Virtually Enhancing Public Engagement During the Pandemic: Measuring the Impact of Virtual Reality Powered Immersive Videos on Corporate Social Responsibility Communication

Abstract

Many companies have applied virtual reality (VR), a new and popular technology, to their corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities. This study examines how 360-degree VR-powered videos might further enhance consumers’ engagement in CSR activities and facilitate business outcomes during a crisis setting. The researchers conducted an online survey study, during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, with 1422 representative U.S. residents and applied the structural equation modeling for data analysis. Results indicated that the four categories of gratifications-sought (i.e., being there, enhancement, interaction, and fun) on 360-degree VR-powered videos could all positively influence CSR engagement; in contrast, CSR skepticism would reduce such engagement online. Corporate social responsibility engagement further improved the organization-public relationships (OPRs) and ultimately influenced consumers’ word-of-mouth toward the company. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings were discussed.

Keywords

corporate social responsibility communication engagement gratifications virtual reality crisis relationships word-of-mouth (WOM)

Introduction

Despite being a relatively new and accessible technology, virtual reality (VR) is gaining tremendous popularity in the digital media landscape. According to the recent report, VR technology was expected to reach around 70.2 million U.S. audiences in 2023 (Petrov, 2022). In communication literature, the term “virtual reality (VR)” refers to “a real or simulated environment in which the perceiver experiences telepresence” (Steuer 1992, p. 76). As a communication medium, VR can offer audiences a 360-degree computer-generated, 3-dimensional (3D) immersive virtual world experience (Kandaurova & Lee, 2019). Subsequently, VR applications have been widely used across industries and disciplines such as consumer marketplace, public relations, health promotion, tourism, and education (Cheng et al., 2022; Kim et al., 2020; Pimentel et al., 2021; Shen et al., 2020). In particular, corporations have used VR technology to develop corporate social responsibility (CSR) campaigns in their CSR practices (Lee et al., 2021). From a broader perspective, CSR is the reputation and activities that corporations pursue to fulfill societal obligations (Diehl et al., 2016). Considering the ever-growing demand for CSR practice, corporations have proactively engaged in social responsibility activities and incorporated such initiatives in their business agenda via new media formats and platforms (Chernev & Blair, 2015; Lee et al., 2021). For example, the alcohol beverage company, Diageo, launched the VR video titled “Decisions: Party’s Over” to offer different points of view from a first-person perspective to raise awareness of the dangers of drunk driving and binge drinking (Drickey, 2018). Further, The New York Times created the 360-degree VR-enabled film “The Displaced,” putting audiences in refugee camps and abandoned villages to experience the real lives of three refugee children (Gosling, 2016).

Despite the rapid growth of VR CSR campaigns, research on this relatively new digital media consumption in the context of CSR communication is sparse. Conventionally, CSR is viewed as an effective action for building a good reputation and creating a reservoir of goodwill during a crisis (Cheng et al., 2019). Moreover, with the ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic, researchers argued that VR had the potential to reduce negative mental health effects via CSR communication (Moreno & Kang, 2020) and could benefit society during this unprecedented and challenging time by creating a virtual community (Pimentel et al., 2021). Thus, there is an urgent need to study the role of VR in CSR engagement during the pandemic crisis. From a functional perspective, the 360-degree VR technology platform has unique features that can motivate audiences to use it, such as “being there,” interaction, and enjoyment (Kim, Lee, & Preis, 2020; Lee et al., 2021). However, during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the gratifications of 360-degree videos remained unknown. With this background, the current research aimed to explore the motives underlying the consumption of VR CSR campaigns, further providing avenues in the uses and effects of 360-degree VR technology on consumers’ attitudes and behavioral intentions in a public health crisis context. In addition, prior research found that reduced CSR skepticism via immersive VR experience could facilitate consumers’ CSR engagement and such engagement further strengthen their relationships with organizations advocating CSR initiatives (Cheng et al., 2021; Xu & Kochigina, 2021). In other words, VR-enabled CSR campaigns could be employed as a medium for corporations to engage their consumers and further generate a positive organization-public relationship (OPR), which is conceptualized as the degree to which organizations and their publics share influence, trust, feel satisfied and committed to each other (Morgan & Hunt, 1994). As Cheng and colleagues (2021) argued, consumers’ CSR engagement played a crucial role in the relationship between CSR efforts and OPRs, ultimately leading to organizational effectiveness and public benefits. However, few researchers have examined the potential mediating role of OPRs in the effect of CSR engagement on word-of-mouth (WOM) communication, which is considered an important business outcome of engagement and OPRs (Hong & Yang, 2011; Kang, 2014) and is defined as “informal, person-to-person communication between a perceived non-commercial communicator and a receiver regarding a brand, a product, an organization, or a service” (Harrison-Walker, 2001, p. 70).

To fill these above-mentioned research gaps, this study addresses a critical research question: how 360-degree VR-enabled videos could influence the publics’ engagement in CSR activities and how such CSR engagement might yield positive business outcomes in a crisis setting. We conducted a national survey among 1422 representative U.S. participants during the COVID-19 pandemic and the purpose of the current study is three-dimensional. First, it aims to contribute to the uses and gratifications (U&G) theory through adopting its 2.0 approach to investigate four types of gratifications of 360-degree VR videos for CSR communication. Second, it establishes a theoretical model to advance the literature on CSR and public relations literature by examining the impact of CSR engagement on OPRs and WOM in a crisis setting. Third, the results of our study aim to provide practical implications on customer engagement and relationship building for companies that launch CSR campaigns on digital platforms.

This article is organized as followed. The theoretical frameworks and the aforementioned central concepts are reviewed, followed by the research methodology. In the next section, we present and interpret the results. Finally, major findings are discussed, and the limitations and future directions of this study are provided.

Literature Review

Theoretical Background

In today’s society, stakeholders expected corporations to conduct CSR activities, not only being responsible for business behavior, but only delivering positive economic, social, and environmental impacts (Cheng et al., 2021). CSR communication, as a key function of corporate management, is helping business organizations to create brand equity and achieve competitive advantage via engaging consumers and raising their awareness of CSR initiatives (Cheng et al., 2021). In the field of CSR communication, according to Verk et al. (2021), digital or social media has been identified as a major focus, where researchers extensively discussed the functions of social media such as opening dialogue with stakeholders, co-creation of CSR meanings, and creating shared values, etc. However, the current literature on the application of VR technology for CSR communication is limited. Few studies ever examined consumers’ usage and gratifications of adopting VR tools for CSR activities. To fill the gap, this study starts to review the U&G theory below, as a major theoretical framework to understand the motivations of using 360-degree immersive videos for CSR communication.

Uses and gratifications theory

According to Ruggiero (2000), the U&G approach refers to an important “subtradition of media effects research” (p. 3). Earlier in the history of mass communication, the U&G approach was developed to consider the importance of gratifications that meet the social and psychological needs of audiences (Katz et al., 1974). Instead of viewing audiences as passive media information receivers, the U&G approach emphasized that audiences could purposely select different types of media to fulfill their own needs.

As U&G theory gradually became a significant paradigm of mass communication, scholars explored the selection patterns and motivations of different types of audiences in both traditional and new media (Cheng & Jiang, 2020; Luo & Remus, 2014). Table 1 summarizes a list of gratifications that have frequently been investigated in previous literature. Each representative study formulated basic typologies of motivations that drive users’ consumption of specific content or a type of medium.

Table 1.

The U&G 1.0 of Technology Use.

Gratifications and Typologies	Type of Medium	Author(s)
Hedonic gratification: Pass time, entertainment, escape; Utilitarian: Information; Social: Companionship	TV	Rubin (1983)
Process gratification: Resources, search engines, searching, technology, surfing, and Internet websites; Content gratification: Education, information, knowledge, learning, and research; Social gratification: Chatting, friends, interactions, and people	Internet	Stafford et al. (2004)
Technology convenience: Accessibility; Information exchange: Cognition needs; Social interaction: Affection, recognition needs; Recreation: Entertainment, fashion	Mobile social networking sites (SNSs)	Cheng et al., (2015)
Hedonic gratification: Fantasy, escapism, and enjoyment; Content gratification: Information sharing, self-documentation, and self-expression; Technology gratification: Convenience, media appeal, and social presence	Microblog	Liu et al. (2016)
Content gratification: Information sharing, self-documentation; Social gratification: Social interaction; Process gratification: Entertainment, passing time, self-expression; Technology gratification: Medium appeal, convenience	YouTube	Balakrishnan and Griffths (2017)
Hedonic gratification: Perceived enjoyment; passing time Social gratification: Social interaction; social presence; Utilitarian gratification: Self-presentation; information documentation, and information sharing; Technology gratification: Media appeal	Mobile SNSs	Gan and Li (2018)

When the U&G approach continued to be examined by numerous scholars, it also faced a strong tide of criticism. For instance, Sundar and Limperos (2013) argued that when users actively experience media, their needs could evolve dynamically with newer media. Meanwhile, novel communication technologies, such as augmented reality smart glasses, chatbots, robots, or VR-enabled videos and their increasingly popular characteristics (e.g., Alzayat & Lee, 2021; Cheng & Jiang, 2020; Kim & Lee, 2022; Rauschnabel, 2018) have made it difficult for researchers as they cannot use the traditional U&G approach to fully conceptualize and operationalize the gratifications of using such newer media. For example, when users actively experience social media such as Pinterest and Facebook, the traditional U&G approach might not fully capture the motivations of using the “like” button of such modern online media (Wang et al., 2016). Due to the advanced VR platform technologies, the U&G 1.0 could not fully capture novel characteristics such as interaction, immersion, and navigability (Kim, Lee, & Preis, 2020).

To refine the traditional U&G approach, Sundar & Limperos (2013) posited a new theoretical framework to study recent media. It was named U&G 2.0, which assumed that gratifications could emerge via the behavior of users and media interaction, users’ production of content, and users’ intervention in communication. Compared to the U&G 1.0, which mainly focused on audiences’ choice of media and the acceptance of media content, the current U&G 2.0 emphasized the development of technologies and new affordances, which generally covered four categories: modality, agency, interactivity, and navigability.

Modality means the diversified presentation forms attracting different perceptual systems of users (Wang et al., 2016). As one type of new media, VR can display content with multiple senses such as vision, hearing, touch, and smell, immersing people within it (Quadrio et al., 2019). “Being there,” a general category of modality, signifies the experience of being there in the intermediary surroundings through the basic technology of a modern, virtual medium (Wang et al., 2016). In other words, through the multi-sensory experience brought by the medium, users could feel as though they were within the scene described by the media. For example, researchers found that in the context of tourism, VR tools could offer users the “being there” gratification, referring to a sense of real tour experience (Kim, Lee, & Preis, 2020), while additionally bringing consumers important components of authenticity in the environment (Guttentag, 2010).

Agency offers every user as a source or agent of messages (Sundar, 2008). “Enhancement” is one type of agency that lets users enhance their subjective perception of reality. Such gratification of enhancement allows users to serve as a content source (Wang et al., 2016). A study showed that users in digital media prefer to act as senders or the origin of the message (Sundar et al., 2012). When it comes to enhancing an empathic connection to the themes that VR users reflect, VR movie production can inform and call for actions by promoting the relationship with users (Gillespie, 2020). In the research on how virtual representation affects users’ sense of agency in VR, participants showed a voluntary motor response to control virtual fingers (Hoyet et al., 2016) and regarded the virtual fingers as their own to a certain extent.

Interactivity means the affordance that facilitates users to “interact with and through the medium” (Sundar, 2008, cited in Wang et al., 2016, p. 3). As one representative category of interactivity, interaction refers to the gratification that allows users to connect with the medium, perform diversified tasks, and specify their preferences or needs continuously (Sundar & Limperos, 2013). As VR allowed participants to interact with the virtual environment at a high level of immersion, interaction served as an important function of this new technology (Holly et al., 2021). Meanwhile, according to previous research, social VR could support active interaction between users (Jonas et al., 2019).

Navigability refers to the affordance that allows users to move through the medium (Sundar, 2008). As a specific category of navigability, “play and fun” signifies a sense of play and fun by allowing users to follow preferred boards and escape into a different world (Wang et al., 2016). For example, VR shopping could give consumers a sense of pleasure and esthetic enjoyment by navigating online for their favorite products or services (Roschk et al., 2017). In addition, a recent study illustrated that the purpose of adopting 360-degree video news was to provide an enjoyable experience for the audience since enjoyment serves as a significant determinant to convince them to continue exploring online content (Van Damme et al., 2019).

Table 2 further presented that VR scholarship has recently applied the four above-mentioned affordances in various scenarios. For instance, Kelly’s (2021) updated research on social VR supported the gratification of “being there,” and such new media tools have successfully offered a “real” setting for social interaction. In an experimental study on the effects of a live concert 360-degree video, researchers identified an enhanced level of social presence among participants who have experienced an immersive video (Shin et al., 2019). Chirico et al. (2017) explored the effects of 360-degree videos and discovered that such a tool could significantly increase the sense of self-presence. In the context of VR gaming, Hoyet et al. (2016) indicated that VR tools allowed users to become publishers of information and send their voluntary motor responses to virtual fingers. In the application of the sex industry, scholars examined the effects of VR porn and discovered that audiences perceived a higher level of interaction with actors when they watched a VR film (Dekker et al., 2021). Last but not least, regarding VR for journalism, researchers have investigated the impact of 360-degree immersive videos and noticed that such a tool facilitated users’ ability to navigate the medium smoothly and enjoy the interactive communication process (Van Damme et al., 2019).

Table 2.

Affordances and Gratifications of VR Tools.

Affordances and Gratifications	Application scenarios	Author(s)
Modality: To bring people into a “real” setting	Social VR	Kelley (2021)
Modality: To lose touch with reality and immerse themselves in the virtual world	VR tourism	Guttentag (2010)
Modality: To enhance the sense of social presence	VR concert video	Shin et al. (2019)
Agency: The sense of self-presence	VR videos	Chirico et al. (2017)
Agency: To show a voluntary motor response to control virtual fingers	VR games	Hoyet et al. (2016)
Interactivity: To interact with self, with others, or with the environment	Social VR	Jonas et al. (2019)
Interactivity: To be stimulated by computer-generated dummies	Social phobia training applications	Poeschl and Doering (2013)
Interactivity: To interact with performers	VR pornography	Dekker et al. (2021)
Navigability: To bring pleasure, esthetic enjoyment, and fun	VR shopping	Roschk et al. (2017)
Navigability: To bring enjoyable experience for news viewers	VR video Journalism	Van Damme et al. (2019)

In summary, these four types of affordances (i.e., modality, agency, interactivity, and navigability) lay a solid foundation for us to understand the gratifications generated by VR-powered immersive videos and the dependence of users on such a medium. Therefore, U&G 2.0 is chosen as the theoretical support of this research.

Hypothesis Development

As shown in the research model presented in Figure 1, we focused on 360-degree VR technology and tested four types of gratification (i.e., being there, enhancement, interaction, and fun) and their influences on CSR engagement, drawing on the recent uses and gratification literature. This model also tested how CSR skepticism could predict CSR engagement. In addition, how CSR engagement might influence the relationship quality and lead to positive word-of-mouth toward the company. The following section will demonstrate relevant literature on the hypothesis development.

Figure 1.

The Conceptual Framework of this Study. Note: CSR = corporate social responsibility; OPR = organization-public relationship; WOM = word-of-mouth.

Corporate social responsibility engagement

Corporate social responsibility engagement is considered a key concept in the field of corporate communication. It refers to individuals’ communicative behaviors toward brands’ CSR activities, including “information seeking, sharing, processing, and commenting” behaviors (p. 7). Consumers’ CSR engagement could enhance the eWOM of enterprises (Chu et al., 2020) and meanwhile form consumers’ perception of an enterprise’s social responsibility (Tian et al., 2011).

Virtual reality can provide various gratification types, such as “being there,” agency, interactivity, and navigability (Sundar, 2008). These gratifications could better convey the purpose of enterprises, trigger audience engagement, complete more effective CSR communication, and facilitate the publics’ CSR engagement. Thus, it was meaningful to explore the relationship between VR’s gratifications and CSR engagement.

“Being there” is one category of modality (Wang et al., 2016). For instance, a virtual art gallery made visitors forget about reality, immerse themselves in it, and then want to recommend its website to others (Cuny et al., 2015). Therefore, we argue that the gratification of “being there” can lead to people’s willingness to share information, which is part of CSR engagement.

Enhancement is a critical part of the agency’s affordance (Sundar & Limperos, 2013). Buzeta et al. (2020) indicated that such a gratification could help consumers identify themselves, share their thoughts, and further motivate the consumption, contribution, and creation of brand-related content. This finding proved that the gratification of enhancement enables consumers to engage with brand-related information, such as CSR messages.

Interaction gratification has also been related to engagement. According to the U&G theory, some people wished to meet their needs immediately, so they expected the media to be responsive at any time (Katz et al., 1974). User-system interaction makes it possible for information seekers to receive responses at any time, weakening the complexity of users’ information search process and enhancing their tendency to search for information (Trippas et al., 2019). In a study of consumer participation in magazine advertisements, Kim et al. (2015) proposed that the interactivity of advertising is the prerequisite for consumers to respond and participate in the discussion. Therefore, we assume that the gratification of interaction provided by VR can motivate its users to seek and engage in CSR information (Raza et al., 2020).

The gratification of navigability proposed by Sundar (2008) allowed users to browse freely and explore easily, making it convenient for users to participate in CSR activities like reading relevant CSR reports. Play/fun is one category of navigability. Gamified enterprise platforms could provide consumers with hedonistic gratification and then engage them to explore their platforms (Kim, Costello, & Lee, 2020). Additionally, recent research indicated that visual messages can be processed easier and faster by individuals than textual ones (Holmes & Mathews, 2005). Compared with TV, the Internet, and other media forms, 360-degree video is more visualized and acceptable. In sum, the gratifications (i.e., “being there,” enhancement, interaction, and fun) that VR can provide are expected to be related to information seeking, processing, and sharing. Therefore, we proposed the following hypothesis about immersive videos.

Users’ “being there” (H1a), enhancement (H1b), interaction (H1c), and fun (H1d) positively influence their engagement in CSR activities via VR-powered immersive videos.

Corporate social responsibility skepticism

Scholars in the fields of media studies (Carr et al., 2014), advertising (Obermiller & Spangenberg, 1998), and public relations (Kim & Rim, 2019) have drawn attention to skepticism for decades. There are two types of skepticism: dispositional and situational skepticism (Rim & Kim, 2016). Dispositional skepticism is an individual’s distrust in management, business, and systems over time, while situational skepticism is “a consumer state, induced independently from one’s trait, and varied depending on the context” (Romani et al., 2016, p. 255). Corporate social responsibility skepticism, in particular, is conceptualized as “publics’ inclination to question, disbeli[ef], and distrust toward an organization’s CSR motives, management, business, CSR outcomes, and the claims of socially responsible positions and actions” (Rim & Kim, 2016, p. 250).

Researchers have explored the relationship between the publics’ CSR skepticism and CSR engagement. According to Rim and Kim (2016), CSR skepticism impeded the effectiveness of an organization’s CSR communication, a critical aspect of CSR engagement (Kang & Atkinson, 2021). The publics’ skepticism toward CSR also harmed their evaluation of the organization (Rim & Kim, 2016). Additionally, the publics’ engagement with the organization’s CSR practices could be influenced by their skepticism towards the organization’s altruism and CSR messages, activities, and informativeness (Rim & Kim, 2016). Thus, we assumed that the publics’ skepticism toward the organization’s CSR efforts might prevent them from engaging with its CSR, which includes seeking and processing information on its CSR campaigns. Therefore, the following hypothesis was presumed.

Publics’ CSR skepticism negatively influences their CSR engagement.

Organization-public relationships

By measuring the quality of the relationships between organizations and their publics, the value of public relations can be obtained (Grunig et al., 2002). Organization-public relationships have drawn attention from public relations scholars since 1984 (Kent & Taylor, 2002). Scholars have proposed the definitions (Huang, 1998), classified (Hung, 2005), and identified the types, properties, and measurements of OPRs (Hon & Grunig, 1999; Huang, 2001).

The relationship between engagement and OPRs has been extensively studied, as shown by Grunig and Hung (2002). They indicated that when the publics were involved with an organization, they tended to have experiential relationships (Grunig & Hung, 2002). Kang (2014) argued that public engagement was the maker of positive OPRs. Public engagement could also facilitate mutually beneficial relationships between an organization and its publics (Bruce & Shelley, 2010). Similarly, according to Malthouse et al. (2013), public engagement with an organization might influence its relationship establishment and maintenance practices. Cheng et al. (2021) documented that the publics’ CSR engagement with an organization on social media positively affected the OPR quality. Thus, we assumed that the public who engage with an organization’s CSR practices are more likely to perceive favorable relationships with the organization. Therefore, we posed the following hypothesis.

Publics’ CSR engagement could positively predict OPRs.

Word-of-mouth communication

A new form of WOM is electronic WOM, which indicates customers’ opinions about a product or service in an online context (Nilashi et al., 2021). Previous studies have examined the antecedents (e.g., personality traits, satisfaction, and situational variables) and outcomes (e.g., attitudinal and behavioral change) of WOM (e.g., Herr et al., 1991; Murray, 1991; Wetzer et al., 2007). Consumers’ positive WOM communication, as a strong supportive behavior can bring benefits for organizations’ growth and increase their revenue as well (e.g., Aaker, 1991; Gremler et al., 2001).

Despite the extensive WOM studies, only a few researchers explored the relationship between WOM communication and its predictors (Hong & Yang, 2009). An organization’s effective communication of its CSR approach could lead to the public’s WOM communication (Kang & Hustvedt, 2014; Moreno & Kang, 2020). Kang (2014) developed a scale of public engagement and found that the publics’ engagement with an organization could facilitate their positive WOM and loyalty to the organization. Given that the publics’ CSR engagement is part of the public engagement with an organization, we expected that the public who engage with an organization’s CSR efforts are more likely to speak positively of the organization. Thus, we articulated the following hypothesis.

Publics’ CSR engagement could positively predict WOM.

In addition to CSR engagement, OPRs were identified as another predictor of WOM communication. According to Wang (2020), if employees were satisfied with and trusted their organization (i.e., two dimensions of OPRs), they tended to share positive information about the organization in problematic situations. Hong and Yang (2011) also indicated that OPR had a great impact on the positive WOM communication of consumers. Similarly, the publics perceiving a favorable relationship with an organization were more likely to engage in positive WOM communication about the organization. This led to the following hypothesis being proposed.

