The document outlines a PhD research proposal to evaluate user acceptance of virtual worlds in the tourism sector using an extended technology acceptance model. It will involve qualitative interviews with virtual world experts to identify key dimensions, followed by quantitative user studies and statistical analysis to determine which dimensions most influence user acceptance and intention to use virtual worlds. The anticipated results are to identify the virtual world characteristics that drive user acceptance to provide insights for both virtual world companies and tourism destinations.

1. Evaluation of the Acceptance of
Virtual Worlds in the Tourism Sector:
An Extended Technology Acceptance
Modelling Approach
ENTER 2009, Ph.D. Workshop, Amsterdam, 27th Jan 2009
Ronald Iberl
University of Innsbruck, Austria

2. Agenda
Problem Definition
•
Conceptual Development
•
Proposed Methodology
•
Anticipated Results
•
Progress to Date
•
2

3. Problem Definition
“Anyone who wants to understand the future of the
Internet needs to understand virtual worlds.”
(Balkin & Noveck, 2006)
3

4. Problem Definition
Evolution of the World Wide Web (WWW):
1990s: Web 1.0 (Supplier Generated Content – 2D)
•
2000s: Web 2.0 (User Generated Content – 2D or 2.5D)
•
2010s: Web 3.0 (Semantic) & Web 3D (3 dimensional)
•
4

5. Problem Definition
Definition of Virtual Worlds:
• computer-generated physical spaces
• represented graphically in 3D
• that can be experienced by many users (avatars) at once
(Castronova, 2005)
Focus of Research:
Internet
• vertical virtual worlds (tourism)
• mirror worlds (reflection of the real world)
Virtual Worlds
• application to support travel phases
(no substitutional/armchair tourism)
Mirror Worlds
5

6. Problem Definition
Map of Virtual Worlds (by age):
6

7. Problem Definition
Map of Virtual Worlds (by sector):
7

8. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
8

9. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
9

10. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
10

11. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
11

12. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
12

13. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
13

14. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
14

15. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
15

16. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
16

17. Problem Definition
Examples of Mirror Worlds:
17

18. Problem Definition
Lack of Research:
• in general:
on virtual worlds
• especially:
in the fields of tourism and the behavioural intentions of the users
and their acceptance of these virtual worlds
Goal of Doctoral Study:
• fill this gap
• evaluate the acceptance level of various target segments with
respect to a specific virtual world and to identify those virtual world
dimensions that are mainly responsible for the acceptance of
virtual worlds by its potential users
18

19. Conceptual Development
1. Creation of Evaluation Model:
• dissolve high dimensionality of the complex virtual world quality
construct
2. Evaluation of Virtual Worlds Acceptance
• using technology acceptance modelling (TAM) approach
(Fishbein & Ajzen, Davis, Venkatesh)
to identify those virtual world dimensions which are mainly
•
responsible for the acceptance of virtual worlds in the fields of
tourism
Doctoral thesis will consist of several refereed journal articles
embraced by a synopsis
19

20. Proposed Methodology
1. Qualitative Survey:
• qualitative interviews with experts and founders of tourism focused
virtual worlds -> record concepts and criteria of virtual worlds
• use results to complement literature-based derivation of
dimensions for a framework and measuring model of customer
related virtual world dimensions (consisting of criteria and sub-
criteria) –> Operationalization by an item-set of several indicators.
2. Quantitative Study:
• usability labs in real life or virtual worlds to evaluate virtual mirror
worlds by respondents
• empirical validation of item-set by using an Explorative Factor
Analysis (Hair, Anderson, Tatham & Black)
20

21. Proposed Methodology
2. Quantitative Study (cont.):
• derived factors will be embedded into a Technology Acceptance
Framework using a Structural Equation Model analysis
-> empirically explain the intention to use a certain technology,
which depends on:
– usefulness: relevance of offered information received by users
– ease of use: usability / degree of effort to use a system
Examples:
– Is three dimensionality improving the usability of a web-based
application thus enhancing the intention to use it?
– Is the ability to interact with other people (impersonated by their
avatars) face to face enhancing the information richness and therefore
the usefulness of the exchanged information?
compare evaluation results of the different virtual worlds evaluated
•
undertaking a Performance Analysis
21

22. Anticipated Results
detect those user-driven virtual world dimensions that are mainly
•
responsible for the acceptance of virtual worlds
especially if additional criteria (e.g. 3D and interaction) will have a
•
significant impact on the user’s acceptance of virtual worlds
usage of the findings as a detailed insight into the acceptance of
•
virtual worlds by virtual world companies and by the management
of destinations
22

23. Progress to Date
- research project has been started in August 2008
- in the process of reviewing literature and drafting the conceptual
framework of the thesis
- started to identify relevant experts and virtual worlds for the
qualitative research
23

24. Literature
Balkin, J. M., & Noveck, B. S. (2006). The State of Play: Law, Games,
•
and Virtual Worlds: NYU Press.
Castronova, E. (2005). Synthetic Worlds: The Business and Culture of
•
Online Games. Chicago and London The University of Chicago Press
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and
•
User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3),
319-340.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and
•
Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Boston: Addison-
Wesley Pub. Co.
Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (1995). Multivariate Data
•
Analysis (4th edition ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
K Zero (2008). Maps of Virtual Worlds. http://www.kzero.co.uk
•
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (Cartographer).
•
(2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified
View [Article].
24

25. Thank you!
Ronald Iberl
Follow my Research: www.virtual-tourism.net