourism, Museums, and Heritage; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1998.
  29. Tjostheim, I.; Waterworth, J.A. Virtual tourism in a game environment: Untangling judged affordances and sense of place. In HCI in Games; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 202–217.
  30. Errichiello, L.; Micera, R.; Atzeni, M.; Del Chiappa, G. Exploring the implications of wearable virtual reality technology for museum visitors’ experience: A cluster analysis. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2019, 21, 590–605.
  31. Wagler, A.; Hanus, M.D. Comparing Virtual Reality Tourism to Real-Life Experience: Effects of Presence and Engagement on Attitude and Enjoyment. Commun. Res. Rep. 2018, 35, 456–464.
  32. Jung, T.H.; tom Dieck, M.C. Augmented reality, virtual reality and 3D printing for the co-creation of value for the visitor experience at cultural heritage places. J. Place Manag. Dev. 2017, 10, 140–151.
  33. Wolff-Hughes, D.L.; Conroy, R.; McClain, J.J.; Nilsen, W.J.; Riley, W.T. Building the infrastructure to accelerate evidence-generating mobile and wireless health research. Transl. Behav. Med. 2018, 8, 295–298.
  34. Vardomatski, S. Augmented and virtual reality after COVID-19. Forbes. 14 September 2021. Available online: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2021/09/14/augmented-and-virtual-reality-after-covid-19/?sh=bc07d852d97c (accessed on 22 February 2022).
  35. Do, A.M.; Rupert, A.V.; Wolford, G. Evaluations of pleasurable experiences: The peak-end rule. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2008, 15, 96–98.
  36. Godovykh, M.; Hahm, J.J. Does the sequence of presentations matter for academic conferences? An application of the peak-end rule in event management. J. Conv. Event Tour. 2020, 21, 201–224.
  37. Shabnam, S.; Quaddus, M.; Ali, M.; Shanka, T. Memorable Tourism Experience: Formative Conceptualization and tests of Socio-demographic Moderators. Tour. Anal. 2021.
  38. Godovykh, M.; Tasci, A.D. The influence of post-visit emotions on destination loyalty. Tour. Rev. 2020, 76, 277–288.
  39. Weisstein, F.L.; Kukar-Kinney, M.; Monroe, K.B. Determinants of consumers’ response to pay-what-you-want pricing strategy on the Internet. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 4313–4320.
  40. Monaco, S., Sacchi, G. Travelling the Metaverse: Potential Benefits and Main Challenges for Tourism Sectors and Research Applications. Sustainability 2023, 15, 3348, https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043348.
  41. Tom Dieck, M.C.; Jung, T.; Michopoulou, E. Experiencing virtual reality in heritage attractions: Perceptions of elderly visitors. In Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality: The Power of AR and VR for Business; tom Dieck, M.C., Jung, T., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 89–98.
  42. Godovykh, M.; Tasci, A.D. Satisfaction vs. experienced utility: Current issues and opportunities. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 2273–2282.
  43. Godovykh, M.; Ridderstaat, J. Health outcomes of tourism development: A longitudinal study of the impact of tourism arrivals on residents’ health. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2020, 17, 1–10.
  44. Tasci, A.D.; Godovykh, M. An empirical modeling of transformation process through trip experiences. Tour. Manag. 2021, 86, 104332.
  45. Sheldon, P.J. Designing tourism experiences for inner transformation. Ann. Tour. Res. 2020, 83, 102935.
  46. Godovykh, M.; Ridderstaat, J.; Fyall, A. The well-being impacts of tourism: Long-term and short-term effects of tourism development on residents’ happiness. Tour. Econ. 2021, 13548166211041227.
  47. Pyke, S.; Hartwell, H.; Blake, A.; Hemingway, A. Exploring well-being as a tourism product resource. Tour. Manag. 2016, 55, 94–105.
  48. Sigala, M. Tourism and COVID-19: Impacts and implications for advancing and resetting industry and research. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 117, 312–321.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Virtual Reality in Tourism
Information
Subjects: Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Maksim Godovykh
,
Salvatore Monaco
View Times: 825
Revisions: 3 times (View History)
Update Date: 11 Mar 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Feedback