OPRs could positively influence publics’ positive WOM communication.

This study further explored the potential mediating role of OPRs. Browning et al. (2020) conceptualized organizational advocacy and documented that consumers’ perceived OPRs mediated the relationship between advocacy and their positive WOM behavior. Customers who were aware of a corporation’s CSR practice tended to perceive favorable relationships with the corporation, leading to participation in its CSR activities (Bhattacharya et al., 2009). According to the communication mediation model, subsequent orientations mediated the relationship between communications and behavior (McLeod et al., 1994). Thus, this study argued that OPRs (subsequent orientation) mediate the relationship between CSR engagement (communications) and WOM communication (behavior). Publics who engage with an organization’s CSR practices are more likely to perceive favorable relationships with the organization, influencing them to recommend it to their friends or praise it. Therefore, the following hypothesis was posited to assess the mediating relationship.

OPRs mediate the relationship between CSR engagement and positive WOM communication.

Method

Data Collection

To implement this survey research, we collected a random sample in the United States. Participants should have been able to use a web browser to view a 360-degree video. Panel participants were invited, via a professional research company (i.e., Lucid), based on the national census data (Coppock & McClellan, 2019). To maintain a high quality of this online research, researchers continued monitoring the progress during the collection process. Additionally, attention check questions were asked throughout the survey. Participants needed to view a full VR video for at least five minutes before answering the rest of questions. A pilot test, with qualitative questions about gratifications-sought on VR experience, was also launched for the first 100 participants. Then, based on the results from the pilot test and feedback from participants, we finalized the questionnaire to obtain suitable information for the research. Participants were offered a brief introduction to CSR communication and 360-degree VR videos at the start of the questionnaire. They were then asked to select a suitable firm from a list of 30 that conducted CSR campaigns through digital media. Participants should consider themselves customers of the selected company and have encountered the company’s CSR message(s) through digital platforms. In the survey, the research background stated that during the COVID-19 health crisis, about 4 in 10 adults in the U.S. have reported mental health problems such as feeling depressed or anxiety (Panchal et al., 2021). Under this circumstance, the selected company would launch a CSR campaign using the VR format to empower individuals to know more about awareness of mental health issues. The questions delivered to participants were related to their gratifications-sought of adopting 360 VR videos, public skepticism, and engagement toward CSR activities, along with the level of trust, commitment, mutuality, satisfaction, and WOM toward the selected company. Based on percentages of demographic indicators (e.g., gender, age, and income) from the U.S. census data, this study applied the quota sampling strategy. In the middle of September 2020, anonymous links were randomly sent to 4940 enrolled participants, and 1137 of them failed to pass the attention check questions. Additionally, 2381 did not fully complete the survey research; therefore, this study utilized 1422 participants for data analysis.

Participants

Within the group of 1422 participants, we found that 712 of them were males (50.1%) and 710 were female (49.9%). 269 participants (19%) were within the age range of 18–35; 540 were between 36–50 year old (38%); 336 were 51–65 years old (23.6%); 277 were 66-year old and above (19.4%). Regarding their ethnicity, 1098 of the participants (77.2%) were Caucasian/White, followed by 124 who were Black or African-American (8.7%), 92 who were Latino/Hispanic (6.5%), 79 who were Asian (5.6%), 15 who were American Indian (1.1%), and 14 who were other (1.0%). Of the 1422 participants, 885 held a bachelor’s, master’s, or doctorate degree (62.3%). In terms of income, the data indicated that 477 respondents’ (33.5%) annual family incomes were $100,001 and higher; 242 (17.1%) were between $40,001 and $60,000; 228 (16%) were between $20,001 and $40,000; 184 (12.9%) were between $60,001 and $80,000; 146 (10.3%) were $20,001 and under; 145 (10.2%) were between $80,001 and $100,000.

Measures

In this research, all major variables were measured using a five-point Likert scale, with “1” representing “strongly disagree” and “5” representing “strongly agree”.

Four types of gratifications-sought

To measure the four dimensions of gratifications-sought on VR-powered immersive videos, we first examined modality (i.e., being there) (Cronbach’s alpha = .91). Based on previous research on U & G 2.0 (Wang et al., 2016), we adopted three questions to test perceived modality (i.e., being there) of the 360-degree VR videos (α = .91). Such questions were “it helps me immerse myself in places that I cannot physically experience,” “it creates the experience of being present in distant environments,” and “I feel like I am able to experience things without actually being there.” Second, this study applied three items from Wang et al. (2016) to measure agency-enhancement (Cronbach’s alpha = .92). These items were “it allows me to have my say,” “it allows me to assert my identity,” and “it allows me to send my thoughts to many others.” Third, based on Sundar (2008)’s operational definition of interaction, this research used three questions: “I expect to interact with the VR-powered videos,” “I can perform a number of tasks,” and “I can specify my needs and preferences on an ongoing basis.” The Cronbach’s alpha of this scale of interaction was .87. Last, to measure navigability (i.e., fun), we asked three items, such as “it is fun to explore,” “it lets me play,” and “I enjoy escaping into a different world” and the Cronbach’s alpha of this scale reached a value of .90.

Corporate social responsibility engagement

Three questions were adapted from Cheng et al., (2021) to measure people’s intentional CSR engagement (Cronbach’s Alpha = .93) on the VR-powered CSR campaign on mental health during the COVID-19 crisis. Sample items were “I will seek more information about the company’s CSR activities,” “I will browse updates about the company’s CSR activities,” and “I will read stories about the company’s CSR activities.”

Corporate social responsibility skepticism

We adopted three questions to measure the publics’ skepticism (Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013) toward the selected company’s VR-powered CSR activities on mental health. The items were “the selected company has an ulterior motive to sponsor the mental health awareness campaign,” “acts in its own self-interest by sponsoring the mental health awareness campaign,” and “has something other than altruistic intentions in sponsoring the mental health awareness campaign.” The Cronbach’s alpha of this variable was .87.

OPRs

We applied Cheng et al.’s (2021) scale to measure participants’ relationships with their selected companies, with three questions for control mutuality (a = .85), four questions for trust (a = .88), three items for satisfaction (a = .88), and three questions for commitment (a = .87). Sample questions included, “whenever this company makes an important decision, I know it will be concerned about me,” “I can see that this company wants to maintain a relationship with me,” and “Generally speaking, I am pleased with the relationship with the company.”

Word-of-mouth

For the measurement of WOM, we asked participants three questions, which included “I will recommend this company to others,” “I’m likely to say good things about the company,” and “I will expand using other products/services of the company.” The Cronbach’s alpha of this scale was .88.

Control variables

Past literature displayed that stakeholders’ perceived CSR fit could influence their engagement on CSR activities, relational outcomes, and word-of-mouth (Chen et al., 2019; Du et al., 2010). This research thus applied three items to assess and control the impact of CSR fit. A sample item asked, “During the COVID-19, I believe that it is a good/not a good match for my selected company to create such a 360-degree video for digital CSR campaign on mental health.” In addition, demographic variables such as gender and income served as control variables in the structural model.

Results

Descriptive Statistics

The Likert scale, ranging from “low” (1.00–1.99), “moderately low” (2.00–2.99), “neutral” (3), “moderately high” (3.01–3.99), and “high” (4.00–5.00), was adopted to present descriptive data such as mean and standard deviation of variables. Generally, participants reported moderately high agreement with their perceived four dimensions of gratifications-sought with the 360-degree VR video on CSR activities: being there (M = 3.92, SD = .99), enhancement (M = 3.53, SD = 1.12), interaction (M = 3.58, SD = 1.10), and fun (M = 3.87, SD = 1.04). Meanwhile, data demonstrated the moderately high levels of CSR engagement (M = 3.75, SD = 1.08) and OPR (M = 3.93, SD = .81). In addition, a low level of CSR skepticism (M = 2.59, SD = 1.14) was observed. Last but not least, data demonstrated that participants reported a high level of WOM toward their selected company (M = 4.05, SD = .86). As shown in Table 3, all examined variables correlated with each other significantly and the coefficient values ranged from −.53 to .83.

