Abstract
The authors conduct a systematic literature review and propose steps toward conceptual clarity to distinguish between 2D and 3D VR. Next, differences are investigated between 2D and 3D VR in telepresence, sense of realism, and a set of marketing outcomes important for advertisers. The authors employ custom-made VR content developed in collaboration with industry partners and tested via a field study and two lab experiments. It is found that 2D and 3D VR do not differ in their ability to elicit positive marketing outcomes, yet 3D surpasses 2D VR in evoking telepresence and a sense of realism.
- Received July 3, 2023.
- Received (in revised form) May 24, 2024.
- Accepted June 4, 2024.
- Copyright © 2024 ARF. All rights reserved.
ARF MEMBERS
If you are a member of the Advertising Research Foundation, you can access the content by logging in here
Log In
Pay Per Article - You may access this article (from the computer you are currently using) for 30 days for US$20.00
Regain Access - You can regain access to a recent Pay per Article purchase if your access period has not yet expired.
Log in using your username and password
Vol 64 Issue 3
Jump to
- Article
- Abstract
- Management Slant
- INTRODUCTION
- THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
- STUDY 1: FIELD STUDY
- STUDY 2: LAB EXPERIMENT
- STUDY 3: POST HOC LAB EXPERIMENT
- GENERAL DISCUSSION
- ABOUT THE AUTHORS
- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
- Appendix 1 Systematic Literature Review Summary
- Appendix 2 VR Types Based on the Method of Production and Display
- Appendix 3 Stimulus Development
- REFERENCES
- Figures & Data
- Info