A Comparative Study of VR and 2D Tourism Videos: A Thematic Analysis of Virtual Tourism Experiences Among Generation Z

Abstract

Tourism marketing videos can lead to positive emotions and visit intention. This study investigated the impact of VR and 2D tourism videos on user engagement, perception, and emotional responses. This research adopted a priori coding, analyzed 52 interviews using thematic analysis, and concluded a framework with six dimensions, including interactivity, authenticity, presence, cognitive value, hedonic value, and learning value. Findings indicate that VR videos compared to 2D allow users to explore the environment actively and feel an increased sense of presence. However, challenges such as rapid movement, lack of control, and distractions were also reported. VR does not necessarily lead to a higher sense of authenticity because the fast-paced sequences and distracting elements may negatively affect the experiences. Regarding cognitive values, participants mentioned that the videos increased their knowledge of the destination, particularly the 2D format video maintained viewers’ focus. VR facilitates exploration and may enhance learning value. Videos can also generate hedonic value, as many participants reported the emotions of excitement, happiness, and relaxation while watching videos. The findings extend the literature on immersive experiences in the video context. This research also offers practical insights into tourism marketers to design more engaging and effective tourism videos.

1. Introduction

In today’s digital world, immersive technologies such as virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), have transformed the way tourism experiences are designed, delivered, and promoted. Unlike traditional 2D videos that are shown on TV or laptop, VR can provide potential visitors with multisensory and interactive experiences of destinations. It also results in a better sense of presence or “being there” (Lo & Cheng, 2020). As destinations rely more on marketing videos to attract potential visitors, it is essential to understand how VR and 2D formats impact viewer experience, perception, engagement, and travel intention.

The role of video in tourism marketing has been widely investigated in previous studies. Researchers have discussed the effects of VR in increasing perceived interactivity (Le et al., 2022), authenticity (Newman & Smith, 2016), and presence (Lo & Cheng, 2020). All those positive experiences contribute to engagement and lead to positive attitudes toward destinations (Tussyadiah et al., 2018). Despite existing findings, significant gaps remain in the literature. Quantitative methods were mostly adopted in previous research and those studies examined outcome variables such as visit intention and attitude change. These methods do not fully explore how users perceive and interpret the immersive qualities of VR and 2D video content, in the same study, with the same tourism videos. There is a lack of qualitative studies that examine users’ subjective experiences with tourism videos across different media formats (e.g., VR and 2D). Furthermore, few studies have compared VR and 2D tourism videos directly within the same research design to identify the important factors that influence user engagement, value perception, and emotional responses.

This study bridges the literature gaps by conducting a qualitative thematic analysis of user experiences with VR and 2D tourism videos. Based on the previous literature, a framework was proposed to explain how participants perceive immersive elements (interactivity, authenticity, and presence) and perceived value dimensions (cognitive, learning, and hedonic value). The qualitative interviews further validated and refined the framework, providing deeper insights into the factors influencing immersive experiences and perceived value, as well as the interrelationships between them. The research objective was to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the impacts of VR and 2D tourism videos on viewers’ intentions and experiences, and via qualitative interviews allowing for rich, narrative explanations of the viewers interpretation of the experience. Although a couple of previous studies have compared VR and 2D (Griffin et al., 2023; Lin et al., 2021), they have not systematically examined differences in the depth of attention, quality of interaction, and process of value formation. Those researchers mainly tested the affective destination image, advertising effectiveness, behavioral intentions, and satisfaction. Investigating the elements that lead to immersive experience is crucial because it reflects the extent to which users feel present and engaged within a virtual environment. Such an experience could further significantly influence learning, emotional responses, and overall satisfaction. Also, understanding perceived value is important, as it results in users’ evaluations of the usefulness, relevance, and worth of the experience. Additionally, most previous research adopted a quantitative approach (e.g., surveys), which is useful for testing relationships. However, it often cannot capture participants’ underlying reasons behind their responses. This study aims to fill the gap in knowledge of the subjective interpretations and meanings that viewers might have when watching 2D and VR tourism videos. This study aims to address both theoretical and practical gaps in the understanding of perceived value theory, especially in the context of virtual immersive experiences and its application in creating marketing videos. The findings extend the literature on immersive experiences and the benefits of such an experience. The findings offer best practices for destination marketers and tourism professionals who seek to design more effective and emotionally engaging virtual tourism experiences.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Defining Immersive Experiences in Tourism Videos

Immersion is “perceptual and psychological involvement” (Lo & Cheng, 2020, p. 543). Immersion incorporates the use of the five senses, allowing for more mental involvement in the virtual environment (Lin et al., 2021). Across the examined literature regarding immersive experiences in tourism videos, definitions of immersion frequently mentioned interactivity, authenticity, and presence. Thompson et al. (2018) conducted a study focused on the importance of authenticity and interactivity in tourism videos, and Lo and Cheng (2020) studied the effects of presence on consumer responses to tourism advertising. Both studies found that immersive elements enhanced viewer engagement and positively influenced intentions toward the destination.

