SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2025 / Sayı: 72

Phygital marketing and technology adoption in tourism within the framework of post industrial transformation in Türkiye

Türkiye’de post-endüstriyel dönüşüm bağlamında turizmde fijital pazarlama ve teknoloji kullanımı

Didem Aşar(Kapadokya Üniversitesi)0000-0002-0138-227X
Kenan Güllü(ERCİYES ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8604-8798
Pages
171–183
Publication Date
2025-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results confirm the validity of the proposed model

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The post-industrial transformation experienced in the post-industrial period has created significant effects, especially in the services sector.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Furthermore, with a participation rate of 98.6%, they do not hesitate to use digital products, and with a 76% participation rate, they indicate that technological developments have changed their consumption habits.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results confirm the validity of the proposed model
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Post-Endüstriyel Dönüşüm · Fijital Pazarlama · Metaverse

Abstract

The post-industrial transformation experienced in the post-industrial period has created significant effects, especially in the services sector. This study aims to examine the effects of this transformation in the field of tourism, which is an important part of the services sector in Turkey, and to reveal its relationship with new technologies emerging through phigitalization. Especially how the integration of digital applications such as smart tourism, metaverse, augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality into the tourism sector is received by consumers and consumers’ attitudes towards these technologies have been examined. The study has been evaluated within the framework of the Extended Technology Acceptance Model, and the variables of perceived enjoyment, innovativeness, and trust have been added to the model. In the research, an online survey was conducted with consumers living in Turkey, and data were collected through the judgmental sampling method. With the obtained data, first, the reliability of the scales and normal distribution were analyzed, then confirmatory factor analysis and Structural Equation Modeling were carried out. The findings show that consumers are generally interested in technology, curious, open to innovations, and willing to adopt digital solutions. Furthermore, with a participation rate of 98.6%, they do not hesitate to use digital products, and with a 76% participation rate, they indicate that technological developments have changed their consumption habits. In addition, with a participation rate of 86.6%, the perception that technology facilitates daily life accelerates their adaptation to this transformation. The results confirm the validity of the proposed model

Özet

Endüstri sonrası dönemde yaşanan post-endüstriyel dönüşümün, özellikle de hizmetler sektöründe belirgin etkiler yarattığı bilinmektedir. Bu çalışma, Türkiye’de hizmet sektörünün en önemli bir parçalarından biri olan turizm alanında, post-endüstriyel dönüşümün etkilerini incelemeyi ve fijitalleşmeyle de ortaya çıkan yeni teknolojilerle ilişkisini ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Özellikle akıllı turizm, metaverse, artırılmış gerçeklik, sanal gerçeklik ve karma gerçeklik gibi dijital uygulamaların turizm sektörüne entegrasyonunun tüketiciler tarafından nasıl karşılandığı ile birlikte tüketicilerin bu teknolojik uygulamalara yönelik tutumları incelenmiştir. Çalışma, Genişletilmiş Teknoloji Kabul Modeli çerçevesinde değerlendirilmiş olmakla birlikte modele çalışmanın konusuna yönelik olarak algılanan eğlence, yenilikçilik ve güven değişkenleri eklenmiştir. Araştırmada, Türkiye’de yaşayan tüketicilere çevrimiçi anket tekniği uygulanarak yargısal örnekleme yöntemiyle veri toplanmıştır. Elde edilen verilerle öncelikle ölçeklerin güvenilirliği ve normal dağılımı analiz edilmiş, ardından doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ve Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Yapılan analizler sonucunda bulgular, tüketicilerin teknolojik uygulamalara karşı genel olarak ilgi duyduklarını, meraklı, yeniliklere açık olduklarını ve dijital çözümleri benimsemeye yönelik istekli olduklarını göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte, %98,6 oranında gerçekleşen katılım ile dijital ürünleri kullanmaktan çekinmedikleri ve %76 oranında katılım ile teknolojik gelişmelerin tüketim alışkanlıklarını yüksek oranda değiştirdiğini göstermektedir. Aynı zamanda, %86,6 oranında gerçekleşen yüksek katılım da göstermektedir ki teknolojinin günlük yaşamı kolaylaştırma algısı bu dönüşüme karşı uyumlarını hızlandırmaktadır. Sonuçlara bakıldığında, önerilen modelin geçerliliği doğrulanmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Aşar, D., Güllü, K. (2025). Phygital marketing and technology adoption in tourism within the framework of post industrial transformation in Türkiye. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı: 72, 171–183. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1762629

