The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0959-3845.htm

VR tourism experiences and tourist VR technology

and tourism in
behavior intention in COVID-19: COVID-19

an experience economy and mood

management perspective
Wilson K.S. Leung Received 2 June 2021
Revised 1 February 2022
College of Professional and Continuing Education, 25 March 2022
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong Accepted 25 April 2022

Man Kit Chang

School of Business, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon, Hong Kong
Man Lai Cheung
Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK and
Department of Marketing, The Hang Seng University of Hong Kong,
Shatin, Hong Kong, and
Si Shi
Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu, China

Abstract
Purpose – Virtual reality (VR) technology is a potential tool for tourism marketers to maintain the
attractiveness of their destinations and recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the effectiveness of VR
technology in motivating potential tourists’ visit intention under lockdown conditions remains unknown. An
integrated model based on the experience economy framework and mood management theory was, therefore,
used to explain how tourists’ VR experiences affect their mood management processes and subsequent
behaviors. This research also examined how perceived travel risk influenced the relationship between mood
management processes and future decisions.
Design/methodology/approach – This study used a cross-sectional design based on a sample collected
from a Chinese survey company, Sojump. The author surveyed 285 respondents who had experienced VR
tourism activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. The research model was tested using partial least squares–
structural equation modeling.
Findings – The results demonstrated that the four dimensions of VR experiences differently affected mood
management processes, while perceived travel risk differently moderated the influence of mood management
processes on visit intention and VR stickiness. This provides insights for tourism marketers to adapt to the
current tourism environment and develop recovery strategies.
Originality/value – In response to gaps in the literature, this research examined the effectiveness of VR
technology in driving tourists’ visit intention during the COVID-19 pandemic, providing insights for tourism
marketers to successfully implement VR tourism and plan timely recovery strategies.
Keywords VR tourism, COVID-19, Travel risk, Mood management theory, Experience economy framework,
Visit intention
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic continues to damage the global economy, and its impact is
estimated to last beyond 2022 (Bloomberg, 2020). Many countries have implemented
measures ranging from social distancing to complete lockdown to slow the spread of the virus
Information Technology & People
“The work described in this paper, was fully funded by a grant from the College of Professional and © Emerald Publishing Limited
0959-3845
Continuing Education, an affiliate of The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.” DOI 10.1108/ITP-06-2021-0423
ITP (Dryhurst et al., 2020). Consequently, undertourism will likely remain an issue in many
destinations (Bec et al., 2021). The number of foreign tourist arrivals is projected to decrease
by almost 80% globally in 2020, resulting in a loss of US$1.2 trillion in the tourism industry
and leading to more than 120 million unemployed tourism practitioners (UNWTO, 2020).
Tourism researchers are thus exploring ways to transform the industry and implement crisis
recovery strategies (Sigala, 2020).
One such strategy involves the proactive transformation of businesses through
technology to build resilience to crises (Sigala, 2020). Despite previously being viewed as a
threat to the tourism sector (Itani and Hollebeek, 2021), virtual tourism presents a potential
solution for destination survival through virtual reality (VR). For example, the Singapore
Tourism Board has adopted VR technology to offer virtual tours since the COVID-19
outbreak to maintain the attractiveness of destinations (Singapore Tourism Board, 2020). The
role of VR has thus been transformed from a possible supplement into a necessity in the
pandemic era. In addition to alleviating the risk of infection, VR technologies have also been
used by tourism marketers to cultivate interest in their destinations during lockdowns, as
virtual tours may encourage real visitation (Guttentag, 2010). Heavy investment has been
made in VR technology since the outbreak of the pandemic in an attempt to maintain the
enthusiasm of potential tourists (Mintchell, 2021), such that they are more likely to visit the
virtually toured locations after lockdowns relax (Kim et al., 2021b; Manchanda and Deb,
2021). However, reaping the benefits of this investment will depend on the repeated use of
tourism-related VR activities (i.e. stickiness) (Hu et al., 2020) and the desire to travel to the
places presented in the VR environment (i.e. visit intention) (Kim et al., 2020a), particularly
during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thereby, this study posed the follow research question: how
can tourism marketers effectively motivate tourists’ VR use and visit intention during the
pandemic? We attempted to address this issue through the theoretical lens of mood
management.
The pandemic has seriously affected mood and created mental health problems (Tull et al.,
2020) due to the psychological burden and challenges posed by social distancing and
lockdowns (Time, 2020; Zenker et al., 2021). According to an international research data, the
number of people with positive feelings has sharply decreased from 50 to 26% while the
percentage of people with negative moods, such as feeling scared (from 11 to 34%) and
stressed (from 19 to 48%), has substantially increased (YouGov, 2020), suggesting that
individuals’ mood states are seriously affected by the pandemic (Terry et al., 2020). However,
recent studies have highlighted that VR technologies can improve individual psychological
health and help manage affective states (Kelson et al., 2021), particularly during the pandemic
(Ball et al., 2021; Riva and Wiederhold, 2020). Consequently, VR technology not only offers
users enjoyable experiences but also helps to improve their affective state in the pandemic.
Researchers in VR tourism have also suggested that tourists’ affective responses to VR
technology (e.g. pleasure or enjoyment) are a crucial driver of visit intention (Kim and Hall,
2019; Pantano and Corvello, 2014). In the circumstances of the pandemic, investigating the
effectiveness of VR tourism from the perspective of mood management thus becomes
particularly relevant.
Mood management theory (MMT) posits that people use media products such as social
media and videogames to enhance positive moods and reduce negative moods (Ho et al., 2017;
Zillmann, 1988). A few recent VR tourism studies have investigated affective responses to
VR, for instance, the effect of perceived enjoyment on visit intention before and during
COVID-19 (Kim et al., 2021b), and the influence of perceived enjoyment on stress reduction
during the pandemic (Yang et al., 2021). However, attempts to explain how engagement in VR
tourism activities influences affective states and consequently affects visit intention remain
lacking. Moreover, previous studies have only focused on positive affective responses
(e.g. perceived enjoyment) to VR tourism activities (Kim and Hall, 2019; Kim et al., 2020a),
while negative mood has been largely neglected despite its relevance to destination recovery VR technology
(Terry et al., 2020; Yung et al., 2020). Drawing upon MMT, this research, therefore, examined and tourism in
the effect of tourism-related VR activities during the COVID-19 pandemic on two mood
management processes, perceived positive mood enhancement and perceived negative mood
COVID-19
reduction, and the subsequent influence on visit intention. Given the stated importance of
repeated engagement in tourism-related VR activities (i.e. stickiness) (Hu et al., 2020), this
study also investigated how positive and negative mood changes affected the stickiness of
VR tourism.
To assess the effectiveness of VR tourism from the perspective of mood management, it is
important to understand what aspects of user experiences enhance positive moods and
reduce negative moods. VR technologies provide a virtual environment where users interact
with virtual objects and receive sensory information, which in turn influences their affective
states (Kim et al., 2020a; Tussyadiah et al., 2018). For instance, Kim et al. (2020a, b) suggested
that authentic virtual tourism experiences stimulate individual affective (e.g. perceived
enjoyment) and behavioral responses (e.g. visit intention). However, prior VR tourism studies
have mainly focused on a single dimension of VR tourism experiences such as authentic
experience (Kim et al., 2020a) or control experience (Kim et al., 2021b; Tussyadiah et al., 2018).
Numerous scholars have suggested that future studies should investigate multifaceted VR
experiences to improve the understanding of how virtual tours should be designed (Kim et al.,
2021b; Merkx and Nawijn, 2021; Yung et al., 2020). This study consequently adopted the
experience economy framework of Pine and Gilmore (1999) to propose four dimensions of VR
tourism experiences, namely, esthetic, educational, escapism, and entertainment, and
investigate how VR experiences affect tourists’ mood management mechanisms.
The COVID-19 pandemic has intensified tourists’ perception of travel risk, the impact of
which must be understood to better predict travel demand and design recovery strategies
(Neuburger and Egger, 2021; Sigala, 2020; Teeroovengadum et al., 2021). Recent studies have
contended that the perceived risk of COVID-19 may serves as a contextual factor which
influence both how people use VR (Ball et al., 2021; Schiopu et al., 2021) and how they make
travel decisions (Kim et al., 2021a; Teeroovengadum et al., 2021). Individual risk perception of
COVID-19 has diverged as more information has accumulated, leading to different judgments
(Paek and Hove, 2020) and higher contextual complexity than before the pandemic (Ball et al.,
2021). Previous studies have found that risk perception moderates the influence of affective
states on behavioral outcomes, such as intention (Lu et al., 2016; Tuu et al., 2011). Therefore,
investigating the moderating effect of risk perception on the relationship between moods and
visit intention as well as VR stickiness can enhance the understanding of the effectiveness of
VR tourism.
In summary, we developed a research model that integrated MMT and the experience
economy framework to investigate how VR tourism-induced mood changes affect both visit
intention and VR stickiness. The study also explored the effect of various aspects of the VR
user experiences on mood changes and how risk perception moderates the effect of moods on
the two behavioral outcomes.

2. Theoretical background
2.1 VR tourism in the COVID-19 era
The underlying mechanism of VR technology is the detection of head movements and
reactions through tracking devices, which enable users to perceive a visual illusion of
real-time movements within the immersive environment (Biocca and Delaney, 1995; Wirth
et al., 2007). In light of technological progress, a more comprehensive definition was proposed
by Boyd and Koles (2019), who proposed that VR “incorporates computer-generated,
interactive and highly vivid environments that enable the user to achieve a state of immersion
ITP through the ultimate experience of telepresence, and facilitate engagements in human
encounters that are multi-sensorial, dynamic and resemble the user’s perception and
understanding of the real world” (p. 442). As VR technologies have expanded into tourism,
scholars have further refined the definition for this context. According to Kim et al. (2020a, b),
the term “tourism-related VR activities” refers to using VR head-mounted display devices to
“play, enjoy, experience, travel, and explore information by looking at pictures, gaming,
watching 3D 360-degree videos, watching drone videos, looking at holographic images, and
other tourism-related activities” (p. 70). This study adopts Kim et al. (2020a, b)’s definition in
the present research context.
Even before the pandemic, VR had been drawing substantial attention from both
marketers and scholars in the tourism context. For instance, applying VR to tourism enables
marketers to create informative and entertaining virtual settings and offer novel travel
experiences that stimulate tourists’ cognitive and affective responses (Kim et al., 2020a). This
can motivate the desire to visit particular destinations (Yeh et al., 2017) and shape favorable
preferences toward destinations before visit decisions (Tussyadiah et al., 2018). The above
benefits generated concerns that VR tourism could substitute real visitation; however, the
extent to which tourists accept VR as a substitute depends on several factors that influence
tourists’ perceptions (Guttentag, 2010). First, the authenticity of VR experiences may
influence their acceptance as a substitute (Guttentag, 2010). Sufficiently realistic experiences
could serve as satisfactory replacements, creating an unforgettable memory in users’ minds
(Guttentag, 2010). Second, the willingness to accept a VR substitute is affected by tourists’
motivations or attitudes such as the desire to escape from the daily routine, to seek
excitement, and to engage in social interaction (Guttentag, 2010). Current VR applications are
only able to satisfy such motivations to a limited degree (Guttentag, 2010). Third, personal
constraints such as lacking money and time, poor health, safety fears, and risk of infection
enhance the level of VR substitute acceptance (Fleischer and Pizam, 2002). VR tourism still
has only limited ability to fully replace real visitation. For instance, tourists who are likely to
seek risk and novelty may reject a VR substitute because the desired experience is difficult to
mimic in controlled virtual settings (Guttentag, 2010). VR tourism also cannot fully stimulate
human senses such as taste, smell, and touch, providing a limited travel experience (Cheong,
1995; Guttentag, 2010). Consequently, although VR tourism has been regarded as a tourism
substitute in the COVID-19 era (Kim et al., 2021b), it may be best viewed as a way of enhancing
tourists’ intention to visit in the real world (Guttentag, 2010). In other words, VR tourism is
only a temporary substitute during the pandemic, but it is actually beneficial to encourage
future real visitation.
COVID-19 has transformed the long-term structure of the tourism industry and provided
opportunities for the rise of technology such as VR (He et al., 2021; Sigala, 2020). For instance,
Yung et al. (2020) developed a conceptual framework arguing that VR technology positively
contributes to users’ emotion enhancement and consequently increases their visit intention in
the COVID-19 era. Sigala (2020) also advocated for the use of technology in the tourism
industry to offer a new way to experience tourism activities throughout the three pandemic
stages of response, recovery, and reset. Kim et al. (2021b) suggested a stimulus–organism–
response (S-O-R) research model to examine the effect of the control features of a 3608 VR
video on students’ enjoyment and intention to visit the portrayed destinations during the
COVID-19 pandemic. They found that the intention to visit during the pandemic was
increased when the VR control features provided high levels of possible action and
self-location (Kim et al., 2021b). Yang et al. (2021) collected 260 samples of shoppers from a
shopping mall in China that provided a VR device to view a 3608 virtual video tour. They
found that a high level of user satisfaction reduced stress, suggesting that such virtual videos
may help to improve psychological well-being during the pandemic. Although prior studies
have investigated the impacts of virtual video experiences on user affective responses, the
experiences and responses have been limited to a single dimension. Future studies should VR technology
explore different types of VR experience to identify which key determinants most drive and tourism in
tourists’ behavioral intentions (Kim et al., 2021b). Moreover, understanding how VR
experiences emotionally engage users could help tourism managers provide better VR
COVID-19
experiences and minimize negative experiences during the pandemic (Diemer et al., 2015; Xiao
et al., 2021). Knowledge of the moderating effects of travel risk perception during the
COVID-19 pandemic on VR users’ affective and behavioral responses could improve the
design of recovery and response strategies (Neuburger and Egger, 2021; Sigala, 2020).To
bridge the above research gaps, we developed a model to understand the impacts of four-
dimensional VR experiences on two mood management processes, and the moderating effect
of perceived travel risk on the relationship between mood management processes and
behavioral intentions (i.e. visit intention and VR stickiness) during the pandemic.

