Introduction

Evolving digital technologies, media, and artifacts are forcing brand managers to focus on the changing experiences of brand touchpoints (Golob et al. 2020). 360 videos are one such technology, having grown in popularity due to their immersive nature and brand storytelling capabilities, particularly on social platforms. As opposed to traditional videos that provide a fixed viewpoint, 360 videos are omni-directional panoramic videos that allow users to tilt and pan in uninterrupted circles (Rupp et al. 2019). Users encounter a sequence of stitched together 360 degree images with a fixed interval of time covering the horizontal field of view (Mi and Yang 2019). Whilst they do immerse users in a computer-generated environment, 360 videos are not necessarily ‘true-virtual reality (VR)’, which processes a user’s head and or hand movements in a responsive and adaptive rendering of a computer-generated reality (Mäkinen et al. 2022; Reer et al. 2022). Nonetheless, 360 videos offer brands a cheaper and more accessible alternative to true ‘VR’ (Feng 2018) that is suitable for attracting brand engagement, and requires less specialized and expensive equipment from users. Evidently, they have grown in popularity over recent years and are now a widely-used video format and communication tool (Kelling et al. 2017). Research even suggests they receive 29% greater views than the same video in a traditional video format (Forer 2018), facilitating more dynamic and autonomous customer experiences, pre, during, and post-purchase (Flavián et al. 2019).

An advantage of 360 videos is that they can be experienced on a greater diversity of devices, from internet browser windows on computers up to VR devices, albeit each with distinct user experiences. When viewed through VR devices they offer brand managers greater capabilities to immerse potential customers (users) with a brand. These experiences enhance the possibilities for real-time interaction with products to influence decision-making (Martínez-Navarro et al. 2019). With rapidly growing VR content and increasing affordability of VR devices amidst the evolving home and recreational activities post-pandemic (Wu et al. 2022) 360 videos have received research attention. For example, news viewed on 360 degree videos are found to induce considerably stronger presence, enjoyment, and credibility (Vettehen et al. 2019), whilst advertising audiences are found to enjoy ad-viewing experiences more when 3D agents are present, culminating in better completion rates and less skipping (Wu et al. 2022). Nonetheless, limited research examines the ‘user experience’ of these emerging technologies (Kelling et al. 2017), particularly those examining how to use VR to maximize benefits of such media for brand management (Wu et al. 2022).

Whilst more brands are utilizing 360 videos than ever before, important gaps still remain to advance research and practice. Firstly, limited examination has considered the subjective experiences of the user with the device. This can include positive and negative aspects of the experience and is not captured by mere group comparison across which device is used. These user experiences impact the depth in which a potential customer immerses themselves within 360 videos and thus their exposure to and processing of brand messages. This depth of immersion is represented through presence, which encompasses the user’s psychological feeling of ‘being there’, or immersed in a virtual environment (Slater et al. 1995). The importance of presence is supported within 360 video research (e.g.,,, Flavián et al. 2021; Rupp et al. 2019; Vettehen et al. 2019). However, Verhulst et al. (2021) identify the gap that analysing presence across devices has seen mixed results, indicating that users evaluate distinct levels of immersion between devices, each with pros and cons. However, the extant research does not consider the experience the user has with the device. This is an important nuance, as existing research, at best, compares across devices (e.g.,,, Verhulst et al. 2021; Martinez-Navarro et al. 2019; Vettehen et al. 2019) without any consideration for the user’s evaluation of their experience with it. This will vary across users, even with the same device. User evaluations of the visual and aural experience, performance, ease of use, and enjoyment with the device are heterogeneous, yet largely ignored. We consider these experiences for PCs, Tablets, and VR HMDs.

In light of the immersive experiences and emotional resonance facilitated by 360 brand videos beyond their standard 2D counterparts, user experiences of presence are considered a crucial aspect of 360 video effectiveness. However, the relationship between presence and emotions remains under-explored (Martínez-Navarro et al. 2019). This is a major shortcoming, as affective responses to 360 brand videos are likely enhanced when a user experiences deeper immersion in the content. For example, a 360 video promoting travel to a tourism destination may attempt to evoke strong affective experiences of interest, wonder, arousal, or envy. By immersing a user deeper into the information and creative execution of the 360 video, these affective experiences are more likely to be had. We seek to examine such a relationship through psychophysiological measurement of arousal and pleasure, assessing its impact on brand engagement. This is an important contribution as much existing 360 video research in branding contexts fails to assess this potentially important relationship, and relies on the use of self-report methods for capturing affective states. Such methods have been identified as prone to demand characteristics and often reflect an over or under-reporting of experiences (Van de Mortel 2008) limiting their capacity in user experience based brand research.

