In the service industry, artificial intelligence (AI) has not only transformed consumer experiences but also fostered exciting new fusions of art and technology (ArtTech). Creativity in AI-based artworks involves using AI algorithms to develop innovative forms, shapes, figures, and patterns, resulting in the creation of novel artworks. It fosters an immersive experience, deeply engaging visitors within the artistic environment. However, research in the area remains scant. As such, the current study draws on affect-as-information theory and the associative information processing model to examine how AI-generated immersive experiences influence emotion, cognition, and the downstream effect on word-of-mouth (WOM). The findings show that creativity in AI-based artworks positively affects WOM. Furthermore, immersive experience and feeling of comfort act as mechanisms, serially mediating the influence of creativity in AI-based artworks on WOM.
AinsworthJ.FosterJ. (2017). Comfort in brick and mortar shopping experiences: Examining antecedents and consequences of comfortable retail experiences. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 35, 27–35.
2.
AkinolaM.MendesW. B. (2008). The dark side of creativity: Biological vulnerability and negative emotions lead to greater artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(12), 1677–1686.
3.
AmabileT. M. (1979). Effects of external evaluation on artistic creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(2), 221–233.
4.
AmbikaA.ShinH.JainV. (2025). Immersive technologies and consumer behavior: A systematic review of two decades of research. Australian Journal of Management, 50(1), 55–79.
5.
AnantrasirichaiN.BullD. (2022). Artificial intelligence in the creative industries: A review. Artificial Intelligence Review, 55(1), 589–656.
6.
ArrietaA. B.Díaz-RodríguezN.Del SerJ.BennetotA.TabikS.BarbadoA.GarciaS.Gil-LopezS.MolinaD.BenjaminsR.ChatilaR.HerreraF. (2020). Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information Fusion, 58, 82–115.
ChamberlainR.MullinC.ScheerlinckB.WagemansJ. (2018). Putting the art in artificial: Aesthetic responses to computer-generated art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(2), 177–192.
9.
ChangJ. I.LeeC. Y. (2020). The effect of service innovation on customer behavioral intention in the Taiwanese insurance sector: The role of word-of-mouth and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 14(3), 341–360.
10.
ChangH. H.Tuan PhamM. (2013). Affect as a decision-making system of the present. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(1), 42–63.
11.
ChenS. X.WuH. C.HuangX. (2023). Immersive experiences in digital exhibitions: The application and extension of the service theater model. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 54, 128–138.
12.
ChenY. F.MoH. E. (2012). Attendees’ perspectives on the service quality of an exhibition organizer: A case study of a tourism exhibition. Tourism Management Perspectives, 1, 28–33.
13.
ChoeY.LeeS. M.KimD. K. (2014). Understanding the exhibition attendees’ evaluation of their experiences: A comparison between high versus low mindful visitors. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 31(7), 899–914.
14.
CloreG. L.GasperK.GarvinE. (2001). Affect as information. In ForgasJ. P. (Ed.), Handbook of affect and social cognition (pp. 121–144). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15.
CohenJ. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.
16.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.
17.
CsikszentmihalyiM.CsikszentmihalyiI. S. (Eds.). (1992). Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
18.
CuongP. H.Nguyen-LeX. D.NgoL. V.NguyenN. P. (2024). How brand innovativeness generates positive word-of-mouth. Australasian Marketing Journal, 32(1), 56–64.
19.
DemmerT. R.KühnapfelC.FingerhutJ.PelowskiM. (2023). Does an emotional connection to art really require a human artist? Emotion and intentionality responses to AI-versus human-created art and impact on aesthetic experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 148, Article 107875.
20.
DerdaI.PredescuD. (2025). Towards human-centric AI in museums: Practitioners’ perspectives and technology acceptance of visitor-centered AI for value (co-) creation. Museum Management and Curatorship, 40(1), 1–23.
21.
DuongT. T. T.NgoL. V.SurachartkumtonkunJ.TranM. D.NortheyG. (2023). Less is more! A pathway to consumer’s transcendence. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 72, Article 103294.
22.
FanX.JiangX.DengN. (2022). Immersive technology: A meta-analysis of augmented/virtual reality applications and their impact on tourism experience. Tourism Management, 91, Article 104534.
23.
FeistG. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309.
24.
FissP. C. (2011). Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393–420.
25.
FornellC.LarckerD. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
GianecchiniM. (2020). Strategies and determinants of corporate support to the arts: Insights from the Italian context. European Management Journal, 38(2), 308–318.
28.
GreifenederR.BlessH.PhamM. T. (2011). When do people rely on affective and cognitive feelings in judgment? A review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(2), 107–141.
29.
GreckhamerT.FurnariS.FissP. C.AguileraR. V. (2018). Studying configurations with qualitative comparative analysis: Best practices in strategy and organization research. Strategic Organization, 16(4), 482–495.
30.
GuoK.FanA.LehtoX.DayJ. (2023). Immersive digital tourism: The role of multisensory cues in digital museum experiences. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 47(6), 1017–1039.
