This study uses meta-analytic structural equation modeling to investigate the applicability of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in predicting tourists’ adoption of extended reality technologies. It further examines whether the type of extended reality [Virtual Reality vs. Augmented Reality] and cultural differences (Eastern vs. Western) moderate the relationships amongst the TAM constructs. Using 32 individual samples (N = 10,630), the study revealed the differences in the effect sizes and variabilities of the links among the constructs given the type of extended reality and cultural differences. The implications of the findings are provided for tourism researchers and managers.
AfshardoostM.EshaghiM. S. (2020). Destination image and tourist behavioural intentions: A meta-analysis. Tourism Management, 81, Article 104154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104154
2.
AkosN.ViktoriaG. (2020, May26–29). To travel or not to travel if already experienced it virtually? [Paper presentation]. 49th Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy, Budapest, Hungary.
3.
AlshareK. A.MesakH. I.GrandonE. E.BadriM. A. (2011). Examining the moderating role of national culture on an extended technology acceptance model. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 14(3), 27–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2011.10856542
4.
AnS.ChoiY.LeeC. K. (2021). Virtual travel experience and destination marketing: Effects of sense and information quality on flow and visit intention. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 19, Article 100492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100492
5.
*AnT. (2017). The effects of island tourists’ tourism motivation on choice attributes for island tourism—Focusing on the moderating effect of involvement. Journal of Tourism Management Research, 21(6), 29–47.
6.
AwangN.YaakubA. R.OthmanZ. (2009). Assessing user acceptance towards virtual museum: The case in Kedah State Museum, Malaysia. In 2009 Sixth International Conference on Computer Graphics, Imaging and Visualization (pp. 158–163). IEEE.
*BasiouniA. F. (2020). Examination of the adoption of augmented reality in al masjid al haram in Makkah al mukarramah: A TAM model approach. Journal of Critical Review, 7(19), 3233–3246.
9.
BogicevicV.SeoS.KandampullyJ. A.LiuS. Q.RuddN. A. (2019). Virtual reality presence as a preamble of tourism experience: The role of mental imagery. Tourism Management, 74, 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.02.009
10.
BuhalisD.LawR. (2008). Progress in information technology and tourism management: 20 years on and 10 years after the internet-the state of eTourism research. Tourism Management, 29(4), 609–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.01.005
11.
CardN. A. (2015). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. Guilford Press.
CheungM. W. (2015). Meta-analysis: A structural equation modeling approach. John Wiley & Sons.
14.
ChiT. (2018). Understanding Chinese consumer adoption of apparel mobile commerce: An extended TAM approach. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 44, 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.07.019
15.
ChoiY. K.TottenJ. W. (2012). Self-construal’s role in mobile TV acceptance: Extension of TAM across cultures. Journal of Business Research, 65(11), 1525–1533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.036
16.
*ChungN.HanH.JounY. (2015). Tourists’ intention to visit a destination: The role of augmented reality (AR) application for a heritage site. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 588–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.068
17.
ChungN.JiaJ.XiaoruiT.KooC. (2019). The influence of technology readiness on satisfaction and destination loyalty toward augmented reality technologies. In Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS) (pp. 36–49). AIS Electronic Library (AISeL).
DavisF. 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
20.
DieckM.DieckD. T.JungT. (2021). Exploring usability and gratifications for virtual reality applications at festivals. Event Management, 25(6), 585–599. https://doi.org/10.3727/152599521X16106577965152
21.
*DisztingerP.SchlöglS.GrothA. (2017). Technology acceptance of virtual reality for travel planning. In R. Schegg, & B. Stangl (Eds.). Information and communication technologies in tourism 2017: Proceedings of the international conference in Rome, Italy, January 24–26, 2017 (pp. 255–268). Springer.
22.
*DoH.ShihW.HaQ. (2020). Effects of mobile augmented reality apps on impulse buying behavior: An investigation in the tourism field. Heliyon, 6(8), e04667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04667
23.
Eraslan YalcinM.KutluB. (2019). Examination of students’ acceptance of and intention to use learning management systems using extended TAM. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2414–2432. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12798
24.
El-SaidO.AzizH. (2021). Virtual Tours a Means to an End: An Analysis of Virtual Tours’ Role in Tourism Recovery Post COVID-19. Journal of Travel Research, 61(3), 528–5481.
25.
FarahM. F.RamadanZ. B.HarbD. H. (2019). The examination of virtual reality at the intersection of consumer experience, shopping journey and physical retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 48, 136–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.02.016
26.
