CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

Literature Review is a crucial part of any research work which affords the researcher the
opportunity of knowing what areas has been covered, what remains to be covered, and what
techniques to employ in the investigation. And this literature review will house the
conceptual framework, theoretical framework, and empirical review.

2.2 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework provides the foundation for understanding the integration and

impact of Virtual Reality (VR) in the cinematic environment. This framework encompasses

several key concepts that are critical to the research:

2.2.1 Immersion

Immersion refers to the depth of engagement and presence that users experience within a VR

environment. This concept is central to VR's ability to transform cinematic experiences,

allowing viewers to feel as though they are part of the virtual world. Factors influencing

immersion include visual fidelity, spatial audio, interactivity, and the degree of realism in the

VR environment (Slater & Wilbur, 1997). The immersive medium of Virtual Reality (VR),

which involves presenting first-person experiences through the use of a head-mounted

display and headphones, enables users to experience synthetic environments as if they were

physically present. This concept arguably began with Ivan Sutherland’s work in 1968. By the

early 1990s, advances in computer technologies led to significant investments from

established manufacturers like Silicon Graphics, Sun Microsystems, and Evans & Sutherland,

as well as the creation of numerous VR start-up companies such as VPL, Division, and

Virtuality. However, the technology at that time was not sufficiently mature or affordable for

viable commercial exploitation, causing the market to stall. Schnipper’s (2014) article, “The

1
Rise and fall and Rise of Virtual Reality,” includes insightful interviews by Robertson and

Zelenko (2014) with key players from that era. Only recently, with the advent of inexpensive,

high-powered computer processing and display systems, has VR begun to achieve

commercial viability and public adoption. A crucial factor in this resurgence has been the

development of Cinematic Virtual Reality (CVR).

Although a formal definition of CVR is still emerging, it generally refers to an immersive VR

experience where users can look around synthetic worlds in 360 degrees, often with

stereoscopic views and audio specifically designed to enhance the realism of the virtual

environment. Unlike traditional VR, which typically generates virtual worlds through real-

time graphics processing and audio triggers, CVR uses pre-rendered picture and sound

elements, allowing the quality of these assets to approach that found in high-end television or

feature films. CVR programs began to appear around 2015, driven by major initiatives from

companies like Google, Jaunt VR, and The New York Times. Google launched its Cardboard,

a low-cost head-mounted display that utilizes mobile phones. Jaunt VR, founded in 2013 and

backed by major investments from Google, Disney, and CMC, aims to deliver a high level of

realism in VR experiences. In late 2016, The New York Times launched "The Daily 360," a

site that releases CVR programs regularly, making it one of the largest producers and

distributors of CVR content. These initiatives often involved collaborations with Hollywood,

featuring major actors and directors to elevate the medium's profile.

CVR programs have been created across various genres, including fashion advertisements

(Gaultier, 2016), travel promotions (Lufthansa, 2016), and sports-based content (Mountain

Dew, 2016; GoPro, 2016). Most projects are either non-fiction, such as "Fighting Cholita

Wrestlers" (Bracken, Shastri, and Mullin, 2016) and "Rapid Fire: A Brief History of Flight"

2
(Starr-Dewar, 2016), or action-based narratives like "Escape the Living Dead" (Lewis, 2016)

and "Help" (Lin, 2015). Program durations vary widely, from short clips of under a minute to

medium-length projects of about twenty minutes, and even multi-part series like "Invisible"

(Liman, 2016). A core difference between traditional VR and CVR is the user’s ability to

move autonomously within the virtual world. In CVR, this is restricted to choosing an angle

from which to view the scene, making CVR experiences linear presentations dictated by the

media assets' duration. This suggests that CVR production techniques represent a new type of

filmmaking, where established techniques could be adapted for this medium. Filmmakers like

Doug Liman, Justin Lin, and Eric Darnell have experimented with CVR, acknowledging

fundamental differences from traditional filmmaking. Liman, for instance, highlights the need

to rethink storytelling for VR to avoid it feeling like a filmed play. Research into applying

filmmaking techniques to VR has been limited but notable. Bates (1991) discussed the need

for a “deep structure” in virtual worlds and the importance of “suspension of disbelief,”

proposing the development of VR production grammars analogous to traditional filmmaking

methods. More recent studies by Chang (2016), Cho et al. (2016), Syrett, Calvi, and van

Gisbergen (2016), and Nilsson et al. (2016) explore various aspects of CVR, including user

engagement, narrative comprehension, and guiding user attention within a 360-degree space.