2.2. Components of Immersive Experiences

2.2.1. Interactivity

Interactivity is a technological aspect of tourism videos that involves the ability of a user to alter the content and perspective of their visual environment, creating a relationship that enhances media richness (Le et al., 2022). Videos increase involvement and help viewers feel like they are in the destination. When watching tourism videos, the way viewers perceive the professionalism and interactivity of the experience has a significant impact on telepresence, which allows people to be in the moment and enjoy the video (Y. Liu, 2003). Pairing sensory learning and physical actions can stimulate learning and retention for individuals (Kiefer & Trumpp, 2012). To create an immersive video, a high-quality sensory experience should be given priority. To achieve this, there should be an improvement in clarity and interactivity using advanced VR devices and processing hardware (Wang et al., 2021).

2.2.2. Authenticity

Tourism videos enable people to have genuine experiences by allowing them to envision their desired imagery and expectations of the destination, while also inspiring them with possible tourism activities (Zhu et al., 2022). To provide an authentic VR experience, it is essential to have high-resolution visual images (Choi & Nam, 2024). Authenticity in tourism can be examined as objective, constructive, and existential (Cohen, 2010). Objective authenticity refers to the extent to which something is genuine or real, and constructive refers to the socially constructed, emergent nature of authenticity, which is created by the viewer. Existential authenticity is a subjective state of being in which might experience their authentic self (Cohen, 2010). Authenticity has been operationalized and studied as authentic video content, authentic producers, and authentic self, all of which correspond with Cohen’s three types of authenticity (Zhou & Li, 2023, p. 304). Authentic content refers to real and attractive objects and the overall atmosphere, producers refer to the trustworthiness of the producers, authentic self refers to self-expression or self-discovery. In tourism videos, authenticity can be strengthened with perceived authentic content (not commercialized) and when the viewer has an emotional or cognitive reaction and can see themself in the destination.

2.2.3. Presence

Presence is defined as the feeling of being transported to a different place (Gonçalves et al., 2020). If a user experiences a high level of presence, it means that the VR application can create an environment that convinces users to think they are experiencing something real. The need for realistic virtual experiences has been shown through studies in which video game players perceived higher levels of presence and enjoyment while playing two Nintendo Wii games—using golf club and steering wheel controllers versus using traditional video game controllers (Skalski et al., 2010).

A study was conducted to determine how VR and spatial presence can influence participant attitudes towards travel decisions. Tussyadiah et al. (2018) identified three aspects of presence: spatial presence, involvement, and realness. The study defines spatial presence as the sense of being in a virtual environment, involvement as the level of attention to real and virtual environments, and realness as judgment of realness of virtual environments. The results revealed that the more attention dedicated to the VR experience, the higher the level of spatial presence.

Researchers conducted a study on the response factors that generate a sense of presence and a destination image from a 360-degree tour, concluding that mental imagery, immersion, and engagement had a significant effect on a sense of presence, cognitive image, and affective image. Engagement was determined to be the main factor affecting a sense of presence (Wu & Lai, 2021).

Lo and Cheng (2020) conducted a study on the effects of using genuine VR content and Google Cardboard goggles on viewers’ perceptions of hotels or tourism promotions. The results revealed viewers had a better perception and greater inclination to book rooms at the advertised hotel when they experienced greater presence using 360° VR video technology.

VR tourism videos are more effective than 2D videos regarding visit intention; however, VR tourism videos require VR equipment that is not readily available for all people, limiting their effectiveness (Lin et al., 2021). The panoramic view that is typically associated with 3D can positively impact viewers’ emotions in relation to a city-tourism video, though it is not an element that is expected by viewers, and there is no dissatisfaction from the absence of a panoramic view in 2D city-tourism videos (Lin et al., 2021).

2.3. Understanding Perceived Value in Tourism Videos

Tourism videos can play a significant role in shaping the perceptions and expectations of potential visitors (Schiopu et al., 2021). Research has shown that visual media such as videos serve as powerful tools for influencing how a destination is perceived, further impacting their tourist visit intentions (J. Liu et al., 2023). The unique storytelling ability of videos provides an immersive experience for users that enhances user engagement as well as their emotional connection with the destination, which is not received from static images or text (Tussyadiah et al., 2018). This engagement facilitates the creation of mental imagery, impacting tourists’ attitudes towards a specific location (Tussyadiah et al., 2018). Furthermore, the growing presence of social media and its use of video-based content has further amplified the importance of tourism videos in shaping user perceptions and travel behaviors (J. Liu et al., 2023).

According to the Perceived Value Theory, a consumer’s evaluation of the usefulness of a product or service is based on their individual perception of the benefits and sacrifices that that specific product or service provides (Zeithaml, 1988). Furthermore, the perceived values of tourism videos influence the psychological state and behavioral response of the viewer (Yang et al., 2024). In the context of tourism videos, we examined how perceived learning, cognitive, and hedonic values shaped the user’s perception of the destination.

2.3.1. Cognitive Value

Tourism videos serve as educational tools by providing viewers with information about destinations, activities, and cultures in an engaging manner. Tussyadiah et al. (2018) define cognitive value in tourism videos as the degree to which users acquire new knowledge and understand new cultures through informative content. Virtual Reality (VR) offers unique three-Dimensional experiences which serve as efficient tools in delivering information (Yoon et al., 2021). Additionally, Vishwakarma et al. (2020) find that the realistic simulation created by VR tourism videos allows for a greater understanding of a particular destination allowing tourists to make informed decisions when choosing a destination.