2.2 Experience economy framework

VR tourism provides a way for potential tourists to experience attractions, museums, and
festival events before making a visit decision (Kim et al., 2020a; Lytras et al., 2021). Such VR
experiences thus facilitate the formation of positive attitudinal and behavioral outcomes
(Tussyadiah et al., 2018). Despite its demonstrated importance, few studies have investigated
VR experiences in the context of tourism. For instance, Tussyadiah et al. (2018) examined users’
attitudes and visit intention before and after using VR. Kim and Hall (2019) utilized a hedonic
motivation model to explore the link between perceived enjoyment and flow experience in VR
tourism. More recently, Kim et al. (2020a, b) investigated the impact of the authentic experience
of using tourism-related VR activities on users’ affective and cognitive responses. Another
study by Kim et al. (2020a, b) also examined the effects of the authenticity of VR experiences on
actual visitation to the destination and positive word-of-mouth feedback. Lee et al. (2020a, b)
similarly explored how tourists’ absorptive experiences influenced their immersion
experiences, and consequently affected their offline museum visit intention. However, our
understanding of the influence of different VR experiences on potential affective responses,
positive or negative, during the pandemic remains deficient. This study thus aimed to extend
users’ VR experiences from the theoretical perspective of the experience economy.
Pine and Gilmore (1999) proposed the experience economy framework to understand how
experiential products are offered by companies to customers. The framework includes four
types of experience—education, entertainment, escapism, and esthetics—which each
uniquely contribute to an optimal tourist experience (Pine and Gilmore, 1999). Considering
VR tourism as an experiential product to create unique virtual travel experiences for tourists,
this research used the four dimensions of the experience economy framework to explore the
subjective mental states perceived by users during tourism-related VR activities.
Prior literature has adopted the experience economy framework to investigate customer
experience management across different disciplines. Manthiou et al. (2014) conceptualized the
four components of experience as a second-order factor to understand festival attendees’
overall experience. Tom-Dieck et al. (2018) examined the impacts of the four experience
dimensions on the satisfaction of augmented reality users. Recent research also investigated
the impact of absorptive experiences on immersion, which predicted visitors’ overall
experience in a VR museum as well as their visit intention (Lee et al., 2020a, b). Nonetheless,
Kim and Hall (2019) suggested that future studies should develop a theoretical basis to
understand emotional responses after participating in VR tourism activities due to their
importance to forming visit intention. Consequently, understanding emotional reactions is
critical for destination recovery (Yung et al., 2020). This study integrated the experience
economy framework with MMT to investigate emotional responses to tourism-related VR
experiences in the context of COVID-19.
ITP 2.3 Mood management theory
Prior literature has contended that VR is a hedonic technology that can induce emotional
reactions (both positive and negative) through perceptual stimulation (Diemer et al., 2015;
Yung et al., 2021a). This has stimulated research on tourists’ emotional responses to VR
tourism experiences, which can determine behavioral intentions (Goossens, 2000; Yung et al.,
2021a). For instance, Kim and Hall (2019) utilized the hedonic motivation system adoption
model to examine the relationship between perceived enjoyment of VR tourism and flow
state. Elsewhere, Kim et al. (2020a, b) used the S-O-R framework to investigate how the
authenticity of VR experiences influences affective responses such as enjoyment. Although
VR technology has been shown to stimulate user enjoyment (e.g. positive moods), its
effectiveness in relieving negative moods has received less empirical attention, particularly
during the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, no research has explored the influences of tourism-
related VR activities on hedonic management, such as enhancing positive moods and
relieving negative moods, under COVID-19 lockdowns. Understanding positive and negative
emotional factors is critical to predict individuals’ visit intention during a pandemic (Das and
Tiwari, 2021). This study thus adopted MMT to explain how tourists manage their moods
after experiencing tourism-related VR activities when they cannot travel due to the pandemic.
Mood refers to “a set of feelings, ephemeral in nature, varying in intensity and duration,
and usually involving more than one emotion” (Lane and Terry, 2000, p. 17) and is not
directed to a specific intention object (Chang, 2007). Mood usually manifests in positive or
negative form (Munz and Munz, 1997; Russell, 2003; Watson and Clark, 1984). According to
Munz and Munz (1997), negative mood refers to “the disposition to react to environmental
conditions and oneself with a generalized negative set that produces a negative interpretation
of a wide range of phenomena,” whereas positive mood refers to “the disposition to be happy
across time and situations, to have an overall sense of well-being, and to experience positive
mood states” (p. 234). As first proposed by Zillmann (1988), MMT postulates that humans
tend to (1) minimize exposure to negative stimuli and negative moods and (2) maximize the
likelihood of pleasurable stimuli and positive moods. Based on this theory, this study
proposed two mood management processes for positive and negative moods in VR tourism:
perceived positive mood enhancement and perceived negative mood reduction. These were
defined as the perception that tourism-related VR activities can improve positive moods or
relieve negative moods, respectively (Lee et al., 2020a, b).
Previous studies have adopted the mood management perspective to understand
consumer behaviors. For example, it was shown that 3D virtual online stores can draw
customer attention and evoke positive moods through visual product presentation.
Customers with strong positive moods subsequently remained longer in the online store,
while the opposite was true for negative moods (Park et al., 2005). Similarly, Lee et al.
(2020a, b) adopted a hedonic management perspective to argue that playing online role-
playing games helps players cope with negative moods and enhance positive moods,
resulting in addictive game-playing behaviors. Understanding both positive and negative
moods is thus important for predicting behavioral intentions, particularly when using
hedonic media or technology such as VR.
In addition, Djamasbi et al. (2010) argued that the effects of mood on cognitive behaviors
are more varied in moderate than extreme situations as the influence of mood on cognition
depends on task conditions such as risk level. Therefore, they suggested that risk perception
such as perceived task uncertainty moderates the relationship between mood and cognition.
With respect to tourism, scholars have contended that understanding individual travel risk
perception is critical to predicting travel behaviors (Neuburger and Egger, 2021; Rather, 2021;
Teeroovengadum et al., 2021). For instance, Itani and Hollebeek (2021) adopted the protection
motivation model to compare the effects of social distancing behavior on VR tour intention
between during- and post-COVID-19 pandemic periods. Their results indicated that
risk-averse consumers were more likely to use VR tours and less likely to travel in person VR technology
during the pandemic, but the effect of consumers’ attitudes toward social distancing was and tourism in
weakened in the post-pandemic period, implying that perceived risk may serve as a
moderating factor. In addition, the effect of emotion on behavior is highly susceptible to the
COVID-19
risk of COVID-19 (Wheaton et al., 2021), implying that risk perception may moderate the
relationship between emotion and behavior. We consequently aimed to understand how
travel risk perception during the pandemic moderates the association between mood
management effects and two relevant behavioral intentions of visit intention and VR
stickiness.

3. Research model and hypothesis development

3.1 Relationship between esthetic experience and mood management
Esthetic experience is the evaluation of physical surroundings or the overall atmospherics
(Pine and Gilmore, 1999). Marketing scholars have suggested that consumer mood is affected
by visual presentation such as decoration or product display in retail stores (Spies et al., 1997;
Swinyard, 1993). In online marketing, Park et al. (2005) found that esthetic experience is
generated through the design of 3D product presentation, such as color, sound, and motion, and
they further suggested that providing a pleasurable online shopping environment can evoke
positive mood. In the tourism context, esthetic experiences often occur through sightseeing
activities in which tourists enjoy an environment without personally altering or influencing it
(Oh et al., 2007). Furthermore, the esthetic experience derived from the overall atmosphere or
environmental setting increases positive emotions and reduces negative emotions due to
positive environmental perceptions (Lee et al., 2008). Manthiou et al. (2014) found that tourists’
vividity of memory regarding a festival event was positively affected by their esthetic
experience, suggesting that the positive atmosphere and attractive settings formed longer-
lasting memories. Song et al. (2015) found that esthetic experience enabled tourists to better
harmonize with the environment of a temple, which increased their overall enjoyment level. VR
technologies similarly provide a vivid virtual environment with immersive visual images and
auditory information that create an engrossing total environment (Shin, 2019) (see Figure 1).
We thus posited that esthetic experience can be generated through tourism-related VR
activities, such as a vivid and harmonious setting with auditory information in the VR
environment, which lead to an increase in positive mood and decrease in negative mood during
the pandemic. Thereby, we proposed the following hypotheses:
H1a. Esthetic experience through tourism-related VR activities positively affects
perceived positive mood enhancement.
H1b. Esthetic experience through tourism-related VR activities positively affects
perceived negative mood reduction.

3.2 Relationship between educational experience and mood management

According to Pine and Gilmore’s (1999) framework, an educational dimension refers to the
desire to gather knowledge and learn through an experience. In the tourism context, Oh et al.
(2007) asserts that some destination managers aim to facilitate learning skills and knowledge
through educational events, such as temple stay programs (Yan et al., 2015) and festivals
(Manthiou et al., 2014). This allows tourists to actively learn by interactively engaging their
mind or body. Research has revealed that educational experience and emotional responses
are positively linked. Kastenholz et al. (2018) showed that engaging with agricultural
products and farming tools during rural tourism provided a meaningful learning
opportunity for tourists and thus increased their positive arousal in the rural destination
ITP Perceived
Travel Risk

Esthetic
Experience
H7a H7b
H1a
H1b

Perceived Positive H5a

Visit Intention
H2a Mood Enhancement H8a
Educational
Experience
H5b
H2b

H3a
H8b H6a
Escapism
Perceived Negative
Experience H3b
VR Stickiness
Mood Reduction
H6b

H4a
H4b
Figure 1. Entertainment
Research model Experience

context. Lai et al. (2019) also found that educational experiences regarding ethnic food and
culture positively affected emotional state (i.e. destination satisfaction). Learning the local
food culture stimulated curiosity and increased satisfaction. With respect to technology,
Tom-Dieck et al. (2018) demonstrated that using AR at science festivals positively influenced
visitors’ satisfaction with their educational experience. Besides, VR combines visual, auditory
and kinesthetic learning styles in a virtual environment, offering direct interaction and
instant feedback for the learners. As such, a more vivid learning experience may reduce the
stress and anxiety during the learning process (Chen and Hsu, 2020). A recent study of
Allcoat and von M€ uhlenen (2018) found that VR learning experience has a positive effect on
positive emotion enhancement and negative emotion reduction as learners may feel happier
and less stressful through the interactive learning approach. Moreover, a learning task
involves cognitive effort which can draw individual attention away from unpleasant states
(Oh et al., 2007; Rieger et al., 2014). The present study thus hypothesized that learning
destination information such as historical background and cultural practices in tourism-
related VR activities may help potential tourists to learn better in an interesting way and
divert their attention from unpleasant situations, which in turn enhances positive moods and
reduces negative moods:
H2a. Educational experience through tourism-related VR activities positively affects
perceived positive mood enhancement.
H2b. Educational experience through tourism-related VR activities positively affects
perceived negative mood reduction.