Due to the novel and immersive capabilities of 360 videos, it is important that their capacity to engage users with a brand is understood contextually to their specific medium and objectives. For example, a user would typically experience a 360 brand video on social media or a digital content platform (e.g.,,, a blog). Thus, the relevant brand engagement that may entail from this is likely to include sharing the 360 video to social media, talking about it to friends, further researching or connecting with the brand, etc. It is these brand engagement outcomes that need to be understood, less so the purchase intention or basic attitudinal measures that are typically studied (see Wu et al. 2022; Uhm et al. 2020) and less focal to digital marketing incorporating 360 brand video experiences. The research of Griffin et al. (2017) evidences that engagement outcomes such as seeking further info, suggesting to others, and sharing info with others do differ across 360 video experiences, including VR; however they analyse no empirical antecedents. Herein, we propose the brand engagement relevant to 360 videos will be driven by the emotions evoked in the user (arousal and pleasure) and the perceived creativity of the 360 video. Each remains unexamined.

In contemporary practice, brands are allocating larger quantities of their marketing budgets to 360 videos despite limited understanding of the aforementioned gaps. This is exacerbated by increasing VR media content and ownership of VR head mounted displays (HMDs) amidst a lack of standards for design and execution of such digital content. Herein, the purpose of this research is to examine 360 video user experiences, how they are impacted by subjective device experiences, and their ability to drive relevant forms of brand engagement. In addressing this, we analyse a conceptual framework through a PROCESS model in SPSS incorporating presence as a mediator of device experiences and antecedent to pleasure, arousal, and 360 video creativity which in turn influence brand engagement intentions. This is analysed on two 360 videos across three devices (PC, Tablet, and VR HMD), using psychophysiological measures to capture pleasure and arousal. Our findings offer important branding implications, including empirically assessing the subjective and heterogeneous experiences users have with the device, presence within the 360 videos influence on the perceived creativity of a 360 brand video, and its subsequent influence on brand engagement outcomes specific to user behaviours with 360 brand videos. Implications are offered for extending scholarship to consider the importance of subjective and nuanced device experiences, the deepening of presence to its influence on creativity of 360 brand videos, and argue for flexible design of immersive brand content with curated, unfolding settings and storylines.

Theoretical background

Device experiences

360 videos can be viewed on multiple devices, including PCs, laptops, tablets, mobile phones, and the less-common HMDs for VR such as the Oculus Rift, Google Cardboard, or numerous generic-brand headsets (Kelling et al. 2017). One of the most exciting capabilities of virtual technologies (such as 360 videos) is their ability to fully immerse and transport users into new experiences (Kelling et al. 2017). However, each device presents content differently and affords varying degrees of interactivity and immersion, thus invoking different user experiences and evaluations of media. In experiencing immersive virtual experiences, consciousness appears to be relocated to the virtual space as a sense of ‘presence’ is achieved (Rupp et al. 2019; Slater 2009). A pre-requisite for this is a device experience that engages the user’s senses more intensely and does not present usability issues. In transporting consciousness to the virtual space, a user may simply perceive images displayed on a screen, or alternatively, experience ‘presence’ when feeling they are ‘in’ an actual virtual place (Rupp et al. 2019). This distinctive quality of immersion is credited as leading to greater presence in 360 videos (Vettehen et al. 2019), and is likely to be experienced differently across devices. Wu et al. (2022) find that the viewing context in which a VR ad is perceived and processed matters, concluding that users desire to see and be immersed with virtual objects and beings. Herein, experiencing 360 videos on VR HMDs, relative to traditional screens, can enhance presence by closing-off from the outside world, facilitating sensitive navigation, and engaging the user in greater involvement (Hebbel-Seeger 2017). The gyroscopic function of devices such as Tablets and HMDs are discovered to generate a higher sense of presence compared to static devices like PCs, allowing users to control what is displayed and create a sense of harmony between their position and the content (Flavián et al. 2019). Martínez-Navarro et al. (2019) note the distinction in the level of ‘immersion’ offered by PCs and VR HMDs, discovering higher levels of presence and overall effectiveness, but also discomfort, with VR HMDs. Other researchers reveal negative aspects of 360 video experiences and VR, such as nausea, discomfort, or simulation sickness (Verhulst et al. 2021; Rupp et al. 2019). In this sense, the subjective experience a user has with a device, not merely the device that was used (as anominal variable), is important to facilitating presence. The following is hypothesized:

H1

Device Experience will positively influence user experiences of presence within the 360 Video.

Presence within the 360 video

As users experience deeper immersion within a 360 video, as characterized by presence, we propose they will experience stronger emotions. Emotional experiences are established as important, with users of digital marketing content driven by hedonic motives, including selecting, interacting with, enjoying, and being entertained by content (Hollebeek and Macky 2019). Authors such as Uhm et al. (2020) and Rupp et al. (2019) support that presence in the virtual environment may lead to increases in positive emotions. The findings of Yung et al. (2021) support that higher presence levels experienced in VR devices are associated with more intense emotional responses, attributing this to VR’s greater interactivity and user control. Flavián et al. (2021) find technological embodiment with 360 video VR experiences to generate more positive emotions than less embodied devices, concluding this is due to the immersive and rich sensory capabilities of VR. Tan (2008) even discusses media entertainment experiences as essentially episodes of emotions, encompassing not only pleasure from entertaining stimuli, but also arousal. In this research, emotional experiences are captured through psychophysiological measures of arousal and pleasure. These user appraisals are widely supported as complementary aspects of an emotional state by authors such as Beck and Egger (2018). Arousal represents an activation of an emotional experience (Uhm et al. 2020), with pleasure encompassing the positive hedonic quality of an affective state (Li et al. 2018).

