Next Article in Journal
Consumers’ Behavioural Intentions to Reuse Recommender Systems: Assessing the Effects of Trust Propensity, Trusting Beliefs and Perceived Usefulness
Previous Article in Journal
Multi-Channel and Omni-Channel Retailing in the Scientific Literature: A Text Mining Approach
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JTAER
Volume 18
Issue 1
10.3390/jtaer18010003
jtaer-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Designing an Attractive Metaverse: Research on Design Factors Influencing Audience Satisfaction with a Virtual Space Based on QCA

by
Lingzhi Brian Fang
1,
Xiongfei Dong
2,
Zhicheng Weng
2,3 and
Taoqin Chen
4,*
1
School of Journalism, Fudan University, Shanghai 200444, China
2
School of Management, Fudan University, Shanghai 200444, China
3
Shanghai Gold Exchange, Shanghai 200444, China
4
SILC Business School, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2023, 18(1), 37-54; https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer18010003
Submission received: 11 September 2022 / Revised: 14 December 2022 / Accepted: 16 December 2022 / Published: 22 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Digital Marketing and the Connected Consumer)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Consistent with the imminence of the metaverse, academics and industry have been paying more attention to the research into the metaverse. The viewpoint that present studies have linked the metaverse to the virtual space provides an opportunity to detect the metaverse. However, current research into virtual spaces remains undeveloped from the perspective of design, especially with a lack of an ergonomic and service viewpoint. Based on this, this study integrates ergonomics, information science and service management to determine how to build an attractive virtual space. Through 102 samples, employing qualitative comparative analysis, three main configurations are proposed, and contribute to filling this research gap. The results of this study indicate that, for designing a virtual space, human interactions with the virtual space should be taken into consideration selectively, from an internal or external perspective. As for the value-delivery process, the position of the audience should be reconsidered with the invalidity of value co-creation.

1. Introduction

In 2021, many well-known IT companies announced that they would begin to explore the metaverse. Facebook, Microsoft and Amazon, etc., took several actions after they foresaw that the metaverse would become the major trend of the internet. In addition, in 2022, metaverse become the most popular term and trend around the world, covered by TIME. To date, the metaverse has drawn attention worldwide, and it is widely believed that we are entering the era of the metaverse [1,2].
However, metaverse is not strictly a new term. When Neal Stephenson created this term in 1992, from his description of the metaverse, there was a link between the metaverse and the current virtual space [3,4]. Furthermore, several studies have already considered the virtual space and applied it to the entertainment, education and commerce industries, thus revealing the direction of society’s advancement [5,6]. Overall, it is clear that neglecting the virtual space has great impact on our society. With the advancement of digital technology, the virtual space has penetrated into every corner of our society.
This fact can been observed by the current digital game industry. The soaring advancement of digital games has brought tremendous change to this society. Consistent with the digital technology development, digital games have evolved from a simple formation (e.g., Mine sweeper) to a virtual world with diversified and complex functions (e.g., World of Warcraft). Therefore, in this digital-gaming era, everyone has been influenced by the relatively developed virtual world of the digital game. Numerous kinds of virtual worlds, representing the current virtual space, have attracted large numbers of people. This reflects the fact that there is an opportunity for the metaverse to be born out of the current digital-gaming industry.
Thus, whether the metaverse, virtual space or digital games, the digital and virtual revolution in our society is expected to transform our lives. Despite such significance, few studies have concentrated on how to design a virtual space. Current studies instead focus on exploring the impacts brought by the virtual space; however, they tend to neglect the notion that the design of the virtual space determines its impact on society [7,8,9].
On the basis of the research gaps and practical background outlined above, this study identified the influencing factors on audience satisfaction with virtual spaces, from the perspective of design. By integrating ergonomics, information science and service management, six influencing factors were proposed and then analyzed, to explore how to design an attractive virtual space. With the construction of the configurations on audience satisfaction, a novel method called qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) was employed. The results of this study contribute to the research on virtual spaces and the forthcoming metaverse, as well as providing several practical implications.

2. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

2.1. Metaverse and Virtual Spaces

The metaverse is a place where humans, as programmable avatars, interact with each other and software agents, in a three-dimensional virtual space that uses the metaphor of the real world. Consistent with the technology greatly improving, the metaverse has begun to come from the imaginary to reality.
The metaverse was introduced into the daily lives of the population when Roblox was listed io the New York Stock Exchange. Nonetheless, the concept of the metaverse originated from the science fiction novel Snow Crash, written by Neal Stephenson in 1992; it was then developed by the industry and became popularized worldwide, in 2021. As the proposition of the metaverse is novel, there are few studies that explore this concept. Stephenson [4] used the metaverse to envisage humans entering into the virtual space. According to Dwivedi et al. [3], metaverse refers to a upgrade of virtual space which can be categorized into environment, interface, interaction and social value. Gadekallu et al. [10] explained that the metaverse is a revolution, characterizing the next stage of digital networks, where users can leverage virtual and augmented reality to experience the virtual space. On the basis of these studies, academics have reached a consensus that the metaverse, characterized by digitalization, computation and immersion, has a strong relationship with virtual spaces [11,12,13]. Above all, the metaverse is closely related to, and evolved from, the virtual space. Therefore, the metaverse is a highly developed virtual space with features of integration into, and immersion in, reality.
Thus, in order to explore the metaverse, it is of great necessity to review the research into virtual worlds. Studies of virtual worlds have been conducted for a significant period of time, since digital games were introduced. Based on prior research into digital games, plenty of scholars have reached a consensus that virtual world is a functional virtual space where users can interact with the other or the virtual environment. According to Messinger et al. [14], a virtual world is a three-dimensional space where people can interact with each other simultaneously. Goel et al. [15] state that a virtual world is a three-dimensional, computer-based and simulated virtual environment, which has attracted a great deal of attention among entertainment, education and commerce. Based on the study of Girvan [16], virtual worlds provide a three-dimensional virtual space where people rely on their avatars to communicate with each other and then shape this space. On the basis of research into the metaverse and virtual worlds, it is obvious that the virtual world is the form of current virtual space, and thus the foundation of the metaverse. Moreover, the metaverse places an emphasis on immersion and integration into reality rather than the present virtual space, with users utilizing immersive devices. Consequently, the metaverse has a stronger linkage with reality than the current virtual space [17,18]. Figure 1 delivers the relationship between the metaverse, the virtual space and the virtual world.
However, the distinctions revealed above do not prevent us from discussing the metaverse through the present virtual space. The impact and transformation on society, brought by the present virtual space, are critically studied in the literature. Regarding the impact of virtual spaces, many current studies deliver important insights. In terms of commerce, consistent with the regular discussion on online shopping [7], avatar marketing has been introduced, and has risen with the development of the metaverse [19,20]. In comparison with the advantages brought by the virtual space, numerical anarchy has drawn the attention of scholars. Several studies on virtual worlds have demonstrated the negative impact brought about by the virtual space. For example, social discrimination and violence are popular in virtual worlds [21]. In order to avoid such flaws, the judgment of the audience on virtual worlds plays an important role. Verhagen et al. [22] detected the influencing mechanism of audience satisfaction with virtual worlds. Bormann and Greitemeyer [23] adopted a psychological perspective to explore audience satisfaction with a virtual world.
Overall, according to the studies mentioned above, it is apparent that no matter what positive or negative impact on society is led by virtual space, how to design an adequate virtual space is the key point. Unfortunately, few studies explore the research question from the perspective of design. Therefore, this research gap is proposed, both from the literature and from the point of view of practical issues.
On the basis of the above studies, we can infer that the design of a virtual space exerts a significant effect on our society and the forthcoming metaverse. With the advancement of the metaverse, building a satisfactory virtual space is of great significance.