3.3 Relationship between escapism experience and mood management

The escapism experience is defined as the extent to which a person is completely immersed in
an environment (Csikszentmihalyi, 1991). As demanding tasks require greater cognitive
effort and attention, they enable individuals to forget unpleasant thoughts or detach from
their deactivated state (Rieger et al., 2014). Entertainment media such as videogames demand
cognitive effort, which creates immersive experiences that direct attention away from
negative moods and toward positive moods (Ho et al., 2017; Rieger et al., 2014). Tourists also VR technology
frequently seek novel experiences to escape from their daily routine (Manthiou et al., 2014), so and tourism in
effective VR tourism experiences should meet this goal. Kim et al. (2020a, b) claimed that the
flow state can be activated by highly immersive VR tourism content, leading to a high level of
COVID-19
enjoyment. They further confirmed that authentic VR tourism provided a sense of immersion
and liberation from daily routines, which positively influenced affective responses. During
the COVID-19 pandemic and lock down, people may make use of VR tourism in order to
escape from the stressful and boring reality. In accordance with MMT, we proposed that
tourism-related VR activities enable potential tourists to escape from their daily life into a
virtual environment and that this active immersion increases positive moods and relieves
negative moods during the pandemic. Thus, we hypothesized:
H3a. Escapism experience through tourism-related VR activities positively affects
perceived positive mood enhancement.
H3b. Escapism experience through tourism-related VR activities positively affects
perceived negative mood reduction.

3.4 Relationship between entertainment experience and mood management

The entertainment experience is defined as the enjoyment of activities with a dimension of
passive absorption (Oh et al., 2007). When individuals are enjoyable during the interaction in
an environment, their positive feelings will be improved and feel less stressful (Flow, 1997).
In medical area, VR technology has been found to helps patients to reduce stress and pain
levels by providing a nature-inspired and enjoyable scenario (Stewart et al., 2019). In tourism,
entertainment experiences occur when individuals passively appreciate events such as
concerts and performances (Manthiou et al., 2014). For example, Song et al. (2015) found that
positive emotional valences increased through the experiences of absorption and passive
involvement in temple stay programs. In the VR tourism context, destination marketers aim
to design an interesting virtual tour to entertain potential tourists through stimulating their
sensory. As such, when users engage in the VR tourism activities which they enjoy, they will
experience happiness, including life satisfaction and positive affect (Kim and Hall, 2019).
A recent tourism study confirmed that offering enjoyable virtual tours to individuals can
reduce their stress caused by the pandemic since the stress level will be reduced when they
participate in the activities which they enjoy (Yang et al., 2021). Immersed in entertaining
experience can also distract people from their daily troubles and bad mood. We thus proposed
that entertainment experiences in tourism-related VR activities may contribute to positive
moods and relieve negative moods, leading to the following hypotheses:
H4a. Entertainment experience through tourism-related VR activities positively affects
perceived positive mood enhancement.
H4b. Entertainment experience through tourism-related VR activities positively affects
perceived negative mood reduction.

3.5 Relationship between mood management, VR stickiness, and visit intention

VR stickiness and visit intention are selected as outcome variables in this study.
Investigating stickiness is important for tourism businesses to understand their ability to
retain visitors (Zott et al., 2000). If tourists are willing to use VR more frequently, a better
return on the VR investments might be realized. Studying how effectively visit intention
to tourism destinations is promoted by VR technologies is also vital in the COVID-19 era
(Sigala, 2020). This study defined VR stickiness as the time spent in tourism-related VR
activities across any number of visits (Zhang et al., 2017), while visit intention refers to the
willingness of tourists to travel in the future (Kim et al., 2020a).
ITP Prior literature has contended that mood states influence a wide variety of consumer
behaviors. In the shopping context, Babin et al. (1998) showed that positive mood states can
increase the time customers remain at a store and their evaluations of the store. In the social
media context, Zhang et al. (2017) found that the hedonic value of pleasant content in
enterprise microblogs increased user stickiness. In the video game addiction context, Lee et al.
(2020a, b) argued that videogames can improve positive emotion and diminish negative
emotion, thus increasing the time spent playing. Turning to VR tourism, activities or content
that exceed expectations enhance users’ satisfaction and increase their intention to reuse the
VR technology. Kim et al. (2020a, b) found that greater positive affect, such as enjoyment and
emotional involvement, increased attachment to VR tourism activities and visit intention. We
consequently hypothesized that enhancing perceived positive moods and relieving perceived
negative moods through tourism-related VR activities in the pandemic increases the chance
of future participation (i.e. VR stickiness) and visit intention due to more favorable
evaluations of the destination.
H5a. Perceived positive mood enhancement through tourism-related VR activities
positively affects tourists’ visit intention.
H5b. Perceived negative mood reduction through tourism-related VR activities
positively affects tourists’ visit intention.
H6a. Perceived positive mood enhancement through tourism-related VR activities
positively affects VR stickiness.
H6b. Perceived negative mood reduction through tourism-related VR activities
positively affects VR stickiness.

3.6 Moderating effects of perceived travel risk

As previously discussed, understanding tourists’ travel risk perception during the pandemic is
critical for businesses to predict tourism demand, and perceived risk may affect tourism
recovery (Dryhurst et al., 2020). Future study is suggested to investigate the impacts of the
pandemic (e.g. perceived travel risk) on mood responses since mood is the key indicator to
reflect how well the society is coping with the COVID-19 (Terry et al., 2020). Perceived risk is
defined as “the consumer’s perceptions of the uncertainty and adverse consequences of buying
a product” (Dowling and Staelin, 1994, p. 119). Among many theories that have been proposed
to explain risk perceptions and decision-making behaviors, protection motivation theory is
most widely used. It postulates that individuals are inclined to protect themselves when they
predict the negative consequences of potential threats (Rogers, 1975). Accordingly, individuals
aim to avoid risky behaviors or cope with threats if they can take preventive measures (Rogers,
1983), although risk evaluation differs among individuals as a subjective psychological factor
(Douglas and Wildavsky, 1983; Loewenstein et al., 2001). Studies have consequently suggested
that examining the moderating effect of perceived risk can provide insights into the impact of
emotional responses on behavioral responses (Parayitam et al., 2020). According to Bauer
(1960), high levels of risk may cause emotional instability, which can weaken the relationship
between customer emotional responses and their behavioral intentions under uncertainty (Tuu
et al., 2011). Conversely, the influence of feelings on behavioral intentions strengthens under
positive stimulation at low perceived levels of risk (Tavitiyaman and Qu, 2013). Lu et al. (2016)
argued that when travelers feel unsafe and uncertain, it weakens the influence of their attitudes
to leisure travel on their actual participation intention. During the COVID-19 pandemic, tourists
have been less likely to travel to a destination when they perceive a high level of risk (Shin and
Kang, 2020). In this study, perceived travel risk is defined as the uncertainty perceived by
individuals when traveling (Farzanegan et al., 2021; Neuburger and Egger, 2021;
Teeroovengadum et al., 2021; Tseng and Wang, 2016). Based on protection motivation theory, VR technology
individuals avoid risky behaviors and take preventive measures to cope with the potential and tourism in
threats (Rippetoe and Rogers, 1987). In addition, people have high sensitivity to losses when in
positive moods (Nygren, 1998), particularly when the loss would impede their happiness
COVID-19
(Chuang, 2007; Isen and Patrick, 1983). In the VR tourism context, we posited that tourists are
less likely to visit places seen in VR tours when they perceive a high level of travel risk.
Accordingly, even though mood management effects (i.e. positive mood enhancement and
negative mood reduction) positively influence visit intention, this relationship weakens under
high perceived travel risk in the pandemic due to greater sensitivity to losses. As such, we
proposed the following hypotheses:
H7a. Perceived travel risk has a moderating effect on the association between perceived
positive mood enhancement and visit intention, such that the positive effect of
perceived positive mood enhancement on visit intention is weaker when perceived
travel risk is high.
H7b. Perceived travel risk has a moderating effect on the link between perceived negative
mood reduction and visit intention, such that the positive effect of perceived
negative mood reduction on visit intention is weaker when perceived travel risk
is high.
In addition, customers participate in risk-reduction activities when they perceive high levels
of risk (G€
urhan-Canli and Batra, 2004), such as switching to lower-risk alternatives (Tuu et al.,
2011; Y€ uksel and Y€ uksel, 2007). During the COVID-19 pandemic, when tourists perceive a
high level of uncertainty regarding travel restrictions, they may travel less and use VR
technologies more as a risk-free option (Itani and Hollebeek, 2021). Drawing on protection
motivation theory, we argued that tourists may use VR tourism activities as a protective
measure to fulfill their desire to travel when travel risk is high. We consequently posited that
the predictive power of mood management effects on VR stickiness increases under higher
perceived travel risk, leading to the following hypotheses:
H8a. Perceived travel risk has a moderating effect on the link between perceived positive mood
enhancement and VR stickiness, such that the positive effect of perceived positive mood
enhancement on VR stickiness is stronger when perceived travel risk is high.
H8b. Perceived travel risk has a moderating effect on the relationship between perceived
negative mood reduction and VR stickiness, such that the positive effect of
perceived negative mood reduction on VR stickiness is stronger when perceived
travel risk is high.

4. Research methodology
4.1 Measurement instruments
The items in the survey questionnaire were adapted from prior studies (see Appendix 1) and
measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale. Our team modified the wordings of all items to fit the
research context. Two Chinese tourism professors and ten Chinese tourism students
reviewed the survey’s content validity, and the survey was translated into Chinese using the
back-translation approach (Bhalla and Lin, 1987).

4.2 Data collection

We hired a leading online survey company to collect samples. The online context was chosen
for three reasons. First, online surveys are a more effective and safer way to reach subjects
ITP during the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, numerous recent tourism studies have contended
that online surveys are appropriate for recruiting subjects with specific behaviors in VR
tourism (e.g. Huang et al., 2016; Kim et al., 2020a). Third, online survey companies generally
have a national consumer database, which provides greater sample diversity and
cross-validation ability to increase the generalizability of results. Many recent high-quality
studies have, therefore, utilized a large-scale online consumer survey platform to collect data
(e.g. Chi, 2018; Leung et al., 2019, 2022b; Lien et al., 2017; Shu et al., 2017). We hired Sojump
(https://www.wjx.cn/) to recruit qualified respondents from August to September 2020.
Sojump is a popular Chinese sampling service company with more than 43 million members
in various Chinese cities (Zheng et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2013). Registered members received
Sojump’s survey invitation through email or mobile applications and each valid respondent
received points or monetary rewards after survey completion. The targeted respondents were
Chinese tourists with experience using tourism-related VR activities during the COVID-19
pandemic; notably, China was the first country to implement lockdown measures (Pan et al.,
2020). The definition of tourism-related VR activities was presented at the beginning of the
survey. Two screening questions were then included to validate the respondents’
appropriateness: (1) “In the past 24 months, did you travel to any other city?” (2) “When
unable to travel due to COVID-19 restrictions (such as lockdown or quarantine), have you
participated in tourism-related VR activities?” Respondents without travel experience in the
past 24 months or who had no experience using VR tourism activities during the lockdown
period were excluded from the study. Qualified respondents were asked to recall their most
recent experience of using tourism-related VR activities while unable to travel during the
pandemic, and to answer the subsequent questions regarding their recalled experience.
The survey initially recruited 393 respondents. To ensure data validity, two additional
procedures were used to screen out invalid responses. First, we removed respondents who
had spent less than five minutes completing the survey according to the online system,
following common data cleaning practice (Zhou et al., 2013). Second, the survey contained
several attention questions to check for careful reading. Respondents were removed if these
questions were answered incorrectly. Finally, 285 valid responses remained. The sample’s
demographic characteristics are shown in Table 1. All respondents were tourists from China
who had tourism-related VR experiences during the pandemic. The sample contained both
men (44.9%) and women (55.1%) with the majority aged 18–40 (93.4%) and 77.9% having
bachelor’s degrees. More than 80% of the respondents had used tourism-related VR activities
for more than half a year. The content of tourism-related VR activities was diverse. More than
40% of the respondents had used head-mounted VR devices to visit outdoor attractions,
followed by museums (26.7%) and street views (19.6%). Overall, the sample of respondents
was deemed appropriate for our research objectives. The hypotheses were tested using
partial least squares–structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM).