Still conceptually ambiguous, support for the antecedent role of presence on arousal and pleasure is building. Jun et al. (2020) demonstrate a consistent positive association between presence and arousal for 43 different 360 videos. Uhm et al. (2020) support that presence levels experienced during a VR sporting experience positively influence neurophysiological arousal. Herein, presence may be the mechanism that explains Barreda-Ángeles et al. (2021) perspective that omni-directional views of immersive content are likely to elicit stronger arousal. This sense of presence experienced by deeper immersion makes the audience feel as if they are really there and interacting, enhancing user arousal during the experience (Wu et al. 2022). Pleasure is considered a positive emotion elicited during usage of interactive products (Mishra et al. 2015). It has been conceptualized in a branding context with how good it feels to interact (Le Bel and Dubé 1998), and has been considered a proximal antecedent of brand outcomes, such as brand love (see Rahman et al. 2021). Holbrook (2002) conceptualizes pleasure as a positive form of hedonic value, which is distinct from the usability (utilitarian value) of one’s experience. Moreover, brand management efforts, such as 360 videos, are proposed to directly impact pleasure (see Rahman et al. 2021). In light of the aforementioned, the following is hypothesized:

H2

Presence within the 360 video will positively influence user arousal

H3

Presence within the 360 video will positively influence user pleasure

Creativity seeks to enhance the communication process. In marketing communications, this is a dynamic process involving the making of meaning by senders and receivers (Stern 1994). To improve consumer perceptions, brands must provide better online experiences through more vivid, interactive, informational, and entertaining content (Wang 2021). 360 videos offer an enhanced way to do this, with their multi-sensory and interactive capabilities allowing for highly creative executions. Sharma et al (2012) highlight that 360 videos provide the perception of an audio-visual reality where spectators have the freedom to interact with what they perceive. Indubitably, this presents enhanced opportunities to immerse (presence) relative to traditional marketing communication mediums. Such immersion will likely foster more freedom of interaction and perceptions of realism of the audio-visual experience. “No matter how functional and advanced the technology, the key is to focus on the story, not the technology itself or any special 3D effects” (Shin 2018; p.72). Swant (2016) note that the overriding sense of presence experienced in virtual realities create a sense of proximity to the heart of a story that would be more difficult to achieve with other media. This enhanced sense of presence within a 360 video paves the way for greater focus on the creative aspects of the messaging.

Creativity evaluations incorporate information processing and the unique perspective of the audience (Ang et al. 2007). As presence is considered a measure of a psychological feeling of ‘being there’, or immersed in a virtual environment other than the physical world in which the body is (Bouvier et al. 2014), this creativity should be perceived stronger when the user experiences greater presence within a 360 video. Kim and Biocca (1997) highlight how presence involves a departure from one’s immediate physical world, to arriving into a virtual one, experiencing the sensation of being in a created scenario. In 360 brand videos, these worlds are created for the purposes of persuasively and entertainingly conveying brand messages. Advertising creativity has been conceptualized through judgments of novelty, meaningfulness, and connectedness (Ang et al. 2007), with arguments made that VR experiences should provide relevant (i.e., connectedness), and socially meaningful stories to users (Shin 2018). Assessments of creativity are made by the individual and their own individual judgement (West et al. 2019), hence the benefits from connecting the creative execution with the audience’s past experiences and identity. Presence may play a role in 360 video users’ information processing (Barreda-Ángeles et al. 2021), and is found to associate with increased interest in the subject matter (Rupp et al. 2019). Transportation represents the integration of attention, imagery and feelings in response to narratives (Green and Brock 2002)—it is the process that leads to presence within a media. Such transportation requires a deep understanding and appreciation of the media, which if achieved, occurs from a deep experience of the inherently creative aspects of a 360 video. Herein, to the extent that a 360 video is creative, the deeper immersion within the video and weaker awareness beyond it (characteristics of presence) should result in a stronger sense of a 360 video’s creativity. The following is hypothesized:

H4

Presence within the 360 video will positively influence user perceptions of 360 video creativity

Driving brand engagement

In contemporary marketing, the important aspects of brand engagement that occur from 360 videos include sharing on social media, word of mouth (WOM), researching, or connecting with the brand after an experience. Emotional engagement with digital marketing content fosters brand-related identification that drives behaviours (Hollebeek and Macky 2019). These emotional experiences are well supported as important drivers of market success, enjoyment, and active technology usage (Triberti et al. 2017). Waqas et al. (2022) link the evocation of strong emotions with brand attachment, whilst Shimul (2022) synthesizes that a recent paradigm shift in brand attachment even limits its focus to affective components. Evidently, affecting a 360 video user personally appears integral to driving brand engagement. This is supported by authors such as Wu et al. (2022) who conclude that people will pay more attention to content that generates higher levels of arousal, developing better ad memory and recall. Similarly, Banovic and Otterbring (2021) note a link between arousal and the attention paid to ads, memory cues, and recall. For 360 videos with persuasive purposes (such as those related to branding), Barreda-Ángeles, et al. (2021) argue that increased arousal may enhance heuristic processing of content. The excitation transfer theory of Zillmann (2008) supposes that when audiences are more aroused, their perceptions towards an ad may become more positive, with the enjoyment of ad-viewing experiences shown to impact the effectiveness of ads (Wu et al. 2022). The enjoyment of positive emotions experienced with 360 videos is found to mediate the effects of presence on visiting intentions (Wu and Lai, 2022), and enhance intentions to share 360 video experiences through social media (Yung et al. 2021). Thus, it is hypothesized:

