Environment and Social Psychology

Exploration of new music experience scenarios empowered by VR technology from perspective of consumption psychology

Qingru Yu

Department of Music, Faculty of Creative Arts, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

MARZELAN BIN SALLEH

Department of Music, Faculty of Creative Arts, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v11i2.4587

Keywords: virtual reality technology; music experience scenarios; consumer psychological characteristics; Technology Acceptance Model; immersive experience; environmental psychology; social psychology

---

Abstract

With the rapid advancement of virtual reality technology, VR-based music experience scenarios have emerged as a novel consumption format, reshaping the contemporary music industry. Grounded in the Stimulus–Organism–Response (S-O-R) framework and the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), this study employed a mixed-methods design integrating a questionnaire survey (n = 450), in-depth interviews (n = 30), and VR experience experiments (n = 20) to examine consumer psychological mechanisms in VR music contexts. Results indicate that virtual environment perception influences consumer psychology through spatial presence, sensory stimulation intensity, and aesthetic quality, with sensory stimulation exhibiting an inverted U-shaped relationship with emotional arousal. Virtual social presence significantly affects consumption decisions, partially mediated by group belongingness and moderated by social comparison tendency and identity recognition. Technology acceptance demonstrates a “high usefulness–low ease-of-use” pattern, while immersive experience quality mediates the relationship between technological features and user satisfaction. Technical anxiety negatively moderates the link between perceived value and usage intention, with operational training reducing anxiety levels by 23.4%. The findings reveal distinctive psychological characteristics of VR music consumption—strong immersion, social embeddedness, personalization, and aesthetic orientation—providing theoretical insights and practical implications for VR product design, marketing strategy, and digital transformation within the music industry.

---

References

[1]. 1.De La Mora Velasco E, Moreno M. Music and online learning: New perspectives and directions. Educational Technology Research and Development 2025; 73(4): 2567-2587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10491-0

[2]. 2.Lei J. Research on the integration and development model of rural music education resources in the context of rural revitalization. Journal of Contemporary Educational Research 2025; 9(7): 356-362. https://doi.org/10.26689/jcer.v9i7.11385

[3]. 3.Harada Y, Takeishi S. Beyond school gates: The role of motivation in music learning on elementary school students' daily music listening behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology 2025; 16: 1441572. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1441572

[4]. 4.Im H, Song H, Jung J. The effect of streaming services on the concentration of digital music consumption. Information Technology & People 2020; 33(1): 160-179. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-12-2017-0420

[5]. 5.Wedel M, Bigné E, Zhang J. Virtual and augmented reality: Advancing research in consumer marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing 2020; 37(3): 443-465. https://doi.org/10.106/j.ijresmar.2020.04.004

[6]. 6.Xi N, Hamari J. Shopping in virtual reality: A literature review and future agenda. Journal of Business Research 2021; 134: 37-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.075

[7]. 7.Slater M. Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behaviour in immersive virtual environments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 2009; 364(1535): 3549-3557. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0138

[8]. 8.Cummings JJ, Bailenson JN. How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychology 2015; 19(2): 272-309. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1015740

[9]. 9.Makransky G, Petersen GB. The cognitive affective model of immersive learning (CAMIL): A theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive virtual reality. Educational Psychology Review 2021; 33(3): 937-958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09586-2

[10]. 10.Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row; 1990.

[11]. 11.Suh A, Prophet J. The state of immersive technology research: A literature analysis. Computers in Human Behavior 2018; 86: 77-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.019

[12]. 12.Shin D. Empathy and embodied experience in virtual environment: To what extent can virtual reality stimulate empathy and embodied experience? Computers in Human Behavior 2017; 78: 64-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.012

[13]. 13.Mehrabian A, Russell JA. An approach to environmental psychology. MIT Press; 1974.

[14]. 14.Eroglu SA, Machleit KA, Davis LM. Empirical testing of a model of online store atmospherics and shopper responses. Psychology and Marketing 2003; 20(2): 139-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.10064

[15]. 15.Kim MJ, Lee C, Jung T. Exploring consumer behavior in virtual reality tourism using an extended stimulus-organism-response model. Journal of Travel Research 2018; 59(1): 69-89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287518818915

[16]. 16.Diemer J, Alpers GW, Peperkorn HM, Shiban Y, Mühlberger A. The impact of perception and presence on emotional reactions: A review of research in virtual reality. Frontiers in Psychology 2015; 6: 26. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00026

[17]. 17.Juslin PN, Västfjäll D. Emotional responses to music: The need to consider underlying mechanisms. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2008; 31(5): 559-575. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x08005293

[18]. 18.Datta H, Knox G, Bronnenberg BJ. Changing their tune: How consumers' adoption of online streaming affects music consumption and discovery. Marketing Science 2018; 37(1): 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2017.1051

[19]. 19.Biocca F, Harms C, Burgoon JK. Toward a more robust theory and measure of social presence: Review and suggested criteria. PRESENCE Virtual and Augmented Reality 2003; 12(5): 456-480. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474603322761270

[20]. 20.Oh CS, Bailenson JN, Welch GF. A systematic review of social presence: Definition, antecedents, and implications. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 2018; 5: 114. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2018.00114

[21]. 21.Onderdijk KE, Bouckaert L, Van Dyck E, Maes P. Concert experiences in virtual reality environments. Virtual Reality 2023; 27(3): 2383-2396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-023-00814-y

[22]. 22.Freeman G, Zamanifard S, Maloney D, Adkins A. My body, my avatar: How people perceive their avatars in social virtual reality. In: Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM; 2020. pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.338292

[23]. 23.Tajfel H, Turner JC. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: Austin WG, Worchel S (editors). The social psychology of intergroup relations. Brooks/Cole; 1979. pp. 33-47.