Table 3.

Inter-Correlation between the Constructs and the Square Root of AVEs. (Fornell–Larcker Criterion).

Constructs	Being There	Enhancement	Interaction	Fun	CSR Engagement	CSR Skepticism	OPR	WOM
Being there	.88
Enhancement	.68^**	.90
Interaction	.66^**	.77^**	.81
Fun	.77^**	.72^**	.70^**	.85
CSR Engagement	.66^**	.70^**	.67^**	.69^**	.91
CSR Skepticism	−.36^**	−.53^**	−.48^**	−.42^**	−.45^**	.84
OPR	.67^**	.71^**	.67^**	.67^**	.77^**	−.45^**	.91
WOM	.63^**	.61^**	.57^**	.62^**	.72^**	−.39^**	.83**	.84

Note. **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

CSR = corporate social responsibility; OPR = organization-public relationship; WOM = word-of-mouth; AVE = average variance extracted.

Values in the diagonal bolded are the square root of AVE while the off-diagonals are correlations.

The Measurement Model

According to Dash and Paul (2021), the acceptable testing criterion include the following: comparative fit index (CFI) is more than .95; standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) is less than .05; root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) is less than .08; Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) is more than .90; Normed Fit Index (NFI) is more than .90. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was applied and the measurement model in the study achieved an acceptable data-model fit (χ² = 934.406, df = 243, χ²/df = 3.845, SRMR = .03, RMSEA = .045 [90% CI = .042–.048], CFI = .98, TLI = .98, NFI = .97, n = 1422). Factor loadings of all questions ranged from .77 to .93. The value of composite reliability (CR) reached a range of .87–.95, and the scores of average variance extracted (AVE) ranged from .65 to .82. We also followed Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) method to assess discriminant validity of the measurement model and results fulfilled the criteria: Square root of the AVE of each latent variable (.81–.91) is higher than the correlations of any other latent variables (as shown in Table 3). So discriminant validity has been established between these constructs. Results supported the reliability and validity of the current scales.

The Structural Model

The structural model reached an acceptable model fit: χ² = 1133.640, df = 303, χ²/df = 3.741, SRMR = .04, RMSEA = .044 [90% CI = .041–.047], CFI = .98, TLI = .97, NFI = .97, n = 1422. The hypothesized associations between constructs in the structural model were analyzed (see Figure 2). The first sets of hypotheses assumed that a positive relationship between the gratifications-sought of viewing 360-degree VR videos (i.e., being there, enhancement, interaction, and fun) and CSR engagement. Consequently, results indicated that being there (β = .10, p < .05), enhancement (β = .11, p < .05), interaction (β = .28, p < .001), and fun (β = .22, p < .001) all significantly predicted CSR engagement, supporting H1a, b, c, d. Additionally, consistent with the prediction in H2, data showed that CSR skepticism could negatively influence CSR engagement (β = −.06, p < .01).

H3 suggested that CSR engagement could exert a positive impact on OPRs. Our findings supported this hypothesis and demonstrated a significant relationship between the two (β = .63, p < .001). Furthermore, our data showed that the level of CSR engagement also significantly affected WOM (β = .13, p < .001), supporting H4. The results then found that a high quality of OPR could facilitate stakeholders’ positive WOM toward the organization (β = .79, p < .001). Thus, H5 was supported.

Figure 2.

Results from the Structural Model. Note: Control variables in this model include the CSR fit and demographic variables such as gender and income. CSR = corporate social responsibility; OPR = organization-public relationship; WOM = word-of-mouth. ***p < .001; **p < .01; *p < .05.

Indirect Effects

We conducted the bias-corrected (BC) bootstrapping procedure (N = 5000) via Amos to examine indirect effects. The results demonstrated that OPRs mediated the relationship between CSR engagement and WOM (β = .50, p < .001, BC 95% CI = [.43, .58]). Additionally, CSR engagement served as a significant mediator between CSR skepticism and OPRs (β = −.04, p < .05, BC 95% CI = [−.07, −.01]); interaction and OPRs (β = .18, p < .01, BC 95% CI = [.08, .28]); and fun and OPRs (β = .14, p < .01, BC 95% CI = [.05, .23]). Meanwhile, CSR engagement significantly mediated the relationships between CSR skepticism and WOM (β = −.04, p < .05, BC 95% CI = [−.07, −.01]); interaction and WOM (β = .18, p < .01, BC 95% CI = [.08, .29]), and fun and WOM (β = .14, p < .01, BC 95% CI = [.05, .24]).

Discussion and Conclusion

This research first advanced the U&G theory via adopting its 2.0 approach to investigate the gratifications of VR-powered immersive videos for CSR communication. On the one hand, the results of this study enhanced the traditional U&G 1.0 approach by following the assumptions and theoretical framework of U&G 2.0 (Sundar, 2008; Sundar & Limperos, 2013). Our results identified the media affordances of advanced VR technologies and highlighted the importance of users’ needs toward VR-powered immersive videos. We examined the following four categories of media affordances and their specific gratifications: Being there, enhancement, interaction, and fun. Findings showed that all the above dimensions could exert a significant impact on consumers’ CSR engagement. In particular, the results identified the salient role of interactivity. If VR-enabled media tools could facilitate an interactive relationship between the digital model and consumers, allow audiences to select, create or share content, or further make the virtual environment responsive, consumers would maintain a high level of CSR engagement. Another gratification named navigability (i.e., fun) played a principal role in facilitating consumers’ CSR digital engagement. It validated the argument that media users would likely navigate and develop their needs for fun during communicative processes with immersive videos (Sundar & Limperos, 2013). With the increasing popularity of VR-powered videos in current society, this study suggested that users’ social and psychological needs and media characteristics serve as key gratifications.

On the other hand, the findings of this research further enhanced the U&G 2.0 approach by broadening its scope in CSR communication during a global pandemic. Although some recent research has applied this new approach to traditional and social media platforms (e.g., Cheng & Jiang, 2020; Wang et al., 2016), current literature has obtained scarce evidence on consumers’ gratifications toward immersive videos for CSR communication during crises. Some previous U&G literature mainly emphasized the technological features of VR/AR tools such as gratifications of wearing smart glasses (Rauschnabel, 2018) or VR tourism (Guttentag, 2010) and ignored the impact of technologies on business performance. This research filled the gap by responding to Cheng et al.’s (2019) call for more scholarship on digital CSR communication. It additionally supported the positive connections between gratifications of immersive videos, CSR engagement, customer-organization relationships, and WOM.

Second, this study contributed to the CSR literature by focusing on VR-powered CSR activities on mental health treatment in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The structure model tested both antecedents (i.e., gratifications and CSR engagement) and outcomes (i.e., WOM) of OPRs. Results demonstrated that building a trustful, committed, satisfied, and mutual relationship with consumers during crises would help them become champions for companies and engage in supportive WOM communications, supporting previous arguments (Hong & Yang, 2009; Ki & Hon, 2007). In addition, a low level of CSR skepticism and virtually enhanced CSR engagement serve as the base to cultivate a positive relationship with the public. During global crises or natural disasters, customers expect corporates to dedicate themselves to crisis relief efforts and genuinely care for social problems (Kim, 2014). When corporates initiate a CSR campaign to solve mental health issues during crises, consumers might view the motive as value-driven and hold positive attitudes toward such CSR initiatives. Further, a low level of CSR skepticism would enhance consumers’ information seeking, sharing, and commenting behavior, eventually facilitating their trust-building process with selected corporates.

