Immersed in Art: The Impact of Affinity for Technology Interaction and Hedonic Motivation on Aesthetic Experiences in Virtual Reality

Abstract

Viewing artworks through virtual reality (VR) offers a unique experience, yet understanding how individual traits and motivations affect this process requires further exploration. In this study, we empirically examined the factors influencing aesthetic experiences when viewing artworks in VR. We conducted two experiments using a between-subjects design with VR and 2D videos based on a virtual tour of the Sydney Opera House and an artistic interpretation of Vincent van Gogh's paintings as stimuli. Our moderated mediation analyses identified two pathways through which VR influences aesthetic experiences: a cognitive pathway and an affective pathway. The cognitive pathway reveals that VR enhances the sense of agency and immersion, enriching the aesthetic experience for individuals with a high affinity for technology. The affective pathway shows that VR increases narrative transportation and immersion, enhancing the aesthetic experience particularly for those with strong hedonic motivations.

Keywords

virtual reality aesthetic experience immersion affinity for technology interaction hedonic motivation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alsaad

(2023). The dual effect of anthropomorphism on customers’ decisions to use artificial intelligence devices in hotel services. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 32(8), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2023.2223584 .

Youn

(2018). The inspirational power of arts on creativity. Journal of Business Research, 85, 467–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.025

Antonietti

Cantoia

(2000). To see a painting versus to walk in a painting: An experiment on sense-making through virtual reality. Computers & Education, 34(3-4), 213–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00046-9

Appel

Richter

(2010). Transportation and need for affect in narrative persuasion: A mediated moderation model. Media Psychology, 13(2), 101–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213261003799847

Bagher

M. M.

Sajjadi

Wallgrün

J. O.

La Femina

P. C.

Klippel

(2021). Move the object or move the user: The role of interaction techniques on embodied learning in VR. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 2, 695312. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2021.695312

Baudrillard

(1994). Simulacra and simulation. University of Michigan Press.

Benjamin

. (1969). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. In Arendt

(Ed.), Illuminations ( Zohn

, Trans., pp. 217–252). Schocken Books. (Original work published 1935).

Berg

L. P.

Vance

J. M.

(2017). Industry use of virtual reality in product design and manufacturing: A survey. Virtual Reality, 21(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-016-0293-9

Berlyne

D. E.

(1974). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Hemisphere.

10.

Biocca

(1997). The cyborg’s dilemma: Progressive embodiment in virtual environments. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2), JCMC324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00070.x

11.

Blanke

Metzinger

(2009). Full-body illusions and minimal phenomenal selfhood. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.10.003

12.

Bloem

B. R.

Pfeijffer

I. L.

Krack

(2018). Art for better health and wellbeing. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 363, k5353. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k5353

13.

Bloom

L. B.

(2020, April 27). Ranked: The world’s 15 best virtual tours to take during coronavirus. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabegleybloom/2020/04/27/ranked-worlds-15-best-virtual-tours-coronavirus/?sh=3caf0caf6709

14.

Bohra

(2023, April 14). As presenters cut back on streams, some disabled arts lovers feel left out. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/14/arts/disabled-people-streaming-performances.html

15.

Bolter

J. D.

MacIntyre

Gandy

Schweitzer

(2006). New media and the permanent crisis of aura. Convergence, 12(1), 21–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856506061550

16.

Bowman

D. A.

McMahan

R. P.

(2007). Virtual reality: How much immersion is enough? Computer, 40(7), 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2007.257

17.

Brinck

(2018). Empathy, engagement, entrainment: The interaction dynamics of aesthetic experience. Cognitive Processing, 19(2), 201–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-017-0805-x

18.

Brown

S. A.

Venkatesh

(2005). Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 399–426. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148690

19.

Bruner

G. C.

II Kumar

(2005). Explaining consumer acceptance of handheld internet devices. Journal of Business Research, 58(5), 553–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2003.08.002

20.

Burrows

C. N.

Blanton

(2016). Real-world persuasion from virtual-world campaigns: How transportation into virtual worlds moderates in-game influence. Communication Research, 43(4), 542–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215619215

21.

Cacioppo

J. T.

Petty

R. E.

(1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116–131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116

22.

Chang

Kim

H. T.

Yoo

(2020). Virtual reality sickness: A review of causes and measurements. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(17), 1658–1682. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1778351

23.

Cheiran

J. F. P.

Rodrigues

Pimenta

M. S.

(2021). Virtual look around: Comparing presence, cybersickness and usability for virtual tours across different devices. Journal on Interactive Systems, 12(1), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.5753/jis.2021.2063

24.

Choi

Yoon

Y. J.

Song

O. Y.

Choi

S. M.

(2018). Interactive and immersive learning using 360 virtual reality contents on mobile platforms. Mobile Information Systems, 2018(1), 2306031. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/2306031 .

25.

Cohen

A. R.

Stotland

Wolfe

D. M.

(1955). An experimental investigation of need for cognition. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(2), 291–294. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042761

26.

Csikszentmihalyi

(1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper and Row.

27.

Csikszentmihalyi

Abuhamdeh

Nakamura

(2014). Flow. In Flow and the foundations of positive psychology: The collected works of mihaly csikszentmihalyi (pp. 227–238). Springer.

28.

Csikszentmihalyi

Robinson

R. E.

(1990). The art of seeing: An interpretation of the aesthetic encounter. Getty Publications.

29.

Damasio

A. R.

(1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. Grosset/Putnam.

30.

David

Newen

Vogeley

(2008). The “sense of agency” and its underlying cognitive and neural mechanisms. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(2), 523–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2008.03.004

31.

Davis

F. D.

(1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

32.

Davis

F. D.

Bagozzi

R. P.

Warshaw

P. R.

(1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x

33.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(1980). The empirical exploration of intrinsic motivational processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 39–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60130-6

34.

De Luca

Gatto

Liaci

Corchia

Chiarello

Faggiano

Sumerano

De Paolis

L. T.

(2023). Virtual reality and spatial augmented reality for social inclusion: The “includiamoci” project. Information, 14(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14010038

35.

Deng

Unnava

H. R.

Lee

(2019). “Too true to be good?” when virtual reality decreases interest in actual reality. Journal of Business Research, 100, 561–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.008

36.

Dooley

(2017). Storytelling with virtual reality in 360-degrees: A new screen grammar. Studies in Australasian Cinema, 11(3), 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/17503175.2017.1387357

37.

Elsaesser

(2014). Pushing the contradictions of the digital: ‘virtual reality’ and ‘interactive narrative’ as oxymorons between narrative and gaming. New Review of Film and Television Studies, 12(3), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/17400309.2014.927182

38.

Escalas

J. E.

(2004a). Imagine yourself in the product: Mental simulation, narrative transportation, and persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 33(2), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2004.10639163

39.

Escalas

J. E.

(2004b). Narrative processing: Building consumer connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1-2), 168–180. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_19

40.

Escalas

J. E.

(2007). Self-Referencing and persuasion: Narrative transportation versus analytical elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(4), 421–429. https://doi.org/10.1086/510216

41.

Etlin

(1998). Aesthetics and the spatial sense of self. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 56(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/431943

42.

Farago

(2020, April 23). Now virtual and in video, museum websites shake off the dust. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/arts/design/best-virtual-museum-guides.html?auth=linked-google

43.

Farshid

Paschen

Eriksson

Kietzmann

(2018). Go boldly!: Explore augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and mixed reality (MR) for business. Business Horizons, 61(5), 657–663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.05.009

44.

Feinstein

(April 8, 2020). ‘Beginning of a new era': how culture went virtual in the face of crisis. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2020/apr/08/art-virtual-reality-coronavirus-vr

45.