2.2. Ergonomics and Interaction

For the most critical features of the metaverse, highly developed interaction has been always posed. In particular, if we want to deepen this research on the metaverse, we will take designing a viewpoint into consideration. Thus, ergonomics, i.e., human–machine interaction, will not be ignored.
Humans have been utilizing machines to assist themselves for a long time. Within the era of technology, human interaction with machines has been emphasized, to improve the user experience. Human–machine interaction is defined as “the discipline concerned with human design, evaluate and interact with machine which has been leveraged to support human finishing their works and achieve a perfect performance” [24,25]. Moreover, human–machine interaction has become focused on human–computer interaction, with the advancement of digitalization. In particular, human–computer interaction can be more easily understood as the human–machine interactive object is narrowed and concentrated.
Meanwhile, the transformation of this interactive object has brought several impacts on industries and academics. For example, when a human interacts with a computer, interactive devices are required. Thus, industries and academics have been continuously attempting to determine how to design and construct a well-developed interface. The present research on automated driving exemplifies this [26,27,28]. Thus, a human–machine interface (HMI) has been designed and developed, in order to deliver convenience in the interactive process [29]. Consequently, it is easy to foresee the trend of HMI, wherein more and more devices have been used to facilitate the development of automation and intelligence, i.e., artificial intelligence [30,31].
Regarding the scope of information, HMI is currently approaching virtual/augmented reality [32,33]. Based on the metaverse, the human–machine interface should provide several types of value for humans, such as ease of use [34], leading the flow experience [33] and building an immersive environment [35]. In summary, as a significant representation of human–machine or human–computer interaction, HMI is an important doorway to the virtual space.

2.3. Configuration Framework of Influencing Factors on Audience Satisfaction

2.3.1. Theoretical Foundation of Antecedent Proposition

Based on the theoretical background outlined above, it can be concluded that research into virtual spaces from the perspective of design, is critical. By adopting and merging interactions, insights can be obtained into to how to design an attractive virtual space.
Thus, the above literature review has offered several theoretical perspectives on the designing antecedents. Firstly, ergonomics must be considered. More specifically, when it comes to interaction, the previous studies on ergonomics and virtual space have shown that humans can interact with other humans or machines [36,37]. From this viewpoint, interaction with humans/environment in virtual space and the human–machine interface will be proposed in this study. In addition, consistent with the related technology theory, the technology acceptance model (TAM) will be taken into consideration. Due to the fact that the metaverse is typically related to advanced technology, adopting TAM in this study as one of the theoretical foundations is appropriate [38,39]. Thus, convenience has been relied on. Lastly, service provision also needs to be taken into consideration, because service-dominant logic (S-D logic) has been proposed to understand the process of value creation and delivery [40,41,42].

2.3.2. Configuration Framework

Figure 2 displays the influencing configuration framework on audience satisfaction with a virtual space (metaverse). According to prior research, the influencing factors on audience satisfaction is of a certain complexity, and thus the conventional theoretical framework is not appropriate for this study [43,44]. The advantage taken by the configuration framework is to display such complexity and the interactivity among all the antecedents.
The influencing factors are posed from the wo main perspectives of interaction and service provision. In accordance with the HMI and digital game classification, HMI, convenience and interactions with the environment and humans will be tested, to determine whether they satisfy the audience. In terms of service provision, with value co-creation and value proposition being the relatively contrasting twofold nature of service provision, they will be analyzed for their influence and impact on audience satisfaction.

3. Materials and Methods

Due to the complexity of the influencing factors of audience satisfaction with virtual spaces, this study needs to approach the synergistic effects between the antecedents. Thus, the traditional hierarchy regression is not suitable for this study. In accordance with the methodology research, QCA has an advantage over multiple-conjunctural causation, consistent with the limited samples and text data [45,46,47]. Specifically, it is mainly used to analyze the effect of the combination of multiple factors on the same outcome between them. Thus, it is suitable for tackling the research question of this study. Consequently, this study utilized QCA as a suitable method to study the influencing factors on audience satisfaction.

3.1. Method and Data Collection

As QCA was first adopted in research in sociology, this method was initially only suitable for a small sample. However, to date, QCA has overcome this limitation and been developed for application to large samples [45,46]. This procedure shows that QCA has a broader sample-size requirement. More specifically, there are no strict rules on sample size while using QCA. Thus, the sample size should depend on the research context and the requirements of the researchers. In accordance with related QCA research, many studies have adopted at least 30 cases as a suitable sample size [48,49].
From the above literature review, it is obvious that the metaverse has a close relationship with the virtual space, and a vast number of virtual spaces exist in digital games. Consequently, digital games are suitable samples for this study. Whereas there are different kinds of digital games, according to prior research game genre classification is still under debate [50,51,52]. Many scholars present game classifications from diversified perspectives, but none of them consider that the virtual space to be of great necessity for digital games [53]. Some digital games rely on virtual spaces, such as “Grand Theft Auto V” and “Massive Multiple Online Role Play Games (MMORPGs)”, to attract users. More specifically, users can engage in a range of activities in these types of games; for example, they can transact with non-player characters (NPCs) or other users; they can even join together and begin war with other player groups in the virtual space. On the world’s largest digital game platform, “Steam”, there are user-defined tags to describe this type of game: open world. Therefore, open world certainly represents a relatively mature virtual space at present. On the basis of this, we chose digital games featuring open world as the case sample in this study.
The data were collected from “Steam” and its related database websites, “Steamspy” and “SteamDB”. First, after searching all the games on Steam with the user-defined tag “open world” through Steamspy, we obtained 3724 games as the sample. Since people have limited time to play digital games, not all the games among the 3724 games obtained were valuable for analysis. In order to identify the game samples suitable for this study, we used the following indicators. Firstly, Steamspy provides the indicator of “Players”, which can measure how many users have actually launched the game. Through this indicator, the games with “N/A” and “0” were eliminated, so that 227 games were obtained. Second, since the technology of video games is rapidly updated, through discussion among the research group we decided to use games released within the last 5 years (1 July 2017–1 July 2022). Such games released within the last 5 years have a certain guarantee of advanced technology and time length of operation. After filtering, 95 games remained. Third, MMORPG has a relatively well-developed virtual space, so we included MMORPG, which was not released within the last 5 years but still included actual users who had launched the game for analysis, and we finally obtained 102 games.

3.2. Measurement

Firstly, before the introduction of measurement of all the conditions in this study, the definition of the conditions must be clarified. Table 1 displays an introduction to the conditions adopted by this study.

