2.1 Prior Research on Virtual Shopping Experience
Previous research on virtual shopping primarily focused on replicating physical stores within virtual environments, exploring the differences between 2D and 3D interfaces and the effectiveness of these virtual systems.
Studies highlight a general consumer preference for 3D environments over 2D. Specifically, van Herpen et al. (2016) found that consumers engaged more with PC-based virtual stores, leading to increased purchases, higher spending, and a broader selection of products and discounts, confirming the potential of VR shopping (van Herpen et al., 2016). Altarteer et al. (2016) noted that 3D VR systems provide superior product visualisation and real-time interaction, promoting a hedonic value that significantly enhances the shopping experience (Altarteer et al., 2016). Moes and van Vliet (2017) observed that consumers who interacted with store photos in VR showed more positive shopping experiences, a higher intent to purchase, a greater willingness to visit physical stores, and more satisfaction with online visits compared to those who viewed regular or 360-degree photos (Moes and van Vliet, 2017). Schnack et al. (2019) demonstrated that participants in an immersive virtual simulated store (VSS) group experienced deeper immersion and felt more natural interacting with the store environment than those in a desktop VSS group, suggesting that these factors could enhance the perception of telepresence (Schnack et al., 2019).
Extensive research has delved into the effectiveness of virtual systems developed by academics. Speicher et al. (2017) developed an immersive virtual shopping environment that merged the key advantages of both online and brick-and-mortar stores. Through a comparative study examining the interactive impact and performance of immersive VR via PC-based WebVR and HMD, they discovered that incorporating voice input with immersive VR in online shopping malls resulted in optimal user performance, including speed and error rate, alongside preferences for usability, user experience, immersion, and motion sickness (Speicher et al., 2017). Lau and Lee (2019) introduced FutureShop, a virtual clothing retailer applying stereoscopic VR (StereoVR), to examine differences in consumer purchase intentions, online shopping experiences, and virtual shopping experiences. The majority of participants found their experience with FutureShop innovative, enjoyable, and exciting, viewing it as a potential improvement over conventional web-based shopping (Lau et al., 2019). Morotti et al., (2020) created an immersive VR fashion environment integrated with the Amazon Alexa virtual assistant, engaging fashion experts unfamiliar with immersive technology to test a VR application. This evaluation focused on usability, enjoyment, and satisfaction with the virtual experience, highlighting that a VR interface enables effective manipulation and trial of products such as clothes and accessories in 3D, with voice commands enhancing the naturalness and simplicity of the experience (Morotti et al., 2020).
In addition, research has explored various factors influencing the consumer experience in virtual shopping malls (Domina et al., 2019), including the impact of consumer personality traits (the Big Five) (Schnack et al., 2012), and the influences of virtual mall congestion on the shopping experience (Van Kerrebroeck et al., 2017).
2.2 Analysis of Commercial Virtual Shopping Mall Content
In our study, we conducted a case analysis to identify key shopping features that enhance user experience by analysing commercially available content from virtual shopping malls. Our selection process involved online searches with keywords such as ‘VR Shopping Mall’, ‘VR Store’, and ‘VR Showroom’, focusing on instances that offered both immersive and non-immersive VR environments. We analysed six distinct cases: Dolce and Gabbana VR Boutique, W-Concept VR Showroom, Mandarina Duck VR Digital Showroom, Iloom Digital VR Showroom, and Samsung VR Store. Our examination covered the shopping environment, interface design, and specific shopping-related features of each (Table 1).
Table 1. Analysis of virtual shopping mall contents
|
Illoom Digital VR Showroom (2021)
|
Samsung VR Store (2021)
|
Mandarina Duck VR Digital Showroom (2021)
|
W Concept VR Showroom (2021)
|
Dolce & Gabbana VR Boutique (2020)
|
Supported devices
|
PC Web, mobile, HMD
|
PC Web, mobile, HMD
|
PC Web, mobile, HMD
|
PC Web, mobile, HMD
|
PC Web, mobile, HMD
|
Products for sale
|
Furniture and interior
|
Electronics and home appliances
|
Bags and lifestyle accessories
|
Clothing and accessories
|
Clothing and accessories
|
Character Design
|
First-person perspective, no character
|
First-person perspective, no character
|
First-person perspective, no character
|
First-person perspective, no character
|
First-person perspective, no character
|
Technological utilization
|
360 VR, 3D space scanning
|
360 VR, 3D space scanning
|
360 VR, 3D space scanning
|
360 VR, 3D space scanning, 3D rendering
|
360 VR, 3D space scanning
|
Navigation methods
|
PC: mouse, keyboard
Mobile: touch
HMD: trigger button
|
PC: mouse
Mobile: touch
HMD: trigger button
|
PC: mouse
Mobile: touch
HMD: trigger button
|
PC: mouse
Mobile: touch
HMD: trigger button
|
PC: mouse
Mobile: touch
HMD: trigger button
|
Features
|
- Navigate through floor and space selection
- Set up experiential zones on each floor
- Access interior tips and preview personalized spaces
- Check detailed product information and provide links for purchasing the product
|
- Navigate through on-screen buttons and the map
- Check detailed product information and provide links for purchasing the product
- Provide personalized product recommendation services for customers
|
- Navigate through on-screen buttons and the map
- Check detailed product information and provide links for purchasing the product
|
- Navigate through on-screen buttons
- View detailed product information
- View the fitting of the model captured in a short video
|
- Navigate through on-screen buttons
|
The results revealed that most cases provided onscreen buttons for seamless movement, with a mini-map feature enabling quick navigation to various locations. Upon selecting a product, users could access basic information, with links to the official online store for further details. Apparel products were verified through model-worn photos, but accessories presented challenges in understanding detailed information, being represented only by simple product images. This analysis underscores the importance of direct interaction elements such as product zooming and rotation for a detailed review of information. Additionally, the potential for avatar-based virtual fitting features was recognised as crucial for enhancing connectivity with the products. These instances of virtual shopping mall content and services, though innovative, are still in developmental stages. They lack comprehensive shopping functionalities and exhibit a wide range of configurations and designs, resulting in varied shopping experiences. Therefore, continued research is needed to explore the functionality, interfaces, and interaction designs of virtual shopping malls to ensure they deliver satisfying user experiences.
