Technology acceptance of virtual reality: A review

The purpose of this article is to review empirical studies on the technology acceptance of virtual reality. In the first part, we present three theoretical approaches used to study the acceptance of technologies. The first approach, the practical acceptance, focuses on the qualities of the technology, especially its ease of use, to ensure its adoption. The second approach, the social acceptance, attempts to predict the intention to use a technology. Different models are used in this approach, two of which are presented in this article: the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989) and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003). Today, TAM is the most widely used model for studying the acceptance of technologies. The last theoretical approach, proposed by Bobillier Chaumon (2013), is based on the real user experience with technology. It studies the contributions and limitations of a technology in its context of use, as well as its relevance to the individual’s activity and projects. The second part of this paper summarizes the results of our literature review. After discussing the various applications of virtual reality and the aims implied behind the evaluation of its acceptance, we show that the studies belong to two categories. The studies of the first category are based on technology acceptance models, mostly the TAM (Davis, 1989). The second category of studies does not use a specific model; the technology acceptance of virtual reality is assessed with different variables. The results of these two categories of studies show that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use are important variables to consider, as well as variables as perceived enjoyment and emotions. Variables specific to virtual reality technologies (e.g., presence or cybersickness) might also be taken into account. However, few studies have specifically studied the effect of these variables. In the last section, we discuss the limitations of the studies and the implications for future research.