5. Data analysis and results

Data were analyzed with PLS-SEM using SmartPLS 3.2.8 (Ringle et al., 2015). PLS-SEM is
considered a preferable technique for exploratory research given its appropriateness for
research with a large number of constructs and ability to identify key predictors (Hair et al.,
2017) despite relatively small samples (e.g. less than 500 responses) (e.g. Leung et al., 2022a;
Shi et al., 2022).

5.1 Results of measurement model

Individual item loadings and composite reliability (CR) were used to assess the reliability of
the latent constructs (Hair et al., 2017). As presented in Table 2, all CR values exceeded 0.80,
Attributes Category Frequency Percentage
VR technology
and tourism in
Gender Male 128 44.9 COVID-19
Female 157 55.1
Age 18–23 64 22.5
24–29 85 29.8
30–35 98 34.4
36–40 19 6.7
41–50 16 5.6
Above 50 3 1.1
Education High school or below 4 1.4
Diploma or relative course 32 11.2
Bachelor’s degree 222 77.9
Master’s degree or above 27 9.5
Length of using tourism-related Less than half year 34 11.9
VR activities Half year-1 year 121 42.5
1–2 years 112 39.3
3–5 years 16 5.6
More than 5 years 2 0.7
Category of visited VR places during Museum 76 26.7
the COVID-19 pandemic Gallery 2 0.7 Table 1.
Street view 56 19.6 Demographic
Outdoor attraction 131 46 characteristics
Others 20 7 (N 5 285)

demonstrating a high level of internal consistency (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994).

Cronbach’s alphas, with values ranging from 0.6 to 0.73, are also reported in Table 2. The
values are seemingly not very high. However, recent methodological studies have found that
Cronbach’s alpha underestimates the reliability of measurement scales in many
circumstances, such as unequal factor loadings (no tau-equivalence) and small number
(<10) of items. Composite reliability is found to be a better indicator of reliability (Goodboy
and Martin, 2020; Hayes and Coutts, 2020; McNeish, 2018). Two items (EST1 and PTR2) were
excluded due to item-loading concerns to achieve a valid and dependable instrument.
The loading of the other items exceeded 0.70.
Average Variance Extracted (AVE) was used to evaluate the convergent validity of the
model. All values exceeded the 0.5 threshold (see Table 2), satisfying the AVE criterion (Hair
et al., 2017). The Fornell–Larcker criterion was adopted to evaluate discriminant validity
(Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The square roots of the AVEs for the latent constructs (Table 3)
were greater than the corresponding latent-variable correlations, demonstrating a good level
of discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2017). Additionally, we used heterotrait-monotrait
(HTMT) ratios to evaluate discriminant validity. All of the constructs’ HTMT ratios were
smaller than the 0.9 threshold (Hair et al., 2017), indicating that our model had discriminant
validity (Table 4).
As data were collected from a single source and survey responses were self-reported,
common method variance (CMV) may have inflated the strength of the relationship
between variables. Harman’s single-factor test (Podsakoff et al., 2003) revealed that no
single factor accounted for more than 25.7% of the variance, which was lower than the
50% threshold and indicated that there was no problematic level of CMV. Variance
Inflation Factor (VIF) values for all exogenous constructs were checked for
multicollinearity, and all were less than the 5.0 threshold (Hair et al., 2017), indicating
that multicollinearity was not a concern.
ITP Constructs Items Factor loading Mean SD

Esthetic experience (EST) EST2 0.85 5.92 0.97

CR 5 0.82, AVE 5 0.70, Alpha 5 0.61 EST3 0.82 5.84 0.95
Educational experience (EDU) EDU1 0.75 5.98 0.91
CR 5 0.80, AVE 5 0.58, Alpha 5 0.64 EDU2 0.72 5.51 1.08
EDU3 0.81 5.62 1.05
Escapism experience (ESC) ESC1 0.85 5.26 1.24
CR 5 0.83, AVE 5 0.62, Alpha 5 0.72 ESC2 0.73 4.36 1.60
ESC3 0.78 4.47 1.65
Entertainment experience (ENT) ENT1 0.71 5.87 0.76
CR 5 0.81, AVE 5 0.59, Alpha 5 0.70 ENT2 0.82 5.74 0.90
ENT3 0.77 6.01 0.79
Perceived positive mood enhancement (PPME) PPME1 0.72 6.03 0.78
CR 5 0.79, AVE 5 0.55, Alpha 5 0.63 PPME2 0.75 5.93 0.95
PPME3 0.76 5.82 0.93
Perceived negative mood reduction (PNMR) PNMR1 0.76 5.84 0.93
CR 5 0.81, AVE 5 0.58, Alpha 5 0.64 PNMR2 0.75 5.87 0.97
PNMR3 0.78 5.53 1.04
Perceived travel risk (PTR) PTR1 0.83 6.19 0.83
CR 5 0.80, AVE 5 0.67, Alpha 5 0.60 PTR3 0.81 6.07 0.76
Visit intention (VIS) VIS1 0.77 5.89 0.93
CR 5 0.83, AVE 5 0.55, Alpha 5 0.73 VIS2 0.78 5.64 1.02
VIS3 0.71 5.20 1.18
VIS4 0.72 5.44 1.09
VR stickiness (VRS) VRS1 0.75 5.25 1.13
CR 5 0.82, AVE 5 0.60, Alpha 5 0.70 VRS2 0.76 5.00 1.31
Table 2. VRS3 0.82 5.34 1.21
Reliability and validity Note(s): * EST1 and PR2 were deleted because of low factor loading (<0.7)

Fornell-Larcker criterion
Constructs EDU ENT ESC EST PNMR PPME PTR VRS VIS

EDU 0.76
ENT 0.40 0.77
ESC 0.22 0.40 0.79
EST 0.45 0.50 0.38 0.84
PNMR 0.34 0.50 0.37 0.31 0.76
PPME 0.45 0.52 0.31 0.51 0.48 0.74
PTR 0.19 0.17 0.04 0.26 0.25 0.31 0.82
VRS 0.25 0.39 0.53 0.33 0.37 0.34 0.08 0.77
Table 3. VIS 0.32 0.39 0.40 0.37 0.35 0.37 0.24 0.36 0.74
Discriminant validity Note(s): The italics diagonal is the square root of AVE

5.2 Structural model

As presented in Figure 2, the model explained 39% of the variance in perceived positive mood
enhancement, which was significantly determined by entertainment experience (β 5 0.28,
p < 0.001), followed by esthetic experience (β 5 0.25, p < 0.001), and educational experience
(β 5 0.22, p < 0.001). Additionally, the model explained 31% of the variance in perceived
negative mood reduction, which was significantly determined by entertainment experience
(β 5 0.37, p < 0.001), followed by escapism experience (β 5 0.20, p < 0.01), and educational
experience (β 5 0.15, p < 0.05). These results supported H1a, H2a, H2b, H3b, H4a, and H4b.
 HTMT ratio
VR technology
Constructs EDU ENT ESC EST PNMR PPME PTR VRS VIS and tourism in
COVID-19
EDU
ENT 0.63
ESC 0.28 0.56
EST 0.73 0.82 0.54
PNMR 0.52 0.77 0.48 0.52
PPME 0.73 0.83 0.41 0.88 0.77
PTR 0.32 0.28 0.18 0.47 0.44 0.57 Table 4.
VRS 0.37 0.57 0.79 0.52 0.53 0.50 0.16 Heterotrait-monotrait
VIS 0.45 0.56 0.52 0.56 0.50 0.55 0.36 0.51 ratio (HTMT)

Perceived
Travel Risk

Esthetic
Experience
–0.18* 0.04 n.s.
0.25***
–0.01 n.s.
Perceived Positive 0.23**
Visit Intention
0.22*** Mood Enhancement –0.07
Educational
Experience 0.21*
R 2 = 0.23
0.15* R 2 = 0.39

0.05 n.s.
0.20**
0.18*
Escapism Perceived Negative
Experience VR Stickiness
0.20** Mood Reduction 0.29***

0.28*** R 2 = 0.31 R 2 = 0.22

0.37***

Entertainment
Experience Figure 2.
Structural model
testing results
Note(s): * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; ns, not significant

The model also explained 23% of the variance in visit intention, which was significantly
determined by perceived positive mood enhancement (β 5 0.23, p < 0.01) and perceived
negative mood reduction (β 5 0.21, p < 0.05), while 22% of the variance in VR stickiness was
significantly determined by perceived negative mood reduction (β 5 0.29, p < 0.001) and
perceived positive mood enhancement (β 5 0.20, p < 0.01). These results supported H5a, H5b,
H6a, and H6b. However, the relationships between esthetic experience and perceived negative
mood reduction (β 5 0.01, p > 0.05) and between escapism experience and perceived
positive mood enhancement (β 5 0.05, p > 0.05) were not significant, thus rejecting H1b and
H3a. The moderating effects of perceived travel risk on the influence of perceived positive
mood enhancement on visit intention (β 5 0.18, p < 0.05) and on the relationship between
perceived negative mood reduction and VR stickiness (β 5 0.18, p < 0.05) were significant,
supporting H7a and H8b. However, the moderating effects of perceived travel risk on the
influence of perceived positive mood enhancement on VR stickiness (β 5 0.07, p > 0.05)
and on the association between perceived negative mood reduction and visit intention
ITP (β 5 0.04, p > 0.05) were not significant, thus rejecting H7b and H8a. Besides, the analysis has
included gender, age, education, and length of using tourism-related VR activities as control
variables in determining visit intention and VR stickiness in order to explain the potential
impacts of individual differences (Leung et al., 2019). The results showed that all the control
variables exert no significant impact on the dependent variables. We summarized our
findings in Table 5.

