Submitted:
25 November 2023
Posted:
27 November 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract

Keywords:
MSC: 68U35 (Information Systems); 91C99 (Social and Behavioral Sciences, Miscellaneous)
1. Introduction
2. Background and literature review
3. The VRRO Platform
3.1. Functionalities
3.1.1. Virtual tours gallery


3.1.2. Social module

3.1.3. Blog

3.1.4. User engagement

3.2. Architecture
3.2.1. Presentation Layer
3.2.2. Business Logic Layer
3.2.3. Data Layer
3.2.4. Cross-Layer Accessibility of Cloud Services

4. Empirical Study
4.1. Methodology
- Quantitative: The short form of the User Engagement Scale (UES) [31] is employed to gather numerical data on user engagement. Additionally, it included participant ratings of platform modules, self-assessed digital familiarity, and evaluations of future engagement intentions, offering a comprehensive view of user interaction and platform impact.
- Qualitative: Open-ended questions were used to collect qualitative data, providing deeper insights into users' experiences and perceptions. This approach captured feedback on specific platform modules, suggestions for improvements, and challenges encountered during interaction. It also included aspects related to technology usage and participants' self-evaluation of their activity on the platform.
4.2. Results


4.2.1. Activity

4.2.2. Engagement
| Factor | Focused Attention | FA 1 | FA 2 | FA 3 | Perceived Usability | Aesthetic Appeal |
Reward Factor | UES (Overall) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 2.97 | 2.29 | 3.23 | 3.39 | 4.56 | 3.70 | 3.97 | 3.81 |
| Question Categories | Average Score |
|---|---|
| Commemorate Travels | 4.10 |
| Connect with Travelers | 3.65 |
| Pre-travel Information | 4.06 |
| Inform Other Travelers | 4.10 |
| Future Platform Use | 3.94 |
| Recommend to Friends | 4.23 |
| Drive Index | 3.98 |
| Endurability Index | 4.05 |
| Module | UES | Open access modules | Advanced features | Endurability |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rating | 3.81 | 4.06 | 3.76 | 4.05 |
4.2.3. The influence of digital literacy on experience
| Variable | Shapiro-Wilk W | p-value | Average (x̄) | Std. Deviation (S) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UES | 0.9749 | 0.6616 | 3.8118 | 0.5137 |
| VT Viewer | 0.8253 | <0.001 | 4.0323 | 1.016 |
| Article Viewer | 0.7897 | <0.001 | 4.129 | 1.0565 |
| Map | 0.8174 | <0.001 | 4.0323 | 1.0796 |
| Web Familiarity | 0.5904 | <0.001 | 4.5484 | 0.85 |
| XR Familiarity | 0.875 | 0.0018 | 3.7097 | 1.1603 |
4.2.4. Qualitative insights
4.3. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Loureiro, S.M.C., Nascimento, J.: Shaping a view on the influence of technologies on sustainable tourism. Sustainability (Switzerland). 13, (2021). [CrossRef]
- Sustainable development | UNWTO, https://www.unwto.org/sustainable-development.
- An EU initiative to reward innovative and smart tourism in European Cities!, https://smart-tourism-capital.ec.europa.eu/index_en.
- 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. 61, 528–548 (2022). [CrossRef]
- Bachiller, C., Monzo, J.M., Rey, B.: Augmented and Virtual Reality to Enhance the Didactical Experience of Technological Heritage Museums. Applied Sciences 2023, Vol. 13, Page 3539. 13, 3539 (2023). [CrossRef]
- tom Dieck, D., tom Dieck, M.C., Jung, T., Moorhouse, N.: Tourists’ virtual reality adoption: an exploratory study from Lake District National Park. Leisure Studies. 37, 371–383 (2018). [CrossRef]
- Tasse, D., Hong, J., Antin, J.: How Geotagged Social Media Can Inform Modern Travelers. (2017). [CrossRef]
- Chan, H.F., Cho, H.J., Lee, H.E.: Examining the Use of Geotags on Instagram: Motivation, Satisfaction, and Location-based Information Sharing in Hong Kong. International Journal of Internet, Broadcasting and Communication. 14, 64–77 (2022). [CrossRef]
- Bosmos, F., Tzallas, A.T., Tsipouras, M.G., Glavas, E., Giannakeas, N.: Virtual and Augmented Experience in Virtual Learning Tours. Information 2023, Vol. 14, Page 294. 14, 294 (2023). [CrossRef]
- Guttentag, D.A.: Virtual reality: Applications and implications for tourism. Tour Manag. 31, 637–651 (2010). [CrossRef]
- Singh, S., Bashar, A.: A bibliometric review on the development in e-tourism research. International Hospitality Review. 37, 71–93 (2021). [CrossRef]
- Guedes, A., Faria, S., Gouveia, S., Rebelo, J.: The effect of virtual proximity and digital adoption on international tourism flows to Southern Europe. Tourism Economics. 29, 1643–1661 (2022). [CrossRef]
- Garcia-Haro, M.A., Martinez-Ruiz, M.P., Martinez-Cañas, R., Ruiz-Palomino, P.: Benefits of Online Sources of Information in the Tourism Sector: The Key Role of Motivation to Co-Create. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research 2021, Vol. 16, Pages 2051-2072. 16, 2051–2072 (2021). [CrossRef]
- Lee, H., Chung, N., Nam, Y.: Do online information sources really make tourists visit more diverse places?: Based on the social networking analysis. Inf. Process. Manag. 56, 1376–1390 (2018). [CrossRef]
- Liu, X., Mehraliyev, F., Liu, C., Schuckert, M.: The roles of social media in tourists’ choices of travel components. Tour Stud. 20, 27–48 (2020). [CrossRef]
- Kurniasari, K.K., Ayu, J.P., Octavanny, V.: Understanding Tourists’ Motivation in Virtual Tour. International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events. 6, 31–41 (2022). [CrossRef]
- Pratisto, E.H., Thompson, N., Potdar, V.: Immersive technologies for tourism: a systematic review. Information Technology & Tourism 2022 24:2. 24, 181–219 (2022). [CrossRef]
- Home Page - VR Ro, https://vrro.azurewebsites.net/.
- KarinaNazare/VRRO_MVC: VR Ro Platform, https://github.com/KarinaNazare/VRRO_MVC.
- Beck, J., Rainoldi, M., Egger, R.: Virtual reality in tourism: a state-of-the-art review. Tourism Review. 74, 586–612 (2019). [CrossRef]
- Panolens.js, https://pchen66.github.io/Panolens/.
- EUR-Lex - 32016R0679 - EN - EUR-Lex, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj.
- What is Azure SignalR Service? | Microsoft Learn, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-signalr/signalr-overview.
- WYSIWYG HTML Editor with Collaborative Rich Text Editing, https://ckeditor.com/.
- NET (and .NET Core) - introduction and overview - .NET | Microsoft Learn, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/introduction.
- Overview of Entity Framework Core - EF Core | Microsoft Learn, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/ef/core/.
- Azure SQL Database – Managed Cloud Database Service | Microsoft Azure, https://azure.microsoft.com/en-gb/products/azure-sql/database.
- Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1, https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/.
- Cloud Computing Services | Microsoft Azure, https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us.
- Google Maps Platform - Location and Mapping Solutions, https://mapsplatform.google.com/.
- Authentication methods at Google | Google Cloud, https://cloud.google.com/docs/authentication.
- Cloud Computing Services | Microsoft Azure, https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/.
- Microsoft identity platform documentation | Microsoft Learn, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/entra/identity-platform/.
- VRRO User Experience Survey, https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfZDKQgXiUAwtduKjeBGHRuFr3RHTu__87rEjO2K2wnFjqLWg/viewform.
- Nazare, K.: VRRO User Engagement Survey Data. 1, (2023). [CrossRef]

