Impact of Virtual Reality on Tourism: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 1 by Chourouk OUERGHEMMI and Version 2 by Lindsay Dong.

As an advanced technology, virtual reality (VR) could contribute substantially to the tourism industry, but differently than existing technologies. In fact, VR creates artificial environments like the real world, which are thus immersive virtual environments that are also more realistic. These features might foster attraction and engagement from additional tourists and improve their perceptions of different destinations [21,23] (e.g., theme parks, cultural heritage centers, or museums).

  • virtual reality
  • Tourism
  • VR
  • virtual tourism experience

1. Introduction

In recent years, the tourism sector has been interested in immersive virtual reality (VR) experiences [1] to promote tourism products. Indeed, the integration of VR in this sector allows the user to dive into a virtual environment and offer the potential tourist a glimpse of his future trip through a virtual tour. The latter allows individuals to see and thus appreciate products before buying them [2] and future tourists to visit the destination remotely [3]. This enriches tourism experiences [4] and consequently influences the intention to visit the destination [5][6]. Similarly, Buhalis and Law [7] have pointed out that customer behavior in the tourism sector is impacted by new communication technologies because, first, they facilitate tourists’ access to multiple experiences [8]. Second, they have changed the way tourism experiences are created [9], such as VR, which allows travel agencies to differentiate themselves from others by providing customers with a unique, satisfying, and pleasant virtual tour experience of a specific destination.
To promote the sale of a tourist product characterized by intangibility and immateriality, the utilization of mental imagery is pivotal. This practice affects memorization [10][11], individuals’ emotional and cognitive responses, such as attitudes towards the product, brand, and advertisements [12][13], as well as information seeking intention [14]. Mental imagery, or imagery, is «a processing mode in which multisensory information is represented in a gestalt form in working memory» [15] (p. 473). The more realistic the elaborated mental images are, the more the sense of presence is reinforced [16]. This heightened sense of presence from a remote place, in turn, might generate enjoyable experiences that encourage individuals to travel more.
Communication technologies, particularly those underpinned by the internet (e.g., chat rooms, online communities, videos, virtual realities), enable the creation of this sense of presence. In fact, it is well known that tourism behavior is impacted by these technologies as they facilitate tourists’ access to destination experiments [7][16] and alter the way of creating tourism experiences by offering customers a unique virtual tour experience of a specific destination [8]. Consequently, in addition to e-tourism, the tourism sector has developed marked interest in immersive VR experiences [9] to stimulate prospective tourists’ mental imagery and foster positive attitudes towards a tourist destination.
VR can be defined in terms of telepresence as “a real or simulated environment in which a perceiver experiences telepresence”[17] (p. 76). Hence, VR is not only related to technological devices, but it is also interested in the perceptions of users[17]. In sum, VR can be defined as the set of devices using a computer with the aim of simulating a real environment in which the user is placed in an interactive and immersive experience where the simulation of the senses (e.g., vision, hearing, touch) allows him to interact with the world simulated in 3D.