These studies indicate that while CVR has unique challenges, it offers new opportunities for

storytelling and filmmaking.

2.2.2 Interactivity

Interactivity in VR cinema allows viewers to influence the narrative or explore the

environment actively. This contrasts with the passive viewing experience of traditional films.

Interactivity can range from simple choices that affect the storyline to full exploration of a

virtual world, enhancing engagement and personalizing the viewing experience (Mateer,

2017).

3
2.2.3 Narrative Structure

The narrative structure in VR differs significantly from traditional cinema. VR requires non-

linear and often branched storytelling techniques, where the sequence of events can change

based on user interactions. This requires innovative approaches to scriptwriting and directing

to maintain narrative coherence and emotional impact (Bucher, 2018).

2.2.4 Presence

Presence is the psychological state in which users perceive themselves to be in the virtual

environment rather than the physical one. High levels of presence are achieved through

realistic graphics, natural interactions, and immersive audio, contributing to the overall

effectiveness of VR as a storytelling medium (Freeman et al., 2017).

Presence is the term developed to assess the level of transportation within Virtual Reality.

Biocca (2002) defines it as a state where “our awareness of the medium disappears and we

are pushed through the medium to sensations that approach direct experience.” While this is

useful as a broad definition directly related to transportation, Heeter’s definition of three

distinct types of presence (1992, 263-4) is more useful in the comparison of transportation

across media as it addresses the different means of immersion possible in VR:

Social presence refers to the extent to which other beings (Living or Synthetic) also exist in

the world and appear to react to you(...) Social presence may derive from conversing with

other human beings, or from interacting with animated characters.

Environmental presence refers to the extent to which the environment itself appears to know

that you are there (e.g., via interaction with or modification of physical objects or setting) and

to react to you (...) If the environment knows you are there, that may contribute to you

believing that you are there.

4
Personal presence is based in part on simulating real world perceptions. You know you are

"there" because sounds and images in the virtual world respond like the real world to your

head movements.

Of these three sub-definitions only the last is relevant to Cinematic Virtual Reality given the

lack of true interaction with the environment and the linear presentation used within the

medium. Experience to maximize presence and thus transportation, as discussed by Slater and

Wilbur (1997). Three of these are directly relevant to Cinematic Virtual Reality:

1. The rules of interaction must be clear - how, where and when the viewer can move or

change viewpoint.

2. Navigation must be simple and intuitive - enabling movement without distracting from

visual or aural elements that facilitate transportation.

3. Movement within the environment must be smooth - with consistent increases or

decreases in speed and no apparent visual artifacts when perspective is changed (e.g. seams

between cameras used in creating 360 degree video)

While at first glance it would seem that the first and second are addressed almost by default

given the limitations in CVR world navigation, it is argued here that they still warrant

detailed consideration by the filmmaker, particularly if transitions between scenes are to be

used. Unlike film, grammars for interaction and navigation are not yet mature enough to be

considered standardised thus it is important that they are considered in relation to other

directorial choices made. As an example, navigation used in CVR projecs such as Invasion!

(2016), invisible (2016) and Great performers: LA Noire (2016) is completely transparent and

does not use interface icon, relying solely on the viewer to physically orient his or her head to

change the viewpoint of the scene. This arguably gives the best chance for full transportation

5
although there is the risk that the viewer misses key action if the viewpoint is in the wrong

direction. Other projects, such as Escape the Living Dead (2016), employ an opposite

approach utilizing an icon-based map to indicate to the viewer where to look at any given

time. While this minimizes the risk of the view missing important story points, it also makes

the viewer acutely aware of the artifice of the viewing medium. The impact of design on

transportation is an interesting area for further investigation.

2.3 Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework explores the underlying theories that support the study of VR in

the cinematic environment.

2.3.1 Transportation Theory

“Transportation” is defined by Green and Brock (2000, 701) as absorption into a story

(entailing) imagery (...) and attentional focus and an integrative melding of attention, imagery

and feelings. They suggest that someone who is transported may be less aware of real-world

facts that contradict assertions made in the narrative and may experience strong emotions (...)

even when they know the events in the story are not real (ibid, 702). Although transportation

theory was originally developed for analysis of engagement with written stories, it is

designed to be platform agnostic. ...