3.2.1. Interaction with Environment

Due to the imperfect digital game technology, many of the virtual spaces entail several limitations for users. Specifically, not all digital games support humans in interacting with the environment in the virtual space. Recently, “sandbox games” have emerged, because they offer strong interactions for users. Distinct digital games provide distinct interactions; for instance, World of Warcraft does not support players interacting with environments such as building a house by themselves in games, etc., whereas in a sandbox game, the environmental features such as trees, stones and creatures, can be destroyed and collected by users. Moreover, users can create weapons or construct buildings, to change the environment. Therefore, the sandbox game provides a relatively strong interaction for users, in comparison with other kinds of game. On the basis of this explanation, with the user-defined tag “sandbox”, “1” indicates that users will have a strong interaction with the environment in a virtual space, and “0” indicates that users cannot experience a strong interaction in a virtual space.

3.2.2. Interaction with Humans

In this study, interaction with humans means that users can participate in social activities in the game. According to the classification of digital games [50], it can be seen that some digital games provide a social function for users. For example, when users play MMORPG, they can chat and link with each other through the chat box or add strangers as their friends in the game. When games contain the user tag “co-op” or “multiplayer”, it indicates that these kinds of games possess a strong social function. Moreover, the social function assesses the extent to which users can interact with other people. In this study, we measured interaction with humans as dependent on the social function offered by the games, where “1” represents games with a social function and “0” indicates the opposite.

3.2.3. Human–Machine Interface

From the abovementioned studies of HMI, HMI can be defined according to the type of controller used when a human interacts with a machine. In the scenario of interacting with a computer, several controllers can be found. As a basis, keyboards and mice are fundamental controllers for humans. On Steam, the supportive controller of a game varies. It can be observed that when a game has the tag “full controller support”, this means that the entirety of the game can be played and controlled entirely by a controller, without keyboard and mouse input. Likewise, the tag “partial controller support” indicates that the game may need keyboard- and mouse-input at some point. There are also games without supportive controller tags, indicating that the game can only be played with a keyboard and mouse. Furthermore, games with advanced controllers such as VR are popular on Steam. When games support VR, it means that they support not only advanced equipment but traditional controllers. Consequently, HMI can be measured by these controller tags on Steam; we evaluated this antecedent as follows: “1” indicates a game without controller tags, “2” indicates a game with the “partial controller support” tag, “3” indicates a game with the “full controller support” tag, and “4” indicates that the game was supported by advanced controllers such as VR.

3.2.4. Convenience

Based on the technology acceptance model (TAM), we adopted convenience to describe a situation in which users experience ease and accessibility when they use new technology. According to related studies on digital games, cloud games invented for improving convenience for players have garnered much attention for scholarship [54,55]. A cloud game allows users to play from anywhere, without relying on proprietary devices. Therefore, it can be observed that whether the game supports cloud gaming or not will determine whether users experience ease and convenience. With the linkage of convenience, it is obvious that the cloud game is appropriate to measure whether the audiences are experiencing ease of use when they are using this virtual space [56]. In accordance with such explanations, based on the “cloud game” tags on Steam, “1” indicates that the game supports cloud gaming, i.e., it provides convenience for users, and “0” indicates that the game does not support cloud gaming.

3.2.5. Value Co-Creation

Among the range of digital games, companies do not limit users in providing value for the game. There are many ways in which users can participate in the process of value creation—for example, as MOD providers. Specifically, when users become MOD providers, they can assist companies in improving the game. According to prior studies of value co-creation, such user behavior confirms their value to the company [57]. On Steam, when a game supports MOD its website page shows the tag “Steam workshop”. Thus, we evaluated value co-creation using this tag, where “1” indicates the workshop tag and “0” indicates the opposite.

3.2.6. Value Proposition

From the perspective of S-D logic, value co-creation and value proposition are coined as the two parts of service provisioning. The study of value proposition shows that, in the service process, value proposition elaborates what the firm can offer to the consumer [58]. In other words, value proposition is the process of value output by the enterprise to the consumer, through the design of its own products. If we regard a digital game as a service product, the value proposition provided by companies is mainly in the form of “narrative provision” to the player, i.e., a large number of tasks to guide the player and thus lay out the story of the game. A task system exists in a large number of digital games in general, and studies on games show that the complexity of the task system depends on the type of digital game [59]. Narrations in the digital game are reflected by these systems, and thus result in a value proposition of the service product. In order to explain the value proposition of virtual space, role-play games (RPGs) have a large number of task systems and story systems. Therefore, to measure value proposition, this study assigns a value of “1” to games without the “RPG” tag, “2” to games with the “RPG” tag, and “3” to games with both the “RPG” and “story-rich” tags.

3.2.7. Audience Satisfaction

Audience satisfaction in this study refers to whether audiences are satisfied or not with the experience they have in virtual space. According to prior studies on human satisfaction, many audiences have reviewed a product positively after they used it [60,61]. Therefore, audience satisfaction can be reflected by whether the review is positive or negative, and is apparent and easily measured. On Steam, a large amount of detail on audience reviews is provided, and it is obvious how to gain a positive review rate, as Steam has already provided this indicator for every user. Consequently, this study adopted this indicator to measure audience satisfaction with the virtual space.

3.3. Calibration

There are 3 types of QCA that can be considered, including crispy-set QCA (CS-QCA), multi-valued QCA(MV-QCA) and fuss-set QCA (FS-QCA). Among these, FS-QCA is widely used to tackle problems where the values of antecedents do not belong to the [0,1] interval. In this study, several antecedents are not clearly described, as required by FS-QCA; thus, the calibration of antecedents is necessary. In past research employing QCA, calibration is used for transforming antecedents into a membership set, ranging from full non-membership, which equals 0, to full membership, which equals 1; 0.5 is the crossover point and indicates maximum ambiguity [62,63,64]. Some techniques are used for calibration. The first technique is to calibrate according to numerical anchors; for example, one can calibrate antecedents according to “disagree”, “neutrality” and “agree”, to assign values to antecedents on a scale. The second method is to calibrate the antecedents with reference to the maximum, mean (median) and minimum values of the sample, and the last method is to assign values according to the percentile of the antecedents. In this study, we used the third technique to calibrate the antecedents. Specifically, we used the upper 95% quantile, the median, and the lower 5% quantile as the criteria for calibration. Table 2 shows the calibration and antecedent measurement.
Subsequently, in order to give a clearer overview of the features of the antecedents, we also performed the corresponding descriptive statistics on the antecedents. We used SPSS 22.0 for this data processing. Table 3 and Table 4 show more details of the sample and depict descriptive statistics and correlations of the antecedents in this study.