31.
HairJ. F.RingleC. M.SarstedtM. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.
32.
HayesA. F.MontoyaA. K.RockwoodN. J. (2017). The analysis of mechanisms and their contingencies: PROCESS versus structural equation modeling. Australasian Marketing Journal, 25(1), 76-81.
33.
HeZ.WuL.LiX. R. (2018). When art meets tech: The role of augmented reality in enhancing museum experiences and purchase intentions. Tourism Management, 68, 127–139.
34.
HenselerJ.RingleC. M.SarstedtM. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115–135.
35.
HenselerJ.RingleC. M.SarstedtM. (2016). Testing measurement invariance of composites using partial least squares. International Marketing Review, 33(3), 405–431.
36.
HoA. (2022, 24–28 July). Application of art-tech in visual experience. Paper presented at: Symposium on Creative Technology and Digital Media (Vol. 27, pp. 28–37). AHFE International.
37.
HuangM.-H.LiaoS.-H. (2015). Creativity in AI-based technologies: The role of emotion in consumer responses. Journal of Business Research, 68(8), 1677–1684.
38.
HullandJ. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195–204.
39.
JacksonS. A.MarshH. W. (1996). Development and validation of a scale to measure optimal experience: The Flow State Scale. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 18(1), 17–35.
40.
JiangY.SunX.ChoiT. Y. (2020). Consumer engagement with immersive technology in entertainment. International Journal of Information Management, 52, Article 102106.
41.
JinY.ZhangJ.LiM.TianY.ZhuH.FangZ. (2017). Towards the automatic anime characters creation with generative adversarial networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.05509.
42.
JonauskaiteD.DaelN.BaboulazL.ChèvreL.CiernyI.DucimetièreN.FeketeA.GabioudP.LederH.VetterliM.MohrC. (2024). Interactive digital engagement with visual artworks and cultural artefacts enhances user aesthetic experiences in the laboratory and museum. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 40(6), 1369–1382.
43.
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.
44.
KarrasT.AilaT.LaineS.LehtinenJ. (2017). Progressive growing of Gans for improved quality, stability, and variation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.10196.
45.
KiernanF.ChmielA.GarridoS.HickeyM.DavidsonJ. W. (2021). The role of artistic creative activities in navigating the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 696202.
46.
KimJ.BioccaF. (2020). The influence of immersive experience on consumer emotions and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(4), 525–541.
47.
KockN. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJEC), 11(4), 1–10.
48.
KumarA.ShankarA. (2023). Why do consumers forgive online travel agencies? A multi-study approach. Australasian Marketing Journal, 32(4), 323–338.
49.
LawR.LinK. J.YeH.FongD. K. C. (2024). Artificial intelligence research in hospitality: A state-of-the-art review and future directions. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 36(6), 2049–2068.
50.
LeeE. J.ParkS. J. (2020). Immersive experience model of the elderly welfare centers supporting successful aging. Frontiers in Pychology, 11, 8.
51.
LiangH.SarafN.HuQ.XueY. (2007). Assimilation of enterpSrise systems: The effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 59–87.
52.
LinY. T.MacInnisD. J.EisingerichA. B. (2020). Strong anxiety boosts new product adoption when hope is also strong. Journal of Marketing, 84(5), 60–78.
53.
LunardoR.PonsignonF. (2020). Achieving immersion in the tourism experience: The role of autonomy, temporal dissociation, and reactance. Journal of Travel Research, 59(7), 1151–1167.
54.
MastandreaS.BartoliG.BoveG. (2009). Preferences for ancient and modern art museums: Visitor experiences and personality characteristics. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(3), 164.
55.
MaxhamJ. G.III. (2001). Service recovery’s influence on consumer satisfaction, positive word-of-mouth, and purchase intentions. Journal of Business Research, 54(1), 11–24.
56.
MelumadS.PhamM. T. (2020). The smartphone as a pacifying technology. Journal of Consumer Research, 47(2), 237–255.
57.
NgoL. V.NortheyG.DuffyS.ThaoH. T. P. (2016). Perceptions of others, mindfulness, and brand experience in retail service setting. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 33, 43–52.
58.
NguyenO. D. Y.NgoH. T.LeQ. A.DuongT. T. T. (2024). The consumer− E-retailer− intermediary triad: Why and when unfairness perceptions undermine ethicality and consumer repurchase intention. Australasian Marketing Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/14413582241274492
59.
O’CassA.CarlsonJ. (2012). An e-retailing assessment of perceived website-service innovativeness: Implications for website quality evaluations, trust, loyalty and word-of-mouth. Australasian Marketing Journal, 20(1), 28–36.
60.
OttoJ. E.RitchieJ. B. (1996). The service experience in tourism. Tourism Management, 17(3), 165–174.
61.
PappasI. O.WoodsideA. G. (2021). Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA): Guidelines for research practice in Information Systems and marketing. International Journal of Information Management, 58, Article 102310.