2. Impact of Virtual Reality on Tourism

VR allows tourists to experience the atmosphere of the destination before the actual visit and to increase their visit intentions [18][19] thanks to a direct virtual experience, allowing tourists to visit destinations of interest, facilitate decision-making [20], and choose the destination that most satisfies their needs. Thus, Jung et al. [21] and Moura et al. [22] found that a well-groomed VR experience leads to stronger visit intentions compared to other means of communication. Indeed, this intention is explained by the potential of the feeling of telepresence, which can arouse the pleasure of customers and influence their intentions to visit [6][23].
In addition, Huang et al. [24] analyzed the effect of flow experiences on travel intention and found that virtual tours encourage customers to seek more information and positively influence the intention to visit the chosen destination. In another study, Huang et al. [25] indicate that hedonic experience, ease, and perceived usefulness positively influence tourists’ behavioral intentions. Similarly, Prayag et al. [26] pointed out that emotional experiences motivate customers to visit the destination. In a subsequent study, Huang et al. [27] found that navigation on a 3D tourist site generates substantial autonomy that positively influences the joy experience and increases visit intentions.
Thus, the researchers [28] found that several factors can influence spatial presence during a VR tour of a tourist destination, such as the conformity of images stored with those presented in VR and external constraints preventing total immersion in the destination. So virtual visits must be improved by offering creative and pleasant representations of the destination to generate positive emotions. Jung et al.[21] agree with these researchers, indicating that the VR experience increases the intention to revisit if the content provides aesthetically pleasing images.
Tussyadiah et al. [5][6] used the sense of being in a virtual world and spatial presence to study how VR can influence attitudes and decision-making. They found that the attention given by individuals to VR environments contributes to spatial presence and that the latter positively influences the changing of post-VR attitudes towards the tourist destination. Studies have also revealed that VR increases the sense of presence in the tourist location, which in turn leads to stronger interest in the destination. This is also what Griffin et al. [29] showed through their comparative study of the effects of VR, 2D video, and websites on the emotional state of tourists. This research revealed that VR generates a feeling of presence in the destination and that, compared to 2D videos and websites, VR positively influences the intention to visit, search for, and share additional information. This technology also makes it possible to offer an immersive experience to customers [27][28][29][30], based on pleasure and sharing [31][32], with the aim of generating positive emotions towards the destination [29] and engaging tourists. Similarly, Moura et al. [22] pointed out that VR leads to higher travel intentions compared to brochures and websites. Yeh et al. [18] also found that VR (vs. 2D images) can attract tourists to the destination and motivate them to visit it. At the same time, Cowan and Ketron [33] have shown that, in a VR environment, the individual benefits from a unique and incontrollable experience compared to 2D environments.
Jung et al. [34] conducted a case study of the virtual discovery of a Lake District National Park via a VR headset. The results indicate that an immersive virtual experience positively influences the intention to visit the destination and increases the engagement of tourists. In the same context, Wei et al. [23] concluded that the sense of presence in VR positively affects the experience and the intention to recommend the park theme. This result aligns with the recommendations by Tussyadiah et al. [28].
Moreover, Marasco et al. [35] examined the impact of a VR experience on the intention to visit a cultural heritage destination. They showed that there is a positive relationship between the perceived visual appeal of VR and the intention to visit and recommend the destination. This means that videos with positive images generate positive emotions, creating the desire to visit the destination [36]. Pasanen et al. [37] studied the effect of viewing a 360-degree tourist video while using a tablet and wearing VR glasses on the behavioral intentions of individuals. Their study showed that the tourist video viewing experience depends on the device used, and the tablet and VR glasses have the same effect on behavioral intentions. From these studies, it can deduce, first, that VR video content is quite important because it influences the attitudes and behavioral intentions of potential tourists [38][39] and creates emotional involvement [6]. This was also revealed by Chen and Chang [40] in their article. Indeed, they pointed out that 360-degree video and VR content help eliminate purchasing constraints and reduce disappointing experiences when making travel decisions. Second, VR hardware must be more efficient [29] to provide a more immersive [30], authentic [41], pleasant, and entertaining experience for customers [20].

3. New Pprogress

Recently, a study by Ouerghemmi et al. [42] explored the concept of telepresence as a key underlying mechanism in the influence of VR on destination travel intent. The study explored the dimensionalities of that construct and examined the mediating effect of mental imagery and attitude towards the tourist destination as explanators of the influence of telepresence on travel intent. Using, the Tunisian tourism market as a study case, a multi-method, abductive-based research highlighted that, telepresence is a second-order construct comprised of three dimensions: 1) the realism of the virtual environment; 2) the sense of presence in the virtual environment; and 3) immersion. Besides, telepresence has a significant and positive effect on the two key identified aspects of visitor experience: mental imagery and attitude towards the tourist destination (p. 17). It should also be noted that positive mental images and favorable attitudes towards the tourist destination increase actual visit intention (p. 17). However, both constructs only partially mediate the influence of telepresence on travel intent since telepresence significantly increases the actual visit intention of potential tourists. This study contributes meaningfully to extant research by highlighting the mediating role of mental imagery and attitude towards the tourist destination in the relationship between telepresence and actual visit intention (p. 18). These results reshape our views and strengthen our understanding of the mechanisms underlying the impact of VR on tourist behavior, highlighting the importance of these factors for the virtual tourism industry.