4. Results

4.1. Necessary Condition Analysis

Similar to other QCA studies, the necessary analysis of single conditions needs to be performed before the configuration analysis. The necessary condition analysis of single conditions refers to whether the set of results is affiliated with a single condition (including its non-set). According to related studies, the main factor for determining whether there is an affiliation is consistency. In general, consistency greater than 0.9 is judged to indicate affiliation [48,64]. Table 5 shows the results of the individual conditional necessary analysis. The results show that none of the main antecedent conditions used in this study were necessary for the outcome condition.
Although QCA can offer necessary condition analysis, in this study, we combined necessary condition analysis (NCA) with QCA to fully demonstrate the result of necessary condition analysis. According to Dule (2016, 2020) [65,66], NCA is proposed to analyze the statistical significance of the necessity condition. Compared with QCA, NCA not only identifies whether a particular condition is necessary for a given outcome, but also analyzes the effect size of the necessary condition. Specifically, the effect size is also called the bottleneck level in NCA, which represents the minimum level of necessary conditions to produce a given result. Consequently, NCA is a complement to QCA in the procedure of necessary condition analysis. Table 6 and Table 7 display the results of NCA.
NCA provides two techniques to analyze the necessary condition. The first one is ceiling regression (CR), which is suitable for analyzing continuous antecedents, and the other is ceiling envelopment (CE), which is suitable for analyzing discrete antecedents. In the NCA data processing, the effect size can be calculated using CR and CE. In the NCA method, the necessary conditions can be confirmed while satisfying two conditions, as follows: first, the effect size is not less than 0.1; second, the Monte Carlo simulation of permutation tests is not significant. Furthermore, in this study, it is observed that many antecedents are discrete antecedents. Thus, as seen in Table 6, we relied on CE to provide the result of the bottleneck analysis. The result of the NCA gives further support to the necessary condition analysis result of QCA.

4.2. Sufficient Analysis

After the necessary analysis of single conditions, we conducted sufficient analysis to examine the mutual impact on audience satisfaction. This section concentrates on the mechanism behind the variation in the antecedent interaction results in terms of a high level or low level of audience satisfaction. We used fs/QCA 3.0 for data processing.
Sufficient analysis firstly needs to set a threshold for raw consistency; the truth-value table is then constructed. In accordance with prior studies, we found that building a truth-value table requires firstly eliminating the configuration with a sample size of 0, and secondly setting the threshold value of raw consistency, according to certain criteria [49,62]. By reviewing the relevant research articles, we found that many studies set the threshold value of raw consistency at 0.8 [48]. Nevertheless, based on the data-processing findings of this study, we noticed that if the threshold value of raw consistency was set to 0.8, it was too low to effectively extract configurations for the outcome. Therefore, we chose to set the raw consistency to 0.96 when building the truth-value table. It should also be noted that when processing the outcome as a low level of audience satisfaction, we discovered that the data of this study did not extract the effective configuration well. Therefore, we set the raw consistency to 0.1 and then approached the relevant configurations. Table 8 shows the full results of the configuration analysis for this study.

4.3. Horizontal Analysis of Antecedent Condition

In order to provide a better analysis of the configurations generated by different outcomes, we firstly conducted a horizontal analysis of the antecedent condition. Table 8 shows that all the antecedents lead to a high level of audience satisfaction. When the outcome is a high level of audience satisfaction, the consistency of the six generated configurations is higher than 0.9, and the solution consistency also meets the basic requirements of QCA (solution consistency > 0.8). This indicates that these six configurations are valid at a high level of audience satisfaction. On the contrary, when the outcome is a low level of audience satisfaction, the four configurations extracted do not meet the requirements of QCA. The consistency of these four configurations is less than 0.9, and the solution consistency does not reach the target. Consequently, the antecedents adopted by this study are confirmed to improve audience satisfaction.

4.4. Configuration Analysis on High Level of Audience Satisfaction

On the basis of the horizontal analysis of the antecedent condition, we then conducted the configuration analysis on the high level of audience satisfaction. It was observed that there were three main configurations among the six configurations. Firstly, value proposition plays a significant role in configurations, resulting in a high level of audience satisfaction. Config. 1a and 1b indicate that value proposition dominates the path leading to a positive user review. Specifically, in config. 1a and 1b, no other conditions are present, except that the value proposition is dominant for audience satisfaction. Especially in the absence of any interaction in the virtual space, it highlights the role of value proposition in enhancing audience satisfaction. In addition, the effect of interaction both inside and outside the virtual space on audience satisfaction is more obvious. As can be seen by configurations 2a and 2b, the external interaction of the virtual space is more crucial. Such prominence, however, is based on a certain internal interaction design. Config. 2a and 2b show that when both HMI and convenience are used as core casual conditions, enhanced audience satisfaction requires either interaction with humans or interaction with the environment as a peripheral casual condition; (config 2a. Human–machine interface * Convenience * Interaction with human *~Value co-creation*~Value proposition and Config 2b. Human–machine interface * Convenience * Interaction with environment *~Value co-creation*~Value proposition). Finally, likewise, the interaction design inside the virtual space also has a beneficial effect on audience satisfaction. Config. 3a and 3b show that interaction within the virtual space is also extremely important, but this interaction does not require value co-creation, which also highlights the fact that value co-creation does not have a significant effect on audience satisfaction.
Although the consistency of these four configurations did not meet the requirements when the outcome was a low level of audience satisfaction, a brief analysis of these four paths is still possible. It can be found that the irrationality of internal and external interaction design can directly lead to audience dissatisfaction. Config. 4a, 4b and 5 indicate that the interaction with the environment is critical for the virtual spaces. Simultaneously, if the internal and external interaction design is not suitable for the audience, it will also lead to audience dissatisfaction. Overall, these four configurations demonstrate the necessity and significance of interaction.

5. Discussion

This study mainly focused on the design factors that influence audience satisfaction with virtual spaces, which will be important for the forthcoming metaverse. In accordance with the definition of metaverse, the configurations figured out by this study exert significant a function, especially the revelation of the interaction and operation roles [3,9]. Given the lack of research on designing virtual spaces, this study aimed to approach the influential factors on audience satisfaction with virtual spaces from a combined perspective of ergonomics, information science and service management. Consequently, the configurations of QCA in this study offered several conclusions and research contributions which it is necessary to discuss.

5.1. Designing an Attractive Virtual Space

5.1.1. Interaction Design of Virtual Spaces: The User and Machine

On the basis of configurations of QCA, it is observed that the interaction design is of great significance for users. Moreover, such interaction can be split into two parts: one is internal virtual space interaction (IVSI), and the other is external virtual space interaction (EVSI). The IVSI represents how users behave via avatars in a virtual space and EVSI represents how users control their avatars and interact with machines.
Firstly, in terms of IVSI, both a social-intercourse function and interaction with the environment are necessary. This study reveals the users’ preference for connections with other users and the freedom offered by virtual spaces. Firstly, although the critical value of social intercourse to the internet and society has been shown, the social attributes of the game are worthy of deeper examination. Furthermore, although the vast virtual space provides a large amount of virtual space for users to explore freely, this exploration may become somewhat lonely and isolated without social intercourse. This feeling of isolation will be detrimental to the user experience, which in turn leads to lower user-satisfaction. Similarly, the results of this study on interaction with the environment in virtual spaces show that users need a certain amount of free space to explore the virtual space. If the interaction is too restrictive, they will feel that the world is not real, thus weakening the user’s positive evaluation of the virtual space. In conclusion, there is a requirement to provide users with a degree of space for social intercourse and interaction with the internal environment in a virtual space.
Regarding EVSI, the configurations of QCA show that the application of varied controllers exert an effect on audience satisfaction. This result suggests that the demand for interactive devices is no longer focused on keyboards and mice, but on having more devices that are supported when playing. The traditional keyboard and mouse are certainly a fully developed solution for external interaction, but users also need more devices to enhance their own experience. Furthermore, regardless of whether the virtual space can be approached with the independence of diversified controllers, the convenience of technology should be taken into consideration. According to TAM, with user acceptance of new technology depending on convenience, the ease of use of a device is of significance. Therefore, for the design of a virtual space, the fundamental user demand for EVSI is convenience. Overall, the convenience of the device is an important factor in determining whether the audience is satisfied with the virtual space.
However, there is additional evidence that, after the external interaction design meets the user requirement, the internal virtual space’s functionality is required to be loosened. In contrast, if the EVSI does not meet the user requirements, then the user raises the demand for the design of IVSI. Config. 2a and 2b indicate that interaction with humans and interaction with the environment have alternative roles. In other words, given a certain level of external interaction design, the IVSI does not need to be fully developed, but can rather allow the user to feel a certain level of interactivity. Config. 3a and 3b support this viewpoint.
In summary, audience satisfaction with virtual spaces depends on interaction. Specifically, EVSI is fundamental to interaction design and largely determines the user experience. IVSI, on the other hand, has a substitute effect on the abovementioned analytical basis; nevertheless, it also determines the user experience to a large extent.