FlaviánC.Ibáñez-SánchezS.OrúsC. (2019). The impact of virtual, augmented and mixed reality technologies on the customer experience. Journal of Business Research, 100, 547–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.050
27.
FotakisT.EconomidesA. A. (2008). Art, science/technology and history museums on the web. International Journal of Digital Culture and Electronic Tourism, 1(1), 37–63.
28.
García-CrespoA.Gonzalez-CarrascoI.Lopez-CuadradoJ. L.VillanuevaD.GonzalezA. (2016). CESARSC: Framework for creating cultural entertainment systems with augmented reality in smart cities. Computer Science and Information Systems, 13(2), 395–425. https://doi.org/10.2298/CSIS150620006G
29.
GoH.KangM.SuhS. C. (2020). Machine learning of robots in tourism and hospitality: interactive technology acceptance model (iTAM) – cutting edge. Tourism Review, 75(4), 625–636. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-02-2019-0062
30.
GoularteA. D. C.ZilberS. N. (2020). The moderating role of cultural factors in the adoption of mobile banking in Brazil. International Journal of Innovation Science, 11(1), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-11-2017-0119
31.
GranićA.MarangunićN. (2019). Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2572–2593. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12864
32.
GutierrezM.VexoF.ThalmannD. (2008). Stepping into virtual reality. Springer Science & Business Media.
HanD. I.Tom DieckM. C.JungT. (2019). Augmented Reality Smart Glasses (ARSG) visitor adoption in cultural tourism. Leisure Studies, 38(5), 618–633.
35.
HanD. I.tom DieckM. C.JungT. (2018). User experience model for augmented reality applications in urban heritage tourism. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 13(1), 46–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2016.1251931
36.
HaugstvedtA. C.KrogstieJ. (2012, November5-8). Mobile augmented reality for cultural heritage: A technology acceptance study. [Paper presentation]. 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), Atlanta, USA.
37.
*HuangY.BackmanS. J.BackmanK. F.MooreD. (2013). Exploring user acceptance of 3D virtual worlds in travel and tourism marketing. Tourism Management, 36, 490–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.09.009
38.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. SAGE.
39.
IswahyudiI.AzlanI.AzlanH. (2021, September14-16). Virtual tourism in new normal: Are people going to change their style of travel temporarily or permanently? [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Sustainable Management and Innovation, Bogor, Indonesia.
40.
JadilY.RanaN. P.DwivediY. K. (2021). A meta-analysis of the UTAUT model in the mobile banking literature: The moderating role of sample size and culture. Journal of Business Research, 132, 354–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.052
41.
*JungK.NguyenV. T.PiscaracD.YooS. (2020). Meet the virtual Jeju Dol Harubang—The mixed VR/AR application for cultural immersion in Korea’s main heritage. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9(6), 367. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9060367
42.
JungT.ChungN.LeueM. C. (2015). The determinants of recommendations to use augmented reality technologies: The case of a Korean theme park. Tourism Management, 49, 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.02.013
43.
*JungT. H.LeeH.ChungN.Tom DieckM. C. (2018). Cross-cultural differences in adopting mobile augmented reality at cultural heritage tourism sites. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(3), 1621–1645. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-02-2017-0084
44.
KanjanakanP.ZhuD.DoanT.KimP. B. (2021). Taking stock: A meta-analysis of work engagement in the hospitality and tourism context. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211066958
45.
KimM. J.HallC. M. (2019). A hedonic motivation model in virtual reality tourism: Comparing visitors and non-visitors. International Journal of Information Management, 46, 236–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.11.016
46.
KimJ. (2016). An extended technology acceptance model in behavioral intention toward hotel tablet apps with moderating effects of gender and age. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(8), 1535–1553. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-06-2015-0289
HwangJ.YoonS. Y.BendleL. J. (2012). Desired privacy and the impact of crowding on customer emotions and approach-avoidance responses: Waiting in a virtual reality restaurant. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 24(2), 224–250. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111211206150
51.
ImtiazM. A.MaaropN. (2014). A review of technology acceptance studies in the field of education. Jurnal Teknologi, 69(2), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v69.3101
52.
LagiewskiR.KesginM. (2017). Designing and implementing digital visitor experiences in New York State: The case of the Finger Lakes Interactive Play (FLIP) project. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 6(2), 118–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.03.005
53.
LeeH.ChungN.JungT. (2015). Examining the cultural differences in acceptance of mobile augmented reality: Comparison of South Korea and Ireland. In Information and communication technologies in tourism 2015 (pp. 477–491). Springer.