References

  1. Guojun Zeng; Xinning Cao; Zhibin Lin; Sarah H. Xiao; When online reviews meet virtual reality: Effects on consumer hotel booking. Ann. Tour. Res. 2020, 81, 102-860.
  2. Yeoryios Stamboulis; Pantoleon Skayannis; Innovation strategies and technology for experience-based tourism. Tour. Manag. 2003, 24, 35-43.
  3. Barbara Neuhofer; Dimitrios Buhalis; Adele Ladkin; A Typology of Technology‐Enhanced Tourism Experiences. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2014, 16, 340-350.
  4. Paolo Mura; Rokhshad Tavakoli; Saeed Pahlevan Sharif; ‘Authentic but not too much’: exploring perceptions of authenticity of virtual tourism. Inf. Technol. Tour. 2017, 17, 145-159.
  5. Iis P. Tussyadiah; Dan Wang; Chenge (Helen) Jia. Virtual Reality and Attitudes Toward Tourism Destinations; Springer Science and Business Media LLC: Dordrecht, GX, Netherlands, 2017; pp. 229-239.
  6. Iis P. Tussyadiah; Dan Wang; Timothy H. Jung; M.Claudia Tom Dieck; Virtual reality, presence, and attitude change: Empirical evidence from tourism. Tour. Manag. 2018, 66, 140-154.
  7. Dimitrios Buhalis; Rob Law; Progress in information technology and tourism management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet—The state of eTourism research. Tour. Manag. 2008, 29, 609-623.
  8. Iis P. Tussyadiah; Toward a Theoretical Foundation for Experience Design in Tourism. J. Travel Res. 2014, 53, 543-564.
  9. Barbara Neuhofer; Dimitrios Buhalis; Adele Ladkin; Conceptualising technology enhanced destination experiences. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2012, 1, 36-46.
  10. Bellezza, F.S. Apel, M.B. Hatala, M.H. The effects of imagery and pleasantness on recalling brand names. J. Ment. Imag.-N. Y.-Int. Imag. Assoc. 2021, 25, 47-62.
  11. Ann E. Schlosser; Learning through Virtual Product Experience: The Role of Imagery on True versus False Memories. J. Consum. Res. 2006, 33, 377-383.
  12. Jennifer Edson Escalas; IMAGINE YOURSELF IN THE PRODUCT : Mental Simulation, Narrative Transportation, and Persuasion. J. Advert. 2004, 33, 37-48.
  13. Jungmin Yoo; Minjeong Kim; The effects of online product presentation on consumer responses: A mental imagery perspective. J. Bus. Res. 2014, 67, 2464-2472.
  14. Laurie Balbo; Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret; Effets du cadrage du message sur les intentions en faveur du frottis : une modération par l’objectif du comportement recommandé, médiatisée par la valence de l’imagerie mentale. Rech. et Appl. en Mark. (French Ed. 2015, 30, 7-34.
  15. Deborah J. MacInnis; Linda L. Price; The Role of Imagery in Information Processing: Review and Extensions. J. Consum. Res. 1987, 13, 473-491.
  16. Lao, A. Martin, A. Jeanpert, S. Stimulation de la présence et des états affectifs par l’imagerie mentale. Une application aux visites en 3D versus 2D. Téoros. Rev. Rech. Tour. 2019, 38, 1-23.
  17. Jonathan Steuer; Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. J. Commun. 1992, 42, 73-93.
  18. Ching-Hsuan Yeh; Yi-Shun Wang; Hsien-Ta Li; Shuo-Yan Lin; The effect of information presentation modes on tourists’ responses in Internet marketing: the moderating role of emotions. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2017, 34, 1018-1032.
  19. Lee, H. Jung, T.H. tom Dieck, M.C. Chung, N. Experiencing immersive virtual reality in museums. Inf. Manag. J. 2020, 57, 103-229.
  20. Roger Cheong; The virtual threat to travel and tourism. Tour. Manag. 1995, 16, 417-422.
  21. Timothy Jung; M. Claudia Tom Dieck; Hyunae Lee; Namho Chung. Effects of Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality on Visitor Experiences in Museum; Springer Science and Business Media LLC: Dordrecht, GX, Netherlands, 2016; pp. 621-635.
  22. Moura, F.T. Nobis, C. Filho, S.C.. Virtual reality and the decision making process of German senior travelers: A cross-media comparison; Department of Tourism, University of Otago: Dunedin, New Zealand, 2017; pp. 619-622.