H5

Arousal will positively influence brand engagement intention

H6

Pleasure will positively influence brand engagement intention

Creativity is a characteristic that is considered integral to the effectiveness of marketing communications, particularly their ability to communicate a clear message and achieve brand recall (Sheinin et al. 2011; Ang et al. 2007) Consumer engagement is proposed to emanate from the interactions and meaning that come from brand content experiences (Waqas et al. 2022). As immersive multi-media experiences capturing many senses, 360 videos foster facilitate creative experiences of a brand or product. Such creativity is crucial to cut through the clutter, attract interest, facilitate novel technology use, and entertain so to drive brand engagement. Extant research suggests such an effect. For example, Bandura (1977) demonstrate that to foster behaviour, individuals must engage with and actively process the content of a message beyond simply reading. Stathopoulou et al. (2017) show that advertising content that ‘stands out’ and is perceived as more original is more likely to lead to consumer brand engagement. The meta-analysis of Rosengren et al. (2020) suggests the effects of advertising creativity go beyond originality, highlighting that more creative ads stimulate more ad processing and positive outcome responses. More interesting, interactive, and informational (analogues to creative) social media posts from brands receive more attention and higher engagement (Wang 2021). Jin et al. (2019) demonstrate that creative ads impair the recall of other less-creative (regular) ads, impeding competing brands more than non-competing. Consequently, this should allow for more engagement with the focal brand.

In light of rapid changes in social media and consumer usage patterns, West et al. (2019) highlight the importance of originality (analogue to novelty) in creative advertising. Analogues of novelty and meaningfulness are widely supported in advertising research (Jin et al.; 2019). Stathopoulou et al. (2017) find that the more novel (original and unusual) an advertisement incorporating a hashtag, the more likely consumers are to engage with the advertised brand on social platforms. Habig (2016) concludes a similar outcome with respect to 360 video sharing behaviour. Till and Baack (2005) argue that novelty in creative advertising works to attract consumer cognition. However, West et al. (2019) argue that this alone is not enough to meet organizational objectives, and should be combined with elements that transmit the brand message in a way that is connected to the target audience, and meaningful for client objectives. The positive effect of creative advertising on consumer responses is supported (Dahlen et al. 2018), with novelty, meaningfulness, and connectedness found to increase recall and linking (Ang et al. 2014). Supporting the connectedness component of creativity, Shimul (2022) note that integrating the consumer’s perceived sense of self with brands is essential to building brand attachment. Thus, the following is hypothesized:

H7: 360 Video creativity will positively influence brand engagement intention (Fig. 1)

Fig. 1
figure 1

Conceptual model. devices: PC, Tablet, VR HMD. Model covariates: age, gender, involvement

Full size image

Method

Research design and participants

A mixed factorial experiment is employed where participants engage with two 360 videos (within-subjects: car and game stimuli) on one of three randomly allocated devices (between-subjects): PC, Tablet (iPad), or VR HMD (Samsung Gear VR). Mobile phones were not compared as a device due to their smaller screen dimensions limiting the field of vision for users in a manner incomparable with the other devices. 130 students from an Australian metropolitan university were recruited to participate in the study through convenience sampling. The sample is considered representative of the population as younger people engaging with digital media routinely access 360 brand videos. Attention tests were administered, requiring participants to confirm the product category and brand featured in the 360 videos. 12 who failed these attention tests or had missing data were omitted from the study, culminating in 118 participants. In total, the ‘PC’ stimuli comprised of 53 participants, the ‘Tablet’ stimuli 27 participants, and the ‘VR HMD’ stimuli 38 participants.

Stimuli

To retain ecological validity, the two 360 brand videos were sourced from industry practice as typical but distinct examples of branded 360 videos a user of social or digital media would typically encounter. Each is approximately 90 s in length, allows for user control/interactivity, can be viewed with or without VR devices, and could be hosted on brand owned media channels (i.e., websites, Youtube, social media, etc.). Two different types of 360 videos are analysed (Stathopoulou et al. 2017) that differ in the creative execution style and the likely level of immersion and affective states experienced. Jun et al. (2020) express the need to examine 360 videos designed for differing levels of arousal, and the relationship between presence and arousal specifically. In doing so, this study enhances the generalizability of results and offers greater depth and validity to conceptual findings. Participants were randomly allocated which 360 video to experience first.