Our study also showed that gratifications-sought of immersive videos such as “being there” and interaction provided a viable direction for corporate’s digital CSR engagement and relationship building in crises. During crises, such as a pandemic filled with fear, anxiety, and uncertainties, “being there” may become an attractive motivation; triggering users to participate in, experience authentic feelings, gain, and share knowledge relevant to mental health with their friends and family members (Liu et al., 2019). Meanwhile, the interactive nature of VR 360-degree videos closely connects users to the media content and allows them access to specific needs and preferences on an ongoing basis. As Kent and Taylor (2016) suggested, the dialogical nature of newer media facilitated public engagement activities and allowed organizations to build genuine relationships with their customers.

In the COVID-19 situation, social distance and limited face-to-face contact prevented the mobility of individuals; however, it created opportunities for VR-powered videos for business purposes. Practical implications of this research shed light on applications of immersive videos for CSR communication, guidance on corporate responses, and effectual relationship building during the COVID-19 crisis. Firstly, our findings indicated that CSR engagement, relational outcomes, and word-of-mouth were affected by the affordances of immersive videos, such as interactivity and navigability. This study emphasized that people’s entertainment needs could effectively motivate their CSR engagement. Brand managers could provide useful and interesting VR content with crisis relief information for the public to play and have a sense of fun. Doing so can be an effective strategy for fulfilling CSR goals and cultivating positive relationships with customers in crises. Secondly, results demonstrated that CSR skepticism remained a major concern, preventing customers from engaging in CSR activities. Consequently, brand managers and video creators might make the CSR content fit with corporate missions or visions, fulfilling the social needs to resolve problems during the pandemic. Lastly, to promote customers’ positive behavioral intentions, such as advocating for brands, brand managers need to implement strategies to improve customer trust, satisfaction, and participation in digital CSR activities.

Although this research focused on the impact of 360-degree VR-powered videos on CSR engagement and business outcomes and contributed both theoretical and practical implications, it contained several limitations. First, since this survey investigation was one-time and cross-sectional, the results might not generate a cause-and-effect conclusion. Further scholarship could examine the media impact of VR-enabled videos on CSR engagement via experimental research within a laboratory setting. Second, we conducted this study in the United States. Since COVID-19 is a global pandemic, scholars in other cultures or contexts could replicate the proposed theoretical model and validate our results. Comparative studies in the future could focus on the cultural impact on individuals’ usage and motivations of adopting VR-powered 360-degree videos and their CSR engagement on campaign messages. Finally, this study did not focus on gender differences or minorities such as low-income or Hispanic ethnicities, and scholars in the future might examine their specific motivations of adopting VR tools for CSR activities and WOM behaviors during crises.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was funded by the Public Science Fellowship, North Carolina State University.

Author Biographies

Yang Cheng (Ph.D., MBA) is a tenured associate professor in the Department of Communication and an adjunct professor in the Poole College of Management. She has taught many courses such as strategic management, research methods, the introduction of public relations, and crisis communication. She has demonstrated a long-term commitment to research involving global public relations management, social media and artificial intelligence, and crisis communication. She has rich experience with marketing and social science research and has published numerous articles in top journals such as the New Media & Society, American Behavioral Scientist, Mass Communication and Society, Telematics and Informatics, Journal of Public Relations Research, Journal of Product and Brand Management, and Public Relations Review. She has also received many awards and honors from global institutions such as the Institute of Public Relations and has received grants including the Arthur Page Johnson Legacy Scholar Grant and National Science Foundation (NSF).

Yuan Wang is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Media and Communication at City University of Hong Kong. His research interests focus on the roles of digital media in public relations processes and outcomes. He has published numerous articles in peer-reviewed journals, such as Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, Public Relations Review, New Media & Society, and Nonprofit Management and Leadership.

Wen Zhao is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication at Fairfield University.

Kaijie Zhang is a student at China Agricultural University.

Xinyi Cai is a student at Soochow University.

Hua Jiang is the Associate Professor in Newhouse school, Syracuse University. Her teaching and research interests include organization-public relationships, social media, leadership in public relations, work-life conflict, activism, identities, ethics and global public relations. She has authored book chapters and peer-reviewed journal articles that have been published or accepted to be published in the Journal of Public Relations Research, Public Relations Review, Journal of Applied Communication Research, Journal of Health Communication, International Journal of Strategic Communication, Journal of Public Affairs, Public Relations Journal, Public Relations Inquiry, Asian Journal of Communication and Global Media Journal-Canadian Edition. Jiang’s professional experiences focus on media relations, community outreach, social cause marketing, fundraising, relief work, social media management, disease prevention and care and statistics support for nonprofits located in the U.S. and China.

References

Aaker

D. A.

(1991). Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of a brand name. Free Press.

Alzayat

Lee

S. H. M.

(2021). Virtual products as an extension of my body: Exploring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value in a virtual reality retail environment. Journal of Business Research, 130, 348–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.03.017

Balakrishnan

Griffths

D. M.

(2017). Social media addiction: What is the role of content in YouTube? Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 6(3), 364–377. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.6.2017.058

Bhattacharya

C. B.

Korschun

Sen

(2009). Strengthening stakeholder–company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 257–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9730-3

Browning

Lee

Park

E.Y.

Kim

Collins

(2020). Muting or meddling? Advocacy as a relational communication strategy affecting organization-public relationships and stakeholder response. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 97(4), 1026–1053. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020916810

Bruce

Shelley

(2010). Assessing stakeholder engagement. Communication Journal of New Zealand, 11(2), 30–48. https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=fde68b6d-9723-4bfa-b69d-91f2ac8b3428%40redis

Buzeta

De Pelsmacker

Dens

(2020). Motivations to use different social media types and their impact on consumers’ online brand-related activities (COBRAs). Journal of Interactive Marketing, 52(1), 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2020.04.004

Carr

D. J.

Barnidge

Lee

B. G.

Tsang

S. J.

(2014). Cynics and skeptics: Evaluating the credibility of mainstream and citizen journalism. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91(3), 452–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699014538828

Chen

Z. F.

Hong

Occa

(2019). How different CSR dimensions impact organization-employee relationships: The moderating role of CSR-culture fit. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 24(1), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-07-2018-0078

10.

Cheng

Chen

Y. R. R.

Hung-Baesecke

C. J. F.

(2021). Social media influencers in CSR endorsement: The effect of consumer mimicry on CSR behaviors and consumer relationships. Social Science Computer Review, 39(4), 744–761. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439320987184

11.

Cheng

Jiang

(2020). How do AI-driven chatbots impact user experience? Examining gratifications, perceived privacy risk, satisfaction, loyalty, and continued use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 64(4), 592–614. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2020.1834296

12.

Cheng

Jin

Hung-Baesecke

Chen

Y. R.

(2019). Mobile corporate social responsibility (mCSR): Examining publics’ responses to CSR-based initiatives in natural disasters. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 13(1), 76–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1524382

13.

Cheng

Liang

J. W.

Leung

(2015). Social network service use on mobile devices: An examination of gratifications, civic attitudes and civic engagement in China. New Media & Society, 17(7), 1096–1116. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814521362

14.

Cheng

Wang

Zhao

(2022). Shared virtual reality experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: Exploring the gratifications and effects of engagement with immersive videos. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19095056.

15.