6. Discussion
6.1 Discussion of findings
By integrating MMT with the experience economy framework, this was the first study to
explicitly investigate how the four dimensions of VR experiences affect two mood
management processes. We also examined how positive mood enhancement and negative
mood reduction influence visit intention and VR use during the pandemic. Drawing on
protection motivation theory, this study examined the moderating effects of perceived travel
risk on the association between mood management processes and visit intention. Our
findings provide insights for tourism practitioners and add to areas of VR tourism literature
in which research was lacking. We henceforth interpret our findings and then discuss the
differences between our results and those of previous studies.
First, the entertainment experience of tourism-related VR activities was the strongest
predictor of both perceived positive mood enhancement and negative mood reduction,
suggesting that tourism-related VR activities can enhance positive feelings and relieve
negative feelings when the content of the virtual tour is entertaining. This finding can be
explained by MMT, which posits that hedonic content can effectively enhance pleasurable
moods and eliminate aversive moods (Reinecke, 2017; Zillmann, 1988), and is supported by
the increasing adoption and consumption of virtual media such as VR tours for entertainment
purposes (Sigala, 2020). Moreover, apart from passively observing activities and
performances (Oh et al., 2007), people may devise entertaining value by actively

Hypothesis β p-value Result

H1a: Esthetic experience → perceived positive mood enhancement 0.25 0.00*** Supported
H1b: Esthetic experience → perceived negative mood reduction 0.01 0.87 n.s Rejected
H2a: Educational experience → perceived positive mood enhancement 0.22 0.00*** Supported
H2b: Educational experience → perceived negative mood reduction 0.15 0.05* Supported
H3a: Escapism experience → perceived positive mood enhancement 0.05 0.36 n.s Rejected
H3b: Escapism experience → perceived negative mood reduction 0.20 0.01** Supported
H4a: Entertainment experience → perceived positive mood enhancement 0.28 0.00*** Supported
H4b: Entertainment experience → perceived negative mood reduction 0.37 0.00*** Supported
H5a: Perceived positive mood enhancement → visit intention 0.23 0.01** Supported
H5b: Perceived negative mood reduction → visit intention 0.21 0.05* Supported
H6a: Perceived positive mood enhancement → VR stickiness 0.20 0.01** Supported
H6b: Perceived negative mood reduction → VR stickiness 0.29 0.00*** Supported
H7a: Perceived travel risk 3 positive mood enhancement → visit intention 0.18 0.05* Supported
H7b: Perceived travel risk 3 perceived negative mood reduction → visit 0.04 0.62 n.s Rejected
intention
H8a: Perceived travel risk 3 perceived positive mood enhancement → VR 0.07 0.36 n.s Rejected
stickiness
H8b: Perceived travel risk 3 perceived negative mood reduction → VR 0.18 0.05* Supported
Table 5. stickiness
Result summary Note(s): *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; n.s., not significant
interacting and manipulating the virtual objects in the VR environment. This aspect of VR VR technology
tourism may explain why entertainment experience can effectively reduce the negative mood. and tourism in
Second, a significant impact of educational experience on both perceived positive mood
enhancement and negative mood reduction confirmed that users’ learning outcomes improve
COVID-19
their positive feelings and relieve their negative feelings when they cannot travel due to
COVID-19. As educational experiences require active participation and engagement (Oh et al.,
2007; Pine and Gilmore, 1999), they divert users’ attention from unpleasant situations and
thus mitigate negative moods. These enriching experiences through VR tourism also provide
meaning and happiness. Tom-Dieck et al. (2018) demonstrated a similar result in which
science festival attendees felt satisfied after learning new skills and knowledge through the
use of AR. Our study further confirmed the importance of educational experiences for mood
management processes in VR tourism.
Third, escapism experience reduced perceived negative mood, indicating that a high level
of escapism experience provides VR with a break from their daily routines and relieves the
negative feelings caused by travel restrictions. Negative emotions such as anxiety and stress
have increased during the pandemic, stimulating individuals to seek ways to escape (Yang
et al., 2021). Escapism is the immersive experience which occurs when users actively
participate in a specific task (Pine and Gilmore, 1999). This escapism generates a sense of
detachment from reality by requiring active participation (Oh et al., 2007). A recent study
found that enjoyable VR tours positively affected psychological stress reduction during the
lockdown (Yang et al., 2021). We consequently proposed that tourism-related VR activities
offer highly task-demanding content that directs attention away from unpleasant states and
alleviates negative moods similarly to other hedonic technologies, such as online role-playing
games (Lee et al., 2020a, b) and videogames more broadly (Rieger et al., 2014). On the other
hand, the non-significant relationship was found between escapism experience and perceived
positive enhancement in this study. One possible explanation is that people in positive mood
may not value the experiences that they escaped from reality. As a result, simply directing
individuals’ attention did not enhance their positive mood as the sense of escapism may not
have been sufficient to induce positive mood.
Fourth, this research found a significant positive relationship between esthetic experience
and perceived positive mood enhancement, suggesting that despite travel restrictions due to
COVID-19, pleasurable virtual environments could enhance positive feelings. Lee et al. (2015)
similarly found that esthetic aspects of AR, such as the beauty of the virtual environment
design, positively influenced user enjoyment. However, the link between esthetic experience
and perceived negative mood reduction was not significant. According to Oh et al. (2007),
esthetic experience is a type of passive enjoyment of the destination environment. Conversely,
negative emotion reduction requires a high level of task demand to draw attention away from
unhappy feelings (Rieger et al., 2015). For instance, unlike non-interactive media, videogames
can draw sufficient attention to create a high level of flow experience (Rieger et al., 2014). Despite
a harmonious and pleasurable experience, VR environments without interactive tasks
nonetheless failed to capture the users’ attention and reduce their negative feelings.
Fifth, both the enhancement of positive moods and the reduction of negative moods had a
similar effect on visit intention, suggesting that both mood management effects increase the
intention to visit a destination after tourism-related VR activities. Kim et al. (2020a, b) similarly
demonstrated a positive relationship between VR users’ affective responses and visit intention.
Moreover, the influences of both mood management effects on VR stickiness were positive and
significant, indicating that the duration of tourism-related VR activity increases when the two
effects are promoted. This is supported by Zhang et al. (2017) who found that the hedonic value
of positive content on a microblog improved its stickiness. Specifically, our results revealed that
perceived negative mood reduction (β 5 0.30, p < 0.001) exerted a greater impact on VR
stickiness than did perceived positive mood enhancement (β 5 0.21, p < 0.01). This may be
ITP because a pleasant stimulus is more mood-enhancing for individuals in a negative mood than
for those already in a positive mood (Chang, 2006). Those in a negative mood may attribute their
mood improvement to the pleasant stimulus (Chang, 2006). We consequently argued that when
tourists’ negative mood is alleviated through VR tourism, they attribute this to the positive VR
experiences, leading to a greater impact on VR stickiness.
Sixth, there was no significant moderating effect of perceived travel risk on the
relationship between negative mood reduction and visit intention. This may be because the
desire to travel had accumulated during the long period of COVID-19 travel restrictions (Shin
et al., 2022). Thus, the effect of perceived negative mood reduction on the desire to travel to
places seen in VR was independent of perceived travel risk. However, this research confirmed
a significant moderating effect of perceived travel risk on the relationship between positive
mood enhancement and visit intention. According to mood literature, people in a positive
mood are more sensitive to losses, leading to stronger risk-aversion than people in negative or
neutral mood states during high-risk decision-making tasks (Isen and Geva, 1987; Mittal et al.,
1998; Nygren, 1998). We thus argued that experiencing positive mood enhancement through
the tourism-related VR activity increases sensitivity to losses derived from traveling when
making visit decisions during the pandemic. Consequently, the influence of positive mood
enhancement has less effect on visit intention when traveling seems risky.
In addition, previous studies have suggested that when perceived risk surpasses a given
tolerance level, people often lessen the negative impact of risk by switching to low-risk
substitutes (Tuu et al., 2011; Y€ uksel and Y€ uksel, 2007). Protection motivation theory also
posits that people take protective measures when they foresee the negative consequences of
potential risks (Rogers, 1975, 1983). This research confirmed this argument in that the
positive effect of perceived negative mood reduction on VR stickiness was stronger during
the high level of travel risk in the pandemic, suggesting that high risk perception stimulated
the pursuit of lower-risk options such as VR. However, the moderating effect of perceived
travel risk on the link between perceived positive mood management and VR stickiness was
not significant. The tendency for positive moods to persist may have contributed to this weak
moderation effect (Isen and Patrick, 1983). In accordance with positive reinforcement theory,
when tourism-related VR activities promoted positive mood, VR use tended to increase
regardless of travel risks (Lee et al., 2020a, b).
There may be concern that increasing engagement in VR tourism might decrease the
intention to travel. We, thus, have conducted a post-hoc analysis for the relationship between
VR stickiness and visit intention and found a positive effect of VR stickiness on visit intention
(as shown in Appendix 2). This result suggested that when potential tourists engage in the
tourism-related VR activity more frequently, their willingness to travel to the place that they
have visited in the VR environment will be higher, implying that VR stickiness and corporeal
travel are more complementary in nature instead of substitution.

6.2 Theoretical implications

Despite prior tourism research emphasizing the importance of VR technology in the pandemic
era, empirical studies on how effectively VR tourism activities affect emotional and behavioral
responses as well as on the moderating role of perceived travel risk remain limited. To address
the need for a holistic model explaining how emotions and behaviors respond to tourism-related
technology and risk level in the pandemic, this study integrated the experience economy
framework and MMT with a risk perspective to examine the importance of VR tourism
experiences. It thus made several theoretical contributions to the COVID-19 tourism literature.
First, this study expanded the experiences of tourism-related VR activities into four
dimensions based on the experience economy framework, responding to the call for further
research on exploring the effects of other dimensions of VR experiences on user emotional
responses (Kim et al., 2021b). Second, previous VR tourism studies have mainly focused on VR technology
how VR tourism influences positive emotional responses (Flavian et al., 2021; Kim et al., and tourism in
2020a), such as perceived enjoyment (Kim et al., 2021b; Kim and Hall, 2019; Tussyadiah et al.,
2018; Yang et al., 2021) and satisfaction (Kim and Ko, 2019; Kim et al., 2020b; Wu et al., 2019),
COVID-19
but the effectiveness of VR tourism in relieving negative mood and enhancing positive mood
has not been examined. In particular, understanding how VR can regulate mood states is
important for motivating travel intentions in the pandemic (Das and Tiwari, 2021; Terry et al.,
2020). Drawing on MMT, this paper was the first to explore how each dimension of the VR
experience enhances positive mood and reduces negative mood in the pandemic through
unique mood regulation mechanisms. The results confirmed that both positive mood
enhancement and negative mood reduction were effective means to increase the stickiness of
engaging in VR tourism and the intention of future travel.
Prior literature has shown that the most important dimensions of travel experience vary
across tourism contexts (Kastenholz et al., 2018; Oh et al., 2007). Thus, we provided new
theoretical implications by comparing our results with those of previous studies on the
experience economy. In the context of corporeal travel, esthetic experience was the most salient
dimension for forming travel memories in festival tourism (Manthiou et al., 2014), emotional
value in temple tourism (Song et al., 2015), and positive arousal and satisfaction in rural tourism
(Kastenholz et al., 2018). In line with these findings, we showed that esthetic experience had a
significant impact on positive mood enhancement in VR tourism, demonstrating that positive
emotion is affected by passive participation in both real and virtual settings. However,
entertainment experience was the strongest factor influencing positive mood state, illustrating
that tourists seek more absorptive experiences (i.e. entertainment) to enhance positive mood in
VR tourism under the pandemic, but are likely to experience more positive mood increases from
immersive tours (i.e. esthetics) in corporeal travel. Surprisingly, esthetic experience did not
influence negative mood reduction, indicating that such experiences should only be applied to
enhancing positive mood but not reducing negative mood in VR tourism.
Educational experience also significantly influenced both positive mood enhancement
and negative mood reduction, suggesting that providing learning opportunities in VR tours
can improve both positive and negative mood states during the pandemic. This result further
contributed to the finding in the tourism literature that learning not only improves tourists’
happiness but also mitigates their negative emotions. Lastly, prior studies have shown that
escapism experience has no influence on positive arousal and satisfaction during real
visitation (Kastenholz et al., 2018; Mahdzar et al., 2017). Our results were consistent with these
previous findings, but we also found that escapism experience significantly affected negative
mood reduction in the VR context. This illustrated that escapism in VR only influenced mood
state by reducing negative mood. To conclude, enhancing positive mood requires more
absorptive and passive experiences (i.e. entertainment, esthetic, and educational), whereas
reducing negative mood needs more absorptive and active experiences (entertainment,
escapism, and educational) in the VR tourism context. This study successfully distinguished
the dimensions of VR experiences and mood states and further identified the key VR
experiences in influencing mood management processes in the context of tourism.
This research, to the best of our knowledge, was one of the first empirical studies to examine
the influence of mood reactions during the COVID-19 pandemic on visit intention and VR
stickiness and validated the significant role of two mood effects in motivating decision
outcomes (i.e. VR stickiness and visit intention). In particular, we found that when VR tours can
mitigate negative mood, tourists are likely to attribute this mood improvement to the virtual
tours, which increases the stickiness of VR tourism more than in people with a positive mood.
Finally, prior COVID-19 tourism literature has mainly examined the direct effect of travel
risk perception on future travel behaviors (Abraham et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2021a; Neuburger
and Egger, 2021; Yung et al., 2021b; Zenker et al., 2021), but little research has investigated the
ITP moderating role of perceived travel risk on the association between mood states and visit
intention. Specifically, understanding tourists’ risk perception is important to forecasting
tourism demand and designing recovery plans to cope with the pandemic (Sigala, 2020).
Accordingly, this study demonstrated how perceived travel risk moderated mood–behavior
relationships, providing insightful contributions to the COVID-19 tourism literature.

