(PO10-07-22) The Use of Technology to Deliver Virtual Grocery Store Tours

The ePoster content is available to NUTRITION 2022 LIVE ONLINE attendees who are logged in.<br><br>If you are registered, log in and then come back here to use this button.

Presenting Author(s)

JH

James Hollis, PhD
– Associate Professor, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, United States

Co-Author(s)

JS

Jenessa Sharratt
– Iowa State University
SW

Shelley Woodall, RD
– Graduate Student, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, United States

Disclosure(s):

James Hollis, PhD: No relevant financial relationship(s) with ineligible companies to disclose.

Objectives: Grocery store tours are potentially a useful approach to improving educating consumers. However, this approach may be limited by barriers to access to grocery stores. Virtual grocery stores tours (VGST) may offer an alternative approach to providing GSTs. Several methods could be used to provide a VGST and differences between these methods on the user experience need to be elucidated. The purpose of this study was to determine participant experiences in a VGST provided using different technologies.

Methods: A VGST was created by using the Unity Game Engine. An avatar, voiced by a registered dietitian, provided nutrition education at various locations in the virtual grocery store (e.g., produce, dairy, meat or grains sections). In a repeated measures design. 13 individuals experienced this VGST using 3 different technologies: immersive virtual reality (IVR), a PC monitor or a tablet. After baseline physiological measurements were collected (using an Empatica wristband), the participant viewed a VGST that lasted approximately 15 minutes. Then, they completed a questionnaire about their feelings of presence (feeling they were present in a supermarket), nausea, enjoyment of the VGST and the likelihood they would recommend the VGST to a friend. Responses were captured on a 7-point scale.

Results: Participants experienced a greater sense of presence in the IVR condition (IVR = 5.8, PC = 2.6, tablet = 2.6; p< 0.05). In the IVR session participants experienced greater feelings of nausea (IVR = 1.7, PC = 0.4, tablet = 0.4; p< 0.05). Users enjoyed the IVR medium more than the tablet medium (IVR = 5.3, PC = 4.6, tablet = 4.1; p< 0.05). There was no differences in the participants willingness to recommend the VGST to a friend (IVR = 6.4, PC = 7, tablet = 5.5; p >0.05). Future analysis will examine the physiological differences during each treatment.

Conclusions: These data indicate that VGSTs are a feasible approach to provide nutrition education. IVR creates a greater sense of presence which has been linked to improved learning outcomes. The effect of different electronic mediums on the ability to learn and retain nutrition information requires investigation.

Funding Sources: None