Extant empirical studies related to the acceptance of metaverse shopping
| Sources | Technologies | Devices | Methods | Relevant variables | Sources | Technologies | Devices | Methods | Relevant variables |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Altarteer and Charissis (2019) | VR for online luxury products | Projection screen | User evaluation-based questionnaire (N = 42) | Perceived presence, usefulness, ease of use, perceived experience value, attitudes | Park and Kim (2022) | Virtual try-on (AR) vs. 3D virtual stores (VR) | Two mock e-commerce websites/PC | Between-subjects experiment (N = 194, female students) | Consumption vision, interactivity, image quality issue, novelty, lack of realism, difficult to use, technological limitations |
| Javornik (2016a) |
|
| Between-subjects experiment (N = 60) | Perceived augmentation, flow, affective responses, cognitive responses | Peukert et al. (2019) | VR shopping environment | HTC VIVE | Between-subjects experiment (N = 257) | Immersion, perceived product diagnosticity, telepresence, usefulness, enjoyment and intention to reuse shopping environment |
| Huang and Liao (2015) | ARIT for online fitting | N/A | User evaluation-based questionnaire (N = 220) | Presence, ease of use, usefulness, aesthetics, service excellence, playfulness, sustainable relationship, consumer’s cognitive innovativeness | Rese et al. (2014) | IKEA AR app | Mobile phone | User evaluation-based questionnaire (N = 275) | Perceived informativeness, enjoyment, usefulness, ease of use, attitude toward using and behavioral intention to use |
| Hwang et al. (2023) | Fashion-related (eyewear) AR apps | Mobile phone | Between-subjects experiment (N = 114) | Perceived ease of use, usefulness, privacy priming, behavioral intention to use | Rese et al. (2017) | Four different AR apps (marker and markerless) | - Tablet - Smartphone - PC/laptop with webcam | Evaluation-based questionnaires (4 studies, N = 978) | Perceived informativeness, enjoyment, usefulness, ease of use, attitude toward using and behavioral intention to use |
| Kim and Forsythe (2008) | Virtual Try-on technology | N/A | Five focus groups and an online survey (N = 491) | Usefulness of virtual try-on, ease of use, entertainment value, attitude, technology anxiety, innovativeness, intended use, post-use evaluation | Saleem et al. (2022) | Eyeglass-wearing AR apps | Mobile phone | User evaluation-based questionnaire (N = 363) | Vividness, novelty, perceived usefulness, ease of use, enjoyment, attitude toward use, behavioral intention to use |
| Lee et al. (2022) | AR-enhanced virtual try-ons | Mobile phone | User evaluation-based questionnaire (N = 352) | Perceived interactivity, augmentation, telepresence, utilitarian value, hedonic value, adoption intention, sensation-seeking tendency, technology anxiety | Shah Alam et al. (2022) | AR applications for online buying | N/A | Online questionnaire (N = 265) | Social identity, perceived usefulness, ease of use, personal innovativeness, self-efficacy, enjoyment, attitude, intention to use |
| McLean and Wilson (2019) | Three AR apps: ASOS, Amazon and IKEA | N/A | Online questionnaire from users of AR apps (N = 441) | AR novelty, interactivity and vividness, ease of use, usefulness, enjoyment, subjective norms, brand engagement, satisfaction and brand usage intention | Sikström et al. (2016) | VR shelf | Oculus Rift DK2 | Within-subjects experiment (N = 22) | Presence, body ownership, awareness of movements, usability and enjoyment |
| Ohta et al. (2015) | AR and VR for electronic product | - Oculus Rift DK1-VR - Desktop PC-AR | User evaluation-based questionnaire (N = 11) | Usefulness and ease of use | Spreer and Kallweit (2014) | AR application for books | Tablet | Experimental field study (N = 96) | Perceived ease of use, usefulness, enjoyment and intention to reuse |
| Oyman et al. (2022) | AR apps virtually trying-on cosmetic products | Mobile phone | User evaluation-based questionnaire (N = 278, all females) | Novelty seeking, perceived augmented reality, enjoyment, usefulness, informativeness and ease of use, behavioral intention to use | Van Kerrebroeck et al. (2017) | VR Christmas experience | Oculus Rift DK2 | Between-subjects experiment (N = 183) | Attitude toward the mall, approach behavior, mall satisfaction and loyalty intention |
| Pantano and Servidio (2012) | VR clothing store | Large screen with polarized glasses | User evaluation-based questionnaire (N = 150) | Ease of use, enjoyment, store perception and consumer satisfaction | Verhulst et al. (2016) | VR supermarket | Full HD 3D 1080p Projector | Between-subjects experiment (N = 80) | Performance (task completion time and the traveled distance) and NASA Task Load Index |