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (98)

  1. Ab Hamid, M. R., Sami, W., & Sidek, M. M. (2017). Discriminant validity assessment: Use of Fornell & Larcker criterion versus HTMT criterion. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/890/1/012163
  2. Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1997). The role of innovation characteristics and perceived voluntariness in the acceptance of information technologies. Decision Sciences, 28(3), 557-582. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1997.tb01322.x
  3. Agrebi, S., & Jallais, J. (2015). Explain the intention to use smartphones for mobile shopping. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 22, 16-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.09.003
  4. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  5. Aldas-Manzaro, J., Ruiz-Mafe, C., & Sanz-Blas, S. (2009). Exploring individual personality factors as drivers of m-shopping acceptance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 109(6), 739-757. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570910968018
  6. Almeida, G. F., Almeida, G., & Cardoso, J. (2024). Scope extension of the Metaverse tourism concept: Proposing a research agenda. Tourism Management, 98, 105056.
  7. Altın Gümüşsoy, Ç., & Yeterel, A. C. (2016). Fırsat Sitelerinden Tekrar Satın Alma Kararını Etkileyen Faktörlerin Araştırılması. Bilişim Teknolojileri Dergisi, 9(3), 275.
  8. Asoodar, M., Janesarvatan, F., Yu, H., & de Jong, N. (2024). Theoretical foundations and implications of augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality for immersive learning in health professions education. Advances in Simulation, 9, 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-024-00311-5
  9. Aytaç, Ö. (2002). Boş zaman üzerine kuramsal yaklaşımlar. Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 12(1), 231-260.
  10. Baudrillard, J. (2014). Simülakrlar ve simülasyon. Doğu Batı Yayınları.
  11. Bec, A., Moyle, B., Schaffer, V., & Timms, K. (2021). Virtual reality and mixed reality for second chance tourism. Tourism Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104256
  12. Binbaşıoğlu, H., & Türk, M. (2020). Mobile technology acceptance among Turkish travelers. In J. D. Santos & Ó. L. Silva (Eds.), Digital Marketing Strategies for Tourism, Hospitality, and Airline Industries (pp. 111–140). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-9783-4.ch006
  13. Bozok, D., Açıksözlü, Ö., Şahin, N. N., & Varol, İ. (2014). Turistlerin kişilik özellikleri ile postmodern turizme eğilimleri arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemeye yönelik bir araştırma: Balıkesir ili örneği. In 9th International Conference: New Perspectives in Tourism and Hospitality. Balıkesir University & Białystok University. 849-871.
  14. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. A., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2018). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
  15. Can, A. (2013). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi. Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
  16. Çapık, C. (2014). Geçerlik ve güvenilirlik çalışmalarında doğrulayıcı faktör analizinin kullanımı. Anadolu Hemşirelik ve Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 17(3), 196–205.
  17. Çavuşoğlu, S., Demirağ, B., & Dağ, K. (2022). Akıllı Turizm Teknolojilerinin Hafızaya Dayalı Turizm Deneyimleri, Turist Tatmini ve Sadakati Üzerindeki Etkisi: Akıllı Şehir Antalya Örneği. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 7(17), 13-29. https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.1023964
  18. Çetinsöz, B. C. (2015). Yerli turistlerin e-satın alma eğilimlerinin teknoloji kabul modelinde analizi (TKM). Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(53), 242–258.
  19. Cevher, M. F. (2023). Fijital pazarlama: Geleneksel ve dijital pazarlamanın kesişimi. Pearson Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 8(2), 122–135.
  20. Chen, L., Gillenson, M. L., & Sherrell, D. L. (2002). Enticing online consumers: An extended technology acceptance perspective. Information and Management, 39(8), 705-719. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00127-6
  21. Chen, Y. Y. (2012). Why do consumers go internet shopping again? Understanding the antecedents of repurchase intention. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 22(1), 38-63.
  22. Chong, A. Y. L. (2013). Mobile commerce usage activities: The role of demographics and motivation variables. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(7), 1350-1359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.12.011
  23. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  24. Davis, F. D. (1992). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions, and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475–487. https://doi.org/10.1006/imms.1993.1022
  25. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
  26. Erkorkmaz, Ü., Etikan, İ., Demir, O., Özdamar, K., & Sanisoğlu, S. Y. (2013). Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ve uyum indeksleri. Türkiye Klinikleri Journal of Medical Sciences, 33(1), 210–223. https://doi.org/10.5336/medsci.2011-26747
  27. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
  28. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90.
  29. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2016). IBM SPSS Statistics 23 step by step: A simple guide and reference (14nd ed.). Routledge.
  30. Groß, M. (2015). Exploring the acceptance of technology for mobile shopping: An empirical investigation among smartphone users. The Traditional Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 25(3), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2014.988280
  31. Güllü, K., & Acar, N. (2023). Pazarlama yönetiminde e-teknolojik trenler: Artırılmış gerçeklik. İçinde Gülmez, Y. S., Kayaoğlu, A., & Güllü, K. (Eds.). Nobel Bilimsel Eserler, (ss. 37-50).
  32. Güllü, K., Aşar, D., & Tüfek, H. (2024). Turizm işletmelerinin teknoloji kabul modeli kullanılarak fijital pazarlama teknolojilerine yönelik tutumlarının belirlenmesi. Tujom, 9(4), 134–144. https://doi.org/10.30685/tujom.v9i4.205
  33. Ha, S., & Stoel, L. (2009). Consumer e-shopping acceptance: Antecedents in a technology acceptance model. Journal of Business Research, 62(5), 565-571.
  34. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Exploratory factor analysis. In Multivariate data analysis (7nd ed.). Pearson.
  35. Hair, J. R., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-151.
  36. Hauer, T. (2017). Technological determinism and new media. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 2(2), 1‑4.
  37. Holdack, E., Lurie-Stoyanov, K., & Fromme, H. F. (2020). The role of perceived enjoyment and perceived informativeness in assessing the acceptance of AR wearables. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 54, 102259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102259
  38. Huang, Y., Backman, S. J., Chang, L. L., Backman, K., & Mcguire, F. A. (2013). Experiencing student learning and tourism training in a 3D virtual world: An exploratory study. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 13, 190-201.
  39. Im, J. Y., & Hancer, M. (2014). Shaping travelers’ attitude toward travel mobile applications. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 5(2), 177-193. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-11-2013-0036
  40. İşler, H. (2024). Türkiye’de 1980-2000 dönemi sanayileşme politikaları. BİİBFD: Business and Economics Studies, 5(1), 1–14.
  41. Johnson, M., & Barlow, R. (2021). Defining the phygital marketing advantage. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(6), 2365–2385. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer16060130
  42. Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Scientific Software International.
  43. Kalantari, M. (2017). Consumers’ adoption of wearable technologies: Literature review, synthesizing future research agenda. International Journal of Technology Marketing, 12(3), 274-307. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTMKT.2017.10008634
  44. Kamarulzaman, Y. (2007). Adoption of travel e-shopping in the UK. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35(9), 703-719. https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550710773255
  45. Kim, M. J., & Hall, C. M. (2019). A hedonic motivation model in virtual reality tourism: Comparing visitors and non-visitors. International Journal of Information Management, 46, 236-249.
  46. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
  47. Korkmaz, İ. (2024). Yapay zekâya yönelik tutumun, kolaylığın, yenilikçiliğin ve güvenin satın alma niyeti üzerine etkisi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 26(2), 318-339. https://doi.org/10.33707/akuiibfd.1522892
  48. Kourtesis, P. (2024). A comprehensive review of multimodal XR applications, risks, and ethical challenges in the metaverse. Multimodal Technol and Interact., 8(11), 98.
  49. Kulakoğlu Dilek, N. (2020). Turizmde sanal gerçeklik teknolojisinin kullanımına ve etkisine yönelik keşifsel bir araştırma [Yayınlanmış doktora tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi]. Ulusal Tez Merkezi. (Tez No. 616294)
  50. Kyriazos, T. A. (2018). Applied psychometrics: Sample size and sample power considerations in factor analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in general. Psychology, 9, 2207-2230.
  51. Lampropoulos, G. (2025). Intelligent virtual reality and augmented reality technologies: An overview. Future Internet, 17(2), 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi17020058
  52. Lehy, T. T. (2017). Fijital (Phygital) dünyanın psikolojik motifleri. Brandmap, 47.
  53. Liberato, P., Alen, E., Liberato, D., & Veloso, D. (2018). Digital technology in a smart tourist destination: The case of Porto. Journal of Urban Technology, 25(1), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2017.1413228
  54. Liu, I., Chen, M., Sun, Y., Wible, D., & Kuo, C. (2010). Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Computers & Education, 54(2), 600–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.009
  55. Lu, H.-P., & Su, P. Y.-J. (2009). Factors affecting purchase intention on mobile shopping websites. Internet Research, 19(4), 442–458. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240910981399
  56. Mele, C., & Russo Spena, T. (2023). The phygital transformation: A systematic review and a research agenda. Italian Journal of Marketing, 2023(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-023-00070-7
  57. Misirlis, N., Nikolaidis, Y., & Sabidussi, A. (2023). Should I use metaverse or not? An investigation of university students’ behavioral intention to use MetaEducation technology. IADIS International Journal on Computer Science and Information Systems, 18(1), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.15251
  58. Nakip, M. (2003). Pazarlama araştırmaları: Teknikler ve (SPSS destekli) uygulamalar. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  59. Natarajan, T., Balasubramanian, S. A. & Kasilingam, D. L. (2017). Understanding the intention to use mobile shopping applications and its influence on price sensitivity. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 37, 8–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.02.010
  60. Natarajan, T., Balasubramanian, S. A., & Kasilingam, D. L. (2018). The moderating role of device type and age of users on the intention to use mobile shopping applications. Technology in Society, 53, 79-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.01.003
  61. Nath, R., Bhal, K. T., & Kapoor, G. T. (2014). Factors influencing IT adoption by bank employees: An extended TAM approach. Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, 38(4), 83-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0256090920130406
  62. Odabaşı, Y. (2017). Pazarlama fijital dünyada nereye? Brandmap, (Aralık 2016–Ocak 2017 Birleşik Sayısı), 43.
  63. Oh, A. H. J, Junghwan Kim, B., Jeongheon J.C., Chang, B., Nohil Park, B., & Sangrock Le, A. (2023). Social benefits of living in the metaverse: The relationships among social presence, supportive interaction, social self-efficacy, and feelings of loneliness. Computers in Human Behavior, 139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107498
  64. Oliveira, T., & Martins, M. F. (2011). Literature review of information technology adoption models at firm level. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 14(1), 110-121.
  65. Özyurt, B., & Gürkan, G. Ç. (2024). Havalimanlarında yenilikçi uygulamaları kullanan yolcuların bireysel yenilikçilik düzeyi ile teknoloji kabul düzeyi arasındaki ilişki. Turizm ve İşletme Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(1), 137-163.
  66. Pratisto, E. H., Thompson, N., & Potdar, V. (2022). Immersive technologies for tourism: A systematic review. Information Technology & Tourism, 24(2), 181-219.
  67. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
  68. Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Mitchell, R., & Gudergan, S. P. (2020). Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(12), 1617-1643. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1416655
  69. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4nd ed.). New York: Simon and Schuster.
  70. Rumyantsev, A. A. (2015). Post‑industrial technological mode of production: Theory, economic and environmental features, discussion questions. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Special Issue 5, 194‑201.
  71. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research, 8(2), 23-74. https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12784
  72. Schmitt, B., Simonson, A. (2000). Pazarlama estetiği: Marka, kimlik ve imajın stratejik yönetimi. Çev. Zelal Ayman, İstanbul: Sistem Yayıncılık.
  73. Segars, A. H., & Varun, G. (1993). Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness. MIS Quarterly, 17(4), 517-525. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249590
  74. Seyhun, S. (2019). Mobil alışveriş uygulamalarının benimsemesini etkileyen faktörlerin genişletilmiş teknoloji kabul modeli bağlamında incelenmesi. Kırklareli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 22(1). 599-627. https://doi.org/10.26468/trakyasobed.617630
  75. Shang, D. & Wu, W. (2017). Understanding mobile shopping consumers’ continuance intention. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117(1), 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-02-2016-0052
  76. Şıklar, E., Tunalı, D., & Gülcan, B. (2015). Mobil internet kullanımının benimsenmesinde yakınsama faktörüyle teknoloji kabul modeli. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15(2), 99-110.
  77. Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49-74.
  78. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6nd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
  79. Tan, G. W. H., Ooi, K. B., Chong, S. C., & Hew, T. S. (2014). NFC mobile credit card: The next frontier of mobile payment? Telematics and Informatics, 31(2), 292-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2013.06.002
  80. Tiryaki, İ., & Önder, L. G. (2022). Akıllı giyilebilir nesnelerin benimsenmesinde genişletilmiş teknoloji kabul modeli: Nesnelerin interneti perspektifi. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(3), 456-474.
  81. TÜBİTAK Bilim Genç (2023). X, Y, Z, Alfa Kuşakları Ne Anlama Geliyor? https://bilimgenc.tubitak.gov.tr
  82. Türker, A., & Özaltın Türker, G. (2013). Turistik ürün satın alma davranışının teknoloji kabul modeli ile incelenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15(2), 281–312.
  83. Twum, A., & Yalley, E. A. (2024). Marketing analytics acceptance: using the UTAUT, perceived trust, personal innovativeness in information technology and user attitude. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management. 16(7), 1271–1295. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-01-2022-0001
  84. UNWTO New Publications, (2019). https://www.e-unwto.org/pb-assets/unwto/9789284420483
  85. Üstüner, M., & Dilek, S. E. (2024). The relationship between tourism and technology: A bibliometric evaluation of articles in international tourism journals (2009-2023). Journal of Tourism Intelligence and Smartness, 7(1), 36-50. https://doi.org/10.58636/jtis.1469307
  86. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
  87. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  88. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
  89. Verma, S., Bhattacharyya, S. S., & Kumar, S. (2018). An extension of the technology acceptance model in the big data analytics system implementation environment. Information Processing and Management, 54(5), 791–806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2018.01.004
  90. Wang, Y., Lin, H., & Luarn, P. (2006). Predicting consumer intention to use mobile service. Information Systems Journal, 16(2), 157–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2006.00213.x
  91. World Trade Report, (2020). Government policies to promote innovation in the digital age. https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/wtr20_e.pdf
  92. Wu, J.-H., & Wang, S.-C. (2005). What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42(5), 719–729.
  93. Yılmaz, M., & Karamustafa, K. (2022). Artırılmış gerçeklik uygulamaları ve turizm. Seyahat ve Otel İşletmeciliği Dergisi, 19(3), 399–422. https://doi.org/10.24010/soid.1077349
  94. Yu, J., Msook, H., Munkee, C., & Jaejeung, R. (2005). Extending the TAM for a tcommerce. Information & Management, 42(7), 965–976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2004.11.001
  95. Zakaria, W. F. A. W., & Buaben, J. M. (2021). The theory of post-industrial society. Akademika, 91(1), 139–149.
  96. Zhang, H. L., Xue, Y., Lu, Y., & Lee, S. (2023). A fusion model: Towards a virtual, physical and cognitive integration and its principles. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 13(3),107-114.
  97. Zhang, M. M., Hashim, H., & Yunus, M. M. (2025). Analyzing and comparing augmented reality and virtual reality assisted vocabulary learning: A systematic review. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 6(2025), 1522380. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2025.1522380
  98. Zhong, L., Zhu, M., Sun, S., & Law, R. (2021). Research progress and development of technology in tourism research: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Smart Tourism, 1(2), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.52255/smarttourism.2021.1.2.2