Franck

Farrer

Georgieff

Marie-Cardine

Daléry

d’Amato

Jeannerod

(2001). Defective recognition of one’s own actions in patients with schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158(3), 454–459. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.158.3.454

46.

Franke

Attig

Wessel

(2019). A personal resource for technology interaction: Development and validation of the affinity for technology interaction (ATI) scale. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35(6), 456–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150

47.

Freedberg

Gallese

(2007). Motion, emotion and empathy in esthetic experience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(5), 197–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.02.003

48.

Galeazzi

(2018). 3-D Virtual replicas and simulations of the past: “real” or “fake” representations? Current Anthropology, 59(3), 268–286. https://doi.org/10.1086/697489

49.

Gallagher

(2000). Philosophical conceptions of the self: Implications for cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01417-5

50.

Gallese

(2017a). Mirroring, a liberated embodied simulation and aesthetic experience. In Mirror images. Reflections in art and medicine (pp. 27–37). Verlag für moderne Kunst.

51.

Gallese

(2017b). Visions of the body: Embodied simulation and aesthetic experience. Aisthesis, 1(1), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.13128/Aisthesis-20902

52.

Garzotto

Matarazzo

Messina

Gelsomini

Riva

(2018). Improving museum accessibility through storytelling in wearable immersive virtual reality. In 2018 3rd Digital Heritage International Congress (DigitalHERITAGE) held jointly with 2018 24th International Conference on Virtual Systems & Multimedia (VSMM 2018) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2018.8810097

53.

Geng

Peng

(2016). Three aesthetic dimensions of virtual reality from the perspective of Heidegger. Journal of Dalian University of Technology (Social Sciences), 2, 21.

54.

Giannini

Bowen

J. P.

(2022). Museums and digital culture: From reality to digitality in the age of COVID-19. Heritage, 5(1), 192–214. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage5010011

55.

Gotthardt

K. A.

Rakoczy

Tallon

Seitz

Frick

(2023). Can virtual art touch your heart?—the impact of virtual reality art on affect considering individual characteristics and aesthetic experiences. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 02762374231221920. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374231221

56.

Green

M. C.

Brock

T. C.

(2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701–721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701

57.

Green

M. C.

Brock

T. C.

Kaufman

G. F.

(2004). Understanding media enjoyment: The role of transportation into narrative worlds. Communication Theory, 14(4), 311–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00317.x

58.

Green

M. C.

Chatham

Sestir

M. A.

(2012). Emotion and transportation into fact and fiction. Scientific Study of Literature, 2(1), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.2.1.03gre

59.

Grishin

(June 13, 2022). Review: Connection: Songlines from Australia's First Peoples is an immersive experience. The Canberra Times. https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7771648/experiencing-indigenous-art-in-a-multi-sensory-way/

60.

Hamby

Brinberg

Jaccard

(2018). A conceptual framework of narrative persuasion. Journal of Media Psychology, 30(3), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000187

61.

Hayes

A. F.

(2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.

62.

X. R.

(2018). When art meets tech: The role of augmented reality in enhancing museum experiences and purchase intentions. Tourism Management, 68, 127–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.03.003

63.

Heim

(1993). The essence of VR. In The metaphysics of virtual reality (pp. 109–128). Oxford University Press.

64.

Herz

M. F.

Diamantopoulos

(2013). Activation of country stereotypes: Automaticity, consonance, and impact. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41(4), 400–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-012-0318-1

65.

Holbrook

M. B.

Zirlin

R. B.

(1985). Artistic creation, artworks, and aesthetic appreciation: Some philosophical contributions to nonprofit marketing. Advances in Nonprofit Marketing, 1(1), 1–54.

66.

E. B.

(2020, Jun 14). Performing arts scene gears up for post-coronavirus era. The Korea Herald. http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20200614000228

67.