Chernev

Blair

(2015). Doing well by doing good: The benevolent halo of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(6), 1412–1425. https://doi.org/10.1086/680089

16.

Chirico

Cipresso

Yaden

D. B.

Biassoni

Riva

Gaggioli

(2017). Effectiveness of immersive videos in inducing awe: An experimental study. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-01242-0

17.

Chu

S. C.

Chen

H. T.

Gan

(2020). Consumers’ engagement with corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication in social media: Evidence from China and the United States. Journal of Business Research, 110, 260–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.036

18.

Coppock

McClellan

(2019). Validating the demographic, political, psychological, and experimental results obtained from a new source of online respondents. Research & Politics, 6(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168018822174

19.

Cuny

Fornerino

Helme-Guizon

(2015). Can music improve e-behavioral intentions by enhancing consumers’ immersion and experience? Information & Management, 52(8), 1025–1034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2015.07.009

20.

Dash

Paul

(2021). CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM methods for research in social sciences and technology forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173(3), 121092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121092

21.

Dekker

Wenzlaff

Biedermann

Briken

Fuss

(2021). VR porn as “empathy machine”? Perception of self and others in virtual reality pornography. The Journal of Sex Research, 58(3), 273–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2020.1856316

22.

Diehl

Terlutter

Mueller

(2016). Doing good matters to consumers: The effectiveness of humane-oriented CSR appeals in cross-cultural standardized advertising campaigns. International Journal of Advertising, 35(4), 730–757. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2015.1077606

23.

Drickey

(2018, April 24). Diageo fights binge drinking with virtual reality. https://www.alistdaily.com/technology/diageo-binge-drinking-decisions-vr/

24.

Bhattacharya

C. B.

Sen

(2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x

25.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312

26.

Gan

(2018). Understanding the effects of gratifications on the continuance intention to use WeChat in China: A perspective on uses and gratifications. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 306–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.003

27.

Gillespie

(2020). Virtual humanity-access, empathy and objectivity in VR film making. Global Society: Journal of Interdisciplinary International Relations, 34(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2019.1656173

28.

Godes

Mayzlin

(2004). Using online conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Marketing Science, 23(4), 545–560. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1040.0071

29.

Gosling

(2016). The New York Times VR film “the displaced” wins the Lions entertainment grand prix. Medium. https://medium.com/@simongosling/the-new-york-times-vr-film-the-displaced-wins-the-lions-entertainment-grand-prix-1f68c23e78b1

30.

Gremler

D. D.

Gwinner

K. P.

Brown

S. W.

(2001). Generating positive word-of-mouth communication through customer-employee relationships. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(1), 44–59. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230110382763

31.

Grunig

L.A.

Grunig

J. E.

Dozier

(2002). Excellent public relations and effective organizations: A study of communication management in three countries. Lawrence Erlbaum.

32.

Grunig

J. E.

Hung

C. J. F.

(2002, March). The effect of relationships on reputation and relationships on reputation: A cognitive, behavioral study [Conference session]. In Conference of Public Relations Society of America, Educator’s Academy, Miami, FL, March 2002.

33.

Guttentag

D.A.

(2010). Virtual reality: Applications and implications for tourism. Tourism Manage, 31(5), 637–651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.07.003

34.

Harrison-Walker

L. J.

(2001). The measurement of word-of-mouth communication and an investigation of service quality and customer commitment as potential antecedents. Journal of Service Research, 4(1), 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050141006

35.

Herr

P. M.

Kardes

F. R.

Kim

(1991). Effects of word-of-mouth and product-attribute information on persuasion: An accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(4), 454–462. https://doi.org/10.1086/208570

36.

Holly

Pirker

Resch

Brettschuh

Gutl

(2021). Designing VR experience: Expectations for teaching and learning in VR. Educational Technology & Society, 24(2), 107–119. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/27004935

37.

Holmes

E. A.

Mathews

(2005). Mental imagery and emotion: A special relationship? Emotion, 5(4), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.5.4.489

38.

Hon

L. C.

Grunig

J. E.

(1999). Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations. The Institute for Public Relations, Commission on PR Measurement and Evaluation.

39.

Hong

S. Y.

Yang

S. U.

(2009). Effects of reputation, relational satisfaction, and customer-company identification on positive word-of-mouth intentions. Journal of Public Relations Research, 21(4), 381–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627260902966433

40.

Hong

S. Y.

Yang

S. U.

(2011). Public engagement in supportive communication behaviors toward an organization: Effects of relational satisfaction and organizational reputation in public relations management. Journal of Public Relations Research, 23(2), 191–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2011.555646

41.

Hoyet

Argelaguet

Nicole

Lecuyer

(2016). Wow! I have six fingers!”: Would you accept structural changes of your hand in VR? Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 3(27), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2016.00027

42.

Huang

Y. H.

(1998, August). Public relations strategies and organization–public relationships [Conference session]. In Annual Conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Baltimore, MD, USA, August 1998.

43.

Huang

Y.-H.

(2001). OPRA: A cross-cultural, multiple-item scale for measuring organization-public relationships. Journal of Public Relations Research, 13(1), 61–90. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1301_4

44.

Hung

C. J. F.

(2005). Exploring types of organization–public relationships and their implications for relationship management in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 17(4), 393–426. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr1704_4

45.

Jonas

Said

Aiello

Furlo

Zytko

(2019, October). Towards a taxonomy of social VR application design. In Extended Abstracts of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play Companion Extended Abstracts (CHI PLAY '19 Extended Abstracts). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, October 2019, 437–444. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341215.3356271

46.

Kandaurova

Lee

S. H. M.

(2019). The effects of Virtual Reality (VR) on charitable giving: The role of empathy, guilt, responsibility, and social exclusion. Journal of Business Research, 100, 571–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.027

47.

Kang

E. Y.

Atkinson

(2021). Effects of message objectivity and focus on green CSR communication: The strategy development for a hotel’s green CSR message. Journal of Marketing Communications, 27(3), 229–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2019.1640270

48.

Kang

Hustvedt

(2014). Building trust between consumers and corporations: The role of consumer perceptions of transparency and social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(2), 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1916-7

49.

Kang

(2014). Understanding public engagement: Conceptualizing and measuring its influence on supportive behavioral intentions. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(5), 399–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2014.956107

50.

Katz

Blumler

Gurevitch

(1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In Katz

Blumler

(Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19–32). Sage.

51.

Kelley

(2021). The rise of the ‘quarantine bar simulator’: The uses and gratifications of social VR during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Information and Computer Technologies (ICICT), HI, USA, 11–14 March 2021, pp. 216–221. IEEE Xplore. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICICT52872.2021.00043

52.

Kent

M. L.

Taylor

(2002). Toward a dialogic theory of public relations. Public Relations Review, 28(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0363-8111(02)00108-X

53.

Kent

M. L.

Taylor

(2016). From homo economicus to homo dialogicus: Rethinking social media use in CSR communication. Public Relations Review, 42(1), 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.11.003

54.

Hon

L. C.

(2007). Testing the linkages among the organization-public relationship and attitude and behavioral intentions. Journal of Public Relations Research, 19(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627260709336593

55.

Kim

Costello

F. J.

Lee

K. C.

(2020). The unobserved heterogeneous influence of gamification and novelty-seeking traits on consumers’ repurchase intention in the omnichannel retailing. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1664–1664. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01664

56.

Kim

Lee

Jung

Kang

(2015). Magazine reading experience and advertising engagement: A uses and gratifications perspective. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92(1), 179–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699014559914

57.

Kim

(2014). What’s worse in times of product-harm crisis? Negative corporate ability or negative CSR reputation? Journal of Business Ethics, 123(1), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1808-x

58.