The ‘Game’ 360 brand video immerses the user in an animated cartoon world based on the Clash of Clans game (not using gameplay footage). The user rides on the back of a hog through a field, before being joined by numerous other characters riding on hogs as they march into a medieval battle. In entering the battle, they are then thrust into the air before landing in a medieval stadium at the conclusion of the 360 video. Through rotating the view, the user can see small front and rear portions of the hog, but it remains in 1st-person view. Users are able to rotate their view left, right, up, and down throughout. A cinematic, climatic score progresses throughout, with noises from the animals, other humans, and the battle; however, no discernible dialogue is present, nor does any textual information appear. Overall, the video is more sensually dynamic (rapid movement, a bouncing and jolting view, many noises, bolder colours, other characters, action, etc.) and entertainment driven. The ‘Car’ 360 brand video displays an Aston Martin in a showroom by itself. The video follows a set sequence of different 360 video scenes showcasing different aspects of the car, with users able to rotate their 1st-person view left, right, up, and down throughout. Scenes include the outside of the car, driver’s side, interior, and passenger seat views of the car. No characters or dialogue appear throughout. Subtle engine sounds play spontaneously throughout, with a set of textual information regarding the car’s specification (e.g.,,,, engines, torque, etc.) displayed on top of the car at one point, illustrating the 360 video’s informational nature.

Measures and analysis

Participants evaluated their user experience with each 360 video in an online survey immediately after usage. The user’s subjective device experience is captured through assessing its ease of use, enhancement of visual and aural experiences, performance, and enjoyment. To capture the user’s experience of presence, we employed items from the temple presence inventory (TPI) scale (Lombard et al. 2011). Specifically, Spatial Presence, Social Presence, and Engagement were captured. Evaluations of 360 Video Creativity is measured using assessments of novelty, meaningfulness, and connectedness from Ang et al. (2007) ‘ad creativity cube’. Brand Engagement Intentions (BEI) items assess conducting more research into the brand, connecting with the brand, speaking more favourably of the brand to others, and sharing on social media; these are adapted from Huang et al. (2013) to reflect the typical user behaviours in response to experiencing a 360 video. Each self-report measure is captured through a 7-point Likert scale. Covariates of age and gender are captured. To factor expertise in a domain (Vettehen et al. 2019) and the impact of an individual’s motivations on information processing (Wu et al. 2022), participants involvement with each of the product categories (video games and cars) was captured as a covariate though a 4-item adaptation of O’Cass’ (2000) product involvement scale using a 7-point Likert scale.

Self-report measures of arousal have often mistaken the construct for presence, and vice versa, presenting significant validity issues (Jun et al. 2020). To address such limitations of self-report measures, affective aspects of the user experience are captured using psychophysiological measures of Pleasure (using facial electromyography or fEMG) and arousal (using electrodermal activity or EDA). This responds to Banovic and Otterbring’s (2021) and Li et al’s (2018) advocacy for measuring consumers’ affective reactions more objectively through psychophysiological tools, with Shimul (2022) arguing that laboratory methods incorporating psychophysiological analysis may better capture consumer emotions related to brands. After providing written consent, the wireless psychophysiological equipment was set up by a trained researcher following a research protocol adapted from previous studies (for a review, see Cacioppo et al. 2007). Biopac’s BioNomadix Wireless equipment and MP160 was used to collect both fEMG and EDA. For fEMG, the facial surface of the fEMG electrode location (e.g.,,,, zygomatic major) was cleaned using an alcohol wipe and lightly abraded to reduce impedance to below 10 kiloohms. After that, a pair of disposable cloth-based silver-silver chloride electrodes were placed on the zygomatic major (i.e.,, the smiling muscle). To ensure the quality of the fEMG Pleasure data, participants conducted a maximal expression test whereby they were asked to smile for a maximal joyful expression and the researchers were trained to spot the appropriate activity on the data acquisition system. For EDA, participants' palmar surface of the medial phalanxes of their index and middle fingers were cleaned before a pair of silver-chloride electrodes was attached to the area. To check the quality of the EDA data, the participants were asked to conduct a breathing task whereby they inhale and exhale deeply. The researcher was trained to identify the appropriate activity on the data acquisition system during the breathing test. The fEMG and EDA electrodes were connected to two Biopac’s BioNomadix wearable wireless transmitters that interfaced with Biopac’s MP160 that is connected to a desktop computer. All psychophysiological data was collected through AcqKnowledge software package with a sampling rate of 10,000 samples per second. For the fEMG data analysis, a trained researcher conducted a power spectral density analysis to remove any abnormal power spectral and the constant line frequency of 50 Hz. A bandpass filer at 20 Hz and at 500 Hz were also applied to the raw fEMG data. The root mean squared EMG were then computed at an average of one second epoch. For the EDA data, AcqKnoweldge was used to separate the phasic skin conductance data from the tonic skin conductance using a 0.05 Hz high pass filer and a threshold of 0.1 microsiemen at every 250 ms epoch. Due to different scales of measurement to self-report variables, affect and pleasure psycho-physiological data are standardized.

To determine if the device used to experience the 360 brand video results in differing user experiences, device experience underwent one-way ANCOVA analysis, with Age and Gender as covariates. To factor the novelty effect of experiencing immersive 360 videos with particular devices (addressed by Flavián et al. 2021; Barreda-Ángeles et al. 2021; Vettehen et al. 2019), participants indicated their device familiarity, i.e., if they had used the device to view a 360 video before (Yes/No). This was included as a covariate in ANCOVA analysis (see Table 1). Reliability assessments of internal consistency are conducted assessing Cronbach’s alpha. To address the hypotheses of the study, mediation analysis is undertaken using the Process Macro (v4) in SPSS (Model 6).