6.3 Managerial implications

Organizations are increasingly seeking practical guidelines for integrating VR practices into
their business strategies, particularly in the COVID-19 era (Sigala, 2020). Our results suggest
that tourism marketers should create and design virtual tours and content according to the
four dimensions of experience because potential tourists are more likely to continue using VR
tourism activities when their moods are improved through such experiences. VR content
developers should particularly utilize entertainment and educational experiences as these
significantly affected perceived positive mood enhancement and negative mood reduction.
First, VR tour content should be sufficiently interesting and entertaining to offer stimulating
hedonic experiences, for instance, adding animations and 3D effects into the VR tours or
using virtual characters to interact with the tourists.
Second, tourists increasingly participate in tourism activities to learn about culture and history
(Manthiou et al., 2014). VR content operators should thus add educational programs related to
their destinations, such as tours that provide cultural and historical information through the use of
animations to display the historical production skills, craftsmanship, or environmental evolution
of destinations in the VR tours so as to create an educational experience for tourists to learn the
skills and knowledge. VR tourism operators should also provide information in the form of
description boards or videos next to attractions or exhibits within the VR environment.
Third, esthetic experience significantly influenced perceived positive mood enhancement,
suggesting that VR content designers should carefully design environmental elements, such
as color, images, and font style, to provide an attractive virtual environment rich in visual,
auditory, and kinesthetic information (Tussyadiah et al., 2018). The visual depth, width, and
interactivity should also be consistent with maintaining the overall visual harmony of the
virtual environment (Kim and Ko, 2019).
Fourth, escapism experience in VR tourism activities during the COVID-19 outbreak
reduced negative moods. VR business operators should thus offer immersive experiences in
VR environments by creating a role-playing story to generate a higher sense of involvement.
To increase a sense of immersion, VR activity developers might also include mini-games and
other tasks for users to play and complete.
Fifth, when planning a recovery strategy in the pandemic, tourism operators should account
for travel risk perceptions. This study found that the influence of positive mood enhancement
on visit intention was weakened when the perceived travel risk was high, suggesting that
destination managers should provide detailed and current information regarding periods of
self-quarantine and entry regulations. VR content designers should clearly display the hygiene
measures adopted in a destination within their VR tours, such as showing social distancing and
health management signs, and demonstrating disinfection standards in hotels and other
facilities or attractions to lower travel uncertainty. If the pandemic situation does not improve
and the perception of high travel risk thus remains, tourism operators should focus more on
their VR businesses as this study found that at higher risk levels, the use of VR tourism
activities increased when they effectively relieved negative moods.

6.4 Limitations and future research

Although this study made meaningful contributions, there were some limitations. The
research was cross-sectional and only conducted in China, which limited its generalizability to
other countries. Thus, future research should include more longitudinal data and comparisons VR technology
between nations with diverse cultures. Secondly, the study used convenience sampling, and tourism in
making it vulnerable to selection bias. This could be avoided in future research by using
random sampling in order to enhance the generalizability. Third, this study concentrated only
COVID-19
on VR experiences and mood states, but did not consider the antecedents of VR experiences,
such as VR technology characteristics based on media richness theory or a sense of VR
presence based on social presence theory, or their impacts on potential tourists’ emotional
responses. Fourth, future research should compare the differences in how the four dimensions
of VR experience influence user emotions between desktop and head-mounted VR devices in
order to offer precise tour guidance for VR designers. Last but not least, our results showed
that educational experience had a positive effect on two mood management values, justifying
its importance in VR tourism. Future research is suggested to further examine different
learning experiences in tourism contexts (e.g. virtual heritage sites) based on other learning-
related theories such as social learning theory.

7. Conclusion
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns, the tourism industry has been seriously hit.
The pandemic has affected the moods of people as well. Virtual tourism presents a potential
solution for maintaining the interest of travel destination and improve tourists’ willingness
to travel after COVID-19 pandemic. Although extant research acknowledges the
importance of VR technology in tourism marketing, its impact on tourists’ affective and
behavioral intentions is understudied. Thus, drawing on the theoretical perspective of
mood management and experience economy, this research investigates the impact of four
dimensions of VR experiences on tourists’ mood management processes, which then affect
their behavioral intentions (visit intention and VR stickiness), along with the moderating
effect of perceived travel risk in influencing the relationship between tourists’ moods and
behavioral intentions. Our results show that tourists’ positive mood enhancement is driven
by esthetic experience, educational experience and entertainment experience, while
education experience, escapism experience and entertainment experience are significant
predictors of tourists’ negative mood reduction. Both mood management processes
positively affect tourists’ VR stickiness and visit intention. Furthermore, perceived travel
risk positively moderates the impact of perceived negative mood reduction on VR
stickiness, and negatively moderates the impact of perceived positive mood enhancement
on visit intention confirming the important role of travel risk in tourists’ travel decisions in
the pandemic. Our research model can provide an additional theoretical lens to understand
the effectiveness of VR technology in tourism. Moreover, our findings indicated that virtual
tourism is a useful tool for tourism marketers to maintain the attractiveness of their
destinations.