Kim

Rim

(2019). The role of public skepticism and distrust in the process of CSR communication. International Journal of Business Communication. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488419866888

59.

Kim

Lee

(2022). Falling in love with virtual reality art: A new perspective on 3D immersive virtual reality for future sustaining art consumption. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 38(4), 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1944534

60.

Kim

M. J.

Lee

C. K.

Jung

(2020). Exploring consumer behavior in virtual reality tourism using an extended stimulus-organism-response model. Journal of Travel Research, 59(1), 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287518818915

61.

Kim

M. J.

Lee

Preis

M. W.

(2020). 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, 49, 101349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2020.101349

62.

Lee

Y. J.

Zhao

Chen

(2021). Consumer response to virtual CSR experiences. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 42(1), 102–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2020.1734119

63.

Liu

I. L. B.

Cheung

C. M. K.

Lee

M. K. O.

(2016). User satisfaction with microblogging: Information dissemination versus social networking. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(1), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23371

64.

Liu

Zeng

Pope

Z. C.

McDonough

D. J.

Gao

(2019). Acute effects of immersive virtual reality exercise on young adults’ situational motivation. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 8(11), 1947. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8111947

65.

Luo

M. M.

Remus

(2014). Uses and gratifications and acceptance of web-based information services: An integrated model. Computers in Human Behavior, 38, 281–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.042

66.

Malthouse

E. C.

Haenlein

Skiera

Wege

Zhang

(2013). Managing customer relationships in the social media era: Introducing the social CRM house. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(4), 270–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2013.09.008

67.

McLeod

J. M.

Kosicki

G. M.

McLeod

D. M.

(1994). The expanding boundaries of political communication effects. In Bryant

Zillman

(Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 123–162). Erlbaum.

68.

Moreno

Kang

(2020). How to alleviate consumer skepticism concerning corporate responsibility: The role of content and delivery in CSR communications. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(6), 2477–2490. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1969

69.

Morgan

R. M.

Hunt

S. D.

(1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252308

70.

Murray

K. B.

(1991). A test of services marketing theory: Consumer information acquisition activities. Journal of Marketing, 55(1), 10–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299105500102

71.

Nilashi

Asadi

Minaei-Bidgoli

Abumalloh

R. A.

Samad

Ghabban

Ahani

(2021). Recommendation agents and information sharing through social media for coronavirus outbreak. Telematics and Informatics, 61(3), 101597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2021.101597

72.

Obermiller

Spangenberg

E. R.

(1998). Development of a scale to measure consumer skepticism toward advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 159–186. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0702_03

73.

Panchal

Kamal

Cox

(2021). The implications of COVID-19 for mental health and substance use. https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/the-implications-of-covid-19-for-mental-health-and-substance-use/

74.

Petrov

(2022, June 03). 45 virtual reality statistics that will rock the market in 2022. Techjury.net. https://techjury.net/blog/virtual-reality-statistics/#gref

75.

Pimentel

Foxman

Davis

D. Z.

Markowitz

D. M.

(2021). Virtually real, but not quite there: Social and economic barriers to meeting virtual reality’s true potential for mental health. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 2, 627059. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2021.627059

76.

Poeschl

Doering

(2013). The German VR simulation realism scale--psychometric construction for virtual reality applications with virtual humans. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 191, 33–37. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-282-0-33

77.

Quadrio

Bujari

Gaggi

Palazzi

(2019). New interactive VR/AR media: A challenge worth to address. In Proceedings of the 5th EAI international conference on smart objects and technologies for social good (pp. 128–129). ACM Digital Library. https://doi.org/10.1145/3342428.3342676

78.

Rauschnabel

P. A.

(2018). Virtually enhancing the real world with holograms: An exploration of expected gratifications of using augmented reality smart glasses. Psychology & Marketing, 35(8), 557–572. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21106

79.

Raza

Saeed

Iqbal

M. K.

Saeed

Sadiq

Faraz

N. A.

(2020). Linking corporate social responsibility to customer loyalty through co-creation and customer company identification: Exploring sequential mediation mechanism. Sustainability, 12(6), 2525. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062525

80.

Rim

Kim

(2016). Dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) skepticism and their impacts on public evaluations toward CSR. Journal of Public Relations Research, 28(5–6), 248–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2016.1261702

81.

Romani

Grappi

Bagozzi

R. P.

(2016). Corporate socially responsible initiatives and their effects on consumption of green products. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(2), 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2485-0

82.

Roschk

Loureiro

S. M. C.

Breitsohl

(2017). Calibrating 30 years of experimental research: A meta-analysis of the atmospheric effects of music, scent, and color. Journal of Retailing, 93(2), 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2016.10.001

83.

Rubin

A. M.

(1983). Television uses and gratifications: The interactions of viewing patterns and motivations. Journal of Broadcasting, 27(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158309386471

84.

Ruggiero

T. E.

(2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication & Society, 3(1), 3–37. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_02

85.

Shen

Wang

Chen

Nelson

M. R.

Yao

M. Z.

(2020). Using virtual reality to promote the university brand: When do telepresence and system immersion matter? Journal of Marketing Communications, 26(4), 362–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2019.1671480

86.

Shin

Song

S. W.

Kim

S. J.

Biocca

(2019). The effects of 3D sound in a 360-degree live concert video on social presence, parasocial interaction, enjoyment, and intent of financial supportive action. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 126, 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2019.02.001

87.

Skarmeas

Leonidou

C. N.

(2013). When consumers doubt, watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1831–1838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.004

88.

Stafford

T. F.

Stafford

M. R.

Schkade

L. L.

(2004). Determining uses and gratifications for the internet. Decision Sciences, 35(2), 259–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02524.x

89.

Steuer

(1992). Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of communication, 42(4), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00812.x

90.

Sundar

S. S.

(2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In Metzger

M. J.

Flanagin

A. J.

(Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 72–100). The MIT Press.

91.

Sundar

S. S.

Limperos

A. M.

(2013). Uses and grats 2.0: New gratifications for new media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57(4), 504–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.845827

92.

Sundar

S. S.

Bellur

Jia

Kim

H. S.

(2012). Interactivity as self-expression: A field experiment with customization and blogging. Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’12), Austin, Texas, 2012, pp. 395–404.

93.

Tian

Wang

Yang

(2011). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(2), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0716-6

94.

Trippas

J. R.

Spina

Thomas

Sanderson

Joho

Cavedon

(2019). Towards a model for spoken conversational search. Information Processing & Management, 57(2), 102162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102162

95.

Van Damme

All

De Marez

Van Leuven

(2019). 360° video journalism: Experimental study on the effect of immersion on news experience and distant suffering. Journalism Studies, 20(14), 2053–2076. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1561208

96.

Verk

Golob

Podnar

(2021). A dynamic review of the emergence of corporate social responsibility communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 168(3), 491–515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04232-6

97.

Wang

Yang

Zheng

Sundar

S. S.

(2016). Why do we pin? New gratifications explain unique activities in Pinterest. Social Media + Society, 2(3), 205630511666217. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116662173

98.

Wang

(2020). Exploring the linkages among transparent communication, relational satisfaction and trust, and information sharing on social media in problematic situations. El Profesional de la Información, 29(3), Article e290207. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.may.07

99.

Wetzer

I. M.

Zeelenber

Pieters

(2007). Never eat in that restaurant, I did!”: Exploring why people engage in negative word-of-mouth communication. Psychology & Marketing, 24(8), 661–680. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20178

100.

S. F.

Kochigina

(2021). Engaging through stories: Effects of narratives on individuals’ skepticism toward corporate social responsibility efforts. Public Relations Review, 47(5), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102110