Table 1 Device Familiarity one-way ANCOVA (between-subjects effects)
Full size table

Results

Assessment of the internal consistency of each of the multi-item psychometric scales used is conducted, revealing suitable Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from 0.719 to 0.884 (see Appendix 1). One-way ANCOVA analysis of participants’ evaluations of the Device Experience is conducted to determine if the three devices used to view the 360 video differ in the user’s subjective experience. Results indicate a statistically significant difference for device experience between devices when controlling for the covariates of age, gender, and device familiarity (F = 4.029, p = 0.020; means: PC: 5.34, Tablet: 5.37, VR HMD: 5.95). Each of these covariates did not evidence a statistically significant difference on device experience (age: F = 1.621, p = 0.230; gender: F = 3.027, p = 0.085; device familiarity: F = 1.561, p = 0.214). This indicates that the user experience with the 360 videos is subjectively different between devices, justifying its use as a salient independent variable in subsequent regression analysis.

Analysis of the hypothesized relationships is undertaken (see Table 2) for both 360 video stimuli separately. Device experience is found to statistically significantly influence Presence for both the stimuli (game: β = 0.333, p < 0.001; car: β = 0.453, p < 0.001), thus supporting Hypothesis 1. Presence is not found to statistically significantly influence Arousal (game: β = − 0.155, p = 0.208; car: β = − 0.043, p < 0.687), rejecting Hypothesis 2. A statistically significant influence of Presence on Pleasure is found for the Game stimuli (β = 0.295, p < 0.05), but not for the Car (β = 0.062, p = 0.548), tentatively supporting Hypothesis 3. Presence is found to statistically significantly influence 360 Video Creativity for both the stimuli (game: β = 0.619, p < 0.001; car: β = 0.624, p < 0.001), thus supporting Hypothesis 4. Arousal is not found to statistically significantly influence Brand Engagement Intention for either stimuli (game: β = 0.184, p = 0.059; car: β = 0.150, p = 0.149), rejecting Hypothesis 5. Similarly, Pleasure is also found to not statistically significantly influence (game: β = 0.068, p = 0.490; car: β = 0.142, p = 0.192), rejecting Hypothesis 6. 360 Video Creativity is found to statistically significantly influence Brand Engagement Intention for both the stimuli (game: β = 0.835, p < 0.001; car: β = 0.790, p < 0.001), thus supporting Hypothesis 7.

Table 2 Regression analysis (PROCESS, model 6 [4 mediators, 3 covariates])
Full size table

Discussion

Quality consumer experiences drive brand engagement (Waqas et al. 2022), and using innovative technologies to engage customers through web-mediated, virtual information and experiences is increasingly important in a post-COVID-19 world (Yung et al. 2021). Users of social and digital media are increasingly encountering a myriad of 360 brand videos. Whether experiencing on their computer or tablet, or turning to a VR device to enhance immersion, various nuances of their experiences with the device and content itself remain important, yet overlooked. 360 videos represent innovative technologies that when harnessed effectively, can have powerful branding and marketing implications. Our results highlight that crucial to their power is the user’s experience with the device, the presence experienced within the 360 video, and how creatively it is perceived. In turn, these factors drive relevant brand engagements of contemporary digital marketing, particularly across social media.

Presence is an essential ingredient to suspend audiences in captivating and compelling brand communications. The salient, subjective experience of presence exists within the tug-of-war of awareness between the virtual and physical worlds (Bouvier et al. 2014). Importantly for brand managers, we demonstrate that presence is impacted by the subjective experience a user has with the device, not merely the device used. Such experiences encompass ease of use, visual and aural experiences, performance expectations, and enjoyment. Evidently, it is proposed that the user’s familiarity and expertise with the device (hardware and software) and the design of the 360 brand video must be coordinated to ensure deep immersion is achieved. Such a finding challenges the practice of treating the user experiences of devices as homogenous within particular device types (i.e., PC, tablet, VR HMD), instead arguing for strong heterogeneity, even between 360 brand videos. This is an important extension to the literature, as extant research that considers the influence of the device tends to focus on just which device was used (e.g.,,, Verhulst et al. 2021; Martínez-Navarro et al. 2019; Vettehen et al. 2019). This conceals the more valid variable, which is the user’s subjective evaluation of the experience with the device. This provides greater credence to the diversity of 360 brand video experiences one may have with a device, including potential negative aspects examined by Verhulst et al. (2021) and Rupp et al. (2019), yet often not considered in research. Burton and Schlieman (2012) note that brands must be mindful of important aspects of 360 video user experiences that apply to the device, such as difficulties in interacting with 360 videos, technological limitations, and user ignorance. This is supported by Vettehen et al. (2019) assertion of the inhibiting impact of ‘cognitive loads’ on user experiences. In broadening the salient aspects of device experiences, we invoke Wu et al. (2022) interpretation of ‘vividness’ in 360 degree VR experiences. Here, vividness represents the ability of a medium to produce high quality and high resolution information across sensory perceptions, which is found to produce more favourable attitudes towards content. We demonstrate that these device experiences help deepen the user’s sense of immersion within a 360 brand video.