  23. Wei, W. Qi, R. Zhang, L. Effects of virtual reality on theme park visitors’ experience and behaviors: A presence perspective. Tour. Manag. 2019, 71, 282-293.
  24. 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.
  25. Yu-Chih Huang; Sheila J. Backman; Kenneth F. Backman; DeWayne Moore; Exploring user acceptance of 3D virtual worlds in travel and tourism marketing. Tour. Manag. 2013, 36, 490-501.
  26. Prayag, G.; Hosany, S.; Odeh, K. The role of tourists’ emotional experiences and satisfaction in understanding behavioral intentions.. JDMM 2023, 2, 118-127.
  27. Yu Chih Huang; Kenneth Frank Backman; Sheila J. Backman; Lan Lan Chang; Exploring the Implications of Virtual Reality Technology in Tourism Marketing: An Integrated Research Framework. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2016, 18, 116-128.
  28. Tussyadiah, I.P.; Wang, D.; Jia, C.H. Exploring the persuasive power of virtual reality imagery for destination marketing. TTRA Adv. Tour. Res. Glob. 2016, 25, 1-8.
  29. Griffin, T.; Giberson, J.; Lee, S.H.M.; Guttentag, D.; Kandaurova, M.; Sergueeva, K.; Dimanche, F. Virtual reality and implications for destination marketing. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual TTRA 2017, Quebec City, QC, Canada, 20–22 June 2017.
  30. Carlos Flavián; Sergio Ibáñez-Sánchez; Carlos Orús; Integrating virtual reality devices into the body: effects of technological embodiment on customer engagement and behavioral intentions toward the destination. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2019, 36, 847-863.
  31. Timothy Jung; Namho Chung; M. Claudia Leue; The determinants of recommendations to use augmented reality technologies: The case of a Korean theme park. Tour. Manag. 2015, 49, 75-86.
  32. Philipp A. Rauschnabel; Young K. Ro; Augmented reality smart glasses: an investigation of technology acceptance drivers. Int. J. Technol. Mark. 2016, 11, 123-148.
  33. Kirsten Cowan; Seth Ketron; A dual model of product involvement for effective virtual reality: The roles of imagination, co-creation, telepresence, and interactivity. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 100, 483-492.
  34. Timothy Hyungsoo Jung; M. Claudia Tom Dieck; 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.
  35. Alessandra Marasco; Piera Buonincontri; Mathilda van Niekerk; Marissa Orlowski; Fevzi Okumus; Exploring the role of next-generation virtual technologies in destination marketing. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2018, 9, 138-148.
  36. Teixeira, J.E.M. The role of promotional touristic videos in the creation of visit intent to Barcelona. Int. J. Sci. Manag. Tour 2017, 3, 463-490.
  37. Katja Pasanen; Juho Pesonen; Jamie Murphy; Johanna Heinonen; Jenni Mikkonen. Comparing Tablet and Virtual Reality Glasses for Watching Nature Tourism Videos; Springer Science and Business Media LLC: Dordrecht, GX, Netherlands, 2018; pp. 120-131.
  38. Tianyi Gong; Vincent Wing Sun Tung; The impact of tourism mini-movies on destination image: The influence of travel motivation and advertising disclosure. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2017, 34, 416-428.
  39. Daniel Leung; Astrid Dickinger; Lyndon Nixon. Impact of Destination Promotion Videos on Perceived Destination Image and Booking Intention Change; Springer Science and Business Media LLC: Dordrecht, GX, Netherlands, 2017; pp. 361-375.
  40. Chia-Chen Chen; Ya-Ching Chang; What drives purchase intention on Airbnb? Perspectives of consumer reviews, information quality, and media richness. Telematics Informatics 2018, 35, 1512-1523.
  41. Kim, M.J.; Lee, C.K.; Jung, T. Exploring consumer behavior in virtual reality tourism using an extended stimulus-organismresponse model. J. Travel. Res. 2020, 59, 69-89.
  42. Chourouk Ouerghemmi; Myriam Ertz; Néji Bouslama; Urvashi Tandon; The Impact of Virtual Reality (VR) Tour Experience on Tourists’ Intention to Visit. Inf. 2023, 14, 546.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Video Production Service
Feedback