54.
*LeeI.ChenC.SuC. (2017). App based souvenirs and entry tickets: A new means of enhancing post visit memories: A case study from Taiwan. Tourism Management Perspectives, 24, 177–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.09.001
55.
*LiT.ChenY. (2019). Will virtual reality be a double-edged sword? Exploring the moderation effects of the expected enjoyment of a destination on travel intention. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 12, 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2019.02.003
56.
LimS.OkC. M. (2021). A meta-analytic review of antecedents of hospitality and tourism firms’ performance: A cross-cultural comparison. Tourism Management, 86, Article 104325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104325
57.
LinH. C. (2014). An investigation of the effects of cultural differences on physicians’ perceptions of information technology acceptance as they relate to knowledge management systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 38, 368–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.001
58.
*LinH.ChenC. (2015). Design and application of augmented reality query-answering system in mobile phone information navigation. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(2), 810–820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.07.050
59.
*LinH.ChenC. (2017). Combining the technology acceptance model and uses and gratifications theory to examine the usage behavior of an augmented reality tour-sharing application. Symmetry, 9(7), 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym9070113
60.
LiuA.FanD. X.QiuR. T. (2021). Does culture affect tourism demand? A global perspective. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 45(1), 192–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348020934849
61.
LiuI. F.ChenM. C.SunY. S.WibleD.KuoC. H. (2010). Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Computers & Education, 54(2), 600–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.009
62.
LoureiroS. M. C.GuerreiroJ.AliF. (2020). 20 years of research on virtual reality and augmented reality in tourism context: A text-mining approach. Tourism Management, 77, Article 104028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.104028
63.
MaE.WangD.WangL.LiuA. (2021). Industry as contexts or theory? A systematic and meta-analysis of status and directions of organizational citizenship behaviors in hospitality. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211019104
64.
MailizarM.AlmanthariA.MaulinaS. (2021). Examining teachers’ behavioral intention to use E-learning in teaching of mathematics: An extended TAM model. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(2), e298. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/9709
65.
MarascoA.BuonincontriP.van NiekerkM.OrlowskiM.OkumusF. (2018). Exploring the role of next-generation virtual technologies in destination marketing. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 9, 138–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.12.002
66.
MathewV.SolimanM. (2021). Does digital content marketing affect tourism consumer behavior? An extension of technology acceptance model. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 20(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1854
67.
MilgramP.KishinoF. (1994). A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information and Systems, 77(12), 1321–1329.
68.
MoherD.LiberatiA.TetzlaffJ.AltmanD. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
69.
MoorhouseN.tom DieckM. C.JungT. (2018). Technological innovations transforming the consumer retail experience: A review of literature. In JungT.tom DieckM. (Eds.), Augmented reality and virtual reality. Progress in IS. (pp. 133–143). Springer.
70.
NakataC.SivakumarK. (2001). Instituting the marketing concept in a multinational setting: The role of national culture. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(3), 255–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/03079459994623
71.
ObeidyW. K.ArshadH.HuangJ. Y. (2017). An acceptance model for smart glasses-based tourism augmented reality. In AIP Conference Proceedings (pp.020080). AIP Publishing.
PatelK. J.PatelH. J. (2018). Adoption of internet banking services in Gujarat. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 36(1), 147–169. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-08-2016-0104
74.
*PauloM. M.RitaP.OliveiraT.MoroS. (2018). Understanding mobile augmented reality adoption in a consumer context. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 9(2), 142–157. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-01-2017-0006
RahimiB.NadriH.AfsharH. L.TimpkaT. (2018). A systematic review of the technology acceptance model in health informatics. Applied Clinical Informatics, 9(3), 604–634. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1668091
77.
*RahimizhianS.OzturenA.IlkanM. (2020). Emerging realm of 360-degree technology to promote tourism destination. Technology in Society, 63, Article 101411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101411
78.
*Rejón-GuardiaF.García-SastreM. A.Orfila-SintesF.Garau-VadellJ. B. (2020). Virtual reality in tourism: Centennials acceptance. Tourism Analysis, 25(2), 335–344. https://doi.org/10.3727/108354220X15758301241837
79.
SarkadyD.NeuburgerL.EggerR. (2021). Virtual reality as a travel substitution tool during COVID-19. In WörndlW.KooC.SteinmetzJ. (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2021 (pp. 452–463). Springer.
80.
SchepersJ.WetzelsM. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management, 44(1), 90–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.10.007
81.
