A holistic analysis towards understanding consumer perceptions of virtual reality devices in the post-adoption phase
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite gaining consumer momentum and interest of Virtual Reality (VR) in the consumer marketplace, the literature has lagged in exploring the continuance usage behaviour and factors associated with the post-adoption. To build on this, the current research seeks to identify factors that support the continuance usage of current VR users. To examine this, we employ a mixed-method approach. In Study 1, we initially gathered a total of 3,205 actual purchasers (Amazon verified purchase) from the top 10 VR brands listed in Amazon.com, Through a nethnographic content analysis, the key determinants of post-adoption of VR devices emerged (i.e. perceived functional benefit, perceived discomfort, perceived focused immersion, temporal dissociation, perceived health risk, and task quality). In Study 2, hypotheses were tested using structural equation modelling from 119 current VR users. The results demonstrate temporal dissociation and task quality were found to be the most significant antecedents affecting continuance usage. Theoretical and managerial implications are debated, as well as suggestions for future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it