| Pantano et al. (2017) | Virtual try-on system for sunglasses | PC with webcamera | User evaluation-based questionnaire (n = 150, Italy; n = 168, Germany) | Aesthetic quality, interactivity, response time, quality of information, ease of use, enjoyment, usefulness, attitude and behavioral intention | The current study | AR, VR and AV (AR + VR) shops compared to self-built physical shop | Valve Index VR headset & Microsoft HoloLens AR headset; allow body movement and interaction | Between-subjects experiment (N = 157) | Perceived enjoyment, perceived ease of use (NASA Task Load Index), perceived usefulness, attitude and intention to visit |
| Sources | Technologies | Devices | Methods | Relevant variables | Sources | Technologies | Devices | Methods | Relevant variables |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VR for online luxury products | Projection screen | User evaluation-based questionnaire ( | Perceived presence, usefulness, ease of use, perceived experience value, attitudes | Virtual try-on (AR) vs. 3D virtual stores (VR) | Two mock e-commerce websites/PC | Between-subjects experiment ( | Consumption vision, interactivity, image quality issue, novelty, lack of realism, difficult to use, technological limitations | ||
IKEA AR app AR virtual try-on for sunglasses | Tablet PC with webcamera | Between-subjects experiment ( | Perceived augmentation, flow, affective responses, cognitive responses | VR shopping environment | HTC VIVE | Between-subjects experiment ( | Immersion, perceived product diagnosticity, telepresence, usefulness, enjoyment and intention to reuse shopping environment | ||
| ARIT for online fitting | N/A | User evaluation-based questionnaire ( | Presence, ease of use, usefulness, aesthetics, service excellence, playfulness, sustainable relationship, consumer’s cognitive innovativeness | IKEA AR app | Mobile phone | User evaluation-based questionnaire ( | Perceived informativeness, enjoyment, usefulness, ease of use, attitude toward using and behavioral intention to use | ||
| Fashion-related (eyewear) AR apps | Mobile phone | Between-subjects experiment ( | Perceived ease of use, usefulness, privacy priming, behavioral intention to use | Four different AR apps (marker and markerless) | - Tablet | Evaluation-based questionnaires (4 studies, | Perceived informativeness, enjoyment, usefulness, ease of use, attitude toward using and behavioral intention to use | ||
| Virtual | N/A | Five focus groups and an online survey ( | Usefulness of virtual try-on, ease of use, entertainment value, attitude, technology anxiety, innovativeness, intended use, post-use evaluation | Eyeglass-wearing AR apps | Mobile phone | User evaluation-based questionnaire ( | Vividness, novelty, perceived usefulness, ease of use, enjoyment, attitude toward use, behavioral intention to use | ||
| AR-enhanced virtual try-ons | Mobile phone | User evaluation-based questionnaire ( | Perceived interactivity, augmentation, telepresence, utilitarian value, hedonic value, adoption intention, sensation-seeking tendency, technology anxiety | AR applications for online buying | N/A | Online questionnaire ( | Social identity, perceived usefulness, ease of use, personal innovativeness, self-efficacy, enjoyment, attitude, intention to use | ||
| Three AR apps: ASOS, Amazon and IKEA | N/A | Online questionnaire from users of AR apps ( | AR novelty, interactivity and vividness, ease of use, usefulness, enjoyment, subjective norms, brand engagement, satisfaction and brand usage intention | VR shelf | Oculus Rift DK2 | Within-subjects experiment ( | Presence, body ownership, awareness of movements, usability and enjoyment | ||
| AR and VR for electronic product | - Oculus Rift | User evaluation-based questionnaire ( | Usefulness and ease of use | AR application for books | Tablet | Experimental field study ( | Perceived ease of use, usefulness, enjoyment and intention to reuse | ||
| AR apps virtually trying-on cosmetic products | Mobile phone | User evaluation-based questionnaire ( | Novelty seeking, perceived augmented reality, enjoyment, usefulness, informativeness and ease of use, behavioral intention to use | VR Christmas experience | Oculus Rift DK2 | Between-subjects experiment ( | Attitude toward the mall, approach behavior, mall satisfaction and loyalty intention | ||
| VR clothing store | Large screen with polarized glasses | User evaluation-based questionnaire ( | Ease of use, enjoyment, store perception and consumer satisfaction | VR supermarket | Full HD 3D 1080p Projector | Between-subjects experiment ( | Performance (task completion time and the traveled distance) and NASA Task Load Index | ||
| Virtual try-on system for sunglasses | PC with webcamera | User evaluation-based questionnaire ( | Aesthetic quality, interactivity, response time, quality of information, ease of use, enjoyment, usefulness, attitude and behavioral intention | The current study | AR, VR and AV (AR + VR) shops compared to self-built physical shop | Valve Index VR headset & Microsoft HoloLens AR headset; allow body movement and interaction | Between-subjects experiment ( | Perceived enjoyment, perceived ease of use (NASA Task Load Index), perceived usefulness, attitude and intention to visit |
Source(s): Author’s own creation/work
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.