2.3.2. Learning Value

Based on the concept of consumer purchase intention, tourism intention is a tourists’ attitude toward a tourism destination (Chen & Tsai, 2007). Shani et al. (2009) find that destination images play a large role in destination selection during a traveler’s decision-making process. The immersive nature of VR tourism provides users with realistic experiences, which increases positive perceptions of the destination (Vishwakarma et al., 2020). This enhancement of perceived value increases both feelings of involvement and desire to visit (Yang et al., 2024). Additionally, S. Huang and Hsu (2009) find that this not only influences recommendation intention but also revisit intention, which are defined as the judgement of tourists on the possibility of recommending the destination or revisiting the destination. Utilizing videos that provide a multisensory experience may be more influential in changing customers’ attitudes and behaviors (Tussyadiah & Fesenmaier, 2009).

2.3.3. Hedonic Value

Happiness as a metric of satisfaction is a significant reason for the pursuance of the creation and use of VR tourism (Y. C. Huang et al., 2015). VR tourism is unique in that its immersive nature has the ability to enhance peoples’ level of enjoyment, ultimately leading to an increased well-being (Li et al., 2021). Davis et al. (1992) define perceived enjoyment in the context of a virtual environment as the user’s intrinsic motivation, which moves them to engage with the experience. Furthermore, increased enjoyment of an experience results in greater intention to visit the destination (Tussyadiah et al., 2018).

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Data Collection

This qualitative paper is part of a larger mixed-method research project. The data were collected by three research assistants on a university campus during the Spring of 2023. This research aimed to explore how participants interact with VR and 2D tourism videos and to provide actionable insights for design enhancements. The pilot study included 12 participants to evaluate the research design and test the measurement scales. Any unclear questions were revised to enhance clarity and reliability of the data collection process.

For formal data collection, participant recruitment emails were distributed through faculty from four departments. This research is independent of any assignment or class activity conducted by the authors. After agreeing to take part in this research, participants were invited to a research room. They were randomly assigned to one of eight conditions: familiarity (SLO vs. Japan) × format (VR vs. Flat Screen) × order (SLO first vs. Japan first). The presentation of videos from two distinct locations was intended to examine whether familiarity impacts the effectiveness of VR experiences (Ferreira et al., 2024). After participants watched the videos, they completed survey questionnaires using paper-and-pencil format. The questions were developed based on the literature review and measured using a 5-point Likert scale.

The research team also conducted semi-structured interview with participant to gain deeper insights into their opinions of the VR experience and 2D experience and their survey responses. Interview questions explored participants’ perceptions of the tourism video’s effectiveness across multiple dimensions, including interactivity, authenticity, presence, perceived value, and well-being. Those who completed the interview received a $10 Amazon gift card. In total, 62 participants completed interviews and 52 responses were useable. Researchers recorded the interviews using the Voice Memo app on an iPhone. Interview transcripts varied in length with a mean of 670 words and a median of 584 words. After the interviews were completed, the recordings were securely uploaded to a university-protected drive, and the files were deleted from the iPhones. Microsoft Transcribe in Word for the Web (Microsoft 365) was utilized to convert raw audio into text. Two researchers checked the transcripts to make sure each was accurate.

3.2. Data Analysis

A total of 52 interviews were recorded on site and then transcribed using the Transcribe tool of Microsoft 365. Afterward, the research assistants carefully reviewed the recordings and edited the transcripts to ensure the content was accurately transcribed. Both Microsoft Word and Excel were used to complete data coding. The data analysis process involved two individuals who collaboratively coded the data for 52 participants, whose age ranged between 19 and 23. Females represented 54% of the group, and males accounted for 46%. The participants were undergraduate students from different majors.

This research adopted a priori coding, with predefined categories based on existing literature and theoretical frameworks to code the data. The framework consisted of immersive experience elements including interactivity, authenticity, and presence (Bogicevic et al., 2019; Kim et al., 2020; Y. Liu, 2003); perceived values including learning, cognitive, and hedonic values (Calver & Page, 2013; Prebensen & Rosengren, 2016; Verleye, 2015); and mindfulness (Leht, 2012). Before coding, the researchers established agreed-upon definitions for the themes, informed by the literature review, to ensure consistency in their coding. They created three Excel sheets: one for each researcher to code independently and a third for shared codes. Using the agreed-upon definitions of the themes, the researchers read through each transcript to identify codes and patterns that aligned with these themes. Each researcher coded each transcript independently. The coders met weekly to discuss progress, compare coding approaches, and address any discrepancies. During these discussions, the researchers provided the rationale for their coding choices, ensuring transparency and alignment in their analysis process. Each researcher recorded their codes in their respective spreadsheets, maintaining independent records of their findings. The researchers did not use a fully emergent coding scheme because the study’s aim was to understand experiences through the lens of existing theories.

Once all data were independently coded, the researchers compared their coded data and agreed with 91.7% inter-rater reliability. All shared codes were transferred into a single shared spreadsheet, creating a consolidated record of their collaborative analysis. This process allowed the researchers to refine and validate their themes through iterative discussions and comparisons. The researchers used the codes to refine and further develop definitions of the themes to reflect the data. Illustrative quotes were also chosen from the transcripts to represent each code. After all codes were recorded in the shared spreadsheet, the top three positive and negative elements associated with each theme were selected. The final shared spreadsheet represented the collective understanding of the themes and patterns identified in the participant data.

4. Results

4.1. Interactivity

Participants were asked about their interactive experience with the VR video compared to the 2D video. They were asked about their preference between the two types of videos and what they did or did not like about the VR experience. Codes and percentage results can be seen in

Table 1. Codes and Percentages for Interactivity.

Codes	Number of Participants	Percentages
Active Participation	15	28.85%
Move Around	10	19.23%
Look Around/Surrounding	9	17.31%
Hard to Follow/Pace (-)	8	15.38%
No Control (-)	8	15.38%
Distracting (-)	3	5.77%

. The most common codes found in participant responses were “active participation,” “move around” and “look around/surrounding.” “Active participation” was coded when participants indicated the VR experience made them feel like they were going through the VR experience themselves rather than being shown a video, often suggesting they enjoyed this aspect of the experience. Fifteen (28.85%) of the participants mentioned “active participation.” Participant 55 mentioned enjoying the active participation, stating, “it’s fun for it to be more interactive, and if people want to look at more of the architecture of the buildings or what the people are doing, you can kind of decide on your own.” “Move around” was coded when participants referred to feeling like they were moving through the experience rather than just watching. “Move around” was mentioned by 10 (19.23%) of the participants. One participant said they “think it was cool being able to move around and get the 360 view” (P28). “Look around/surrounding” was coded when participants described the ways you could pan the screen around to see different parts of the video. “Look around/surrounding” was found in 9 (17.31%) of the participant interviews. One participant said, “it definitely helps me see the surrounding area more, so it was really nice to be able to see what the area, what the environment looked like” (P19).

The most common negative codes regarding interactivity were “hard to follow/pace,” “no control,” and “distracting.” “Hard to follow/pace” was identified in 8 (15.38%) of the participant interviews when participants referred to the video being too fast to follow along or there being too much movement that made it so the participants could not keep track of what they were trying to look at, such as “the Japan one was all these jump cuts […] and the cameras moving, you’re moving, I was like, I don’t know what to look at there’s so much going on” (P29). “No control” was found in 8 (15.38%) of the participant interviews, referring to participants not liking that they could not move in the non-VR video. Participant 39 said “I mean, everything in the videos was pretty cool, but I don’t know if it was like, like I enjoyed watching it, but I didn’t feel like I had much control over what I was seeing,” and participant 20 said “it [the non-VR video] could have used the interactive quality [of the VR video].” Three (5.77%) of the participants mentioned aspects of the VR video being “distracting,” saying that these aspects took away from their experience by drawing their attention away from the video. Participant 28 said, “it [the VR movement] was a little distracting at times because it was like turning the mouse without actually paying attention to the video.”

4.2. Authenticity

Many participants mentioned that the VR videos provided cultural experiences that felt familiar, genuine, or unique. Codes and percentages can be found in

Table 2. Codes and Percentages for Authenticity.

Codes	Number of Participants	Percentages
Familiar/Recognize/Resonate	15	28.85%
Genuine	7	13.46%
Typical	4	7.69%
Lacking/Limited (-)	6	11.54%
Commercial/Touristy (-)	4	7.69%
Already Know (-)	4	7.69%

. The most common positive codes regarding authenticity were “familiar/recognize/resonate,” “genuine,” and “typical.” “Familiar/recognize/resonate” was found in 15 (28.85%) of the participant interviews when participants referred to seeing things they had seen before or that felt like home. Participants said, “I resonated with a lot of things in the video because I do a lot of those things in my life, like go to Scout and do yoga,” (P39) and “it brings kind of sense of home and calm” (P34). “Genuine” was found in 7 (13.46%) of the participant interviews when participants referred to having experiences that they believed to be an honest representation of the destination or the interactions within the destination. Participant 44 said, “I felt like [the SLO video] felt more like kind of mundane, genuine experiences.” “Typical” was identified in 4 (7.69%) of the participant interviews. “Typical” was coded when participants noticed activities or locations that they believe are usually associated with the destination; “I feel that the SLO video kind of gives you the ability to do what you would normally do in a destination” (P1).

The most frequently mentioned keywords that referenced authenticity in a negative way were “lacking/limited,” “commercial/touristy,” and “already know.” “Lacking/limited” meant that the participant felt that elements were missing from the videos that could have made the videos more accurate to the destination or more enjoyable had they been included. This was identified in 6 (11.54%) of the participant interviews. “Commercial/Touristy” was coded when participants talked about feeling like they were watching an advertisement for the destination or only viewing the activities aimed at visitors rather than local experiences. This was found in 4 (7.69%) of the interviews. One participant stated, “it’s those kinds of commercialized videos I tend to not watch because it’s just, they’re advertising to you what they want you to see, but I prefer the authentic connection” (P43). “Already Know” was identified in 4 (7.69%) of the interviews. This was coded when participants expressed wanting to see new things in the videos rather than things that they had seen before; “the scenes I’ve already seen before doesn’t get me as excited as much” (P49).

