The Impact of Virtual Reality (VR) Tour Experience on Tourists’ Intention to Visit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing on media richness theory, this study investigates the effect of rich media, such as virtual reality (VR), on visit intentions for a specific destination. Specifically, this research employs a mixed-method approach, using abductive theorization to explore and confirm the dimensions of the VR visit experience, notably those related to telepresence, a key concept in tourism through VR. Furthermore, the study aims to elucidate how telepresence influences mental imagery, attitudes towards tourist destinations, and actual visit intentions. To do this, qualitative data were gathered between February and June 2022 from 34 semi-structured interviews with respondents who viewed a VR video of the destination. A second study collected quantitative data from 400 participants through face-to-face questionnaires after a VR video view between June and August 2022. The findings reveal that telepresence comprises three dimensions: realism of the virtual environment, immersion, and the sense of presence in the virtual environment. Telepresence, in turn, both directly and indirectly affects actual visit intentions, with mental imagery and attitude toward tourist destinations partially mediating those relationships. This study provides methodological, theoretical, and tourism management implications to enhance our comprehension of telepresence’s facets, its measurement, and the process by which VR influences real visit intentions.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".