Jennett

Cox

A. L.

Cairns

Dhoparee

Epps

Tijs

Walton

(2008). Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(9), 641–661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.04.004

68.

Jeunet

Albert

Argelaguet

Lécuyer

(2018). “Do you feel in control?”: Towards novel approaches to characterise, manipulate and measure the sense of agency in virtual environments. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 24(4), 1486–1495. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2018.2794598

69.

Kalckert

Ehrsson

H. H.

(2012). Moving a rubber hand that feels like your own: A dissociation of ownership and agency. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00040

70.

Kang

H. J.

Shin

J. H.

Ponto

(2020). How 3D virtual reality stores can shape consumer purchase decisions: The roles of informativeness and playfulness. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 49(1), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2019.07.002

71.

Kari

Kosa

(2023). Acceptance and use of virtual reality games: An extension of HMSAM. Virtual Reality, 27(3), 1585–1605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-023-00749-4

72.

Kilteni

Groten

Slater

(2012). The sense of embodiment in virtual reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 21(4), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1162/PRES_a_00124

73.

Kim

Lee

(2022). Falling in love with virtual reality art: A new perspective on 3D immersive virtual reality for future sustaining art consumption. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 38(4), 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1944534

74.

Kim

Ratneshwar

Thorson

(2017). Why narrative ads work: An integrated process explanation. Journal of Advertising, 46(2), 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2016.1268984

75.

Klein

L. R.

(2003). Creating virtual product experiences: The role of telepresence. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 17(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.10046

76.

Kojić

Spang

Vergari

Meier

Möller

Voigt-Antons

J. N.

(2023). Effects of user factors on user experience in virtual reality: Age, gender, and VR experience as influencing factors for VR exergames. Quality and User Experience, 8(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41233-023-00056-5

77.

Koksal

Darrat

James

(2022). Online donation behavior in nonprofit organizations: The role of congruent processing styles. Journal of Philanthropy and Marketing, 27(1), e1708. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.1708

78.

Koss

(2006). On the limits of empathy. The Art Bulletin, 88(1), 139–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043079.2006.10786282

79.

Kristeller

P. O.

(1952). The modern system of the arts: A study in the history of aesthetics (II). Journal of the History of Ideas, 13(1), 17–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/2707724

80.

Kuo

Y. T.

Garcia Bravo

Whittinghill

D. M.

Kuo

Y. C.

(2023). Walking into a modern painting: The impacts of using virtual reality on student learning performance and experiences in art appreciation. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2278929

81.

Kyndrup

(2016). Modernism and “aesthetic experience”: Art, aesthetics–and the role of modernism. The Nordic Journal of Aesthetics, 25(51), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.7146/nja.v25i51.25153

82.

LaValle

S. M.

(2023). Virtual reality. Cambridge University Press.

83.

Lee

K. M.

(2004). Presence, explicated. Communication Theory, 14(1), 27–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00302.x

84.

Lee

M. K.

Cheung

C. M.

Chen

(2005). Acceptance of internet-based learning medium: The role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Information & Management, 42(8), 1095–1104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.10.007

85.

Lee

Jung

T. H.

tom Dieck

M. C.

Chung

(2020). Experiencing immersive virtual reality in museums. Information & Management, 57(5), 103229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.103229

86.

Lee

S. H.

Sergueeva

Catangui

Kandaurova

(2017). Assessing google cardboard virtual reality as a content delivery system in business classrooms. Journal of Education for Business, 92(4), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2017.1308308

87.

Lim

Childs

(2020). Visual storytelling on Instagram: Branded photo narrative and the role of telepresence. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 14(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIM-09-2018-0115

88.

W. T.

R. H.

(2001). Cybersickness in the presence of scene rotational movements along different axes. Applied Ergonomics, 32(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-6870(00)00059-4

89.

Lombart

Millan

Normand

J. M.

Verhulst

Labbé-Pinlon

Moreau

(2020). Effects of physical, non- immersive virtual, and immersive virtual store environments on consumers’ perceptions and purchase behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 110, 106374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106374

90.