References
Abraham, V., Bremser, K., Carreno, M., Crowley-Cyr, L. and Moreno, M. (2020), “Exploring the
consequences of COVID-19 on tourist behaviors: perceived travel risk, animosity and intentions
to travel”, Tourism Review, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 701-717.
uhlenen, A. (2018), “Learning in virtual reality: effects on performance, emotion
Allcoat, D. and von M€
and engagement”, Research in Learning Technology, Vol. 26, pp. 1-13.
Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R. and Babin, L.A. (1998), “Negative emotions in marketing research: affect or
artifact?”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 271-285.
Ball, C., Huang, K.T. and Francis, J. (2021), “Virtual reality adoption during the COVID-19 pandemic:
a uses and gratifications perspective”, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 65, 101728.
ITP Bauer, R.A. (1960), “Consumer behavior as risk taking”, paper presented at the Proceedings of the 43rd
National Conference of the American Marketing Association, Chicago, IllinoisJune 15-17,
pp. 389-398, 1960, 1960, American Marketing Association.
Bec, A., Moyle, B., Schaffer, V. and Timms, K. (2021), “Virtual reality and mixed reality for second
chance tourism”, Tourism Management, Vol. 83, 104256.
Bhalla, G. and Lin, L.Y. (1987), “Cross-cultural marketing research: a discussion of equivalence issues
and measurement strategies”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 275-285.
Biocca, F. and Delaney, B. (1995), “Immersive virtual reality technology”, Communication in the Age of
Virtual Reality, Vol. 15 No. 32, pp. 10-5555.
Bloomberg (2020), “Covid-19 pandemic likely to last two years, report says”, available at: https://www.
bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-01/covid-19-pandemic-likely-to-last-two-years-report-says
(accessed 1 May 2020).
Boyd, D. and Koles, B. (2019), “An introduction to the special issue ‘virtual reality in marketing’:
definition, theory and practice”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 100, pp. 441-444.
Chang, C. (2006), “Beating the news blues: mood repair through exposure to advertising”, Journal of
Communication, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 198-217.
Chang, C.T. (2007), “Interactive effects of message framing, product perceived risk, and mood—the case
of travel healthcare product advertising”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 51-65.
Chen, Y.L. and Hsu, C.C. (2020), “Self-regulated mobile game-based English learning in a virtual reality
environment”, Computers and Education, Vol. 154, 103910.
Cheong, R. (1995), “The virtual threat to travel and tourism”, Tourism Management, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 417-422.
Chi, T. (2018), “Understanding Chinese consumer adoption of apparel mobile commerce: an extended
TAM approach”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 44, pp. 274-284.
Chuang, S.C. (2007), “The effects of emotions on the purchase of tour commodities”, Journal of Travel
and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 1-13.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991), Flow: the Psychology of Optimal Experience, 1st ed., Harper Perennial,
New York.
Das, S.S. and Tiwari, A.K. (2021), “Understanding international and domestic travel intention of
Indian travellers during COVID-19 using a Bayesian approach”, Tourism Recreation Research,
Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 228-244.
uhlberger, A. (2015), “The impact of
Diemer, J., Alpers, G.W., Peperkorn, H.M., Shiban, Y. and M€
perception and presence on emotional reactions: a review of research in virtual reality”,
Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 6, p. 26.
Djamasbi, S., Strong, D.M. and Dishaw, M. (2010), “Affect and acceptance: examining the effects of positive
mood on the technology acceptance model”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 383-394.
Douglas, M. and Wildavsky, A. (1983), “Risk and culture: an essay on the selection of technological
and environmental dangers”, Revue Française De Sociologie, Vol. 28 No. 1, p. 178.
Dowling, G.R. and Staelin, R. (1994), “A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity”,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 119-134.
Dryhurst, S., Schneider, C.R., Kerr, J., Freeman, A.L., Recchia, G., Van Der Bles, A.M. and van der
Linden, S. (2020), “Risk perceptions of COVID-19 around the world”, Journal of Risk Research,
Vol. 23 Nos 7-8, pp. 994-1006.
Farzanegan, M.R., Gholipour, H.F., Feizi, M., Nunkoo, R. and Andargoli, A.E. (2021), “International
tourism and outbreak of coronavirus (COVID-19): a cross-country analysis”, Journal of Travel
Research, Vol. 60 No. 3, pp. 687-692.
~ez-Sanchez, S. and Or
Flavian, C., Iban us, C. (2021), “Impacts of technological embodiment through
virtual reality on potential guests’ emotions and engagement”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing
and Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 1-20.
Fleischer, A. and Pizam, A. (2002), “Tourism constraints among Israeli seniors”, Annals of Tourism VR technology
Research, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 106-123.
and tourism in
Flow, F. (1997), The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life, Basic Books, New York.
COVID-19
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Goodboy, A. and Martin, M. (2020), “Omega over alpha for reliability estimation of unidimensional
communication measures”, Annals of the International Communication Association, Vol. 44
No. 4, pp. 442-439.
Goossens, C. (2000), “Tourism information and pleasure motivation”, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 301-321.
urhan-Canli, Z. and Batra, R. (2004), “When corporate image affects product evaluations: the
G€
moderating role of perceived risk”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 197-205.
Guttentag, D.A. (2010), “Virtual reality: applications and implications for tourism”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 637-651.
Hair, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Gudergan, S.P. (2017), Advanced Issues in Partial Least
Squares Structural Equation Modeling, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Los Angeles, CA.
Hayes, A. and Coutts, J. (2020), “Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability.
But. . .”, Communication Methods and Measures, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-24.
He, W., Zhang, Z.J. and Li, W. (2021), “Information technology solutions, challenges, and suggestions for
tackling the COVID-19 pandemic”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 57, 102287.
Ho, S.S., Lwin, M.O., Sng, J.R. and Yee, A.Z. (2017), “Escaping through exergames: presence,
enjoyment, and mood experience in predicting children’s attitude toward exergames”,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 72, pp. 381-389.
Hu, L., Min, Q., Han, S. and Liu, Z. (2020), “Understanding followers’ stickiness to digital influencers: the effect
of psychological responses”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 54, 102169.
Huang, Y.C., Backman, K.F., Backman, S.J. and Chang, L.L. (2016), “Exploring the implications of
virtual reality technology in tourism marketing: an integrated research framework”,
International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 116-128.
Hung, K., Huang, H. and Lyu, J. (2020), “The means and ends of luxury value creation in cruise
tourism: the case of Chinese tourists”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 44
No. 1, pp. 143-151.
Isen, A.M. and Geva, N. (1987), “The influence of positive affect on acceptable level of risk: the person
with a large canoe has a large worry”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 145-154.
Isen, A.M. and Patrick, R. (1983), “The effect of positive feelings on risk taking: when the chips are
down”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 194-202.
Itani, O.S. and Hollebeek, L.D. (2021), “Light at the end of the tunnel: visitors’ virtual reality (versus in-
person) attraction site tour-related behavioral intentions during and post-COVID-19”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 84, 104290.
Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M.J., Marques, C.P. and Loureiro, S.M.C. (2018), “The dimensions of rural
tourism experience: impacts on arousal, memory, and satisfaction”, Journal of Travel and
Tourism Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 189-201.
Kelson, J.N., Ridout, B., Steinbeck, K. and Campbell, A.J. (2021), “The use of virtual reality for
managing psychological distress in adolescents: systematic review”, Cyberpsychology, Behavior,
and Social Networking, Vol. 24 No. 10, pp. 633-641.
Kim, M.J. and Hall, C.M. (2019), “A hedonic motivation model in virtual reality tourism: comparing
visitors and non-visitors”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 46, pp. 236-249.
Kim, D. and Ko, Y.J. (2019), “The impact of virtual reality (VR) technology on sport spectators’ flow
experience and satisfaction”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 93, pp. 346-356.
ITP Kim, M.J., Lee, C.K. and Jung, T. (2020a), “Exploring consumer behavior in virtual reality tourism using an
extended stimulus-organism-response model”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 69-89.
Kim, M.J., Lee, C.K. and Preis, M.W. (2020b), “The impact of innovation and gratification on authentic
experience, subjective well-being, and behavioral intention in tourism virtual reality: the
moderating role of technology readiness”, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 49, 101349.
Kim, E., Seo, K. and Choi, Y. (2021a), “Compensatory travel post COVID-19: cognitive and emotional
effects of risk perception”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print,
doi: 10.1177/00472875211048930.
Kim, H., So, K.K.F., Mihalik, B.J. and Lopes, A.P. (2021b), “Millennials’ virtual reality experiences
pre-and post-COVID-19”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 48,
pp. 200-209.
Lai, I.K., Lu, D. and Liu, Y. (2019), “Experience economy in ethnic cuisine: a case of Chengdu cuisine”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 122 No. 6, pp. 1801-1817.
Lane, A.M. and Terry, P.C. (2000), “The nature of mood: development of a conceptual model with a
focus on depression”, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 16-33.
Lee, Y.K., Lee, C.K., Lee, S.K. and Babin, B.J. (2008), “Festivalscapes and patrons’ emotions,
satisfaction, and loyalty”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 56-64.
Lee, H., Chung, N. and Jung, T. (2015), “Examining the cultural differences in acceptance of mobile
augmented reality: comparison of South Korea and Ireland”, in Information and
Communication Technologies in Tourism 2015, Springer, pp. 477-491.
Lee, H., Jung, T.H., Tom Dieck, M.C. and Chung, N. (2020a), “Experiencing immersive virtual reality in
museums”, Information and Management, Vol. 57 No. 5, 103229.
Lee, Z.W., Cheung, C.M. and Chan, T.K. (2020b), “Understanding massively multiplayer online role-playing
game addiction: a hedonic management perspective”, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 31 No. 1,
pp. 33-61.
Leung, W.K.S., Shi, S. and Chow, W.S. (2019), “Impacts of user interactions on trust development in
C2C social commerce”, Internet Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 335-356.
Leung, W.K., Chang, M.K., Cheung, M.L. and Shi, S. (2022a), “Swift trust development and prosocial
behavior in time banking: a trust transfer and social support theory perspective”, Computers in
Human Behavior, Vol. 129, 107137.
Leung, W.K.S., Cheung, M.L., Chang, M.K., Shi, S., Tse, S.Y. and Yusrini, L. (2022b), “The role of
virtual reality interactivity in building tourists’ memorable experiences and post-adoption
intentions in the COVID-19 era”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, Vol. ahead-of-
print No. ahead-of-print, doi: 10.1108/JHTT-03-2021-0088.
Lien, C.H., Cao, Y. and Zhou, X. (2017), “Service quality, satisfaction, stickiness, and usage intentions:
an exploratory evaluation in the context of WeChat services”, Computers in Human Behavior,
Vol. 68, pp. 403-410.
Loewenstein, G.F., Weber, E.U., Hsee, C.K. and Welch, N. (2001), “Risk as feelings”, Psychological
Bulletin, Vol. 127 No. 2, pp. 267-286.
Lu, C.Y., Yeh, W.J. and Chen, B.T. (2016), “The study of international students’ behavior intention for
leisure participation: using perceived risk as a moderator”, Journal of Quality Assurance in
Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 224-236.
Lytras, M.D., Visvizi, A., Chopdar, P.K., Sarirete, A. and Alhalabi, W. (2021), “Information
management in smart cities: turning end users’ views into multi-item scale development,
validation, and policy-making recommendations”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 56, 102146.
Mahdzar, M., Izhar, F.S., Wee, H., Ghani, A.A., Hamid, Z.A. and Anuar, N.A.M. (2017), “Measuring
experience economy and satisfaction: an examination of visitors in agricultural park”,
Advanced Science Letters, Vol. 23 No. 8, pp. 7574-7577.
Manchanda, M. and Deb, M. (2021), “Effects of multisensory virtual reality on virtual and physical VR technology
tourism during the COVID-19 pandemic”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. ahead-of-print
No. ahead-of-print, pp. 1-19, doi: 10.1080/13683500.2021.1978953. and tourism in
Manthiou, A., Lee, S.A., Tang, L.R. and Chiang, L. (2014), “The experience economy approach to
COVID-19
festival marketing: vivid memory and attendee loyalty”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 1,
pp. 22-35.
McNeish, D. (2018), “Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here”, Psychological Methods, Vol. 23
No. 3, pp. 412-433.
Merkx, C. and Nawijn, J. (2021), “Virtual reality tourism experiences: addiction and isolation”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 87, 104394.
Mintchell, G. (2021), “Optimism around immersive technology rising post pandemic”, available at:
https://themanufacturingconnection.com/2021/08/optimism-around-immersive-technology-
rising-post-pandemic/ (accessed 23 August 2021).
Mittal, V., Ross, W.T. Jr and Baldasare, P.M. (1998), “The asymmetric impact of negative and positive
attribute-level performance on overall satisfaction and repurchase intentions”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 33-47.
Munz, D. and Munz, H. (1997), “Student mood and teaching evaluations”, Journal of Social Behavior
and Personality, Vol. 12 No. 1, p. 233.
Neuburger, L. and Egger, R. (2021), “Travel risk perception and travel behaviour during the COVID-19
pandemic 2020: a case study of the DACH region”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 24 No. 7,
pp. 1003-1016.
Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994), Psychological Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Nygren, T.E. (1998), “Reacting to perceived high-and low-risk win–lose opportunities in a risky decision-
making task: is it framing or affect or both?”, Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 73-98.
Oh, H., Fiore, A.M. and Jeoung, M. (2007), “Measuring experience economy concepts: tourism
applications”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 119-132.
Paek, H.J. and Hove, T. (2020), “Communicating uncertainties during the COVID-19 outbreak”, Health
Communication, Vol. 35 No. 14, pp. 1729-1731.
Pan, S.L., Cui, M. and Qian, J. (2020), “Information resource orchestration during the COVID-19
pandemic: a study of community lockdowns in China”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 54, 102143.
Pantano, E. and Corvello, V. (2014), “Tourists’ acceptance of advanced technology-based innovations
for promoting arts and culture”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 64
No. 1, pp. 3-16.
Parayitam, S., Kakumani, L. and Muddangala, N.B. (2020), “Perceived risk as a moderator in the
relationship between perception of celebrity endorsement and buying behavior: evidence from
rural consumers of India”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 521-540.
Park, J., Lennon, S.J. and Stoel, L. (2005), “On-line product presentation: effects on mood, perceived
risk, and purchase intention”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 9, pp. 695-719.
Pine, J. and Gilmore, J.H. (1999), The Experience Economy: Work Is Theatre & Every Business a Stage,
Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Rather, R.A. (2021), “Monitoring the impacts of tourism-based social media, risk perception and fear
on tourist’s attitude and revisiting behaviour in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic”, Current
Issues in Tourism, Vol. 24 No. 23, pp. 3275-3283.
Reinecke, L. (2017), “Mood management theory”, The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects,
Wiley-Blackwell, New York, pp. 1-13.
ITP Rieger, D., Wulf, T., Kneer, J., Frischlich, L. and Bente, G. (2014), “The winner takes it all: the effect of
in-game success and need satisfaction on mood repair and enjoyment”, Computers in Human
Behavior, Vol. 39, pp. 281-286.
Rieger, D., Frischlich, L., Wulf, T., Bente, G. and Kneer, J. (2015), “Eating ghosts: the underlying
mechanisms of mood repair via interactive and noninteractive media”, Psychology of Popular
Media Culture, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 138-154.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Becker, J.M. (2015), SmartPLS 3, SmartPLS, B€onningstedt (accessed 15
July 2016).
Rippetoe, P.A. and Rogers, R.W. (1987), “Effects of components of protection-motivation theory on
adaptive and maladaptive coping with a health threat”, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 596-604.
Riva, G. and Wiederhold, B.K. (2020), “How cyberpsychology and virtual reality can help us to
overcome the psychological burden of coronavirus”, Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social
Networking, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 277-279.
Rogers, R.W. (1975), “A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change”, The Journal
of Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 1, pp. 93-114.
Rogers, R.W. (1983), “Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: a
revised theory of protection motivation”, in Cacioppo, J.T. and Petty, R.E. (Eds), Social
Psychophysiology: A Source-book, Guilford Press, New York, pp. 153-176.
Russell, J.A. (2003), “Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion”, Psychological Review,
Vol. 110 No. 1, pp. 145-172.
Ryu, H. (2018), “What makes users willing or hesitant to use Fintech?: The moderating effect of user
type”, Industrial Management Data Systems, Vol. 118 No. 3, pp. 541-569.
Schiopu, A.F., Hornoiu, R.I., Padurean, M.A. and Nica, A.M. (2021), “Virus tinged? Exploring the facets
of virtual reality use in tourism as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic”, Telematics and
Informatics, Vol. 60, 101575.
Shi, S., Leung, W.K. and Munelli, F. (2022), “Gamification in OTA platforms: a mixed-methods
research involving online shopping carnival”, Tourism Management, Vol. 88, 104426.
Shin, D. (2019), “How does immersion work in augmented reality games? A user-centric view of immersion
and engagement”, Information, Communication and Society, Vol. 22 No. 9, pp. 1212-1229.
Shin, H. and Kang, J. (2020), “Reducing perceived health risk to attract hotel customers in the
COVID-19 pandemic era: focused on technology innovation for social distancing and
cleanliness”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 91, 102664.
Shin, H., Nicolau, J.L., Kang, J., Sharma, A. and Lee, H. (2022), “Travel decision determinants during
and after COVID-19: the role of tourist trust, travel constraints, and attitudinal factors”,
Tourism Management, Vol. 88, 104428.
Shu, C., Hu, N., Zhang, X., Ma, Y. and Chen, X. (2017), “Adult attachment and profile images on
Chinese social networking sites: a comparative analysis of Sina Weibo and WeChat”,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 77, pp. 266-273.
Sigala, M. (2020), “Tourism and COVID-19: impacts and implications for advancing and resetting
industry and research”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 117, pp. 312-321.
Singapore Tourism Board (2020), “Explore Singapore’s museums at home”, available at: https://www.
visitsingapore.com/editorials/covid19-guide/explore-museums-at-home/ (accessed 15 April 2020).
Song, H.J., Lee, C.K., Park, J.A., Hwang, Y.H. and Reisinger, Y. (2015), “The influence of tourist
experience on perceived value and satisfaction with temple stays: the experience economy
theory”, Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 401-415.
Spies, K., Hesse, F. and Loesch, K. (1997), “Store atmosphere, mood and purchasing behavior”,
International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Stewart, D., Mete, M. and Groninger, H. (2019), “Virtual reality for pain management in patients with heart
failure: study rationale and design”, Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, Vol. 16, 100470.
Swinyard, W.R. (1993), “The effects of mood, involvement, and quality of store experience on VR technology
shopping intentions”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 271-280.
and tourism in
Tavitiyaman, P. and Qu, H. (2013), “Destination image and behavior intention of travelers to Thailand:
the moderating effect of perceived risk”, Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 30
COVID-19
No. 3, pp. 169-185.
Teeroovengadum, V., Seetanah, B., Bindah, E., Pooloo, A. and Veerasawmy, I. (2021), “Minimising
perceived travel risk in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic to boost travel and tourism”,
Tourism Review, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 910-928.
Terry, P.C., Parsons-Smith, R.L. and Terry, V.R. (2020), “Mood responses associated with COVID–19
restrictions”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 11, p. 3090.
Time (2020), “Depression has skyrocketed during the COVID-19 pandemic, study says”, available at:
https://time.com/5886228/depression-covid-19-pandemic/ (accessed 4 September 2020).
Tom-Dieck, M.C., Jung, T.H. and Rauschnabel, P.A. (2018), “Determining visitor engagement through
augmented reality at science festivals: an experience economy perspective”, Computers in
Human Behavior, Vol. 82, pp. 44-53.
Tseng, S.Y. and Wang, C.N. (2016), “Perceived risk influence on dual-route information adoption
processes on travel websites”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 6, pp. 2289-2296.
Tull, M.T., Edmonds, K.A., Scamaldo, K.M., Richmond, J.R., Rose, J.P. and Gratz, K.L. (2020),
“Psychological outcomes associated with stay-at-home orders and the perceived impact of
COVID-19 on daily life”, Psychiatry Research, Vol. 289, 113098.
Tussyadiah, I.P., Wang, D., Jung, T.H. and Tom Dieck, M.C. (2018), “Virtual reality, presence, and
attitude change: empirical evidence from tourism”, Tourism Management, Vol. 66, pp. 140-154.
Tuu, H.H., Olsen, S.O. and Linh, P.T.T. (2011), “The moderator effects of perceived risk, objective
knowledge and certainty in the satisfaction-loyalty relationship”, Journal of Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 363-375.
UNWTO (2020), “UNWTO world tourism barometer”, available at: https://www.unwto.org/news/
covid-19-international-tourist-numbers-could-fall-60-80-in-2020 (accessed 7 May 2020).
Watson, D. and Clark, L.A. (1984), “Negative affectivity: the disposition to experience aversive
emotional states”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 96 No. 3, pp. 465-490.
Wheaton, M.G., Prikhidko, A. and Messner, G.R. (2021), “Is fear of COVID-19 contagious? The effects
of emotion contagion and social media use on anxiety in response to the coronavirus
pandemic”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 11, p. 3594.
Wirth, W., Hartmann, T., B€ocking, S., Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., Schramm, H., Saari, T., Laarni, J.,
Ravaja, N., Gouveia, F.R., Biocca, F., Sacau, A., J€ancke, L., Baumgartner, T. and J€ancke, P.
(2007), “A process model of the formation of spatial presence experiences”, Media Psychology,
Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 493-525.
Wu, H.C., Ai, C.H. and Cheng, C.C. (2019), “Virtual reality experiences, attachment and experiential
outcomes in tourism”, Tourism Review, Vol. 75 No. 3, pp. 481-495.
Xiao, X., Gao, J. and Li, P. (2021), “The dynamics of crowding and tourists’ emotions during the
COVID-19 pandemic: a normative approach”, in Travel and Tourism Research Association:
Advancing Tourism Research Globally, Fort Worth, Texas, pp. 1-5.
Yan, Z., Xing, M., Zhang, D. and Ma, B. (2015), “EXPRS: an extended pagerank method for product feature
extraction from online consumer reviews”, Information and Management, Vol. 52 No. 7, pp. 850-858.
Yang, T., Lai, I.K.W., Fan, Z.B. and Mo, Q.M. (2021), “The impact of a 3608 virtual tour on the
reduction of psychological stress caused by COVID-19”, Technology in Society, Vol. 64, 101514.
Yeh, C.H., Wang, Y.S., Li, H.T. and Lin, S.Y. (2017), “The effect of information presentation modes on
tourists’ responses in Internet marketing: the moderating role of emotions”, Journal of Travel
and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 8, pp. 1018-1032.
ITP YouGov (2020), “Britain’s mood measured weekly”, available at: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/science/
trackers/britains-mood-measured-weekly (accessed 14 May 2020).
Y€ uksel, F. (2007), “Shopping risk perceptions: effects on tourists’ emotions, satisfaction
uksel, A. and Y€
and expressed loyalty intentions”, Tourism Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 703-713.
Yung, R., Khoo-Lattimore, C. and Potter, L.E. (2020), “Virtual reality and tourism marketing:
conceptualizing a framework on presence, emotion, and intention”, Current Issues in Tourism,
Vol. 24 No. 11, pp. 1505-1525.
Yung, R., Khoo-Lattimore, C. and Potter, L.E. (2021a), “VR the world: experimenting with emotion and
presence for tourism marketing”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 46, pp. 160-171.
Yung, R., Khoo-Lattimore, C., Prayag, G. and Surovaya, E. (2021b), “Around the world in less than a
day: virtual reality, destination image and perceived destination choice risk in family tourism”,
Tourism Recreation Research, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 3-18.
Zenker, S., Braun, E. and Gyimothy, S. (2021), “Too afraid to Travel? Development of a pandemic
(COVID-19) anxiety travel scale (PATS)”, Tourism Management, Vol. 84, 104286.
Zhang, M., Guo, L., Hu, M. and Liu, W. (2017), “Influence of customer engagement with company
social networks on stickiness: mediating effect of customer value creation”, International
Journal of Information Management, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 229-240.
Zheng, Y., Yang, X., Liu, Q., Chu, X., Huang, Q. and Zhou, Z. (2020), “Perceived stress and online
compulsive buying among women: a moderated mediation model”, Computers in Human
Behavior, Vol. 103, pp. 13-20.
Zhou, Z., Wu, J.P., Zhang, Q. and Xu, S. (2013), “Transforming visitors into members in online brand
communities: evidence from China”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 12, pp. 2438-2443.
Zillmann, D. (1988), “Mood management through communication choices”, American Behavioral
Scientist, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 327-340.
Zott, C., Amit, R. and Donlevy, J. (2000), “Strategies for value creation in e-commerce: best practice in
Europe”, European Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 463-475.
Appendix 1 VR technology
and tourism in
COVID-19
Constructs Questionnaire items Sources