5.1.2. Rethinking the Service-Provision Design of Virtual Spaces

The results of the QCA not only demonstrate the importance of interaction design for virtual spaces, but also have implications for the service provision of companies. Firstly, it is obvious that value co-creation does not exist in any of the configurations. Thus, value co-creation is not critical to user satisfaction. This has led to a reconsideration of how virtual spaces can be designed to provide better services for users. Config. 1a and 1b demonstrate that there is a need for some value proposition in the virtual space. In addition to a well-designed interaction, users in the virtual space need guidance and settings, and a large proportion of users may even rely heavily on the settings that the virtual space already provides. It is clear from this that if we wish to create a virtual space that pleases the users, activating their value and involving them in the construction of the virtual space does not satisfy them; rather, they need a holistic and very strong value proposition from those who provide and operate the virtual space. In brief, they do not want to be involved in the whole process of value creation. In addition, this strong demand for value proposition is based on the lack of interaction design within the virtual space. In other words, when the interaction within the virtual space does not meet the users’ requirements, the users need the vendor to provide them with strong guidance for play and content output, so that they are satisfied with the virtual space.
This result diverges from previous studies on value co-creation in platforms or games. Many studies have shown the positive impact of value co-creation on consumer word-of-mouth [67,68], but the results from this study show that value co-creation does not have a significant positive impact on audience satisfaction, possibly suggesting that users do not in fact need value co-creation at all. Accordingly, the design of service provision in virtual spaces should break away from the traditional S-D logic and, in turn, the position and role of the user in the process of experiencing the virtual space needs to be reconsidered.

5.2. Theoretical Contributions

On the basis of the results, this study offers several insights for related research. Firstly, the results of this paper contribute to the theoretical study of virtual spaces and the metaverse. Current research on virtual spaces has mostly been conducted on the impacts of virtual spaces, rather than exploring how we design and use virtual spaces from a managerial perspective [3,21]. The lacking of a design perspective accordingly results in an undeveloped virtual space [18,32]. Consistent with ergonomics, the research questions in this paper take into account current trends in society, as well as providing a design perspective to understand the relationship between virtual spaces and users. Above all, the configurations indicate how to design an attractive virtual space, which offers certain research contributions to supplement related studies.
Secondly, the results of the configurations presented in this paper also make a theoretical contribution to the study of HMI and service management. On one hand, the detection of IVSI and EVSI demonstrates a comprehensive view of HMI, rather than a relatively independent view of HMI [26,31]. Based on this, the discussion in this study on HMI combines the traditional technical application of HMI with its impact on audience satisfaction, which is relatively absent in the research into HMI [9,33,68]. Moreover, the configuration presented in this study, on the other hand, serves to indicate that value co-creation may not have the same position and effect as previous scholars have suggested. Prior research into value co-creation has centered on the S-D logic, while scholars in service management have advocated the value and significance of value co-creation for companies and audiences [67,68]. Meanwhile, when the audience is enjoying the virtual space, the audience may not want to help the company to operate and maintain the virtual space. For the audience, they may only require unilateral value delivery from the company during the virtual-space experience. Overall, this study provides a relatively holistic viewpoint to comprehend HMI and service management.

5.3. Practical Implications

The results of this study offer several practical uses. Firstly, due to taking a design perspective, this study can directly provide several approaches for companies currently producing virtual spaces and metaverses. By concentrating on audience satisfaction, this study offers interactive insights for producers and managers of virtual spaces. Secondly, the results of this study indicate that we may engage audiences by improving their experience through a favorable interaction design. In general, this study synthesizes theories related to ergonomics and information science, integrating HMI and service management, to specifically address how the design of virtual spaces affect audience satisfaction. Finally, user value may be not very necessary for operating virtual spaces. Therefore, companies also should explore the relative positions and roles of themselves and their users in maintaining and operating virtual spaces. As for forthcoming metaverses, companies should deliver a coherent operation plan, and, at the same time, companies need to deliver core values to satisfy their audiences in the process of virtual-space operation. In summary, the results of this study provide practical implications for the virtual space and metaverse.
On the basis of the sample we used, this study also provides several practical insights for the digital games industry. The designing of virtual space is typically important for the digital game industry. The findings of this study inspire the managers in the digital game industry to understand that how to design interaction in virtual space exerts significant impact on audience satisfaction. Not only that, value proposition is of great necessity for providers, so that they should not rely on audiences themselves, even though the trend in the digital game industry has begun to lay emphasis on value co-creation.

6. Conclusions and Limitations

6.1. Conclusions

This study has revealed the impact configurations on audience satisfaction with the virtual space from the perspective of design. On the basis of the above discussion, several conclusions will be offered. To begin with, design factors typically play a role in the virtual space, with a mixture of interaction from technology support and service provisioning. In addition, forging a better audience experience depends on the virtual space and forms of interaction. There should be freedoms in the virtual space and forms of interaction. Lastly, it is necessary to decide how the empowerment of users can be reconsidered by the enterprises, due to the fact that the function of value cocreation may be overvalued.