4.3. Presence

Participants were interviewed on whether or not the VR videos made time pass quickly for them or made them feel as though they were actually in the experience rather than watching. Codes and percentages can be found in

Table 3. Codes and Percentages for Presence.

Codes	Number of Participants	Percentages
Actually There	10	19.23%
Engaging	8	15.38%
Immerse	8	15.38%
Hard to Watch/Too Fast (-)	8	15.38%
Distracting (-)	8	15.38%
Overwhelmed (-)	2	3.87%

. The top positive codes relating to presence were “actually there,” “engaging,” and “immerse.” “Actually there” was found in 10 (19.23%) of the participant interviews. This referred to participants feeling like they were inside the VR video and experiencing it themselves rather than watching a screen; “So in a way, it almost felt like I was there, even though I knew I wasn’t physically there” (P19). “Engaging” was the second most frequently mentioned keyword regarding presence, found in 8 (15.38%) of the participant interviews. This was identified when participants felt that the VR drew them in and held their interest more than a regular video; “I felt more like a part of the experience, and it just kept me more engaged” (P33). “Immerse” was found in 8 (15.38%) of the participant interviews, when they referred to feeling lost in or absorbed by the VR video or as though it brought them to a different place than where they were watching the video. Participants said, “it was much more immersive, and I kind of got to look at details,” (P44) and “being able to watch something and then hear it, it just kind of takes you to another place” (P17).

The most frequently identified negative codes regarding presence were “hard to watch/too fast,” “distracting,” and “overwhelmed.” “Hard to watch/too fast” was coded when participants felt that the speed or movement of the VR video detracted from the immersion or enjoyment of the experience. This was found in 10 (15.38%) of the interviews. Participant 9 said, “The camera was moving a lot and it kind of just made it hard to watch.” “Distracting” was identified in 9 (15.38%) of the interviews when participants claimed that aspects of the VR videos made it harder to focus on the overall video including text on the screen, too much going on, focusing on controlling the VR, or glitches in the videos; “the SLO video is there are some kinds of glitches which happen, I think from the technology. So, like people are missing a little bit of their head or like someone’s neck was moving really weird and I was a little distracted” (P56). “Overwhelmed” was found in 3 (5.77%) of the participant interviews when they claimed that they felt stressed or triggered by too many things going on in the videos; “The Japan, when you had more options to look at, but like it was like super-fast and it’s a little bit overwhelming” (P29).

4.4. Learning Value

Participants discussed whether the tourism videos helped them gain a new perspective on the destination. Codes and percentages can be found in

Table 4. Codes and Percentages for Learning Value.

Codes	Number of Participants	Percentages
Interesting	16	30.77%
Stimulate Interest	15	28.85%
Want to Visit	7	13.46%
Didn’t Stimulate Interest (-)	5	9.62%
Not Informational (-)	3	5.77%
No New Interest to Travel (-)	2	3.85%

. The most frequently identified codes were “interesting,” “stimulate interest,” and “want to visit.” “Interesting” was found in 16 (30.77%) of the participant interviews when participants mentioned being intrigued by the videos or activities or details within them; “I would say, I thought both of [the videos] were super intriguing, and they made it pretty interesting” (P26). “Stimulate interest” was found in 15 (28.85%) of the interviews when participants discussed the VR making them consider visiting the destination or carrying out any of the activities in the videos; “SLO I already visit, I’m going to school here. But even that video made me want to do new things, like the live music and going to a football game” (P36). “Want to visit” was coded when participants said that the videos specifically increased their desire to go to the destinations. “Want to visit” was found in 7 (13.46%) of the participant interviews; “it just made me want to visit Japan” (P39).

“Didn’t stimulate interest,” “no new interest to travel,” and “not informational” were the most frequently identified negative codes regarding learning value. “Didn’t stimulate interest” was found in 5 (9.62%) of the interviews, referring to the VR videos not increasing the participants’ desire to visit the destinations; “I feel like just because I’ve already been to Japan and I’ve been living in SLO that it didn’t really make me want to, like, learn more or go” (P5). “Not informational” was found in 3 (5.77%) of the interviews of participants who believed that the content within the videos was not informative enough to spark interest in the destination; “I feel like they weren’t super like informational. Or well, I feel like the SLO one kind of gave a good vibe that SLO was like a slow placed area, but I don’t think they would convince me really to watch” (P47). “No new interest to travel” was found in 2 (3.85%) of the participant interviews. This was mentioned by participants who already felt a desire to travel and did not find that these videos increased that desire; “I mean I already have an interest in going to Japan and Korea. And that video didn’t add to my desire to go because I also didn’t really love the video” (P56).

4.5. Cognitive Value

All participants were interviewed on whether they became more knowledgeable about the destination by watching the videos. Codes and percentages can be found in

Table 5. Codes and Percentages for Cognitive Value.