The term “reader” may be construed to include listeners, viewers or any recipient of narrative

information (irrespective of whether it is) fictional or nonfictional (ibid, 702); the key

psychological ingredients of the transportation experience are assumed to take place

regardless of modality of Communication Green and Brock (2004, 312).

Transportation is not unique to medium or genre and requires that the recipient be able to

develop a compelling mental model of the narrative world and circumstance, including

6
knowledge of character or subject; full transportation equals full concentration equals full

engagement. It is argued here that, since transportation theory can be used as a means of

considering and measuring engagement across media, it is well suited to exploring the

applicability of techniques to achieve transportation between film and Virtual Reality

classically defined as “suspense of disbelief” in film and “presence” in VR.

2.3.2 Presence Theory

Presence Theory posits that the effectiveness of a VR environment is determined by the

degree to which users feel present within it. According to this theory, presence is influenced

by the sensory richness of the VR experience and the degree of control users have over their

environment. High presence leads to more engaging and impactful experiences (Slater &

Wilbur, 1997).

2.3.3 Media Richness Theory

Media Richness Theory (Daft & Lengel, 1986) suggests that the richness of a communication

medium is defined by its ability to transmit information effectively and reduce ambiguity. VR

is considered a rich medium due to its ability to convey multiple cues simultaneously, such as

visual, auditory, and interactive elements, making it highly effective for immersive

storytelling.

2.3.4 User Engagement Theory

User Engagement Theory explores the factors that contribute to the depth and duration of

user involvement with media content. In the context of VR, engagement is enhanced by

immersive experiences, interactivity, and narrative depth. This theory helps explain why VR

can potentially generate more profound and lasting impressions on viewers compared to

traditional media (O’Brien & Toms, 2008).

7
2.3.5 Cognitive Load Theory

Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1988) addresses the mental effort required to process

information. In VR, managing cognitive load is crucial as overly complex environments or

interactions can overwhelm users, reducing the effectiveness of the experience. Balancing

sensory input and interactive elements is essential to maintaining user engagement without

causing cognitive overload.

2.4 Empirical Review

in the cinematic environment:

2.4.1 Technological Advancements and Their Impact in VR Cinema

Empirical studies have demonstrated significant advancements in VR technology that

enhance the cinematic experience. For example, Freeman et al. (2017) found that

improvements in head-tracking and spatial audio significantly increase user immersion and

presence. Similarly, LaViola (2000) highlighted the importance of reducing latency and

motion sickness to improve user comfort and engagement. The integration of VR into the

cinematic environment is largely driven by technological innovations. VR headsets, such as

Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, and PlayStation VR, have revolutionized the way audiences

experience films. These devices provide immersive 360-degree visuals and spatial audio,

creating a sense of presence and interactivity that traditional films cannot match (Slater &

Wilbur, 1997). Studies by Freeman et al. (2017) highlight that VR's immersive capabilities

8
stem from its ability to simulate a convincing reality, engaging multiple senses

simultaneously. This multi-sensory engagement is crucial for creating the illusion of

presence, where viewers feel as though they are part of the virtual world. Advances in real-

time rendering, haptic feedback, and motion tracking further enhance this experience (Jerald,

2015).

However, technological challenges remain. According to Bolas (2013), issues such as motion

sickness, limited field of view, and the high cost of VR equipment pose significant barriers to

widespread adoption. Efforts to address these challenges include improving display

resolution, reducing latency, and developing more affordable VR systems. In the early stage

of the development of virtual reality technology, it was widely used in the game field relying

on post –modeling software to construct a virtual game situation, and film art is an

independent segment composed of a single lens, and then a complete story constructed by

multiple independent segment. Although, both games and movies have entertainment

functions, compared with games, the art of movie pays more attention to shooting. Highly

immersive scene construction and shooting methods are the basis for realizing movie art. For

film works produced by Virtual Reality, high-quality and superior-performance professional

photography equipment such as 360 – degree cameras, three dimensional cameras, light field

cameras, and motion capture systems that can be filmed in all directions must be used. Not

only that, if viewers want to be able to hear the dialogue of the characters in the film, or to

watch the fighting scenes of the characters at close range from various angles, they need to

wear a head-mounted device with similar functions as 3D glasses. But these to a certain

extent, the device has problems such as light leakage, reception delay, or dizziness of the

viewer.