2.3 Virtual Reality (VR) Research Considering Accessibility and Universal Design Aspects
Universal design is a strategic approach to creating products, facilities, and services that are accessible to all individuals, regardless of their gender, age, disability, language, and other factors (Story et al., 1998). In the context of VR, research on universal design remains limited, predominantly focusing on accessibility features designed specifically for individuals with disabilities. Accessibility entails the creation of information and communication devices and services that are easily usable by everyone, regardless of any disabilities they may have (Wegge et al., 2007; Kim and Park, 2020; Kim and Han, 2017). Although universal design incorporates accessibility, it differs by including a broader range of user groups (Iwarsson and Ståhl, 2003; Lee et al., 2023).
Research in the realm of accessibility, especially for visually impaired individuals, has predominantly focused on designing UI with accessibility in mind or developing prototypes that applied specific accessibility features (Teófilo et al., 2016; H. Hoppe et al., 2020; Craddock, 2018; Teófilo et al., 2018). This includes efforts to improve the accessibility of VR technologies, with studies targeting enhancements in accessibility (Powell et al., 2020; Tariq et al., 2018; Ghali et al., 2012). Individuals with low vision, colour blindness, and blindness. Teófilo et al. (2018) assessed the effectiveness of accessibility features for visually impaired individuals in VR environments. Their work involved testing an open-source solution named gear VRF accessibility, designed to implement features such as zooming capabilities, colour contrast adjustments, automatic reading (via screen readers), and captions within a VR environment (Teófilo et al., 2018).
Moreover, significant efforts have been made to develop prototypes that integrate accessibility features (Luangrungruang and Kokaew, 2018; Mirzaei et al., 2012; Mirzaei et al., 2020; Teófilo, 2019; Teófilo et al., 2018; Glasser et al., 2019; Jain et al., 2021). Teófilo (2019) proposed an accessibility service tailored for live VR theatres to accommodate individuals with hearing impairments. This service leverages automatic speech recognition, sentence prediction, and spell-checking technologies to generate both text and sign language captions. The efficiency of this innovative system was validated through both quantitative and qualitative research, yielding high satisfaction levels among participants with hearing impairment (Teófilo, 2019).
Accessibility research related to individuals with physical disabilities has focused on identifying and addressing accessibility issues encountered during device use (Hong et al., 2017; Mott et al., 2020; Ferdous, 2017). This area of paper includes the development of prototypes tailored for individuals with physical disabilities, with particular attention to voice command functionalities (Gerling et al., 2020; Hepperle et al, 2019; Monteiro et al., 2021; Murad et al., 2018; Murad et al., 2019). Mott et al. (2020) discussed methods for making VR systems more accessible to individuals with mobility impairments, emphasising the importance of understanding the varied experiences of individuals with diverse abilities (Mott et al., 2020). Gerling et al. (2020) embarked on designing and testing a VR game specifically for wheelchair users, exploring their preferences and requirements. The findings underscored a keen interest among wheelchair users in VR gaming, highlighting the need to account for disability perspectives, overcome socioeconomic barriers related to technology access, and devise adaptive, flexible VR interactions catering to body diversity (Gerling et al., 2020).
In addition, certain studies broadened the scope beyond specific disabilities, aiming to assess and enhance VR accessibility more generally (Loch et al., 2019; Lischer‐Katz and Clark, 2021; Cook et al., 2019; Fussell et al., 2019). Prominent companies such as Microsoft, Roblox, W3C, and Oculus have presented accessibility guidelines that cater to a wide range of disabilities, setting a benchmark for inclusive design practices (Microsoft, 2023; Roblox, 2023; W3C, 2021; Oculus, 2022).
Based on relevant literature and industry guidelines, we compiled a list of key accessibility features tailored for different disabilities, including visual, auditory, and motor impairments (Table 2). This compilation is based on features that were consistently mentioned across three or more sources or identified as essential components within existing VR technologies. The ‘General’ category of user types outlined in Table 2 encompasses universal features designed without restricting to any specific disability type, reflecting a comprehensive approach to ensuring VR accessibility.
Table 2. Key accessibility/universal design features derived from prior VR technology studies
User types
|
Accessibility/Universal features
|
Source
|
Visually impaired individuals
|
- Voice guidance
- Text/UI size adjustment and magnification
- Colour changes and high contrast
- Voice commands
|
[32, 33, 35, 58, 60]
[35, 57-61]
[34, 35, 58-61]
[52-54, 58, 60, 61]
|
Hearing impaired individuals
|
- Captions
- Caption information modification (font, position, colour, background colour, etc.)
|
[42, 58, 60, 61]
[42, 58, 60, 61]
|
Mobility impaired individuals
|
- Fine control support
- Voice commands
|
[56]
[50, 52-54, 58, 60, 61]
|
General
|
- Motion sickness prevention technology support
- User guide (tutorial)
- Intuitive UI
- Visual Cue (highlights, text, icons, etc.)
- Haptic feedback (deactivation, intensity adjustment, etc.)
- User location/orientation indication and manipulation
|
[60, 61]
[57, 61]
[58, 61]
[44, 58, 59, 61]
[33, 45, 58, 61]
[38, 60, 61]
|