Codes	Number of Participants	Percentages
Culture	18	34.62%
Gained Knowledge of Destination	9	17.31%
Details	6	11.54%
Lack of Information (-)	4	7.69%
Seen Before (-)	3	5.77%
Didn’t Learn (-)	2	3.85%

. The most frequent keywords relating to cognitive value were “culture,” “gained knowledge of destination,” and “details.” “Culture” was mentioned by 18 (34.62%) of the participants. This referred to participants stating that they learned about the destination’s culture from watching the videos; “I feel like I learned a lot about what the country looked like in more of the like customs and traditions” (P55). “Gained knowledge of destination” was found in 9 (15.38%) of the interviews of participants referring to learning more about Japan or SLO overall from the videos; “it was cool to see so many different things that go on there and it made me more aware of what is in Japan” (P20). “Details” was identified when participants discussed the specific characteristics of the destinations they learned about from the videos. This was coded from 6 (11.54%) of the interviews. Participant 23 stated, “I learned some things like some of the events that go on and like the cafes they showed and like the restaurants look different.”

“Lack of information,” “seen before,” and “didn’t learn” were the most frequently identified negative codes relating to cognitive value. “Lack of information” was coded when participants mentioned believing they could have learned more if the videos had provided more specific details about the activities and locations; “I think maybe if there were some words along with it, then I could have learned more” (P54). “Lack of information” was referenced in 4 (7.69%) of the interviews. “Seen before” was found in 3 (5.77%) of the interviews, when participants referred to not learning from the videos because they had already been exposed to the things in the videos; “It was just like stuff that I’ve seen before. Like I’ve been to Scout, you know, I’ve been to the farmers market, so it’s not like, you know that different from what I already do” (P4). “Didn’t learn” was identified in 2 (3.85%) of the interviews, referring to participants generally not gaining knowledge about the destinations from the videos; “I don’t really know if I learned anything necessarily. I feel like just because I’ve already been to Japan and I’ve been living in SLO that it didn’t really make me want to, like, learn more or go” (P5).

4.6. Hedonic Value

Of all of the participants, 82.69% mentioned that the videos affected their mood, many indicating that the experience provided a sense of well-being and triggered positive emotions. Codes and percentages can be found in

Table 6. Codes and Percentages for Hedonic Value.

Codes	Number of Participants	Percentages
Calm/Peaceful/Relaxing	18	34.62%
Excitement	14	26.92%
Enjoyment	12	23.08%
Overwhelming (-)	6	11.54%
Boring/Not Exciting (-)	5	9.62%
Uncomfortable (-)	2	3.85%

. The top codes were “calm/peaceful/relaxing,” “excitement,” and “enjoyment.” “Calm/peaceful/relaxing” was a common response, identified in 18 (34.62%) of the interviews referring to the videos bringing participants a sense of tranquility; “It brings kind of a sense of home and calm” (P34). “Excitement” was mentioned by 14 (26.92%) of the participants discussing the sense of exhilaration that the videos brought to them. 50.00% of the participants who mentioned “excitement” specifically mentioned the Japan video being more exciting than the SLO video, and 21.43% said that the VR video was more exciting than the 2D video; “in the Japan video, I was more excited. And when they were in costumes, and she was bringing out this stuff and it was just so exciting” (P34). “Enjoyment” was coded in 12 (23.08%) of the interviews, meaning that the participants found the experiences entertaining or pleasurable; “the feelings of comfort and things that I find enjoyable” (P53).

“Overwhelming,” “boring/not exciting,” and “uncomfortable” were the negative emotions that were most frequently mentioned by the participants. “Overwhelming” was coded in 6 (11.54%) of the interviews, referring to the Japan video being too fast and having too much going on which made participants feel anxious or over-stimulated; “I was like, I don’t know what to look at. There’s so much going on. I was like, it was. It was over-simulating” (P29). “Boring/not exciting” was found in five (9.62%) of the interviews, referring to either video not being stimulating. 83.33% of participants who mentioned “boring/not exciting” were referring to the SLO video, while 16.67% were referring to the Japan video. Of the participants who thought the SLO video was not stimulating enough, 60.00% had been assigned to the 2D video for SLO. Of the participants who thought the Japan video was less stimulating, 100.00% had been assigned to the 2 videos for Japan. Only one (1.92%) of the participants mentioned “boring/not exciting” when referring to a VR video. Participant 47 said, “I think like for the SLO one at least it could be a little bit more exciting or have more like upbeat music to kind of show the way of life.” “Uncomfortable” was found in two (3.85%) of the interviews, when participants described scenes within the videos that made them feel uneasy; “felt a slight bit uncomfortable watching the sumo scene” (P49).

5. Discussion

The purpose of this study was to explore participant experiences with tourism videos, investigate immersive experiences in tourism advertising, and compare the effectiveness of VR and 2D in tourism videos. Literature found that consumers are more interested in immersive experiences (e.g., 3D, VR), than 2D videos on traditional television (Shafi et al., 2020). 3D tourism videos, however, require VR equipment that is not readily available for all people, limiting their effectiveness (Lin et al., 2021). Previous literature found benefits and limitations to 3D videos and immersive experiences, so this study sought to compare the effectiveness of VR and 2D videos. It specifically explores the effectiveness of an accessible version of 3D tourism videos, allowing potential visitors to experience VR tourism videos from their own home with no VR equipment.

6. Conclusions

6.1. Theoretical Implications

From a theoretical perspective, this study explores immersive experiences within the context of tourism videos, extending existing literature by identifying specific factors that influence users’ engagement, perceptions, and emotional responses in virtual tourism settings. Based on the qualitative analysis of interview transcripts, this research proposed a theoretical framework that includes interactivity, authenticity, presence, learning value, cognitive value, and hedonic value.