[24]. 24.Ren Y, Harper FM, Drenner S, Terveen L, Kiesler S, Riedl J, Kraut RE. Building member attachment in online communities: Applying theories of group identity and interpersonal bonds. MIS Quarterly 2012; 36(3): 841-863. https://doi.org/10.2307/41703483

[25]. 25.Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 1989; 13(3): 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

[26]. 26.Flavián C, Ibáñez-Sánchez S, Orús C. The impact of virtual, augmented and mixed reality technologies on the customer experience. Journal of Business Research 2018; 100: 547-560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.050

[27]. 27.Pizzi G, Scarpi D, Pichierri M, Vannucci V. Virtual reality, real reactions?: Comparing consumers' perceptions and shopping orientation across physical and virtual-reality retail stores. Computers in Human Behavior 2019; 96: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.008

[28]. 28.Tussyadiah IP, Wang D, Jung TH, Dieck MT. Virtual reality, presence, and attitude change: Empirical evidence from tourism. Tourism Management 2017; 66: 140-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.12.003

[29]. 29.Manis KT, Choi D. The virtual reality hardware acceptance model (VR-HAM): Extending and individuating the technology acceptance model (TAM) for virtual reality hardware. Journal of Business Research 2018; 100: 503-513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.021

[30]. 30.Guo W, Tang D. The construction of intelligent emotional analysis and marketing model of B&B tourism consumption under the perspective of behavioral psychology. Frontiers in Psychology 2022; 13: 904352. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.904352

[31]. 31.Zhukov K, Barrett MS. Whole-school music mentoring: Effecting positive change for teaching and learning in early-childhood and primary education. Research Studies in Music Education 2025; 47(3): 387-402. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103x251350668

[32]. 32.Caputo A, Tomai M, Lai C, Desideri A, Pomoni E, Méndez HC, Castellanos BA, La Longa F, Crescimbene M, on behalf of the "Agua Futura" Consortium, Langher V. The perception of water contamination and risky consumption in El Salvador from a community clinical psychology perspective. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2022; 19(3): 1109. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031109

[33]. 33.Schmid S. Music-related wellbeing as a teaching objective? A critical interpretive synthesis. International Journal of Music Education 2024; 43(4): 660-676. https://doi.org/10.1177/02557614241237231

[34]. 34.Srivaralaxmi V, Maheswari PU, Chandrasekar MK. Evaluating the role of a visual pitch meter in carnatic music education and pitch internalization through constructivist and RALD frameworks. Scientific Reports 2025; 15(1): 38251. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-21998-0

[35]. 35.Fibbins H, Edwards L, Morell R, Lederman O, Ward P, Curtis J. Implementing an exercise physiology clinic for consumers within a community mental health service: A real-world evaluation. Frontiers in Psychiatry 2021; 12: 791125. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.791125

[36]. 36.Sperling J, Lee VK, Schmid L, Gray M, Kim JY. A randomized study of El Sistema-inspired youth music education programming: Evidence addressing executive function and social-emotional learning. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 2023; 19(6): 1332-1344. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000596

[37]. 37.Hernández-Dionis P, Pérez-Jorge D, Santos-Álvarez AG, Olmos-Raya E. Service-learning as a strategy for music education: A systematic review. Discover Education 2025; 4(1): 474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00927-3

[38]. 38.Sagnier C, Loup-Escande E, Lourdeaux D, Thouvenin I, Valléry G. User acceptance of virtual reality: An extended technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 2020; 36(11): 993-1007. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2019.1708612

[39]. 39.Putawa RA, Sugianto D. Exploring user experience and immersion levels in virtual reality: A comprehensive analysis of factors and trends. International Journal Research on Metaverse 2024; 1(1): 20-39. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICICCS65191.2025.10985157

[40]. 40.Chen J, He M, Sun J. AI anxiety and knowledge payment: The roles of perceived value and self-efficacy. BMC Psychology 2025; 13(1): 208. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-02510-9

[41]. 41.Barranco Merino R, Higuera-Trujillo JL, Llinares Millán C. The use of sense of presence in studies on human behavior in virtual environments: A systematic review. Applied Sciences 2023; 13(24): 13095. https://doi.org/10.3390/app132413095

[42]. 42.Rauschnabel PA, Felix R, Hinsch C, Shahab H, Alt F. What is XR? Towards a framework for augmented and virtual reality. Computers in Human Behavior 2022; 133: 107289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107289

[43]. 43.Laukkanen T, Xi N, Hallikainen H, Ruusunen N, Hamari J. Virtual technologies in supporting sustainable consumption: From a single-sensory stimulus to a multi-sensory experience. International Journal of Information Management 2021; 63: 102455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102455

[44]. 44.Mullen G, Davidenko N. Time compression in virtual reality. Timing & Time Perception 2021; 9(4): 377-392. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134468-bja10034

[45]. 45.Yoo H. Idea bank: Integrating AI in music education: Experiments from google arts & culture. Music Educators Journal 2025; 112(2): 9-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/00274321251379474

[46]. 46.Venkatesh V, Bala H. Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences 2008; 39(2): 273-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x