6.2. Limitations and Future Research

Although there are several theoretical contributions and practical implications in this study, some flaws can still be found. Firstly, due to the utilization of QCA, the sample is relatively small. A future study may extend the sample and thus lead to a regression analysis. Secondly, the factors selected in this study are limited. Undoubtedly, the influential factors on virtual spaces are of great complexity, and future studies should extend this research scope. Lastly, this study mainly relied on digital games as the samples, thus excluding the industrial application of the metaverse. This led to research limitations. Above all, this research question is of necessity for scholars to explore in the forthcoming era of the metaverse.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.B.F. and T.C.; methodology, L.B.F. and T.C.; software, X.D.; validation, L.B.F. and X.D. resources, Z.W. and T.C.; writing—original draft preparation, L.B.F.; writing—review and editing, X.D., Z.W. and T.C.; revision, L.B.F., Z.W. and T.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (72202130).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data available on request due to restrictions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Belk, R.; Humayun, M.; Brouard, M. Money, Possessions, and Ownership in the Metaverse: NFTs, Cryptocurrencies, Web3 and Wild Markets. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 153, 198–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ahn, S.J.; Kim, J.; Kim, J. The Bifold Triadic Relationships Framework: A Theoretical Primer for Advertising Research in the Metaverse. J. Advert. 2022, 51, 592–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Dwivedi, Y.K.; Hughes, L.; Baabdullah, A.M.; Ribeiro-Navarrete, S.; Giannakis, M.; Al-Debei, M.M.; Dennehy, D.; Metri, B.; Buhalis, D.; Cheung, C.M. Metaverse beyond the Hype: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Emerging Challenges, Opportunities, and Agenda for Research, Practice and Policy. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2022, 66, 102542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Stephenson, N. Snow Crash, 1st ed.; Bantam Books: New York, NY, USA, 1992; ISBN 0-553-08853-X. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bainbridge, W.S. (Ed.) Online Worlds: Convergence of the Real and the Virtual; Human-Computer Interaction Series; Springer: London, UK, 2010; ISBN 978-1-84882-824-7. [Google Scholar]
  6. Duncan, I.; Miller, A.; Jiang, S. A Taxonomy of Virtual Worlds Usage in Education. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2012, 43, 949–964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Baker, E.W.; Hubona, G.S.; Srite, M. Does “Being There” Matter? The Impact of Web-Based and Virtual World’s Shopping Experiences on Consumer Purchase Attitudes. Inf. Manag. 2019, 56, 103153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Srivastava, S.C.; Chandra, S. Social Presence in Virtual World Collaboration: An Uncertainty Reduction Perspective Using a Mixed Methods Approach. MIS Q. 2018, 42, 779–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yu, X.; Xie, Z.; Yu, Y.; Lee, J.; Vazquez-Guardado, A.; Luan, H.; Ruban, J.; Ning, X.; Akhtar, A.; Li, D. Skin-Integrated Wireless Haptic Interfaces for Virtual and Augmented Reality. Nature 2019, 575, 473–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Gadekallu, T.R.; Huynh-The, T.; Wang, W.; Yenduri, G.; Ranaweera, P.; Pham, Q.-V.; da Costa, D.B.; Liyanage, M. Blockchain for the Metaverse: A Review. arXiv 2022, arXiv:2203.09738. [Google Scholar]
  11. Choi, H.; Kim, S. A Content Service Deployment Plan for Metaverse Museum Exhibitions—Centering on the Combination of Beacons and HMDs. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2017, 37, 1519–1527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Lee, L.-H.; Braud, T.; Zhou, P.; Wang, L.; Xu, D.; Lin, Z.; Kumar, A.; Bermejo, C.; Hui, P. All One Needs to Know about Metaverse: A Complete Survey on Technological Singularity, Virtual Ecosystem, and Research Agenda. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2110.05352. [Google Scholar]
  13. Mystakidis, S. Metaverse. Encyclopedia 2022, 2, 486–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Messinger, P.R.; Stroulia, E.; Lyons, K.; Bone, M.; Niu, R.H.; Smirnov, K.; Perelgut, S. Virtual Worlds—Past, Present, and Future: New Directions in Social Computing. Decis. Support Syst. 2009, 47, 204–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Goel, L.; Johnson, N.; Junglas, I.; Ives, B. Predicting Users’ Return to Virtual Worlds: A Social Perspective: Predicting Users’ Return to Virtual Worlds: A Social Perspective. Inf. Syst. J. 2013, 23, 35–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Girvan, C. What Is a Virtual World? Definition and Classification. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2018, 66, 1087–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Shen, B.; Tan, W.; Guo, J.; Zhao, L.; Qin, P. How to Promote User Purchase in Metaverse? A Systematic Literature Review on Consumer Behavior Research and Virtual Commerce Application Design. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 11087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Shiau, W.-L.; Huang, L.-C. Scale Development for Analyzing the Fit of Real and Virtual World Integration: An Example of Pokémon Go. Inf. Technol. People, 2022; ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Jones, C.L.E.; Hancock, T.; Kazandjian, B.; Voorhees, C.M. Engaging the Avatar: The Effects of Authenticity Signals during Chat-Based Service Recoveries. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 144, 703–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Miao, F.; Kozlenkova, I.V.; Wang, H.; Xie, T.; Palmatier, R.W. An Emerging Theory of Avatar Marketing. J. Mark. 2022, 86, 67–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Nguyen, S.H.; Sun, Q.; Williams, D. How Do We Make the Virtual World a Better Place? Social Discrimination in Online Gaming, Sense of Community, and Well-Being. Telemat. Inform. 2022, 66, 101747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Verhagen, T.; Feldberg, F.; van den Hooff, B.; Meents, S.; Merikivi, J. Satisfaction with Virtual Worlds: An Integrated Model of Experiential Value. Inf. Manag. 2011, 48, 201–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bormann, D.; Greitemeyer, T. Immersed in Virtual Worlds and Minds: Effects of in-Game Storytelling on Immersion, Need Satisfaction, and Affective Theory of Mind. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 2015, 6, 646–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Leone, D.; Schiavone, F.; Appio, F.P.; Chiao, B. How Does Artificial Intelligence Enable and Enhance Value Co-Creation in Industrial Markets? An Exploratory Case Study in the Healthcare Ecosystem. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 129, 849–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Cruz-Benito, J.; García-Peñalvo, F.J.; Therón, R. Analyzing the Software Architectures Supporting HCI/HMI Processes through a Systematic Review of the Literature. Telemat. Inform. 2019, 38, 118–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Forster, Y.; Hergeth, S.; Naujoks, F.; Krems, J.F.; Keinath, A. Self-Report Measures for the Assessment of Human–Machine Interfaces in Automated Driving. Cogn. Technol. Work. 2020, 22, 703–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Liu, W.; Li, Q.; Wang, Z.; Wang, W.; Zeng, C.; Cheng, B. A Literature Review on Additional Semantic Information Conveyed from Driving Automation Systems to Drivers through Advanced In-Vehicle HMI Just Before, During, and Right After Takeover Request. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2022, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Métayer, N.; Coeugnet, S. Improving the Experience in the Pedestrian’s Interaction with an Autonomous Vehicle: An Ergonomic Comparison of External HMI. Appl. Ergon. 2021, 96, 103478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Li, X.; Zhao, X.; Pu, W. Measuring Ease of Use of Mobile Applications in E-Commerce Retailing from the Perspective of Consumer Online Shopping Behaviour Patterns. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 55, 102093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Osiurak, F.; Navarro, J.; Reynaud, E. How Our Cognition Shapes and Is Shaped by Technology: A Common Framework for Understanding Human Tool-Use Interactions in the Past, Present, and Future. Front. Psychol. 2018, 9, 293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Saenz, M.J.; Revilla, E.; Simón, C. Designing AI Systems with Human-Machine Teams. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2020, 61, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  32. Rauschnabel, P.A. Augmented Reality Is Eating the Real-World! The Substitution of Physical Products by Holograms. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021, 57, 102279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zhu, M.; Sun, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Shi, Q.; He, T.; Liu, H.; Chen, T.; Lee, C. Haptic-Feedback Smart Glove as a Creative Human-Machine Interface (HMI) for Virtual/Augmented Reality Applications. Sci. Adv. 2020, 6, eaaz8693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Wu, H.; Yang, G.; Zhu, K.; Liu, S.; Guo, W.; Jiang, Z.; Li, Z. Materials, Devices, and Systems of On-skin Electrodes for Electrophysiological Monitoring and Human–Machine Interfaces. Adv. Sci. 2021, 8, 2001938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Korthauer, A.; Guenther, C.; Hinrichs, A.; Ren, W.; Yang, Y. Watch Your Vehicle Driving at the City: Interior HMI with Augmented Reality for Automated Driving. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, Oldenburg, Germany, 5–8 October 2020; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  36. Stephanidis, C.; Salvendy, G.; Antona, M.; Chen, J.Y.C.; Dong, J.; Duffy, V.G.; Fang, X.; Fidopiastis, C.; Fragomeni, G.; Fu, L.P.; et al. Seven HCI Grand Challenges. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2019, 35, 1229–1269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hardy, J.; Wyche, S.; Veinot, T. Rural HCI Research: Definitions, Distinctions, Methods, and Opportunities. Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact. 2019, 3, 1–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Szajna, B. Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model. Manag. Sci. 1996, 42, 85–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lee, Y.; Kozar, K.A.; Larsen, K.R. The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2003, 12, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Vargo, S.L.; Lusch, R.F. Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing. J. Mark. 2004, 68, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Manser Payne, E.H.; Peltier, J.; Barger, V.A. Enhancing the Value Co-Creation Process: Artificial Intelligence and Mobile Banking Service Platforms. JRIM 2021, 15, 68–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Li, F.; Larimo, J.; Leonidou, L.C. Social Media Marketing Strategy: Definition, Conceptualization, Taxonomy, Validation, and Future Agenda. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2021, 49, 51–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yee, N. The Labor of Fun: How Video Games Blur the Boundaries of Work and Play. Games Cult. 2006, 1, 68–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Ferguson, B. Games for Wellness—Impacting the Lives of Employees and the Profits of Employers. Games Health J. 2012, 1, 177–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Fiss, P.C.; Sharapov, D.; Cronqvist, L. Opposites Attract? Opportunities and Challenges for Integrating Large-N QCA and Econometric Analysis. Political Res. Q. 2013, 66, 191–198. [Google Scholar]
  46. Ordanini, A.; Parasuraman, A.; Rubera, G. When the Recipe Is More Important than the Ingredients: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) of Service Innovation Configurations. J. Serv. Res. 2014, 17, 134–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Schneider, C.Q.; Wagemann, C. Standards of Good Practice in Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Fuzzy-Sets. Comp. Sociol. 2010, 9, 397–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Chen, H.; Tian, Z. Environmental Uncertainty, Resource Orchestration and Digital Transformation: A Fuzzy-Set QCA Approach. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 139, 184–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Rutten, R. Uncertainty, Possibility, and Causal Power in QCA. Sociol. Methods Res. 2021, 00491241211031268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Elverdam, C.; Aarseth, E. Game Classification and Game Design: Construction through Critical Analysis. Games Cult. 2007, 2, 3–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Dahlskog, S.; Kamstrup, A.; Aarseth, E. Mapping the Game Landscape: Locating Genres Using Functional Classification. In Proceedings of the Digital Games Research Association (DiGRA), London, UK, 1–4 September 2009. [Google Scholar]
  52. Pe-Than, E.P.P.; Goh, D.H.-L.; Lee, C.S. A Typology of Human Computation Games: An Analysis and a Review of Current Games. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2015, 34, 809–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Vargas-Iglesias, J.J. Making Sense of Genre: The Logic of Video Game Genre Organization. Games Cult. 2020, 15, 158–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Tobarra, L.; Utrilla, A.; Robles-Gómez, A.; Pastor-Vargas, R.; Hernández, R. A Cloud Game-Based Educative Platform Architecture: The Cyberscratch Project. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Alamri, A.; Hassan, M.M.; Hossain, M.A.; Al-Qurishi, M.; Aldukhayyil, Y.; Hossain, M.S. Evaluating the Impact of a Cloud-Based Serious Game on Obese People. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 30, 468–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Khuntia, J.; Saldanha, T.J.V.; Mithas, S.; Sambamurthy, V. Information Technology and Sustainability: Evidence from an Emerging Economy. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2018, 27, 756–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Payne, A.; Frow, P.; Steinhoff, L.; Eggert, A. Toward a Comprehensive Framework of Value Proposition Development: From Strategy to Implementation. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2020, 87, 244–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kao, C.-W. The Effect of a Digital Game-Based Learning Task on the Acquisition of the English Article System. System 2020, 95, 102373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Bai, B.; Law, R.; Wen, I. The Impact of Website Quality on Customer Satisfaction and Purchase Intentions: Evidence from Chinese Online Visitors. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2008, 27, 391–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Anderson, R.E. Consumer Dissatisfaction: The Effect of Disconfirmed Expectancy on Perceived Product Performance. J. Mark. Res. 1973, 10, 38–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Ragin, C.C. Measurement versus Calibration: A Set-theoretic Approach. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2008; pp. 174–198. [Google Scholar]
  62. Schneider, C.Q.; Wagemann, C. Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2012; ISBN 1-139-56061-1. [Google Scholar]
  63. Kraus, S.; Ribeiro-Soriano, D.; Schüssler, M. Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (FsQCA) in Entrepreneurship and Innovation Research–the Rise of a Method. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2018, 14, 15–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Dul, J. Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA) Logic and Methodology of “Necessary but Not Sufficient” Causality. Organ. Res. Methods 2016, 19, 10–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Dul, J.; Van der Laan, E.; Kuik, R. A Statistical Significance Test for Necessary Condition Analysis. Organ. Res. Methods 2020, 23, 385–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Saha, V.; Goyal, P.; Jebarajakirthy, C. Value Co-Creation: A Review of Literature and Future Research Agenda. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 2022, 37, 612–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Taheri, B.; Pourfakhimi, S.; Prayag, G.; Gannon, M.J.; Finsterwalder, J. Towards Co-Created Food Well-Being: Culinary Consumption, Braggart Word-of-Mouth and the Role of Participative Co-Design, Service Provider Support and C2C Interactions. Eur. J. Mark. 2021, 55, 2464–2490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. François, M.; Osiurak, F.; Fort, A.; Crave, P.; Navarro, J. Automotive HMI Design and Participatory User Involvement: Review and Perspectives. Ergonomics 2017, 60, 541–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jtaer 18 00003 g001 550