Esthetic experience (EST) EST1*: When using the tourism-related VR activity, I felt a real Manthiou et al.
sense of harmony in the VR environment (2014)
EST2: When using the tourism-related VR activity, the setting
in the VR environment was pleasurable to my senses
EST3: When using the tourism-related VR activity, just being in
the VR environment was pleasant
Educational experience (EDU) EDU1: My experience of using the tourism-related VR activity Manthiou et al.
made me more knowledgeable (2014)
EDU2: My experience of using the tourism-related VR activity
was highly educational for me
EDU3: I learned a lot from my experience of using the tourism-
related VR activity
Escapism experience (ESC) ESC1: I felt I played a different character when using the Hung et al.
tourism-related VR activity (2020)
ESC2: The experience of using the tourism-related VR activity
let me imaging being someone else
ESC3: I completely escaped from reality when using the tourism-
related VR activity
Entertainment experience ENT1: Using the tourism-related VR activity was entertaining Hung et al.
(ENT) ENT2: Using the tourism-related VR activity was fun (2020)
ENT3: Using the tourism-related VR activity was amusing
Perceived positive mood PPME1: Using the tourism-related VR activity enhanced my Lee et al.
enhancement (PPME) euphoric feelings (2020b)
PPME2: Using the tourism-related VR activity made me happier
PPME3: Using the tourism-related VR activity boosted my good
feelings
Perceived negative mood PNMR1: Using the tourism-related VR activity relieved my Lee et al.
reduction (PNMR) dysphoric feelings (2020b)
PNMR2: Using the tourism-related VR activity released my
stress
PNMR3: Using the tourism-related VR activity eliminated my
bad feelings
Perceived travel risk (PTR) PTR1: In the next 6 months, traveling is uncertain due to many Ryu (2018)
regulations (e.g. self-quarantine, medical test)
PTR2*: In the next 6 months, traveling is associated with a high
level of risk (e.g. COVID-19 infection risk)
PTR3: There is a high level of uncertainty when traveling in the
next 6 months (i.e. stranded abroad)
Visit intention (VIS) VIS1: In the next 6 months, I will plan to visit the place that I Kim et al.
observed in the tourism-related VR activity (2020a, b)
VIS2: In the next 6 months, I will visit the place that I saw in the
tourism-related VR activity in the near future
VIS3: In the next 6 months, I will visit the place that I saw in the
tourism-related VR activity soon
VIS4: In the next 6 months, I will invest money and time to visit
the place that I observed in the VR tourism
VR stickiness (VRS) VRS1: In the next 6 months, I would stay for a long time while Zhang et al.
using the tourism-related VR activity (2017)
VRS2: In the next 6 months, I intend to prolong my stays on the
VR environment when using the tourism-related VR activity
VRS3: In the next 6 months, I would use the tourism-related VR Table A1.
activity frequently Constructs and
Note(s): *EST1 and PTR2 were deleted because of low factor loading (<0.7) measurement items
ITP Appendix 2

Perceived
Travel Risk

Esthetic
Experience
– 0.16* 0.00 n.s.
0.25***
R 2 = 0.27
–0.01 n.s.
Perceived Positive 0.18**
Visit Intention
0.22*** Mood Enhancement –0.07
Educational
n.s. 0.15*
Experience
0.15* R 2 = 0.39 0.24***

0.05 n.s.
0.20**
0.18*
Escapism Perceived Negative
Experience VR Stickiness
0.20** Mood Reduction 0.29***

0.28*** R 2 = 0.31 R 2 = 0.21

0.37***

Figure A1. Entertainment

Results of the post hoc Experience
analysis
Note(s): * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; ns, not significant

About the authors

Wilson K.S. Leung is Lecturer at the Division of Science, Engineering & Health Studies, College of
Professional and Continuing Education, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. He received his PhD in
Finance and Decision Sciences from Hong Kong Baptist University. His research interests include social
commerce, tourism consumer behavior, and IT adoption and user behaviors. His research publications
have appeared in Computers in Human Behavior, Tourism Management, Internet Research, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, among other journals.
Man Kit Chang is Assistant Professor in the Department of Finance and Decision Sciences at the
School of Business, Hong Kong Baptist University. His recent research activities have focused on
addressing issues related to electronic and social commerce, knowledge sharing in social media and
virtual communities, the impacts of social media, Internet addiction, and information system ethics. Dr
Chang has contributed articles to the ACM Transactions on Information Systems, Decision Support
Systems, Information and Management, Journal of the Operational Research Society, Computers in
Human Behavior, Journal of Business Ethics, and International Journal of Production Economics, among
other journals.
Man Lai Cheung is Assistant Professor at the Department of Marketing, The Hang Seng University
of Hong Kong. His main areas of research interest include brand management, social media marketing,
social commerce, influencer marketing and co-creation, with a particular focus on issues of customer
brand engagement. His research publications have appeared in Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Computers in Human Behavior, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Journal of Product and
Brand Management, Australasian Marketing Journal, and Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
Logistics among others.
Si Shi is Associate Professor at the School of Business Administration, Southwestern University of
Finance and Economics, China. She received her PhD in Finance and Decision Sciences from Hong Kong
Baptist University. Her current research interests include the business impact of IT, tourism consumer
behavior, and social commerce. Her research has been published in the Tourism Management, Journal of VR technology
Travel Research, Computers in Human Behavior, International Journal of Information Management, and
Internet Research, among other journals. Si Shi is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: and tourism in
[email protected] COVID-19

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]