| Factor | Description | Affirmations |
|---|---|---|
| FA | Focused attention feeling absorbed in the interaction and losing track of time. | I lost myself in this experience. |
| The time I spent using VRRO just slipped away. | ||
| I was absorbed in this experience. | ||
| PU | Perceived usability, negative affect experienced in the interaction, and the degree of control and effort expended. | I felt frustrated while using VRRO. |
| I found VRRO confusing to use. | ||
| Using VRRO was taxing. | ||
| AE | Aesthetic appeal, the attractiveness and visual appeal of the interface. | VRRO was attractive. |
| VRRO was aesthetically appealing. | ||
| VRRO appealed to my senses. | ||
| RF | Reward factor, curiosity, interest, felt involvement, and the overall success of the interaction. | Using VRRO was worthwhile. |
| My experience was rewarding. | ||
| I felt interested in this experience. |
| Module | Map | VT Viewer | VT Creator | Article viewer | Article Creator | Chat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.03 | 4.03 | 4.00 | 4.13 | 4.14 | 3.14 |
| Factor | All participants |
High Web Familiarity |
High XR Familiarity |
Low Web Familiarity |
Low XR Familiarity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UES | 3.81 | 3.81 | 3.93 | 3.81 | 3.71 |
| VT Viewer | 4.03 | 4.00 | 4.11 | 4.11 | 3.92 |
| Article Viewer | 4.13 | 4.05 | 4.11 | 4.33 | 4.15 |
| Map | 4.03 | 3.95 | 4.11 | 4.22 | 3.92 |
| Variable | Technology familiarity | Mann-Whitney U | p-value | Cohen’s d | Glass’s Delta |
Hedges’ g |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UES | Web | 91 | .7414 | 0.008 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Immersive | 102.5 | .3843 | 0.380 | 0.362 | 0.377 | |
| VT Viewer | Web | 95.5 | .89656 | 0.121 | 0.096 | 0.108 |
| Immersive | 110 | .79486 | 0.111 | 0.106 | 0.110 | |
| Article Viewer | Web | 91.5 | .76418 | 0.297 | 0.245 | 0.270 |
| Immersive | 107.5 | .71884 | 0.098 | 0.094 | 0.097 | |
| Map | Web | 94.5 | .86502 | 0.273 | 0.220 | 0.245 |
| Immersive | 106 | .67448 | 0.031 | 0.028 | 0.030 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