SchererR.SiddiqF.TondeurJ. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
82.
SchererR.TeoT. (2019). Unpacking teachers’ intentions to integrate technology: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 27, 90–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.03.001
83.
*ShinH. H.JeongM. (2021). Travelers’ motivations to adopt augmented reality (AR) applications in a tourism destination. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 12(2), 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-08-2018-0082
84.
SiamionavaK.SlevitchL.TomasS. R. (2018). Effects of spatial colors on guests’ perceptions of a hotel room. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 70, 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.10.025
85.
SongH.RuanW. J.JeonY. J. (2021). An integrated approach to the purchase decision making process of food-delivery apps: Focusing on the TAM and AIDA models. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 95, Article 102943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.102943
86.
ŠumakB.HerickoM.PušnikM. (2011). A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 2067–2077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.005
87.
TamC.OliveiraT. (2019). Does culture influence m-banking use and individual performance?Information & Management, 56(3), 356–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.07.009
88.
TaoD.WangT.WangT.ZhangT.ZhangX.QuX. (2020). A systematic review and meta-analysis of user acceptance of consumer-oriented health information technologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, Article 106147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.09.023
89.
TeoT.van SchaikP. (2012). Understanding the intention to use technology by preservice teachers: An empirical test of competing theoretical models. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 28(3), 178–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2011.581892
90.
tom DieckD.tom DieckM. C.JungT.MoorhouseN. (2018). Tourists’ virtual reality adoption: An exploratory study from Lake District National Park. Leisure Studies, 37(4), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2018.1466905
91.
TussyadiahI. P.JungT. H.tom DieckM. C. (2018). Embodiment of wearable augmented reality technology in tourism experiences. Journal of Travel Research, 57(5), 597–611. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517709090
92.
VahdatA.AlizadehA.QuachS.HamelinN. (2021). Would you like to shop via mobile app technology? The technology acceptance model, social factors and purchase intention. Australasian Marketing Journal, 29(2), 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.01.002
93.
*VishwakarmaP.MukherjeeS.DattaB. (2019). Antecedents of adoption of virtual reality in experiencing destination: A study on the Indian consumers. Tourism Recreation Research, 45(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2019.1638565
94.
WangY. S.WangY. M.LinH. H.TangT. I. (2003). Determinants of user acceptance of Internet banking: an empirical study. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 14(5), 501–519. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230310500192
95.
WedelM.BignéE.ZhangJ. (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
96.
WeiW. (2019). Research progress on virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) in tourism and hospitality. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 10(4), 539–570. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-04-2018-0030
97.
*WuS.ChiuC.ChenY. (2020). The influences of innovative technological introduction on interpretive experiences of exhibition: A discussion on the intention to use augmented reality. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25(6), 662–677. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2020.1752754
98.
XuS. T.CaoZ. C.HuoY. (2020). Antecedents and outcomes of emotional labour in hospitality and tourism: A meta-analysis. Tourism Management, 79, Article 104099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104099
99.
YangL.BianY.ZhaoX.LiuX.YaoX. (2021). Drivers’ acceptance of mobile navigation applications: An extended technology acceptance model considering drivers’ sense of direction, navigation application affinity and distraction perception. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 145, Article 102507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102507
100.
YooS.JungK.VinhT.Piscarac (2020). The effectiveness of Jeju Island mixed reality tourism application: Focusing on the moderating role of users’ K-Culture involvement. International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology, 8(2), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.17703/IJACT.2020.8.2.116
101.
YousafzaiS. Y.FoxallG. R.PallisterJ. G. (2007). Technology acceptance: A meta-analysis of the TAM: Part 2. Journal of Modelling in Management, 2(3), 281–304. https://doi.org/10.1108/17465660710834462
102.
YungR.Khoo-LattimoreC. (2019). New realities: A systematic literature review on virtual reality and augmented reality in tourism research. Current Issues in Tourism, 22(17), 2056–2081. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2017.1417359
103.
ZhangL.ZhuJ.LiuQ. (2012). A meta-analysis of mobile commerce adoption and the moderating effect of culture. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1902–1911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.008
104.
ZhengJ.LiS. (2020). What drives students’ intention to use tablet computers: An extended technology acceptance model. International Journal of Educational Research, 102, Article 101612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101612
105.
*ZhuangX.HouX.FengZ.LinZ.LiJ. (2020). Subjective norms, attitudes, and intentions of AR technology use in tourism experience: The moderating effect of millennials. Leisure Studies, 40(3), 392–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2020.1843692
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