Magnusson

Westjohn

S. A.

Sirianni

N. J.

(2019). Beyond country image favorability: How brand positioning via country personality stereotypes enhances brand evaluations. Journal of International Business Studies, 50, 318–338. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-018-0175-3

91.

Maheswaran

(1994). Country of origin as a stereotype: Effects of consumer expertise and attribute strength on product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2), 354–365. https://doi.org/10.1086/209403

92.

Makin

T. R.

Holmes

N. P.

Ehrsson

H. H.

(2008). On the other hand: Dummy hands and peripersonal space. Behavioural Brain Research, 191(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2008.02.041

93.

Manis

K. T.

Choi

(2019). The virtual reality hardware acceptance model (VR-HAM): Extending and individuating the technology acceptance model (TAM) for virtual reality hardware. Journal of Business Research, 100, 503–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.021

94.

Mark

L. A.

(2022, February 8). An art historian’s take on ‘Beyond Van Gogh: The immersive experience’. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/loisaltermark/2022/02/18/an-art-historians-take-on-beyond-van-gogh-the-immersive-experience/?sh=7f8e80e37706

95.

Matthen

(2017). The pleasure of art. Australasian Philosophical Review, 1(1), 6–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/24740500.2017.1287034

96.

Meehan

Insko

Whitton

Brooks Jr

F. P.

(2002). Physiological measures of presence in stressful virtual environments. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 21(3), 645–652. https://doi.org/10.1145/566654.566630

97.

Meyer

O. A.

Omdahl

M. K.

Makransky

(2019). Investigating the effect of pre-training when learning through immersive virtual reality and video: A media and methods experiment. Computers & Education, 140, 103603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103603

98.

Mikropoulos

T. A.

Strouboulis

(2004). Factors that influence presence in educational virtual environments. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(5), 582–591. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2004.7.582

99.

Moon

J. W.

Kim

Y. G.

(2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information & Management, 38(4), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(00)00061-6

100.

Moreira

G. J.

Luna-Nevarez

McGovern

(2022). It’s about enjoying the virtual experience: The role of enjoyment and engagement in the adoption of virtual reality in marketing education. Marketing Education Review, 32(3), 224–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2021.1965486

101.

Murray

J. H.

(2017). Hamlet on the holodeck, updated edition: The future of narrative in cyberspace. MIT Press.

102.

Nikulina

van Riel

A. C. R.

Lemmink

J. G. A. M.

Grewal

Wetzels

(2024). Narrate, act, and resonate to tell a visual story: A systematic review of how images transport viewers. Journal of Advertising, 53(4), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2024.2309921 .

103.

Onderdijk

K. E.

Bouckaert

Van Dyck

Maes

P. J.

(2023). Concert experiences in virtual reality environments. Virtual Reality, 27(3), 2383–2396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-023-00814-y

104.

Pantano

Corvello

(2014). Tourists’ acceptance of advanced technology-based innovations for promoting arts and culture. International Journal of Technology Management, 64(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2014.059232

105.

Petty

R. E.

Cacioppo

J. T.

(1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Berkowitz

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2.

106.

Raffel

(2018). Narrative transportation and virtual reality: Exploring the immersive qualities of social justice in the digital world. Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 5800. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/5800 .

107.

Ramic-Brkic

Chalmers

(2010, June). Virtual smell: Authentic smell diffusion in virtual environments. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer Graphics, Virtual Reality, Visualisation and Interaction in Africa, (pp. 45–52). https://doi.org/10.1145/1811158.1811166

108.

Richardson

(2023, June 5). Virtual reality is a big trend in museums, but what are the best examples of museums using VR? MuseumNext. https://www.museumnext.com/article/how-museums-are-using-virtual-reality/

109.

Ricoeur

(1991). Life in quest of narrative. In Wood

(Ed.), On Paul Ricoeur: Narrative and interpretation (pp. 20–33). Routledge.

110.

Riva

Wiederhold

B. K.

Mantovani

(2019). Neuroscience of virtual reality: From virtual exposure to embodied medicine. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 22(1), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2017.29099.gri

111.

Rodero

Rodríguez-de-Dios

(2024). The 3D sound power of immersion processing and psychophysiological effects of binaural versus stereo audio stories. Media Psychology, 27(5), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2023.2281545 .

112.

Roussou

(2001). Immersive interactive virtual reality in the museum. Proceedings of TiLE (Trends in Leisure Entertainment).

113.

Rudd

Vohs

K. D.

Aaker

(2012). Awe expands people’s perception of time, alters decision making, and enhances well-being. Psychological Science, 23(10), 1130–1136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612438731

114.

Rupp

M. A.

Odette

K. L.

Kozachuk

Michaelis

J. R.

Smither

J. A.

McConnell

D. S.

(2019). Investigating learning outcomes and subjective experiences in 360-degree videos. Computers & Education, 128, 256–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.015

115.

Ryan

R. M.

(1993). Agency and organization: Intrinsic motivation, autonomy, and the self in psychological development. In Jacobs

J. E.

(Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1992: Developmental perspectives on motivation (pp. 1–56). University of Nebraska Press.

116.

Ryan

M. L.

(2001). Narrative as virtual reality. In Immersion and interactivity in literature (pp. 357–359). The Johns Hopkins University Press.

117.

Sato

Yasuda

(2005). Illusion of sense of self-agency: Discrepancy between the predicted and actual sensory consequences of actions modulates the sense of self-agency, but not the sense of self-ownership. Cognition, 94(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.04.003

118.

Schino

van Klaveren

L. M.

González

H. G. G.

Cox

R. F.

Nori

van Heusden

(2022). Measuring experiences of art in the museum: Exploring methodology for getting it right. Itinera, 2022(23), 277–302. https://doi.org/10.54103/2039-9251/18562

119.

Seghezzi

Giannini

Zapparoli

(2019). Neurofunctional correlates of body-ownership and sense of agency: A meta-analytical account of self-consciousness. Cortex, 121, 169–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2019.08.018

120.

Seo

Septianto

(2022). The role of cultural congruence in the art infusion effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 32(4), 634–651. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1248

121.

Shehade

Stylianou-Lambert

(2020). Virtual reality in museums: Exploring the experiences of museum professionals. Applied Sciences, 10(11), 4031. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10114031

122.

Shelley

(2017). The concept of the aesthetic. In Zalta

E. N.

(Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/aesthetic-concept

123.

Sherman

W. R.

Craig

A. B.

(2003). Understanding virtual reality: Interface, application, and design. Morgan Kaufmann.

124.

Shi

Honjo

Zhang

Furuya

(2020). Using virtual reality to assess landscape: A comparative study between on-site survey and virtual reality of aesthetic preference and landscape cognition. Sustainability, 12(7), 2875. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072875

125.

Sitzia

(2016). Narrative theories and learning in contemporary art museums: A theoretical exploration. Stedelijk Studies, 4, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.54533/StedStud.vol004.art04

126.

Skov

Nadal

(2020). A farewell to art: Aesthetics as a topic in psychology and neuroscience. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(3), 630–642. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916198979

127.

Skov

Nadal

(2021). The nature of perception and emotion in aesthetic appreciation: A response to Makin’s challenge to empirical aesthetics. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(3), 470–483. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000278

128.

Slater

(2009). Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behaviour in immersive virtual environments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1535), 3549–3557. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0138

129.

Slater

Usoh

(1994). Body centred interaction in immersive virtual environments. Artificial Life and Virtual Reality, 1, 125–148.

130.

Slater

Usoh

Steed

(1994). Depth of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 3(2), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1994.3.2.130

131.