62.
PhamM. T.GeuensM.De PelsmackerP. (2013). The influence of ad-evoked feelings on brand evaluations: Empirical generalizations from consumer responses to more than 1000 TV commercials. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 30(4), 383–394.
63.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ. Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.
64.
RadfordA.MetzL.ChintalaS. (2015). Unsupervised representation learning with deep convolutional generative adversarial networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.06434.
65.
RaginC. C. (2009). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. University of Chicago Press.
66.
RauschnabelP. A.RossmannA.Tom DieckM. C. (2020). An adoption framework for virtual and augmented reality: Insights from the technology acceptance model. Computers in Human Behavior, 101, 123–140.
67.
Robaina-CalderínL.Martín-SantanaJ. D.Munoz-LeivaF. (2023). Immersive experiences as a resource for promoting museum tourism in the Z and millennials generations. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 29, Article 100795.
68.
RussoI.ConfenteI. (2019). From dataset to qualitative comparative analysis (QCA)—Challenges and tricky points: A research note on contrarian case analysis and data calibration. Australasian Marketing Journal, 27(2), 129–135.
69.
RyuK.HanH. (2011). New or repeat customers: How does physical environment influence their restaurant experience?International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(3), 599–611.
70.
SchwaigerM.SarstedtM.TaylorC. R. (2010). Art for the sake of the corporation: Audi, BMW Group, DaimlerChrysler, Montblanc, Siemens, and Volkswagen help explore the effect of sponsorship on corporate reputations. Journal of Advertising Research, 50(1), 77–90.
71.
SchwarzN.CloreG. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3), 513.
72.
SchwarzN.CloreG. L. (1996). Feelings and phenomenal experiences. In HigginsE. T.KruglanskiA. W. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 433–465). Guilford.
73.
SchwarzN.CloreG. L. (2007). Feelings and phenomenal experiences. Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles, 2, 385–407.
74.
ShinD. (2019). How do users experience the interaction with an immersive screen?Computers in Human Behavior, 98, 302–310.
75.
SimontonD. K. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55(1), 151.
76.
SmithC. A.KirbyL. D. (2000). Consequences require antecedents: Toward a process model of emotion elicitation. In ForgasJ. (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (pp. 83–106). Cambridge University Press.
77.
SmithR. E.MacKenzieS. B.YangX.BuchholzL. M.DarleyW. K. (2007). Modeling the determinants and effects of creativity in advertising. Marketing Science, 26(6), 819–833.
78.
SongJ.MoonH.KimM. (2019). When do customers engage in brand pages? Effects of social presence. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(9), 3627–3645.
79.
SuhA.ProphetJ. (2018). The state of immersive technology research: A literature analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 86, 77–90.
80.
TaheriB.ChalmersD.WilsonJ.ArshedN. (2021). Would you really recommend it? Antecedents of word-of-mouth in medical tourism. Tourism Management, 83, Article 104209.
81.
Tom DieckM. C.HanD. I. D. (2022). The role of immersive technology in Customer Experience Management. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 30(1), 108–119.
82.
TrunfioM.CampanaS.MagnelliA. (2020). Measuring the impact of functional and experiential mixed reality elements on a museum visit. Current Issues in Tourism, 23(16), 1990–2008.
83.
TuY.JiangS.AnY.YangZ. (2024). AI vs. human vs. AI+ human: A study on consumer perceived novelty of works created by different entities. SSRN.
84.
TurnerS.HuangC. W.BurrowsL.TurnerP. (2016). Make-believing virtual realities. In TurnerP.HarviainenJ. T. (Eds.), Digital Make-believe (pp. 27–47). Springer.
85.
Van EschP.Stewart BlackJ. (2021). Artificial intelligence (AI): Revolutionizing digital marketing. Australasian Marketing Journal, 29(3), 199–203.
86.
VerleyeK. (2015). The impact of technology-based experiences on word-of-mouth. Journal of Service Management, 26(3), 471–490.
87.
WaittG.GibsonC. (2014). Tourism and creative economies. In LewA. A.HallC. M.WilliamsA. M. (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to tourism (pp. 230–239). Wiley.
88.
WhitelockD.RomanoD.JelfsA.BrnaP. (2000). Perfect presence: What does this mean for the design of virtual learning environments?Education and Information Technologies, 5, 277–289.
89.
XuC.SunY.ZhouH. (2024). Artificial aesthetics and ethical ambiguity: Exploring business ethics in the context of AI driven creativity. Journal of Business Ethics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05837-2
90.
YimM. Y.-C.ChuS.-C.SauerP. L. (2017). Is augmented reality technology an effective tool for commerce? An interactivity and vividness perspective. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 39(1), 89–103.
91.
ZhangJ.QuoquabF.MohammadJ. (2023). The role of pandemic risk communication and perception on pro-environmental travel behavioral intention: Findings from PLS-SEM and fsQCA. Journal of Cleaner Production, 429, Article 139506.