There were generally positive responses to the interactive aspect of VR videos, as respondents felt like they had control over their experience and expressed a desire for more control when shown the 2D videos. However, the interactivity was often hard to follow or distracting, so an improvement in clarity and interactivity using advanced VR devices and processing hardware is necessary. This confirmed previous research (i.e., Choi & Nam, 2024; Wang et al., 2021), which found that to create an immersive 360 video travel experience, high-quality video and seamless interaction should be given priority.

A sense of familiarity increased the perceived authenticity of the destinations in the videos, as participants felt familiarity and resonated with the aspects of the videos they recognized, increasing their perception of the authenticity of the videos. A previous study found that participants felt they had genuine experiences when watching tourism videos because these videos allow them to envision the destination and the tourism activities they may experience there (Zhu et al., 2022). This study confirmed these findings but also identified qualities which limited the ability for viewers to feel they are having genuine experiences while watching tourism videos. The perceptions of the authenticity and genuineness of the videos decreased when viewers believed that the videos were lacking aspects that they associated with the location or if the viewers perceived the videos as touristy or like a commercial.

This study extends previous research on the sense of presence created by VR experiences, identifying the necessary elements of the VR videos in creating this sense of presence. Previous research found that if a user experiences a high level of presence, it means the VR application can create an environment that convinces users that they are experiencing something real (Gonçalves et al., 2020). The VR experience made many participants feel like they were “actually there” and engaged, but many participants felt distractions from this presence due to the speed of the video or feeling like the videos were “hard to watch.” This indicates the importance of control as a contributing factor to participants’ sense of presence. Additionally, this research explored the connection between VR experiences and visit intentions. It was found that the VR videos did increase interest in the destination and desire to visit. Research found that VR tourism videos provide users with realistic experiences, increasing positive perceptions of the destination, and that a traveler’s perceived image of a destination has a significant impact on their destination selection when making travel plans (Shani et al., 2009; Vishwakarma et al., 2020). Creating a positive image of the destinations in the minds of participants through realistic VR videos increases the interest levels of participants, making them more likely to seriously consider the destinations being presented as a potential travel destination.

VR videos provide valuable information about the destinations, and specifically about the culture of the destination. The realistic simulation created by VR tourism videos allows for a greater understanding of the destination (Vishwakarma et al., 2020). This research confirmed this, finding that knowledge is gained through VR tourism videos, and even found that it is noticed when there is not enough information provided by the videos, due to participants’ desire for information and to learn. The interactive aspect of VR tourism videos does not inherently provide a greater understanding of the destination but rather impacts participants’ retention of material that is presented. Therefore, the cognitive value of the VR video is largely dependent on the video content, and VR tourism videos with informational content are effective at increasing viewers’ understanding of the destination.

This study found that participants found the tourism videos relaxing, enjoyable, and exciting for a variety of reasons, likely positively impacting their visit intentions. Literature found that enjoyment plays an important role in virtual tourism experiences, resulting in greater visit intentions (Tussyadiah et al., 2018). However, this study also identified qualities of the videos that reduced enjoyment, and therefore likely would result in lesser visit intentions, such as a lack of exciting music, interaction, or portrayal of interesting activities, which caused the videos to be described as “boring” or “not exciting.” However, participants were usually referring to the 2D videos as “boring,” not the VR videos.

VR can strongly impact the tourism video’s ability to create immersive, authentic, and emotionally engaging experiences. The VR experience provided a strong sense of presence and emotional engagement aligning with prior research by Tussyadiah et al. (2018) which highlighted VR’s potential to evoke emotional responses. However, challenges such as pacing issues, content familiarity, and sensory overload negatively impacted the VR experience. Videos with a fast pace may be distracting causing viewers to lose focus on the content of the video as viewers may not have enough time to absorb information before scenes change. Pacing, along with other factors such as loud sounds and bright colors, further contributed to feelings of sensory overload. This ultimately results in lower engagement from participants as they are not able to maintain focus on the content. Similar findings by Sihvonen and Turunen (2022) emphasize the importance of managing the senses to prevent sensory overload and promote information absorption.

Additionally, content familiarity may negatively impact viewers’ interest in the destination, specifically when familiar content is presented in the 2-D format. While familiar content can make the virtual tourism experiences feel more authentic, it may be less interesting to the viewer, causing feelings of boredom and lack of presence. This may also lead to commercial bias where viewers feel like they were watching a commercial rather than engaging in an authentic cultural experience. This can negatively impact destination image which further influences tourist motivations (Shani et al., 2009). Still, the addition of VR in tourism videos has the ability to elevate familiar content by providing new perspectives on a familiar destination. The incorporation of VR keeps users engaged with content, even if they are familiar with the location being presented.

6.2. Practical Implications

To optimize user comfort and interactivity, VR experiences should be carefully designed with appropriate pacing and user-directed controls. For example, in one VR video, there is a skateboarding scene that is too fast, making it hard to navigate moving through the VR. For participants to feel they have control over their experience, scenes must be still enough for participants to be able to effectively look around and navigate through the scene. The scenes also should last long enough for participants to look around and explore the scene without feeling like the video is moving on too fast. Additionally, to achieve an effective VR tourism experience, high-quality video must be prioritized to limit distractions.