Two distinct types of 360 brand videos are examined in this study to generalise results to brand managers. Both produce comparable results. The car stimuli offered less opportunity for sensory immersion, did not feature any central characters/people, and offered less user control. Unsurprisingly, the presence experienced by users within this 360 video was lower for each of the devices. Petit et al. (2019) assert that innovative marketers must employ the latest and most appropriate tools and technologies to deliver rich online experiences; we validate that the content and the device matters. Supporting the finding of Martínez-Navarro et al. (2019), we find VR HMDs to facilitate a greater experience of presence when compared to other devices such as PCs and tablets. As demonstrated, devices that allow for deeper sensory engagement and focus to the branded content, such as VR HMDs, perform better at establishing this sense of presence. However, the subjective nature of the experience with the device dictates this can be achieved in non-VR devices, just as VR HMDs may fail to engender. Considering that the web remains highly-cluttered with user, media, and brand generated content (Choi et al. 2018), more user friendly, sensory rich, and enjoyable device experiences, irrespective of the device, are necessary for brand managers to facilitate a deeper sense of presence.

Contrary to the findings of several researchers supporting affective influences for 360 videos or VR experiences (e.g.,,, Wu et al. 2022; Wu and Lai 2022; Martinez-Navarro et al. 2019; Beck and Egger 2018), in employing psycho-physiological methods (pleasure and arousal) we do not support affective influences on brand engagement intentions. Uhm et al. (2020) advocate for examining the presence and arousal relationships under higher-fidelity VR conditions and with respect to ‘real life market response’ such as behavioural intentions. Our mediation analysis did so, failing to support. This lack of support is not without precedence though. For example, emotional reactions to 360 video experiences have been found to not mediate technological embodiment (an analogue to presence) on intention to recommend a hotel (Flavián et al. 2021), whilst Marasco et al. (2018) argue that emotional involvement itself is not enough to enhance behavioural intentions. As a possible explanation, Vettehen et al. (2019) discuss ‘optimal arousal’ where a balance between psychological stimulation and capacity to deal with an input is reached, citing an inverted-U shape of polar experiences of stress and boredom. Barreda-Ángeles, et al. (2021) consider optimal arousal for information processing to be a ‘medium’ level of arousal, as high immersion messages incur greater cognitive demands. However, this study argues that the technically more complicated, interactive, and inherent sense of place and awareness within 360 brand videos present particularly high cognitive demands at the setup and commencement of a user’s experience. Such demands may be unavoidable, but should be tapered off as the experience unfolds and the user encounters more of the information and persuasive appeals of the brand/product. Our two 360 brand videos elicited quite different levels of arousal and pleasure, despite neither being influential on brand engagement intentions. This may be explained by arousal’s interaction with other aspects of the message that demand information processing and lead to cognitive overload. This overload may explain why recall and recognition of arousing messages can be weaker than calmer ones (Barreda-Ángeles, et al. 2021), suggesting other aspects of the user experience are more important.

To invoke the necessary reactions in individuals, media content must be highly creative in the digital world, preferably utilizing new technologies that facilitate greater interaction (Liu et al. 2019). Here, we demonstrate that the presence experienced within a 360 brand video is found to have a strong influence on how creatively it is perceived. This may be explained by the notion that highly immersive virtual experiences achieve greater sensory immersion where the outside world is shut out, reducing distractions away from content (Rupp et al. 2019), thus enabling a stronger focus on the creative aspects of the 360 video. Schrader and Bastiaens (2012) argue that presence raises interest, driving attention to the content over the interface. We offer that this enables users to immerse more deeply with the creative aspects of a 360 brand video—its novelty, meaningfulness, and connectedness. In doing so, greater persuasion and associative influence can be achieved for brands. Presence is found to associate with greater interest in the 360 video subject (Rupp et al. 2019), with psychological engagement (an analogue to presence) shown to foster the development of brand-related sense-making where consumers develop mental brand maps over time, stimulating brand learning (Hollebeek and Macky (2019) and drive recommendation behaviour (Flavián et al. 2021). Thus, we establish a new insight into its branding importance through the support for its mediating influence through creativity on brand engagement. This substantial mediating influence for both 360 brand videos is established in consideration of BEI items pertaining to intentions to share the 360 video on social media, research and connect with the brand, and share positive WOM. These are important brand outcomes for 360 videos, as creative advertising is found to engender brand trust and build brand relationships (Sheinin et al. 2011). Considering Wang’s (2021) argument for creating greater customer value and relationship building through social media and multiple levels of engagement behaviours, we elevate the importance of 360 brand video creativity.

Research implications

Through its investigation of the user experiences of 360 brand videos this research makes several important conceptual contributions to the brand management literature. Firstly, we reveal the importance of measuring and modelling subjective user experiences with a device, not merely nominal comparisons of which device was used. Different devices will invoke different sensory experiences, and the same device may be experienced differently by users. However, this is an area of the literature that has been overlooked, as noted by Verhulst et al. (2021). We address this by empirically demonstrating the influence of user experiences with the device through evaluations of the visual and aural experience, performance, ease of use, and enjoyment. This extends existing research by empirically evaluating a diversity of positive and negative (which is often ignored) device experiences, both within and across devices. As brands can reach customers through 360 videos experienced on basic web browsers right through to VR HMDs that offer far more immersive, demanding, and impactful experiences, modelling the nuances of those experiences is critical; particularly the potential negative aspects of the experience that largely remains concealed in existing research.

We deepen research examining user presence within the context of 360 brand videos. This is an important contribution, as 360 videos are becoming a staple of digital marketing and advertising strategies, and are widely employed to facilitate immersive experiences where a user’s sense of presence within the 360 video is crucial. We extend scholarship through empirical support that more positive device experiences deepen a user’s sense of presence within a 360 brand video. However, this presence was not found to influence emotions in the form of arousal and pleasure. In doing so, we contribute to a growing body of literature that has employed psychophysiological measures of affective states (for their rigour and precision above self-report) and not found empirical support. Contrastingly, support for the mediating influence of 360 video creativity for the presence experienced on brand engagement intentions suggests researchers may be better served focusing their attention here. This strong mediating effect is established in the 360 brand video context for the first time, and reveals a crucial aspect of the user experience that lays the conceptual foundation for subsequent empirical analysis.

Our results support that 360 brand videos will be more effective if they create a stronger sense in the user of being inside the environment, virtually surrounded, and engaging of their senses. Herein, greater presence is traded-off with less awareness of the world beyond the 360 video. This is validated across two different industry-sourced 360 brand videos. Through the game stimuli, we provide further insight into the gap identified by Song et al. (2021) pertaining to the use of animated characters, albeit with first-person perspective. By examining the experience of two industry-sourced 360 brand videos across three different devices commonly used by consumers (PC, Tablet, and VR HMD) we provide deeper insights into the superiority of VR-capable devices for brand experiences. By using media devices that are readily accessible and utilized by consumers with 360 videos we further enhance ecological validity, as proposed by Song et al. (2021).

This study provides important implications for brand managers. In considering the impact of users of novel technologies, we highlight that practitioners should strive to design 360 brand videos and limit their access to devices that are considered easy to use, enjoyable, and impactful on one’s senses. This likely encompasses limiting to newer and more technologically advanced versions of devices, and may be achieved through software version constraints/minimum standards, or design features that are only accessible by the intended devices so to invoke only the desired experiences and association transfers. As VR maturity and familiarity increases, this becomes more scalable. Doing so will maximize the presence a user experiences within a 360 brand video, enabling it to be perceived as more creative whilst driving brand engagement. Murphy et al. (2016) highlight that digital marketing strategies must accommodate the different device preferences of customers during ‘search’ and purchase. For 360 brand videos, we argue they are particularly important for contemporary customer discovery through social media platforms where customers are drawn in to engage with new brand experiences. Considering its important mediating influence, we deepen this proposition to a focus on the creativity of 360 brand videos through concept development, testing, and final execution. To ensure optimal device experiences so to elicit deeper presence, it is recommended the execution of the 360 brand video incorporates interaction constraints and flexible ‘on-boarding’ instructions, cues, and reminders (for hardware and software) into its narratives, wayfinding, and character interaction. Furthermore, employing principles of ‘responsive design’ will help ensure content adapts optimally to the user’s device. Liu et al., (2019) argue for brands to re-interpret marketing communications in the digital sphere by creatively engaging with customers more freely. Similarly, Golob et al. (2020) challenge research to understand the relevance of ‘digital creativity’ for brand engagement. Where suitable to brand objectives, 360 brand videos should encompass an unfolding or curated setting and goal, rather than a purely exploratory, open scene so to ensure 360 brand video’s ‘passive’ nature (relative to true-VR) still remains pleasurable and arousing. Furthermore, we support that 360 brand videos must ensure they are extra-ordinary and original (novelty), effectively convey the ad message with respect to benefits and value proposition (meaningfulness), and allow the audience to identify with the ad and connect it with past experiences (connectedness). In doing so, we advance the social media customer engagement research of Wang (2021), demarcating the relevant engagement outcomes a 360 brand video is likely to address. This includes intentions to share on social media, research and connect with the brand, and share positive WOM about it.

Limitations and future research directions

This research has unearthed a crucial influence of the subjective experience a user has with a device when experiencing 360 brand videos. However, future research should seek to understanding these experiences for devices with different screen size and orientation capabilities (such as mobiles), and VR capabilities. Future research should examine a broader range of 360 videos, and as knowledge matures, more concertedly evaluate specific design techniques. Whilst psychophysiological affective measures were employed, they were not discovered to be influential. Future research may seek to understand their influence at particularly strong affective experiences, as well as what may influence emotions beyond presence. We employed the TPI scale to measure the presence experienced within 360 videos. However, not all forms of presences captured through the scale are relevant to all types of 360 brand videos, particularly those without characters/actors. Thus, future research should empirically adapt this scale to this specific context. Validation of the strong empirical influence of creativity is also necessary, as is the examined components of brand engagement impacted by 360 videos.

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.