Stanney

K. M.

Hale

K. S.

Nahmens

Kennedy

R. S.

(2003). What to expect from immersive virtual environment exposure: Influences of gender, body mass index, and past experience. Human Factors, 45(3), 504–520. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.45.3.504.27254

132.

Stark

E. A.

Vuust

Kringelbach

M. L.

(2018). Music, dance, and other art forms: New insights into the links between hedonia (pleasure) and eudaimonia (well-being). Progress in Brain Research, 237, 129–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2018.03.019

133.

Steuer

(1992). Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00812.x

134.

Stinson

S. W.

(1995). Body of knowledge. Educational Theory, 45(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.1995.00043.x

135.

Summers

Jesse

(2017, March). Creating immersive and aesthetic auditory spaces in virtual reality. IN 2017 IEEE 3rd VR workshop on sonic interactions for virtual environments (SIVE), (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.1109/SIVE.2017.7938144

136.

Tamilmani

Rana

N. P.

Prakasam

Dwivedi

Y. K.

(2019). The battle of brain vs. heart: A literature review and meta-analysis of “hedonic motivation” use in UTAUT2. International Journal of Information Management, 46, 222–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.008

137.

Trunfio

Jung

Campana

(2022). Mixed reality experiences in museums: Exploring the impact of functional elements of the devices on visitors’ immersive experiences and post-experience behaviours. Information & Management, 59(8), 103698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2022.103698

138.

Tschacher

Greenwood

Kirchberg

Wintzerith

van den Berg

Tröndle

(2012). Physiological correlates of aesthetic perception of artworks in a museum. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(1), 96–103. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023845

139.

Tussyadiah

I. P.

Wang

Jung

T. H.

Tom Dieck

M. C.

(2018). Virtual reality, presence, and attitude change: Empirical evidence from tourism. Tourism Management, 66, 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.12.003

140.

Van der Heijden

(2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695–704. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148660

141.

Van Laer

De Ruyter

Visconti

L. M.

Wetzels

(2014). The extended transportation-imagery model: A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of consumers’ narrative transportation. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(5), 797–817. https://doi.org/10.1086/673383

142.

Venkatesh

Thong

J. Y.

(2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412

143.

Ventura

Brivio

Riva

Baños

R. M.

(2019). Immersive versus non-immersive experience: Exploring the feasibility of memory assessment through 360 technology. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 479119. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02509

144.

Wang

Zhang

Long

(2024). Virtual reality and augmented reality in artistic expression: A comprehensive study of innovative technologies. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science & Applications, 15(3), 641–649. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2024.0150365

145.

Wanzer

D. L.

Finley

K. P.

Zarian

Cortez

(2020). Experiencing flow while viewing art: Development of the aesthetic experience questionnaire. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 14(1), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000203

146.

Waterworth

J. A.

Waterworth

E. L.

(2003). The meaning of presence. Retrieved August 5, 2024, from https://www8.informatik.umu.se/∼jwworth/PRESENCE-meaning.htm

147.

Watts

(2023). A journey through communication research on transportation: The future of narrative transportation on emerging forms of media. Review of Communication, 23(4), 367–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2023.2239321

148.

Wedel

Bigné

Zhang

(2020). Virtual and augmented reality: Advancing research in consumer marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 37(3), 443–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.04.004

149.

Winkler

J. R.

Appel

Schmidt

M. L. C.

Richter

(2023). The experience of emotional shifts in narrative persuasion. Media Psychology, 26(2), 141–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2022.2103711

150.

Yin

Jin

(2022). Research on the interactive relationship of immersive art. In International conference on human-computer interaction (pp. 442–453). Springer International Publishing.

151.

Zusi

(2013). Vanishing points: Walter Benjamin and Karel Teige on the liquidations of Aura. Modern Language Review, 108(2), 368–395. https://doi.org/10.5699/modelangrevi.108.2.0368