Genuine and familiar elements are valued, and they reinforce the importance of authentic content. VR content creators should prioritize authentic, local culture experiences to enhance perceived value and emotional connection. For example, viewers of the SLO tourism VR video who live in SLO felt that familiar scenes, such as the coffee shop or farmer’s market, increased their perceptions of the authenticity and accuracy of the VR video. Familiarity is particularly important for destinations that are looking to attract repeat visitors through VR, as showing a mixture of familiar and new attractions, viewers will be reminded of their past experiences at the destination while also being shown new activities they could participate in if they return. Additionally, showing activities that locals regularly participate in a tourism video helps increase the perceived authenticity of the video. On the other hand, aspects that make viewers perceive the videos as a commercial or advertisement detract from the viewer’s experience. A VR tourism video showing only exciting tourist activities as opposed to more mundane local cultural experiences was sometimes seen as less authentic. Viewers consider videos that they believe only depict tourist activities as more commercialized or like an advertisement.

Presence was compromised by technical distractions and rapid visual movement, which caused disorientation or overwhelm. VR videos should be slow enough for participants to be able to look around without feeling rushed or that they are missing parts of the video due to the speed. Feelings of presence were enhanced when viewers felt like they were in the shoes of the people in the video or at eye level with the people in the video, rather than watching from above. VR videos should place the viewer at the same height as the people in the videos to increase their sense of presence.

To maintain viewer interest in the content, VR tourism videos must incorporate novel, informationally rich material to sustain viewer interest and promote educational value. Showcasing only one or a few scenes of a destination may lead to viewer fatigue, therefore it is essential to present a dynamic and diverse array of experiences. For example, the inclusion of both natural and urban landscapes not only shows the viewer the breadth of what a particular destination has to offer but also keeps the viewer actively engaged by introducing new content. By weaving together multiple dimensions of a destination, VR tourism videos have the ability to create a richer, more immersive experience that holds the viewers’ attention and encourages greater interest in the destination.

Utilizing storytelling and substantive educational content can maximize cognitive value in tourism videos. Effective educational experiences from tourism videos will be not only visually captivating but also deepen the viewers’ understanding of the destination’s culture and history (Jun, 2021). One way to achieve this is to weave together scenes that showcase both tourist destinations like the Tokyo Tower as well as cultural elements such as traditional Japanese dances and sumo wrestling matches, this gives the viewer a richer understanding of the destination and its culture. Additionally, the integration of text overlays and slogans can further enhance the educational aspect of the experience without sacrificing the immersive properties. These text elements could identify popular attractions or dishes being served in the video, fostering a deeper intellectual connection to the destination (Salamurović, 2015). By thoughtfully combining entertainment and education, VR tourism videos can appeal to a wide range of interests, encouraging more meaningful exploration of a destination.

This research found that balancing exciting and calming elements enhances hedonic satisfaction without overstimulation. This balance is crucial for creating an exciting and engaging experience, without causing exhaustion. Soundtrack selection and pacing are both important tools for maintaining this balance. For example, when transitioning to a high-energy scene such as a crowded farmers’ market, the use of a lively yet controlled soundtrack can heighten emotional excitement without being overstimulating. Pacing is equally critical in allowing viewers to absorb information while retaining interest in the destination. Video sequences should be edited in a tempo where viewers are allowed time to absorb and appreciate the content. While rapid cuts and constant movement may generate excitement, it may also lead to sensory overload. Alternating energetic scenes such as football games with more relaxing content such as sunset views will allow viewers to emotionally recharge without losing their interest.

Both 2D and VR technologies can significantly enhance accessibility in tourism and become effective tools for promoting destinations. Audiences who face physical, financial or geographic barriers can engage with a destination virtually in an immersive way. It provides DMOs with opportunities to reach broader audiences and contribute to their social responsibility goals. The findings of this research show that the choice between VR and 2D should be determined by the purpose of the experience (e.g., generate travel interest, heritage protection, and new site introduction) and the audience’s prior familiarity with the destination.

While VR and 2D videos can enhance accessibility and promote destinations, they may also pose challenges for tourism destinations and stakeholders. Offering rich virtual experiences could reduce the motivation for some potential visitors to travel physically, which results in decreased demand for tourism businesses. This reduction in physical visitation could further impact local economies that depend heavily on tourism revenue. Therefore, destinations and stakeholders need to adopt a balanced approach to virtual tourism to prevent potential negative effects on the economy.

7. Limitations and Future Research

This study adopted interviews as a qualitative method to explore participants’ attitudes and responses to tourism videos. The student sample was used to help control extraneous variables in the experimental design. However, this sample could lead to limited generalization of the results. Additionally, only two destinations were examined in the experiment. Although they represented a familiar and an unfamiliar destination, the findings have limited generalizability beyond these specific contexts. Future research could interview or survey the participants with a more diverse background to further examine tourism video effectiveness. Segmenting the responses in a way that aligns with advertising segmentation may provide clear direction for creating tourism videos for specific markets. Testing the factor of interactive storytelling could also a future direction as participants mentioned storytelling could generate more positive emotional responses.