Figure 1. Relationship between metaverse, virtual space and virtual world.
Figure 1. Relationship between metaverse, virtual space and virtual world.
Jtaer 18 00003 g001
Jtaer 18 00003 g002 550
Figure 2. Configuration framework of influencing factors on audience satisfaction with virtual space (metaverse).
Figure 2. Configuration framework of influencing factors on audience satisfaction with virtual space (metaverse).
Jtaer 18 00003 g002
Table
Table 1. An introduction to conditions.
Table 1. An introduction to conditions.
Theoretical FoundationConditionsDefinition
ErgonomicsInteraction with humans Audiences can communicate or cooperate with other audiences in virtual space through avatars.
Interaction with environmentAudiences can interact, influence and even change the environment in virtual space.
Human–machine interfaceThe real machine which has been used for controlling or interacting with virtual space, such as keyboard, mouse etc.
Technology acceptance model (TAM)ConvenienceThe convenience, which has been adopted to measure the accessibility and the degree of ease-of-use of a virtual space.
Service-dominant logicValue co-creation From the perspective of S-D logic, audiences can join the procedure of service provisioning, creating the value together with the service provisioner, as well.
Value propositionAs the main subject of service provisioning, enterprises can deliver their value through the procedure of service provisioning.
Outcome conditionAudience satisfactionAudiences’ reviews on the virtual space brought about by their attitudes, which depend on their using experience in virtual space.
Table
Table 2. Antecedent measurement and calibration.
Table 2. Antecedent measurement and calibration.
ConditionMeasurementCalibration
Fully InCross-Over PointFully Out
AntecedentsInteraction with humansWhether it is a multiplayer game (including co-op, multiplayer, etc.)1/0
Interaction with environmentWhether it is a sandbox game1/0
Human–machine interfaceIt depends on varied supportive controllers431
ConvenienceWhether it supports cloud gaming1/0
Value co-creationWhether it supports Steam workshop1/0
Value propositionWhether it is an RPG or story-rich game321
OutcomeAudience satisfactionX% of the total user reviews for this game are positive95.0%84.6%68.2%
Table
Table 3. Descriptive statistics and frequency of nominal conditions.
Table 3. Descriptive statistics and frequency of nominal conditions.
Antecedents and OutcomeMeanS.D.Frequency of Nominal Conditions
01234
Interaction with humans0.490.5052 (51%)50 (49%)---
Interaction with environment0.320.4769 (67.6%)33 (32.4%)---
Human–machine interface2.490.95-24 (23.5%)13 (12.7%)56 (54.9%)9 (8.8%)
Convenience0.500.5051 (50%)51 (50%)---
Value co-creation0.120.3290 (88.2%)12 (11.8%)---
Value proposition1.960.88-41 (40.2%)24 (23.5%)37 (36.3%)-
Audience Satisfaction83.627.84Audience satisfaction is continuous
Note: N = 102; S.D. represents the standard deviation; 0–4 is the assigned value for each nominal antecedent; (N%) represents the percentage of the varied assigned values on nominal conditions.
Table
Table 4. Correlations of conditions.
Table 4. Correlations of conditions.
Antecedents and Outcome1234567
Interaction with humans (1)1.00
Interaction with environment (2)−0.091.00
Human–machine interface (3)−0.197 *−0.141.00
Convenience (4)0.000.272 **0.041.00
Value co-creation (5)−0.050.463 **−0.160.304 **1.00
Value proposition (6)−0.225 *−0.425 **0.02−0.247 *−0.191.00
Audience satisfaction (7)−0.070.312 **0.020.140.12−0.091.00
Note: N = 102; ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05.
Table
Table 5. Necessity analysis of single condition by QCA.
Table 5. Necessity analysis of single condition by QCA.
AntecedentsOutcome: High Levels of Audience SatisfactionOutcome: Low Levels of Audience Satisfaction
ConsistencyCoverageConsistencyCoverage
Interaction with humans0.490.830.510.17
~Interaction with humans0.510.840.490.16
Interaction with environment0.340.870.250.13
~Interaction with environment0.660.820.750.18
Human–machine interface0.460.940.810.33
~Human–machine interface0.670.950.840.23
Convenience0.510.850.470.15
~Convenience0.490.830.530.17
Value co-creation0.120.860.100.14
~Value co-creation0.880.830.900.17
Value proposition0.530.910.750.25
~Value proposition0.570.920.740.23
Note: N = 102.
Table
Table 6. NCA results.
Table 6. NCA results.
AntecedentCeiling TechniquesAccuracyCeiling ZoneScopeEffect Size (d)p Value
Interaction with humansCR100.3501
CE100.3501
Interaction with environmentCR10.010.350.0290.031
CE10.020.350.0570.031
Human–machine interfaceCR100.6801
CE100.6801
ConvenienceCR10.0050.350.0140.5
CE10.010.350.0290.5
Value co-creationCR10.0050.350.0140.116
CE10.010.350.0290.116
Value propositionCR100.3101
CE100.3101
Note: N = 102; CR represents the ceiling regression; CE represents the ceiling envelopment; the data used by NCA are calibrated fuzzy-set affiliation values; 0.0 ≤ d < 0.1: “low level”; 0.1 ≤ d < 0.3: “medium level”; p value is used for permutation test in NCA analysis.
Table
Table 7. The result of NCA bottleneck analysis (%).
Table 7. The result of NCA bottleneck analysis (%).
OutcomeAntecedents
Audience SatisfactionInteraction with HumansInteraction with EnvironmentHuman–Machine InterfaceConvenienceValue Co-CreationValue Proposition
0NNNNNNNNNNNN
10NNNNNNNNNNNN
20NNNNNNNNNNNN
30NNNNNNNNNNNN
40NNNNNNNNNNNN
50NNNNNNNNNNNN
60NNNNNNNNNNNN
70NNNNNNNNNNNN
80NNNNNNNNNNNN
90NNNNNNNNNNNN
100NN100NN100100NN
Note: N = 102; the result of bottleneck analysis relying on CE; NN = not necessary.
Table
Table 8. Configurations strongly related to audience satisfaction.
Table 8. Configurations strongly related to audience satisfaction.
AntecedentsOutcome: High Level of Audience SatisfactionOutcome: Low Level of Audience Satisfaction
1a1b2a2b3a3b4a4b56
Interaction with humans ⊗ ⊗ • ● ● • ⊗
Interaction with environment ⊗ ⊗ • ● ● ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ •
Human–machine interface ⊗ ● ● ⊗ ⊗ ● ●
Convenience⊗ ● ● •⊗ ⊗•
Value co-creation⊗⊗⊗⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗⊗⊗⊗
Value proposition ● ● ⊗⊗⊗ ⊗• ⊗
Raw coverage0.1550.1490.0920.0600.0430.0290.3100.4540.2050.062
Unique coverage0.0620.0680.0680.0360.0190.0400.1280.2070.0800.062
Consistency0.9100.9830.9910.9980.9550.9920.2560.2810.3200.204
Solution coverage0.4100.784
Solution consistency0.9560.254
Note: N = 102; ● represents the core casual condition presence; • represents the peripheral casual condition presence; ⊗ represents the core casual condition absence; ⊗ represents the peripheral casual condition absence.
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.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Fang, L.B.; Dong, X.; Weng, Z.; Chen, T. Designing an Attractive Metaverse: Research on Design Factors Influencing Audience Satisfaction with a Virtual Space Based on QCA. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2023, 18, 37-54. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer18010003

AMA Style

Fang LB, Dong X, Weng Z, Chen T. Designing an Attractive Metaverse: Research on Design Factors Influencing Audience Satisfaction with a Virtual Space Based on QCA. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research. 2023; 18(1):37-54. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer18010003

Chicago/Turabian Style

Fang, Lingzhi Brian, Xiongfei Dong, Zhicheng Weng, and Taoqin Chen. 2023. "Designing an Attractive Metaverse: Research on Design Factors Influencing Audience Satisfaction with a Virtual Space Based on QCA" Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research 18, no. 1: 37-54. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer18010003

APA Style

Fang, L. B., Dong, X., Weng, Z., & Chen, T. (2023). Designing an Attractive Metaverse: Research on Design Factors Influencing Audience Satisfaction with a Virtual Space Based on QCA. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 18(1), 37-54. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer18010003

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop