Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This paper investigates the transition from videoconferencing (VC) to virtual reality (VR) collaborative meetings by comparing user perceptions in regions with low – United Kingdom (UK) and United States of America (USA) - and high – Portugal (PT) – uncertainty avoidance (UA) levels. Based on an experimental design approach, a questionnaire was distributed to respondents from one of two groups, depending on the type of platform (TP) – VC or VR. For the low UA region, Study 1.1 explores the impact of the type of platform on work engagement (WE) as well as the mediation of creative behavior (CB), impression of interaction possibilities (IIP), and perceived enjoyment (PE). Because no significant difference in WE levels between VR and VC was found, as a possible explanation for this result, we further examined and confirmed a significant moderation of resistance to change (RTC) in Study 1.2. From the findings of Study 1 emerged the possibility that these unfavorable feelings about the technological shift could be a more generalized phenomenon than previously expected (in low and high UA regions). Focusing on Portugal, Study 2 presented similar findings to the ones of Study 1: no significant WE difference between VR and VC was found and RTC's moderation was supported. Overall, despite the advantages of the technology, transitioning from VC to VR collaborative meetings may pose a higher challenge than previously expected. The findings of this paper initiate a critical discussion on the potential global barriers to the implementation of VR collaborative meetings. • Advancements in virtual reality (VR) technology provide new elements and opportunities for collaborative work. • In regard to remote meetings, virtual reality is becoming an alternative to videoconferencing (VC). • Resistance toward VR collaborative meetings may be a more globalized phenomenon than expected. • VR may not be initially perceived as providing higher work engagement levels than VC.
Barreiras et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: