Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Trends in Food Science & Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tifs

The application of virtual reality in food consumer behavior research: A

systematic review
Chengyan Xu *, Michael Siegrist, Christina Hartmann
Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Switzerland

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Background: The development of virtual reality (VR) technology has the potential to provide enormous oppor­
Virtual reality tunities for food and consumer behavior research to further explore current research methodologies and establish
Food consumer behavior new ones. VR is different from the environment we experience in daily life. Therefore, the extent to which VR can
Sensory evaluation
be applied in food consumer behavior research needs to be assessed on the basis of the evidence provided by the
Eating behavior
Applications
studies that have employed VR.
Limitations Approach: To better understand VR technology and its potential applications and limitations in food and con­
sumer behavior research, we conducted a systematic review of the literature on VR in food and consumer
behavior research. The applications of VR addressed in the articles were extracted. The validity of VR for food
and consumer behavior research was analyzed.
Key findings: VR has been used to build complex and realistic contextual environments for conducting food
sensory evaluation research. VR was also used as a substitute (e.g., a VR buffet and supermarket) to real life
settings for investigating consumers’ purchasing behavior and food choices. Virtual food and food-related cues
were used to induce psychological and physiological responses in consumers. The results supported the validity
of VR as a tool for investigating consumers’ behavior toward food.

1. Introduction level achieved in laboratory experiments (Hartmann & Siegrist, 2019).

At the same time, experimental environments with highly realistic
Virtual reality (VR) is defined as “a computer-generated digital contextual information for point-of-sale and point-of-consumption can
environment that can be interacted with as if that environment were be conveniently designed or built in VR. Subsequently, the limitations of
real” (Jerald, 2015, p. 9). The applications of VR technology have drawn traditional test environments (e.g., field and laboratory), such as envi­
the attention not only of the entertainment industry (e.g., video games, ronmental cues that cannot be fully controlled and low ecological val­
theme parks, immersive film) but also of scientific researchers. VR has idity can be overcome (Xu, Demir-Kaymaz, Hartmann, Menozzi, &
been used in many research fields, such as data visualization, architec­ Siegrist, 2021). It allows researchers to investigate consumers’ behavior
ture, aviation simulation, and product prototyping (Jerald, 2015). in an environment that is as realistic as an RL situation in which the
Because of its potential to create realistic and engaging environments behavior naturally occurs while environmental cues can simultaneously
and experiences, it has been employed to provide safe environments for be fully controlled. VR seems to be promising and beneficial for estab­
studies that would be dangerous or unethical in real life (RL). For lishing alternative research methodologies in food and consumer
example, it has been applied in confrontation therapy to treat anxiety or behavior research, especially for research questions that would be
phobias (e.g., acrophobia or arachnophobia) by exposing people to arduous to investigate in RL––for example, the measurement of the
feared stimuli without actually placing them in the feared environments impact of environmental factors in a physical supermarket on con­
(Choi, Jang, Ku, Shin, & Kim, 2001; Muhlberger, 2003). sumers’ purchasing behavior and food choices.
VR has also been applied in the research fields of food and consumer Even though VR may provide manifold opportunities, it is still a
behavior. The advantage of using VR to observe consumer behavior is computer-generated artificial environment that is different from the
that it can provide a high level of standardization that is similar to the environments we experience in daily life. Consequently, to what extent

* Corresponding author. Postal address: SEC B8, Scheuchzerstrasse 7, 8092, Zürich, Switzerland.
E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Xu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.07.015
Received 18 December 2020; Received in revised form 26 June 2021; Accepted 9 July 2021
Available online 11 July 2021
0924-2244/© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

VR can be employed in food and consumer behavior research and compared other data, such as consumers’ emotional responses and
whether it is a valid tool for collecting consumers’ behavior data need to salivation, instead of behavioral data collected in VR and RL settings
be examined. Although some studies have provided evidence to support were also not included (Gorini, Griez, Petrova, & Riva, 2010; Gutier­
the validity of VR as a data collection tool for consumer behavior rez-Maldonado, Pla-Sanjuanelo, & Ferrer-Garcia, 2016; Ledoux,
research (Pizzi, Scarpi, Pichierri, & Vannucci, 2019; Siegrist et al., 2019; Nguyen, Bakos-Block, & Bordnick, 2013; van der Waal, Janssen,
Ung, Menozzi, Hartmann, & Siegrist, 2018; van Herpen, van den Broek, Antheunis, Culleton, & van der Laan, 2021).
van Trijp, & Yu, 2016; Waterlander, Jiang, Steenhuis, & Ni Mhurchu,
2015; Xu et al., 2021), comprehensive analyses based on systematically 2.2. VR systems and immersion
reviewed data are needed. Thus far, no systematic review papers have
focused on answering these questions. Therefore, the aim of the present Schoor and colleagues have classified VR systems into the categories
review was to systematically inspect the types of food and consumer of fully immersive, semi-immersive, and low-immersive (desktop VR)
research that VR technology has been employed in and to provide systems (Schoor et al., 2009). As indicated by their names, different VR
evidence-based information about the validity and the limitations, but systems can provide different immersion levels. Immersion is a
also the possibilities, of VR. description of the extent to which the VR system can deliver “an inclu­
This systematic review pursues the following research objectives: 1) sive, extensive, surrounding and vivid illusion of reality to the senses of a
to determine which research domains within food and consumer human participants” (Slater & Wilbur, 1997, p. 2). It is an objective
behavior research VR has been employed in, and what type of VR sys­ factor that indicates the potential of the VR system or application itself
tems were typically used in each research domain; 2) to investigate to engage participants. However, how the participants subjectively
whether VR is a valid tool for food and consumer behavior research perceived the immersion is known as presence, which means a sense of
based on the comparison between VR settings and RL settings; and 3) to “being” in the virtual environment (Jerald, 2015). Immersion and
identify the gaps that exist in the literature and to inform future presence together describe how engaging or realistic a VR experience is
experimental and applied practice in the field of food and consumer objectively and subjectively.
behavior. The results of this systematic review paper are important for The level of immersion a VR system or application can provide de­
researchers or food industries who aim to gain more knowledge of the pends on its design. According to the definition of immersion, the design
technology and use it in their future studies or in, for example, product of the VR system must be surrounding, inclusive, vivid, and extensive to
design and marketing research. provide a high level of immersion. High surroundness can be achieved
by a wide field of view, which depends on the display of the VR system.
2. Theoretical background For example, the highest field-of-view can be provided in a fully
immersive VR system (e.g., a head-mounted-display [HMD] system or a
2.1. Measuring the validity of VR cave automatic virtual environment [CAVE] system), because partici­
pants are blocked from the outside world and only experience and
Two approaches to measuring the validity or usability of VR were interact with the displayed virtual environment. In a semi-immersive VR
found in the literature. The first is the use of post-VR-experience ques­ system (e.g., video wall system), on the other hand, participants may not
tionnaires to measure consumers’ subjective ratings of the usability or be fully blocked from the real world, and most of the field-of-view is
validity of the VR system (Allman-Farinelli et al., 2019; Isgin-Atici et al., provided by hardware such as video projectors. As for the low-
2020). The most frequently employed questionnaire in the literature is immersive system (e.g., desktop VR), the virtual environment is nor­
the system usability questionnaire originally developed by Brooke mally displayed on a computer screen. Therefore, only a limited field-of-
(1996). A usability score was usually calculated based on the partici­ view can be provided (Narciso et al., 2021). The inclusiveness level can
pants’ responses. The higher the usability score, the higher the usability be affected by interactability, which is the user’s capability to interact
or validity of the VR application. The other approach, which is most with and influence the virtual environments and events, and the loco­
frequently used, is to compare consumer behavior data collected in VR motion, which is the way of moving around in the virtual environments,
settings and in RL settings (Ammann, Stucki, & Siegrist, 2020; Cheah in the VR systems (Jerald, 2015). Vividness can be influenced by the
et al., 2019, 2020; Lombart et al., 2020; Persky, Goldring, Turner, quality of the virtual content simulated: the more realistic the content,
Cohen, & Kistler, 2018; Pizzi et al., 2019; Siegrist et al., 2019; Ung et al., the higher the vividness. Extensiveness refers to the range of sensory
2018; van Herpen et al., 2016; Waterlander et al., 2015; Xu et al., 2021). modalities (e.g., visuals, audio, and haptic feedback) presented to the
Under this approach, the validity of VR can be supported if the consumer participants: the wider the range of sensory modalities provided, the
behavior data in VR are highly comparable and correlate with the data higher the extensiveness level. Fig. 1 shows a detailed graphic illustra­
collected in RL or other well-recognized experimental settings. In tion of the design of VR systems that can provide different immersion
contrast to the first approach, this approach allows consumers’ behavior levels.
data collected in different environments or settings to be objectively For ease of comprehensibility, the VR systems mentioned in this
observed and compared, and objective evidence therefore can be systematic review are represented by the displays they use. For example,
expected. a VR system with a head-mounted display (HMD), controllers to provide
In this systematic review, the studies that aimed at investigating the interaction, and physical walking for locomotion is called an HMD
comparability or similarity of consumers’ behavior in VR and RL settings system. A VR system with a computer screen/desktop as a display, a
were examined and summarized into a table (Table 2) to fulfill the keyboard and mouse for interaction, and no locomotion is called a
research objective of determining the validity of VR. Namely, studies desktop VR system. The immersion level in this systematic review refers
that employed both VR and RL settings to collect data but without the to the objective immersion (not presence).
goal of exploring their comparability were not included. For example,
some sensory evaluation studies have employed VR to provide contex­ 3. Methods
tual information and compared the results with those obtained from a
traditional sensory booth; however, their goals were to study the dif­ 3.1. Literature search
ferences created by contextual information rather than whether the two
settings were comparable (Andersen, Kraus, Ritz, & Bredie, 2019; A literature search was conducted on the Web of Science (databases
Bangcuyo et al., 2015; Hannum, Forzley, Popper, & Simons, 2019; included Core Collection, Current Contents Connect, FSTA––the food
Hathaway & Simons, 2017; Kong et al., 2020; Sinesio et al., 2019; science resource, and MEDLINE) and Scopus in April 2021. The
Torrico et al., 2020, 2021; Worch et al., 2020). Studies that have following search string was used: ((“virtual reality” OR “virtual

534
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

Fig. 1. The designs of virtual reality (VR) systems that can provide different immersion levels.

environment” OR “immersive environment”) AND ((food*) OR (con­

Table 1
sum*) OR (eat*))). Only peer-reviewed journal articles and conference
The inclusion and exclusion criteria used for article selection.
proceedings were included. The search was restricted to English lan­
guage research articles from 2005 to 2021. This date criterion was Inclusion Exclusion
chosen because VR during the 1980s and 1990s was still in the explo­ Studies that used VR (i.e., fully Studies that used other 3D (immersive)
ration phase, and its applications were mainly focused on professional immersive, semi-immersive, and systems or environments such as
research (e.g., aviation simulation, military use) and entertainment. In low-immersive VR systems) in augmented reality (AR) and video games
research related to food and
addition, VR-related research was not widely published in the first few consumer behavior toward food
years of the 21st century (Jerald, 2015). Studies related to other research topics
within consumer behavior, such as
marketing, tourism, and hotel
3.2. Selection and screening management
Studies that investigated the therapeutic,
pedagogical, and psychological
The literature search resulted in 9230 records. After the removal of applications of VR
duplicate records, the records were screened by title and abstract first. Literature review, qualitative studies (e.g.,
Two screeners performed this procedure independently. The inter-rater in-depth interviews), abstracts, prototypes
reliability between the two screeners was checked, which yield an or concepts, and gray literature
average agreement of 91%. The disagreements between the screeners
were solved by discussion. The full-text publication was reviewed if the
quantitative results (e.g., review articles or qualitative studies). This
articles met the inclusion criteria in the title and abstract screening
exclusion resulted in 137 articles whose full text was screened. Using the
process. Overall, 6970 articles were excluded because they did not meet
same criteria described for the screening of the titles and abstracts, 52
the inclusion criteria described in Table 1. Specifically, these articles
articles were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria.
were not related to food and consumer behavior, did not use VR (e.g.,
This resulted in a set of 85 articles that were included in the systematic
investigating video games instead of VR), or did not report primary

535
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

review. A PRISMA flow diagram compiling the study selection process is

shown in Fig. 2 (Page et al., 2021).

4. Results

4.1. Characteristics of the included studies

There are 85 articles included in this systematic review, with the date
of publication ranging from 2005 to April 2021. The number of included
articles is higher in later years, and most of the articles (91%) were
published from 2015 to April 2021. The summary can be found in Fig. 3.
Relatively young samples were tested in the studies. The mean age of the
Fig. 3. The number of included articles published in different years from 2005
samples in most of the articles (n = 45) was younger than 45 years old.
to April 2021. The literature search was limited to articles that were published
There was no article tested with samples older than 65 years old (mean
from 2005 to April 2021.
age), and only one study tested children (Karkar, Salahuddin,
Almaadeed, Aljaam, & Halabi, 2018). The gender distributions of the
Worch et al., 2020). An examination of the samples’ place of residence
samples were also examined. In general, samples in most of the articles
showed that most of the studies (n = 41) recruited samples in European
(n = 63) included 50% or more female participants. There were 12 ar­
countries. Among them, samples from Spain and Italy were most
ticles that only tested female participants. A few articles (n = 9) had
frequently used, followed by Switzerland and the Netherlands. Studies
samples with more male participants. Among these, two articles only
(n = 25) also often recruited samples from the USA. In addition, a few
used male participants (Alkahtani, Eisa, Kannas, & Shamlan, 2019;

Fig. 2. PRISMA flowchart of the study selection processes of the systematic review.

536
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

studies also recruited samples from New Zealand, China, Australia, and Mielby, & Wang, 2020; Torrico et al., 2020). However, the magnitude of
Japan. For detailed information about all the reviewed articles, please the impact of VR depends on the products that are examined and the
refer to Table 1 in the supplementary material. properties that are evaluated. For example, changing the evaluation
environment can alter the perception but not necessarily the accept­
4.2. Research domain and test stimuli (food) ability of a wine sample (Torrico et al., 2020).
The other studies investigated the impact of manipulating the sen­
Each of the articles included was examined for its topic and research sory characteristics of food on evaluation and perception of food. Three
domain based on its research aims, questions, and interventions. Three studies investigated the impact of VR-based color simulation of drinks (i.
main research domains were identified: 1) sensory evaluation of food e., tea, coffee, and juices) on sensory evaluation of the drinks (Ammann,
products in VR; 2) exposures and responses to virtual food or food- Stucki, & Siegrist, 2020; Huang, Huang, & Wan, 2019; Wang, Meyer,
related cues and environments; and 3) consumer behavior towards Waters, & Zendle, 2020). Ammann, Stucki, and Siegrist (2020) showed
food in VR settings. The third research domain can be further classified that participants had more difficulty identifying the flavor of a product
into the following categories: 1) shopping behavior and product when it was presented in a color that have modified from the original.
perception in VR supermarket settings; 2) food choice in VR buffet set­ Wang et al. (2020) suggested that viewing a simulated coffee color in VR
tings; and 3) other applications. Fig. 4 shows the percentage of each did influence perceived creaminess but not perceived sweetness or
research domain among all included articles. liking. Huang et al. (2019) found that the simulation of the actual color
of teas did not influence the taste ratings, but the color that participants
4.2.1. The application of VR in studying food sensory evaluation associated with the taste of the teas influenced their saltiness rating of
This research domain accounted for 24% of the included articles. the teas. A study conducted by Huang and colleagues tested the effects of
Studies in this research domain examined the applications of VR on packaging color-flavor incongruency of potato chips on the experience
providing contextual information or environments. They compared of the products and perception of the brands (Huang & Wan, 2019).
participants’ sensory evaluation of the same food stimuli in test envi­ They also explored the individual differences in the reactions to the
ronments with or without contextual information (e.g., VR contextual color–flavor incongruency (Huang, Zhao, & Wan, 2021). The re­
environment, pictures contextual environment, RL contextual environ­ searchers found that participants tend to like a food product less if the
ment, and traditional sensory booth) (Bangcuyo et al., 2015; Hannum color of its packaging is incongruent with its flavor label, although the
et al., 2019; Hathaway & Simons, 2017; Kong et al., 2020; Oliver & brand in such cases was perceived as more innovative. Sugita, Zempo,
Hollis, 2021; Pennanen, Närväinen, Vanhatalo, Raisamo, & Sozer, 2020; Mizutani, and Wakatsuki (2017) examined whether a chromatic
Picket & Dando, 2019; Sinesio et al., 2019; Stelick, Penano, Riak, & gradient color transition of a self-made fizzing candy through an HMD
Dando, 2018; (Torrico et al., 2020; Torrico et al., 2021)). Bangcuyo et al. would modify impressions and evaluations of it. They found that the
(2015) indicated that participants felt significantly more engaged and impression can be altered by changing the visual information (color)
immersed in virtual environments with contextual information than in delivered to the participants. These studies showed that manipulating
traditional sensory booths. Studies also found that different contexts characteristics of food products in VR can influence perception and
elicited different emotions associated with the evaluated food products liking of the products.
(Kong et al., 2020; Torrico et al., 2020, 2021). The results of some
studies also acknowledged that contexts did influence the evaluation of 4.2.2. The application of VR in studying food (-related) cue exposures and
some products, such as wine, coffee, and snacks (Bangcuyo et al., 2015; responses
Barbosa Escobar, Petit, & Velasco, 2021; Chen, Huang, Faber, Makran­ The studies in this research domain accounted for 28% of all
sky, & Perez-Cueto, 2020; Hathaway & Simons, 2017; Nivedhan, included articles. They mainly investigated the impact of exposure to

Fig. 4. Research domains in which virtual reality has been employed and the percentage of each research domain within all reviewed articles. VC: exposures and
responses to virtual food or food-related cues and environments; VS: shopping behavior and product perception in VR supermarket settings; SE: sensory evaluation of
food products in VR; VB: food choice in VR buffet settings.

537
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

virtual food or food-related cues and environments on participants’ Brünner, Müschenich, & Sijben, 2020; Schnack et al., 2019, Schnack,
psychological (e.g., food craving, anxiety level, depression episode) or Wright, & Holdershaw, 2020; Siegrist et al., 2019; van Herpen et al.,
physiological responses (e.g., salivation). Virtual food or food-related 2016; (Verhulst, Normand, Lombart, & Moreau, 2017; Verhulst, Nor­
cues and environments have been used as alternatives to RL cues in mand, Lombart, Sugimoto, & Moreau, 2018; Waterlander et al., 2015;
cue exposure treatment or inhibitory control training for treating eating Zhao, Huang, Spence, & Wan, 2017). Specifically, some studies
disorders (Ferrer-Garcia et al., 2014, 2017, 2013; Ferrer-García, compared participants’ food selection or purchasing behavior in an
Gutiérrez-Maldonado et al., 2017; Ferrer-García, Gutiérrez-Maldonado, immersive virtual simulated store with participants’ food selection and
Caqueo-Urízar, & Moreno, 2009; Ferrer-Garcia, Gutierrez-Maldonado, purchasing behavior in a physical store (Pizzi et al., 2019; Siegrist et al.,
Treasure, & Vilalta-Abella, 2015; Gorini et al., 2010; Gutiérrez-Maldo­ 2019; van Herpen et al., 2016; Waterlander et al., 2015) or in a desktop
nado, Ferrer-García, Caqueo-Urízar, & Moreno, 2010; Gutierrez-Mal­ supermarket, a virtual simulated store with a lower immersion level
donado et al., 2016; Gutiérrez-Maldonado, Ferrer-García, (Peukert et al., 2019; Schnack et al., 2019). Their results showed that
Caqueo-Urízar, & Letosa-Porta, 2006; Manasse, Lampe, Juarascio, Zhu, participants’ food selection and shopping behavior in the VR stores was
& Forman, 2021; Perpiñá et al., 2013; Pla-Sanjuanelo et al., 2017, 2019, comparable to those in the RL stores. Studies have examined the effect of
2015; Tuanquin, Hoermann, Petersen, & Lindeman, 2018). Participants’ the shape of food products, packaging, and labels on the food packages
food craving level, anxiety level, and depressed mood episodes were or shelf-tags (i.e., a popularity label, “all-natural” label, or
used as outcome measures to test the effectiveness of virtual cue expo­ front-of-package nutrition information label) on consumers’ perceptions
sures. These studies either compared the effectiveness of different vir­ and purchasing behavior towards the tested food items (Blitstein et al.,
tual food cues (e.g., high-calorie virtual food and low-calorie virtual 2020; Goedegebure et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2017; Lombart et al., 2019;
food) or compared the effectiveness of virtual food cues with real food (Lombart et al, 2020; Verhulst et al., 2017); Zhao et al., 2017). The
cues and picture food cues. They found that virtual food or food-related impact of embodying participants of a normal body-mass-index in an
cues and environments can successfully induce food craving, anxiety, obese or a normal virtual body on their perception and purchase
and depressed mood (Ferrer-Garcia et al., 2014, 2017, 2013; (Fer­ behavior of food products was also investigated in one study (Verhulst
rer-García, Gutiérrez-Maldonado et al., 2017, Ferrer-García et al., 2009); et al., 2018). Bigné et al. (2016) combined VR with eye-tracking and
Ferrer-Garcia, Gutierrez-Maldonado, Pla-Sanjuanelo et al., 2015; Fer­ human behavior tracking technologies to study the effect of store nav­
rer-Garcia, Gutierrez-Maldonado, Treasure, & Vilalta-Abella, 2015; igation and gaze behavior on consumers’ purchase decisions. The other
Gutierrez-Maldonado et al., 2016; Gutiérrez-Maldonado et al., 2010, two studies investigated the efficacy of nudging strategies (e.g., making
2006; Perpiñá et al., 2013; Pla-Sanjuanelo et al., 2017, 2019, 2015; healthier food alternatives more salient) on promoting healthy food
Tuanquin et al., 2018). Also, Gorini et al. (2010) found that virtual food purchases (Blom et al., 2021; Hoenink et al., 2020). Blom et al. (2021)
cues could elicit similar anxiety levels in participants as those elicited by found that the healthy food purchases increased in the nudging condi­
real food cues and higher anxiety levels than those elicited by picture tion (vs. control condition). Hoenink et al. (2020) investigated the ef­
cues. Manasse et al. (2021) suggested that participants had significnatly ficacy of combining nudging and pricing strategies on increasing healthy
fewer loss-of-control episodes after exposure to the VR cues in inhibitory food purchases. The researchers found that nudging and non-salient
control training. pricing alone did not statistically significantly increase healthy food
Some studies also aimed at testing participants’ psychological or purchases; however, combining salient pricing and nudging increased
physiological responses to virtual food or food-related cues and envi­ healthy food purchases.
ronments. However, they focused on the general population instead of
subjects with eating disorders (Alkahtani et al., 2019; Ammann, Hart­ 4.2.4. The application of VR buffets in studying food choice
mann, Peterhans, Ropelato, & Siegrist, 2020; Andersen et al., 2019; Kuo, Of the included articles, 16% belong to this research domain. Some
Lee, & Chiou, 2016; Ledoux et al., 2013; van der Waal et al., 2021; studies compared participants’ food choices in a VR buffet to partici­
Worch et al., 2020). Among these articles, four compared the partici­ pants’ food choices in an RL buffet or a fake food buffet, and found the
pants’ responses to virtual, picture, and real food or food–related cues or food choices to be highly correlated and comparable ((Cheah et al.,
environments (Andersen et al., 2019; Ledoux et al., 2013; van der Waal 2019, Cheah et al., 2020); Persky et al., 2018; Ung et al., 2018). The
et al., 2021; Worch et al., 2020). Two other studies investigated the other studies examined parents’ food choices for their child in VR buffet
influence of exposure to virtual cues on participants’ eating behavior settings (Bouhlal, McBride, Ward, & Persky, 2015; Dolwick & Persky,
afterward (Alkahtani et al., 2019; Kuo et al., 2016). Ammann and col­ 2021; Hagerman, Ferrer, Klein, & Persky, 2020; Marcum, Goldring,
leagues tested the ability of VR food-related cues to induce disgust McBride, & Persky, 2018; McBride, Persky, Wagner, Faith, & Ward,
(Ammann, Hartmann, et al., 2020). These studies showed that virtual 2013; Persky et al., 2015, 2018; Persky et al., 2020; Persky et al., 2019;
cues can successfully induce psychological responses (e.g., food craving Persky & Yaremych, 2020; Yaremych, Kistler, Trivedi, & Persky, 2019).
and disgust) (Alkahtani et al., 2019; Ammann, Hartmann, et al., 2020; Specifically, they investigated the impacts of providing information
Andersen et al., 2019; Kuo et al., 2016; Ledoux et al., 2013; van der Waal about obesity risks for their child and the way of framing the messages or
et al., 2021; Worch et al., 2020). The results also showed that virtual information on parents’ food choices for their child in a VR buffet. The
food cues, compared to non-food cues, are more comparable to real-food impacts of parents’ sociodemographic, cognitive, and attitudinal factors
cues in eliciting food craving. However, the influence of exposure to on their food choices for their child in a VR buffet were also explored.
virtual food cues on physiological responses (e.g., salivation) was not One study also linked parents’ food choices for their child in a VR buffet
significant (van der Waal et al., 2021). with their translational movement in the virtual environment (Yar­
emych et al., 2019). They found that receiving risk information
4.2.3. The application of VR supermarket in studying consumers’ shopping increased parents’ lifestyle- and genetics-guilt, and choosing fewer un­
behavior healthy foods in the VR buffets reduced both types of guilt. Parents with
Of the reviewed articles, 24% investigated consumers’ shopping higher guilt levels reported stronger intentions to improve child-feeding
behavior and product perception in VR supermarket settings (Bigné, and their own eating behavior in the future. However, guilt could only
Llinares, & Torrecilla, 2016; Blitstein, Guthrie, & Rains, 2020; Blom, predict stronger feeding intentions when parents had served their child
Gillebaart, De Boer, van der Laan, & De Ridder, 2021; Goedegebure, van relatively more unhealthy foods in the VR buffets.
Herpen, & van Trijp, 2020; Hoenink et al., 2020; Liu, Hooker, Parasidis,
& Simons, 2017; Lombart et al., 2019, 2020; Payne Riches, Aveyard, 4.2.5. Other applications
Piernas, Rayner, & Jebb, 2019; Peukert, Pfeiffer, Meißner, Pfeiffer, & There were seven articles that did not fit into any of the aforemen­
Weinhardt, 2019; Pizzi et al., 2019; Rodriguez-Raecke, Sommer, tioned research domains. Among them, four studies investigated the

538
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

usability and validity of self-developed virtual environments or VR tools, (Worch et al., 2020). Among the 14 articles included in the research
such as a VR cafeteria and a VR food court (Allman-Farinelli et al., 2019; domain that investigated the application of VR buffets, five studies
Isgin-Atici et al., 2020; Jayachandran, Chilakamarri, Coelho, & Mueller, employed HMD systems (Cheah et al., 2020; McBride et al., 2013; Persky
2017; Karkar et al., 2018). Schnack and colleagues compared the impact et al., 2018; Ung et al., 2018; Yaremych et al., 2019). The other nine
of different locomotion approaches (i.e., instant teleportation and studies did not describe in detail which VR systems were used. In the
motion-tracked walking) in a VR supermarket on participants’ shopping research domain that investigated the applications of VR supermarkets,
behavior (Schnack, Wright, & Holdershaw, 2021). They found that six studies used desktop VR systems, ten studies used HMD systems, one
participants who used the two different locomotion approaches did not study used a CAVE system (Bigné et al., 2016), and another one used a
differ in emotional states and investigated shopping outcomes. A study video wall system (Liu et al., 2017). The other two studies used both
conducted by Xu and colleagues investigated the comparability of con­ HMD systems and desktop VR systems (Lombart et al., 2020; Schnack
sumers’ healthiness perceptions of 20 breakfast cereals in a VR envi­ et al., 2019). For detailed information about what VR systems were used
ronment and in RL (Xu et al., 2021). They indicated that the data and which types of HMDs were employed in the HMD systems, please
collected in the VR and RL environments were highly comparable. Li and refer to Table 1 in the supplementary material.
Bailenson (2018) studied the impact of adding the smell and touch of
donuts to the virtual environment on participants’ satiation and eating
behavior. This study found that participants ate significantly fewer do­ 4.3. Comparison between consumers’ behavior data collected in VR and
nuts and reported higher satiation with the presence of the donut’s touch RL settings
or scent than those without exposure to these cues. However, the study
did not draw clear conclusions about the impact of exposing participants Studies that examined the comparability of consumer behavior data
to both haptic and olfactory cues. collected in VR and RL settings are summarized in Table 2. There were
five studies that compared VR simulated stores with physical stores or
4.2.6. VR systems picture simulated stores (Lombart et al., 2020; Pizzi et al., 2019; Siegrist
Each of the included articles was then examined to determine what et al., 2019; van Herpen et al., 2016; Waterlander et al., 2015). They all
type of VR systems were used. Generally, more than half of the VR found that consumers’ behavior in VR simulated stores was highly
systems were HMD systems (n = 48). Desktop VR system (n = 23) was comparable to consumers’ behavior in physical stores. Compared to
exploited less often than HMD systems but more often than video wall picture simulated stores, consumers’ behavior in VR stores was also
systems (n = 7) and CAVE systems (n = 2). A few studies did not spe­ closer to the consumers’ behavior in RL (van Herpen et al., 2016). Four
cifically describe or explain which VR system they had used for their studies compared a VR buffet to an RL buffet or a fake food buffet (Cheah
studies (n = 10). Some articles used more than one VR systems; there­ et al., 2019)(Cheah et al., 2020); Persky et al., 2018; Ung et al., 2018).
fore, the totally number of VR systems (n = 90) was higher than the These studies suggested that consumers’ food choices in a VR buffet and
number of articles included (n = 85). The summarized results are shown an RL buffet, or in a VR buffet and a fake food buffet, were highly
in Fig. 5. correlated in the amount of kilocalories, grams, carbohydrates and
In the research domain that investigated sensory evaluation of food protein they contained. They also found that participants showed similar
in VR, 15 studies employed HMD systems. One study applied a CAVE brain activity when making food choices in an RL buffet and a VR buffet
system (Pennanen et al., 2020), and video wall systems were applied in (Cheah et al., 2019). The other two studies compared consumers’
four studies (Bangcuyo et al., 2015; Hannum et al., 2019; Hathaway & perception of the healthiness of breakfast cereals or consumers’ sensory
Simons, 2017; Sinesio et al., 2019). The studies conducted by Hathaway evaluation of juices and lemon cakes in a VR environment and an RL
and Simons (2017) used both a video wall system and a desktop VR environment (Ammann, Stucki, & Siegrist, 2020; Xu et al., 2021). They
system. In the research domain that investigated virtual food or both found that consumers behavior data collected in VR environments
food–related cue exposures and responses, thirteen studies employed and in RL environments were not statistically significantly different, and
desktop VR systems, eight studies applied HMD systems, and one study consumers’ behavior was highly comparable in the two environments.
did not explain which VR system was used. There were two studies Some differences between the data collected in the VR and RL set­
employing both an HMD system and a desktop VR system (Gutierrez-­ tings were also found. Studies found that participants spent more time in
Maldonado et al., 2016) or an HMD system and a video wall system VR environments compared to in RL environments (Pizzi et al., 2019;
Siegrist et al., 2019; Xu et al., 2021). One study also indicated that

Fig. 5. The virtual reality (VR) systems used in the included studies. HMD: Head-Mounted-Display; CAVE: Cave Automatic Virtual Environment.

539
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

Table 2 Table 2 (continued )

Summary of the articles that compared consumer behavior data collected in Authors, year Research Comparison: Main findings
virtual reality (VR) and in real life (RL) settings. domain different
Authors, year Research Comparison: Main findings experiment
domain different settings
experiment The kJs of the foods chosen
settings in the VR and RL buffets
Ammann, Sensory VR & RL 1) It was harder for were highly correlated.
Stucki, and evaluation environments participants to identify the van Herpen VR VR & picture & Consumers’ behavior in the
Siegrist flavor when the products et al. (2016) supermarket RL stores VR store (vs. picture
(2020) were shown in modified condition) is more similar
color (vs. original color); 2) to their behavior in the RL
No significant difference store regarding the number
between the results of products selected,
obtained in VR and RL amount of money spent,
environments were found. and the selection of
Cheah et al. VR buffet VR & RL buffets 1) The total number of products from different
(2019) calories selected in the VR areas of the shelf.
and RL buffets were highly Waterlander VR VR & RL stores 1) There was no trend of
correlated; 2) When et al. (2015) supermarket over-spending in VR; 2) The
participants chose high- (vs. average presence score was
low-) density food in both medium-to-high; 3)
VR and RL, the left inferior Shopping patterns in the
frontal gyrus showed virtual supermarket were
significant differential comparable to those in RL.
activation. Xu et al. (2021) Other VR & RL 1) The perceived
Cheah et al. VR buffet VR & RL buffets 1) Participants’ food environments healthiness of cereals in VR
(2020) selections in the VR and RL and RL were highly
buffets were significantly correlated; 2) The time
and positively correlated in spent for the task in VR was
kilocalories, grams, significantly higher (vs.
carbohydrates, and protein; RL); 3) There was no
2) The participants statistically significant
perceived the VR buffet as difference between
natural, and their selection information–seeking
represented their food behavior in VR and RL; 4)
selection on an average day. Participants used similar
Lombart et al. VR VR & RL stores 1) Consumers’ perceptions attributes to evaluate the
(2020) supermarket of fruits and vegetables in healthiness of the cereals.
both fully and low-
immersive VR stores are
like those in an RL store; 2) consumers bought more food products in VR simulated stores (vs. the RL
Consumers buy more fruits store), and they relied on extrinsic cues (i.e., prices) in the VR simulated
and vegetables in both low stores rather than on the intrinsic cues (i.e., appearance) of food prod­
and fully immersive VR
stores (vs. a RL store); 3)
ucts they used in the physical store (Lombart et al., 2020). However, this
Consumers rely more on result was only tested with fruits and vegetables.
extrinsic cues (e.g., price)
than intrinsic cues (e.g., 5. Discussion
appearance) to evaluate
food in the fully immersive
VR store. The present study systematically reviewed the existing literature on
Persky et al. VR buffet VR & RL buffets Parents’ serving amounts the application of VR technology in food and consumer behavior
(2018) and food choices are highly research with the aim of understanding and exploring the validity of VR
correlated between VR and
and the limitations and possibilities of applying VR technology in this
real buffets.
Pizzi et al. VR VR & RL stores 1) Consumers reported high research field. The literature search and screening resulted in 85 articles
(2019) supermarket levels of perceived realism that were included in the final data extraction, syntheses, and analyses.
and presence level in the VR Subsequently, the three main research objectives were achieved. To
store; 2) Behaviors in the facilitate reading, the following discussion is divided into subsections
VR-based and physical
stores were comparable.
according to the research domains. A subsection that proposes gaps and
Siegrist et al. VR VR & RL stores 1) Participants’ choice of future studies is presented last.
(2019) supermarket cereals and the packages
they focused on did not
significantly differ under 5.1. VR and food sensory evaluation research
VR and RL conditions; 2)
Participants checked Based on the results of this systematic review, the application of VR
nutrition information more in food sensory evaluation mainly focused on: 1) exploiting VR to pro­
when had to select a healthy
(vs. taste good) cereal in
vide contextual information or environments for food sensory evalua­
both VR and physical stores; tion; and 2) studying the impact of the simulation of the color of food on
3) Participants spent more perception and evaluation. One advantage of using VR in food sensory
time in front of a VR shelf evaluation research is that highly realistic contextual information can be
(vs. a real shelf).
designed and delivered in fully controlled and highly standardized
Ung et al. VR buffet VR & fake food
(2018) buffets laboratory settings. In VR contextual environments, participants feel like
they are drinking a beer or coffee in a bar or a coffee house, for example,
rather than doing a scientific experiment. Meanwhile, environmental

540
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

factors that might influence the study results in RL can be controlled. markets.
Some disadvantages of traditional sensory booths (e.g., that the tasting In addition, VR can be combined with other technologies, such as
environment is different from a real consumption context) can be eye-tracking, body movement tracking, and neurophysiological
reduced. response measurement (Bigné et al., 2016; Cheah et al., 2019; Huang
The studies also indicated that the color of food or food packages can et al., 2021; Siegrist et al., 2019; Yaremych et al., 2019). Together with
be successfully simulated in VR to affect the perception and evaluation other technologies, VR can help researchers gain a deeper knowledge of
of food products and brands (Ammann, Stucki, & Siegrist, 2020; Huang the mechanisms behind consumers’ behavior and ultimately help con­
et al., 2019; Huang et al., 2021; Huang & Wan, 2019; Sugita et al., 2017; sumers make better and healthier food choices. VR provides an envi­
Wang et al., 2020). This implication is particularly relevant for the ronment that can easily implement technologies such as eye-tracking.
development and marketing of new food products and brands. Virtual Compared to eye-tracking in RL, VR provides the opportunity to observe
prototypes can be pre-examined and adjusted before real products are and calculate participants’ gaze behavior in a 3D space during the ses­
produced, saving time and costs. This result also offers significant po­ sion; attentional data such as the area of interest can be easier defined
tential for innovative experimental designs in food consumer behavior and tracked in VR as well (Clay, Koenig, & Koenig, 2019). The conve­
research. The application of VR broadens the range of possible research nience of implementing these technologies in VR also broadens the
topics, from only investigating products or scenarios that already exist in potential applications of VR in food consumer behavior research.
RL to testing those that may not exist in RL but can be specifically However, using VR for food consumer behavior research also has
designed for a research question. However, the reviewed studies only some limitations. First, virtual environments may lack some of the
investigated one sensory characteristic (i.e., color). Future studies can characteristics of real food choices or consumption environments, such
focus on exploring other visual characteristics, such as shape and size. as the touch, weight, or smell of foods and the presence of other people
For the simulation of other sensory characteristics of food, such as taste (Allman-Farinelli et al., 2019; Kuo et al., 2016; Lombart et al., 2019;
and texture, VR might not be the appropriate tool to use. Other tech­ Marcum et al., 2018; Persky et al., 2018). Therefore, the influence of
nologies, such as augmenting flavor with electric sensors, can be used to these factors on consumers’ food choices and consumption might not be
simulate the taste of the food (Ranasinghe, Jain, Karwita, & Do, 2017). It considered or investigated in most studies. Therefore, VR might not be
would be interesting for future studies to explore the potential of the best tool to investigate consumer’s actual patterns of food con­
combining VR and those technologies and applying them to sensory sumption in RL. Second, the nature of VR implies that compared to the
evaluation research. real world, participants may need more time to get familiar with the
Highly immersive VR systems were mainly used in this research virtual environment before starting the experiment so that they will
domain. Even though the HMD system was the most frequently focus on the task itself instead of on exploring the novel and unfamiliar
employed, this might not be the best VR system for sensory evaluation environments (Pizzi et al., 2019; Siegrist et al., 2019; Xu et al., 2021).
studies. Because of the characteristics of HMD systems, participants Especially with VR systems that have low immersion levels, the expe­
were blinded to the food samples presented in RL. This situation could rience might be less natural and further away from an RL experience.
cause difficulties in tasting and evaluating the samples (Huang et al., Nevertheless, the validity of VR tools for food consumer behavior
2019). The video wall system may be a better choice for sensory eval­ research was supported by the result that consumer behavior data
uation studies because participants can be immersed in contextual en­ collected in VR settings (e.g., VR supermarkets or VR buffets) were
vironments without being totally blinded to the food samples presented highly correlated and comparable to the data collected in RL settings (e.
in the real world. However, HMD systems can be beneficial if partici­ g., physical stores or RL buffets) (Ammann, Stucki, & Siegrist, 2020;
pants can interact with the sample without actually seeing it. For Cheah et al., 2020, 2019; Lombart et al., 2020; Persky et al., 2018; Pizzi
example, trackers could be used to map the position of the real food et al., 2019; Schnack et al., 2019; Siegrist et al., 2019; Ung et al., 2018;
sample in RL to the position of its 3D model in VR. In this way, partic­ van Herpen et al., 2016; Waterlander et al., 2015; Xu et al., 2021). The
ipants could interact with the real food sample by interacting with the validity was further supported by the evidence showing that similar
3D model (Nivedhan et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020). brain activities of participants were found when they were making food
choices in a RL and a VR buffet (Cheah et al., 2019). Therefore, despite
5.2. VR and food consumer behavior research the potential limitations of VR, it is clear that VR has significant po­
tential to provide effective and innovative methods and study designs for
Of the 85 reviewed articles, 34 investigated the applications of VR to food consumer behavior research.
the observation of consumers’ shopping behavior and food choices in
environments with contextual information of point-of-sale (i.e., store or 5.3. VR and food cue exposure and responses
supermarket) and point-of-consumption (i.e., buffet). As innovative al­
ternatives to physical supermarkets and RL buffets, VR supermarkets Virtual food or food-related cues have been used to study food–cue
and VR buffets are preferred, especially when examining those variables exposure and response in the general population and in patients with
that cannot be easily manipulated or controlled in traditional test en­ eating disorders. The reviewed studies demonstrated that virtual food or
vironments, such as food shape, packaging, colors, and labels, as well as food-related cues can successfully induce eating-behavior-related
environmental factors (Bigné et al., 2016; Blitstein et al., 2020; Goede­ emotional reactions in consumers (Ammann, Hartmann, et al., 2020;
gebure et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2017; Lombart et al., 2019, Lombart et al., Ferrer-Garcia, Gutierrez-Maldonado, & Pla, 2013; Ferrer-García,
2020; Verhulst et al., 2017, Verhulst et al., 2018; Zhao et al., 2017). Gutiérrez-Maldonado et al., 2017; Ferrer-Garcia, Gutierrez-Maldonado,
Another advantage of using VR in food consumer behavior studies is that Treasure, & Vilalta-Abella, 2015; Gorini et al., 2010; Gutierrez-Maldo­
methods such as nudging and pricing can be more time- and nado et al., 2016; Gutiérrez-Maldonado et al., 2006; Kuo et al., 2016;
cost-efficiently implemented in VR supermarkets and VR buffets than in Ledoux et al., 2013; Pla-Sanjuanelo et al., 2019; Tuanquin et al., 2018).
RL settings (Blom et al., 2021; Hoenink et al., 2020). Meanwhile, virtual However, studies yielded inconsistent results about the extent to which
environments are computer generated; thus, the same experimental VR cues are more effective than picture cues, which were commonly
environments can be ensured as long as the same VR system and hard­ applied or recognized in studies that investigated food cue exposures
ware are provided. Therefore, the same experiment can be conducted in and responses (Gorini et al., 2010; Ledoux et al., 2013; van der Waal
different places with participants from varied cultural or ethnic back­ et al., 2021). The possibility that picture cues are sufficiently effective
grounds. This might be advantageous, for example, for multinational may raise the question of why we need more expensive VR systems when
companies. Food development and marketing strategies can be formu­ pictures are as effective. Even though the effectiveness of virtual cues
lated according to the specific preferences of consumers in specific (vs. pictures) is still up for discussion, VR may be preferable to pictures

541
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

cues because it has greater potential to provide food-related contextual food–related cues or environments. Evidence suggests that VR is a valid
information. At the same time, compared to real food cues, VR has the tool for research that investigates consumer behavior towards food. VR
advantage of ensuring that the participants will be exposed to exactly supermarkets and VR buffets can be used as innovative alternatives to
the same food cues even at different times and locations. However, RL tools. VR food cues can also successfully induce food–related
additional studies need to be conducted to explore whether VR cues are emotional responses. However, more evidence might be needed to better
better than pictures and real food cues to provide suggestions for which understand whether VR food cues can always provide better results than
cues to use in food–cue exposure and response studies. picture cues. On the basis of the results of this paper, the authors
recommend that future studies should be conducted with a broader set
5.4. Existing gaps in the literature and future studies of food categories. Additional studies that investigate the comparability
of consumers’ behavior in VR and RL would be welcome. Future studies
This paper systematically reviewed the articles that employed VR in can also focus on investigating the impact of providing more sensory
food and consumer behavior research. The results indicate some gaps or modalities than merely visuals on the results of food and consumer
limitations in the literature. First, most of the reviewed studies were behavior studies.
conducted in the US and Europe. Children, males, and older populations
were under represented in the reviewed studies. Therefore, additional Funding sources
studies can be conducted in more varied cultural and ethnic environ­
ments with more focus on these populations. Second, limited food cat­ This research did not receive any grants from funding agencies in the
egories were tested in the reviewed studies. Future studies should aim at public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
exploring a broader set of food categories, especially with the food
products that are unpackaged and whose consumption is less context- Declaration of interest
dependent, such as fruit, vegetables, bakery bread, dried fruits, nuts,
and fresh meat and meat products. Third, only a limited number of None.
studies have contributed to the investigation of the validity of VR.
Although the results of these studies have justified the validity of VR as a Author statement
tool for collecting consumer behavior data, additional studies that aim at
investigating the comparability of the behavior data collected in VR and Chengyan Xu: methodology, investigation, data curation, formal
RL settings will further support the conclusion. analysis, writing-original draft. Michael Siegrist: methodology, writing-
Furthermore, most of the VR systems or applications applied in the review & editing, validation, supervision. Christina Hartmann: concep­
reviewed studies only provided one sensory modality (i.e., visual) to tualization, methodology, writing-review & editing, validation,
consumers; some sensory modalities (e.g., olfactory, haptic, and audi­ supervision.
tory modalities) from a food consumption or selection environment in
RL were missing. Future studies could investigate whether adding these Appendix A. Supplementary data
sensory modalities to VR environments would influence consumer
behavior. In particular, studies could focus on understanding what level Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
of sensory modalities would be sufficient for consumers to feel immersed org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.07.015.
and present in the VR environment and behave similarly to the way they
behave in RL food consumption or selection environments. Studies could References
also investigate the impact of different ways of interaction and loco­
motion in VR systems on the results of food and consumer behavior Alkahtani, S., Eisa, A., Kannas, J., & Shamlan, G. (2019). Effect of acute high-intensity
interval cycling while viewing a virtual natural scene on mood and eating behavior
studies. Meanwhile, more studies are needed to help understand the in men: A randomized pilot trial. Clinical Nutrition Experimental, 28, 92–101. https://
impact of the immersion level of VR systems on consumer behavior doi.org/10.1016/j.yclnex.2019.10.003
because inconsistent results on this topic have been found in the liter­ Allman-Farinelli, M., Ijaz, K., Tran, H., Pallotta, H., Ramos, S., Liu, J., et al. (2019).
A virtual reality food court to study meal choices in youth: Design and assessment of
ature (Lombart et al., 2020; Peukert et al., 2019; Schnack et al., 2019). usability. JMIR Formative Research, 3(1), e12456. https://doi.org/10.2196/12456
Finally, studies in sensory evaluation have provided support for the Ammann, J., Hartmann, C., Peterhans, V., Ropelato, S., & Siegrist, M. (2020). The
ability of applying VR to simulate the color of foods (Ammann, Stucki, & relationship between disgust sensitivity and behaviour: A virtual reality study on
food disgust. Food Quality and Preference, 80(103833). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Siegrist, 2020; Huang et al., 2019; Huang et al., 2021; Huang & Wan, foodqual.2019.103833
2019; Sugita et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2020). Given the significant re­ Ammann, J., Stucki, M., & Siegrist, M. (2020). True colours: Advantages and challenges
sults from food sensory evaluation studies, it would also be interesting to of virtual reality in a sensory science experiment on the influence of colour on
flavour identification. Food Quality and Preference, 86(103998). https://doi.org/
investigate the impacts of the simulation of foods’ visual characteristics 10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.103998
(e.g., color, shape, and size) on food choice and shopping behavior. Andersen, I. N. S. K., Kraus, A. A., Ritz, C., & Bredie, W. L. P. (2019). Desires for
Future studies should also explore and use the full potential of beverages and liking of skin care product odors in imaginative and immersive virtual
reality beach contexts. Food Research International, 117, 10–18. https://doi.org/
combining a VR system with eye-tracking and other systems to investi­
10.1016/j.foodres.2018.01.027
gate the link between neurophysiological or attentional activities and Bangcuyo, R. G., Smith, K. J., Zumach, J. L., Pierce, A. M., Guttman, G. A., &
consumer behavior. Simons, C. T. (2015). The use of immersive technologies to improve consumer
testing: The role of ecological validity, context and engagement in evaluating coffee.
Food Quality and Preference, 41, 84–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
6. Conclusion foodqual.2014.11.017
Barbosa Escobar, F., Petit, O., & Velasco, C. (2021). Virtual terroir and the premium
The present systematic review summarizes the recent scientific evi­ coffee experience. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2021.586983
dence regarding the applications of VR in food and consumer behavior Bigné, E., Llinares, C., & Torrecilla, C. (2016). Elapsed time on first buying triggers brand
research to explore the validity of VR and the possibilities and limita­ choices within a category: A virtual reality-based study. Journal of Business Research,
tions of using VR technology in this research field. The results indicate 69(4), 1423–1427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.119
Blitstein, J. L., Guthrie, J. F., & Rains, C. (2020). Low-income parents’ use of front-of-
that VR has been widely used in food and consumer behavior research. It package nutrition labels in a virtual supermarket. Journal of Nutrition Education and
has been employed in research domains that investigated sensory Behavior, 52(9), 850–858. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2020.04.003
evaluation of food in VR contextual environments, food choice in VR Blom, S. S. A. H., Gillebaart, M., De Boer, F., van der Laan, N., & De Ridder, D. T. D.
(2021). Under pressure: Nudging increases healthy food choice in a virtual reality
buffets, shopping behavior and product perception in virtual simulated
stores, and emotional and physical responses to virtual food or

542
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

supermarket, irrespective of system 1 reasoning. Appetite, 160(105116). https://doi. Hathaway, D., & Simons, C. T. (2017). The impact of multiple immersion levels on data
org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105116 quality and panelist engagement for the evaluation of cookies under a preparation-
Bouhlal, S., McBride, C. M., Ward, D. S., & Persky, S. (2015). Drivers of overweight based scenario. Food Quality and Preference, 57, 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
mothers’ food choice behaviors depend on child gender. Appetite, 84, 154–160. foodqual.2016.12.009
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.09.024 van Herpen, E., van den Broek, E., van Trijp, H. C. M., & Yu, T. (2016). Can a virtual
Brooke, J. (1996). SUS -A quick and dirty usability scale Usability and context. Usability supermarket bring realism into the lab? Comparing shopping behavior using virtual
Evaluation in Industry, 189(194). and pictorial store representations to behavior in a physical store. Appetite, 107,
Cheah, C. S. L., Barman, S., Vu, K. T. T., Jung, S. E., Mandalapu, V., Masterson, T. D., 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.07.033
et al. (2020). Validation of a Virtual Reality Buffet environment to assess food Hoenink, J. C., Mackenbach, J. D., Waterlander, W., Lakerveld, J., van der Laan, N., &
selection processes among emerging adults. Appetite, 153(104741). https://doi.org/ Beulens, J. W. J. (2020). The effects of nudging and pricing on healthy food
10.1016/j.appet.2020.104741 purchasing behavior in a virtual supermarket setting: A randomized experiment.
Cheah, C. S. L., Kaputsos, S. P., Mandalapu, V., Tran, T., Barman, S., Jung, S. E., et al. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 17(1), 98. https://
(2019). Neurophysiological variations in food decision-making within virtual and doi.org/10.1186/s12966-020-01005-7
real environments. 2019 IEEE EMBS International Conference on Biomedical & Health Huang, F., Huang, J., & Wan, X. (2019). Influence of virtual color on taste: Multisensory
Informatics (BHI), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/BHI.2019.8834497 integration between virtual and real worlds. Computers in Human Behavior, 95,
Chen, Y., Huang, A. X., Faber, I., Makransky, G., & Perez-Cueto, F. J. A. (2020). Assessing 168–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.027
the influence of visual-taste congruency on perceived sweetness and product liking Huang, J., & Wan, X. (2019). The color–flavor incongruency effect in product evaluation
in immersive VR. Foods, 9(4), 465. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9040465 and brand perception. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 18(6), 484–495. https://doi.
Choi, Y. H., Jang, D. P., Ku, J. H., Shin, M. B., & Kim, S. I. (2001). Short-term treatment of org/10.1002/cb.1787
acrophobia with virtual reality therapy (vrt): A case report. CyberPsychology and Huang, J., Zhao, P., & Wan, X. (2021). From brain variations to individual differences in
Behavior, 4(3), 349–354. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493101300210240 the color–flavor incongruency effect: A combined virtual reality and resting-state
Clay, V., Koenig, P., & Koenig, S. (2019). Eye Tracking in Virtual Reality. Journal of Eye fMRI study. Journal of Business Research, 123, 604–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Movement Research, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.12.1.3. jbusres.2020.10.031
Dolwick, A. P., & Persky, S. (2021). Parental reward-based eating drive predicts parents’ Isgin-Atici, K., Ozkan, A., Celikcan, U., Ede, G., Aslan, C., Bulbul, A. S., et al. (2020).
feeding behaviors and Children’s ultra-processed food intake. Appetite, 164(105241). Usability study of a novel tool: The virtual cafeteria in nutrition education. Journal of
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105241 Nutrition Education and Behavior, 52(11), 1058–1065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Ferrer-Garcia, M., Gutierrez-Maldonado, J., Agliaro-Lopez, M., Lobera-Espi, X., Pla, J., & jneb.2020.08.001
Vilalta-Abella, F. (2014). Validation of VR-based software for binge eating Jayachandran, K., Chilakamarri, S., Coelho, D., & Mueller, K. (2017). A virtual reality
treatment: Preliminary data. Annual Review of Cybertherapy and Telemedicine 2014: grocery shopping game to improve awareness for healthy foods in young adults.
Positive Change: Connecting the Virtual and the Real, 199, 146–150. https://doi.org/ 2017 13th International Conference and Expo on Emerging Technologies for a
10.3233/978-1-61499-401-5-146 Smarter World (CEWIT), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEWIT.2017.8263138.
Ferrer-García, M., Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J., Caqueo-Urízar, A., & Moreno, E. (2009). The Jerald, J. (2015). The VR book: Human-centered design for virtual reality. Association for
validity of virtual environments for eliciting emotional responses in patients with Computing Machinery and Morgan & Claypool. https://doi.org/10.1145/2792790.
eating disorders and in controls. Behavior Modification, 33(6), 830–854. https://doi. Karkar, A., Salahuddin, T., Almaadeed, N., Aljaam, J. M., & Halabi, O. (2018). A virtual
org/10.1177/0145445509348056 reality nutrition awareness learning system for children. 2018 IEEE Conference on E-
Ferrer-Garcia, M., Gutierrez-Maldonado, J., & Pla, J. (2013). Cue-elicited anxiety and Learning, e-Management and e-Services (IC3e), 97–102. https://doi.org/10.1109/
craving for food using virtual reality scenarios. Annual Review of Cybertherapy and IC3e.2018.8632634
Telemedicine 2013: Positive Technology and Health Engagement for Healthy Living and Kong, Y., Sharma, C., Kanala, M., Thakur, M., Li, L., Xu, D., et al. (2020). Virtual reality
Active Ageing, 191, 105–109. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-282-0-105 and immersive environments on sensory perception of chocolate products: A
Ferrer-Garcia, M., Gutierrez-Maldonado, J., Pla-Sanjuanelo, J., Vilalta-Abella, F., preliminary study. Foods, 9(4), 515. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9040515
Andreu-Gracia, A., Dakanalis, A., et al. (2015). External eating as a predictor of cue- Kuo, H.-C., Lee, C.-C., & Chiou, W.-B. (2016). The power of the virtual ideal self in weight
reactivity to food-related virtual environments. Annual Review of Cybertherapy and control: Weight-reduced avatars can enhance the tendency to delay gratification and
Telemedicine 2015: Virtual Reality in Healthcare: Medical Simulation and Experiential regulate dietary practices. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(2),
Interface, 219, 117–122. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-595-1-117 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0203
Ferrer-García, M., Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J., Pla-Sanjuanelo, J., Vilalta-Abella, F., Ledoux, T., Nguyen, A. S., Bakos-Block, C., & Bordnick, P. (2013). Using virtual reality to
Riva, G., Clerici, M., et al. (2017). A randomised controlled comparison of second- study food cravings. Appetite, 71, 396–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
level treatment approaches for treatment-resistant adults with bulimia nervosa and appet.2013.09.006
binge eating disorder: Assessing the benefits of virtual reality cue exposure therapy. Li, B. J., & Bailenson, J. N. (2018). Exploring the influence of haptic and olfactory cues of
European Eating Disorders Review, 25(6), 479–490. https://doi.org/10.1002/erv.2538 a virtual donut on satiation and eating behavior. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual
Ferrer-Garcia, M., Gutierrez-Maldonado, J., Treasure, J., & Vilalta-Abella, F. (2015). Environments, 26(3), 337–354. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres_a_00300
Craving for food in virtual reality scenarios in non-clinical sample: Analysis of its Liu, R., Hooker, N. H., Parasidis, E., & Simons, C. T. (2017). A natural experiment: Using
relationship with body mass index and eating disorder symptoms. European Eating immersive technologies to study the impact of “all-natural” labeling on perceived
Disorders Review, 23(5), 371–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/erv.2375 food quality, nutritional content, and liking. Journal of Food Science, 82(3), 825–833.
Ferrer-Garcia, M., Pla-Sanjuanelo, J., Dakanalis, A., Vilalta-Abella, F., Riva, G., https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.13639
Fernandez-Aranda, F., et al. (2017). Eating behavior style predicts craving and Lombart, C., Millan, E., Normand, J.-M., Verhulst, A., Labbé-Pinlon, B., & Moreau, G.
anxiety experienced in food-related virtual environments by patients with eating (2019). Consumer perceptions and purchase behavior toward imperfect fruits and
disorders and healthy controls. Appetite, 117, 284–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. vegetables in an immersive virtual reality grocery store. Journal of Retailing and
appet.2017.07.007 Consumer Services, 48, 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.010
Goedegebure, R. P. G., van Herpen, E., & van Trijp, H. C. M. (2020). Using product Lombart, C., Millan, E., Normand, J.-M., Verhulst, A., Labbé-Pinlon, B., & Moreau, G.
popularity to stimulate choice for light products in supermarkets: An examination in (2020). Effects of physical, non-immersive virtual, and immersive virtual store
virtual reality. Food Quality and Preference, 79(103786). https://doi.org/10.1016/j. environments on consumers’ perceptions and purchase behavior. Computers in
foodqual.2019.103786 Human Behavior, 110(106374). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106374
Gorini, A., Griez, E., Petrova, A., & Riva, G. (2010). Assessment of the emotional Manasse, S. M., Lampe, E. W., Juarascio, A. S., Zhu, J., & Forman, E. M. (2021). Using
responses produced by exposure to real food, virtual food and photographs of food in virtual reality to train inhibitory control and reduce binge eating: A proof-of-concept
patients affected by eating disorders. Annals of General Psychiatry, 9(1), 30. https:// study. Appetite, 157(104988). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.104988
doi.org/10.1186/1744-859X-9-30 Marcum, C. S., Goldring, M. R., McBride, C. M., & Persky, S. (2018). Modeling dynamic
Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J., Ferrer-García, M., Caqueo-Urízar, A., & Letosa-Porta, A. (2006). food choice processes to understand dietary intervention effects. Annals of Behavioral
Assessment of emotional reactivity produced by exposure to virtual environments in Medicine, 52(3), 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kax041
patients with eating disorders. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 9(5), 507–513. https:// McBride, C. M., Persky, S., Wagner, L. K., Faith, M. S., & Ward, D. S. (2013). Effects of
doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.507 providing personalized feedback of child’s obesity risk on mothers’ food choices
Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J., Ferrer-García, M., Caqueo-Urízar, A., & Moreno, E. (2010). using a virtual reality buffet. International Journal of Obesity, 37(10), 1322–1327.
Body image in eating disorders: The influence of exposure to virtual-reality https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2013.87
environments. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(5), 521–531. Muhlberger, A. (2003). Efficacy of a one-session virtual reality exposure treatment for
https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0301 fear of flying. Psychotherapy Research, 13(3), 323–336. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptr/
Gutierrez-Maldonado, J., Pla-Sanjuanelo, J., & Ferrer-Garcia, M. (2016). Cue-exposure kpg030
software for the treatment of bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder. Psicothema, Narciso, D., Melo, M., Rodrigues, S., Paulo Cunha, J., Vasconcelos-Raposo, J., & Bessa, M.
28(4), 363–369. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2014.274 (2021). A systematic review on the use of immersive virtual reality to train
Hagerman, C. J., Ferrer, R. A., Klein, W. M. P., & Persky, S. (2020). Association of professionals. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 80(9), 13195–13214. https://doi.
parental guilt with harmful versus healthful eating and feeding from a virtual reality org/10.1007/s11042-020-10454-y
buffet. Health Psychology, 39(3), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000831 Nivedhan, A., Mielby, L. A., & Wang, Q. J. (2020). The influence of emotion-oriented
Hannum, M., Forzley, S., Popper, R., & Simons, C. T. (2019). Does environment matter? extrinsic visual and auditory cues on coffee perception: A virtual reality experiment.
Assessments of wine in traditional booths compared to an immersive and actual wine Companion Publication of the 2020 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction,
bar. Food Quality and Preference, 76, 100–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 301–306. https://doi.org/10.1145/3395035.3425646
foodqual.2019.04.007 Oliver, J. H., & Hollis, J. H. (2021). Virtual reality as a tool to study the influence of the
Hartmann, C., & Siegrist, M. (2019). Virtual reality and immersive approaches to eating environment on eating behavior: A feasibility study. Foods, 10(1), 89. https://
contextual food testing. Context (pp. 323–338). Woodhead Publishing. doi.org/10.3390/foods10010089

543
C. Xu et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 116 (2021) 533–544

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Schnack, A., Wright, M. J., & Holdershaw, J. L. (2021). Does the locomotion technique
et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting matter in an immersive virtual store environment? – comparing motion-tracked
systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 walking and instant teleportation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 58
Payne Riches, S., Aveyard, P., Piernas, C., Rayner, M., & Jebb, S. A. (2019). Optimising (102266). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102266
swaps to reduce the salt content of food purchases in a virtual online supermarket: A Schoor, W., Bollenbeck, F., Seidl, T., Weier, D., Weschke, W., Preim, B., et al. (2009). VR
randomised controlled trial. Appetite, 133, 378–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. based visualization and exploration of plant biological data. Journal of Virtual Reality
appet.2018.11.028 and Broadcasting, 6(8).
Pennanen, K., Närväinen, J., Vanhatalo, S., Raisamo, R., & Sozer, N. (2020). Effect of Siegrist, M., Ung, C.-Y., Zank, M., Marinello, M., Kunz, A., Hartmann, C., et al. (2019).
virtual eating environment on consumers’ evaluations of healthy and unhealthy Consumers’ food selection behaviors in three-dimensional (3D) virtual reality. Food
snacks. Food Quality and Preference, 82(103871). https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Research International, 117, 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.02.033
foodqual.2020.103871 Sinesio, F., Saba, A., Peparaio, M., Saggia Civitelli, E., Paoletti, F., & Moneta, E. (2019).
Perpiñá, C., Roncero, M., Fernández-Aranda, F., Jiménez-Murcia, S., Forcano, L., & Reprint of “Capturing consumer perception of vegetable freshness in a simulated
Sánchez, I. (2013). Clinical validation of a virtual environment for normalizing real-life taste situation.”. Food Research International, 117, 2–9. https://doi.org/
eating patterns in eating disorders. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 54(6), 680–686. 10.1016/j.foodres.2018.10.084
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2013.01.007 Slater, M., & Wilbur, S. (1997). A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE):
Persky, S., Ferrer, R. A., Klein, W. M. P., Goldring, M. R., Cohen, R. W., Kistler, W. D., Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators
et al. (2019). Effects of fruit and vegetable feeding messages on mothers and fathers: and Virtual Environments, 6(6), 603–616. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.6.603
Interactions between emotional state and health message framing. Annals of Stelick, A., Penano, A. G., Riak, A. C., & Dando, R. (2018). Dynamic context sensory
Behavioral Medicine, 53(9), 789–800. https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kay088 testing-A proof of concept study bringing virtual reality to the sensory booth. Journal
Persky, S., Goldring, M. R., Turner, S. A., Cohen, R. W., & Kistler, W. D. (2018). Validity of Food Science, 83(8), 2047–2051. https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.14275
of assessing child feeding with virtual reality. Appetite, 123, 201–207. https://doi. Sugita, Y., Zempo, K., Mizutani, K., & Wakatsuki, N. (2017). The alteration of gustatory
org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.12.007 sense by virtual chromatic transition of food items. In N. Munekata, I. Kunita, &
Persky, S., McBride, C. M., Faith, M. S., Wagner, L. K., & Ward, D. S. (2015). Mothers’ J. Hoshino (Eds.), Entertainment computing - icec 2017 (pp. 211–217). https://doi.
guilt responses to children’s obesity risk feedback. Journal of Health Psychology, 20 org/10.1007/978-3-319-66715-7_23. Vol. 10507.
(5), 649–658. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105315576608 Torrico, D. D., Han, Y., Sharma, C., Fuentes, S., Gonzalez Viejo, C., & Dunshea, F. R.
Persky, S., & Yaremych, H. E. (2020). Parents’ genetic attributions for children’s eating (2020). Effects of context and virtual reality environments on the wine tasting
behaviors: Relationships with beliefs, emotions, and food choice behavior. Appetite, experience, acceptability, and emotional responses of consumers. Foods, 9(2), 191.
155(104824). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.104824 https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9020191
Persky, S., Yaremych, H. E., Goldring, M. R., Ferrer, R. A., Rose, M. K., & Hollister, B. M. Torrico, D. D., Sharma, C., Dong, W., Fuentes, S., Gonzalez Viejo, C., & Dunshea, F. R.
(2020). Investigating the efficacy of genetic, environmental, and multifactorial risk (2021). Virtual reality environments on the sensory acceptability and emotional
information when communicating obesity risk to parents of young children. Annals responses of no- and full-sugar chocolate. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft & Technologie,
of Behavioral Medicine. , Article kaaa103. https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kaaa103 137(110383). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2020.110383
Peukert, C., Pfeiffer, J., Meißner, M., Pfeiffer, T., & Weinhardt, C. (2019). Shopping in Tuanquin, N. M. B., Hoermann, S., Petersen, C. J., & Lindeman, R. W. (2018). The effects
virtual reality stores: The influence of immersion on system Adoption. Journal of of olfactory stimulation and active participation on food cravings in virtual reality.
Management Information Systems, 36(3), 755–788. https://doi.org/10.1080/ IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR), 709–710. https://doi.
07421222.2019.1628889 org/10.1109/vr.2018.8446279
Picket, B., & Dando, R. (2019). Environmental immersion’s influence on hedonics, Ung, C.-Y., Menozzi, M., Hartmann, C., & Siegrist, M. (2018). Innovations in consumer
perceived appropriateness, and willingness to pay in alcoholic beverages. Foods, 8 research: The virtual food buffet. Food Quality and Preference, 63, 12–17. https://doi.
(2), 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8020042 org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.07.007
Pizzi, G., Scarpi, D., Pichierri, M., & Vannucci, V. (2019). Virtual reality, real reactions?: Verhulst, A., Normand, J.-M., Lombart, C., & Moreau, G. (2017). A study on the use of an
Comparing consumers’ perceptions and shopping orientation across physical and immersive virtual reality store to investigate consumer perceptions and purchase
virtual-reality retail stores. Computers in Human Behavior, 96, 1–12. https://doi.org/ behavior toward non-standard fruits and vegetables. IEEE Virtual Reality (VR),
10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.008 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1109/vr.2017.7892231
Pla-Sanjuanelo, J., Ferrer-Garcia, M., Gutierrez-Maldonado, J., Vilalta-Abella, F., Verhulst, A., Normand, J.-M., Lombart, C., Sugimoto, M., & Moreau, G. (2018). Influence
Andreu-Gracia, A., Dakanalis, A., et al. (2015). Trait and state craving as indicators of being embodied in an obese virtual body on shopping behavior and products
of validity of VR-based software for binge eating treatment. Annual Review of perception in VR. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5(113). https://doi.org/10.3389/
Cybertherapy and Telemedicine 2015: Virtual Reality in Healthcare: Medical Simulation frobt.2018.00113
and Experiential Interface, 219, 141–146. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-595- van der Waal, N. E., Janssen, L., Antheunis, M., Culleton, E., & van der Laan, L. N. (2021).
1-141 The appeal of virtual chocolate: A systematic comparison of psychological and
Pla-Sanjuanelo, J., Ferrer-García, M., Vilalta-Abella, F., Riva, G., Dakanalis, A., Ribas- physiological food cue responses to virtual and real food. Food Quality and Preference,
Sabaté, J., et al. (2019). Testing virtual reality-based cue-exposure software: Which 90(104167). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104167
cue-elicited responses best discriminate between patients with eating disorders and Wang, Q. J., Meyer, R., Waters, S., & Zendle, D. (2020). A dash of virtual milk: Altering
healthy controls? Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and product color in virtual reality influences flavor perception of cold-brew coffee.
Obesity, 24(4), 757–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40519-017-0419-4 Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.595788
Pla-Sanjuanelo, J., Ferrer-Garcia, M., Vilalta-Abella, F., Riva, G., Dakanalis, A., Ribas- Waterlander, W. E., Jiang, Y., Steenhuis, I. H. M., & Ni Mhurchu, C. (2015). Using a 3D
Sabate, J., et al. (2017). VR-based cue-exposure therapy (VR-CET) versus VR-CET virtual supermarket to measure food purchase behavior: A validation study. Journal
plus pharmacotherapy in the treatment of bulimic-type eating disorders. Annual of Medical Internet Research, 17(4), e107. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3774
Review of Cybertherapy and Telemedicine, 15, 116–122. Worch, T., Sinesio, F., Moneta, E., Abbà, S., Dreyfuss, L., McEwan, J. A., et al. (2020).
Ranasinghe, N., Jain, P., Karwita, S., & Do, E. Y.-L. (2017). Proceedings of the Eleventh Influence of different test conditions on the emotional responses elicited by beers.
International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction, 183–190. Food Quality and Preference, 83(103895). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3024969.3024977. foodqual.2020.103895
Rodriguez-Raecke, R., Sommer, M., Brünner, Y. F., Müschenich, F. S., & Sijben, R. Xu, C., Demir-Kaymaz, Y., Hartmann, C., Menozzi, M., & Siegrist, M. (2021). The
(2020). Virtual grocery shopping and cookie consumption following intranasal comparability of consumers’ behavior in virtual reality and real life: A validation
insulin or placebo application. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 28(4), study of virtual reality based on a ranking task. Food Quality and Preference, 87
495–500. https://doi.org/10.1037/pha0000330 (104071). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104071
Schnack, A., Wright, M. J., & Holdershaw, J. L. (2019). Immersive virtual reality Yaremych, H. E., Kistler, W. D., Trivedi, N., & Persky, S. (2019). Path tortuosity in virtual
technology in a three-dimensional virtual simulated store: Investigating telepresence reality: A novel approach for quantifying behavioral process in a food choice context.
and usability. Food Research International, 117, 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 22(7), 486–493. https://doi.org/
foodres.2018.01.028 10.1089/cyber.2018.0644
Schnack, A., Wright, M. J., & Holdershaw, J. L. (2020). An exploratory investigation of Zhao, H., Huang, F., Spence, C., & Wan, X. (2017). Visual search for wines with a triangle
shopper behaviour in an immersive virtual reality store. Journal of Consumer on the label in a virtual store. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(2173). https://doi.org/
Behaviour, 19(2), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1803 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02173

544