9
Virtual Reality technology improves the quality of film art. Another main feature of Virtual

Reality technology is “Communication and Interactivity”, which means that the audience can

freely obtain desired objects, choose their own location, and observe in a certain Virtual

situation. The detailed characteristics of the characters in the situation. Different from

traditional two dimensional space works, the audience only passively receives the emotions

of the picture that the filmmakers hopes to express through the large screen from long

distance. The film produce by Virtual Reality technology allows the audience to freely choose

the scene or details they want to pay attention to, and this requires that more attention should

be paid to the plot, scene layout and prop design of the work. Not only must a more compact

storyline be used to attract the attention of the audience. At the same, the scene props in the

work must match the content of the plot. In order to enable the audience to enter the plot

immersively. For actors, films made with VR technology can shorten the distance between

the audience and the actors. Therefore, the actors are required to be more refined in their

performances. It can be seen that VR technology can improve the quality of film.

10
Reference

11
 CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction

This chapter contain the research methodology procedure to explore the impact of virtual
reality (VR) in the cinematic environment. A mixed-method approach, incorporating both
qualitative and quantitative data collection methods, was adopted to provide a comprehensive
understanding of the subject. Specifically, this chapter details the use of interviews and
questionnaires to gather in-depth insights and broad patterns from key stakeholders in the
Virtual Reality industry and audiences.

3.2 Research Method

Research methods refer to the specific procedures, techniques, and tools used to gather and
analyze data in a research study (Abutabenjeh & Jaradat, 2018). They provide a systematic
framework for conducting research and obtaining reliable and valid results (Sekaran &
Bougie, 2016). The study employ the use of mixed-methods (Qualitative and Quantitative) to
thoroughly examine the effects of virtual reality (VR) on cinematic environment. Through the
use of qualitative techniques involves case studies, and interviews. While quantitative
approaches like surveys and content analysis will yield statistical data that will deepen our
understanding of audience perceptions and engagement metrics. In other words, the study

12
utilizes a mixed-methods research design, which combines qualitative and quantitative
approaches to leverage the strengths of both. This design is particularly suited for exploring
the complex and multifaceted impact of VR in cinema, allowing for a holistic analysis that
encompasses both subjective experiences and objective data. In other words, the study
utilizes a mixed-methods research design, which combines qualitative and quantitative
approaches to leverage the strengths of both. This design is particularly suited for exploring
the complex and multifaceted impact of VR in cinema, allowing for a holistic analysis that
encompasses both subjective experiences and objective data.

3.2.1 Qualitative Approach

The qualitative approach focuses on understanding the experiences and perspectives of VR

filmmakers, industry experts, and audience members. This involves:

i) Interviews: Conducting in-depth, semi-structured interviews with VR

filmmakers, directors, producers, and technical experts to gather insights into the

artistic and technical challenges of VR production.

ii) Case Studies: The case study approach involves an in-depth, contextual analysis of

specific instances where virtual reality (VR) has been integrated into the cinematic

environment. This method provides a comprehensive understanding of the real-world

application, challenges, and impacts of VR in film.

3.2.2 Quantitative Approach

In quantitative research, Edmonds and Kennedy (2016) stated that “the emphasis of the
researcher is on collecting scores that measures distinct attributes of the population”. This

13
study will therefore use survey in the collection of data in order to investigate the impact of
virtual reality technology on Nigeria Cinematic Environment and explore its implications for
storytelling and audience engagement. The quantitative approach aims to measure audience
reception and engagement with VR cinema. This involves:
i) Surveys: Distributing structured questionnaires to a large sample of viewers to collect data

on their experiences, satisfaction levels, and willingness to adopt VR technology for

cinematic purposes. A survey is a research method that involves gathering data from a sample

of individuals or groups through the use of standardized questionnaires (Mohajan, 2020). It is

a widely used method for collecting information on various topics and allows researchers to

gather data from a large number of participants in a relatively efficient manner (Fowler

2013).

3.3 Data Collection Methods

The research employs multiple data collection methods to ensure comprehensive data

gathering.

3.3.1 Interviews

i) Participant: 15-20 VR filmmakers, directors, and technical experts.

ii) Procedure: Conduct face-to-face or virtual interviews, each lasting approximately 60

minutes. Use a semi-structured interview guide to ensure consistency while allowing

flexibility for participants to share detailed insights.

14
iii) Topics to be covered: Technical challenges, narrative techniques, production costs,

audience engagement, and future prospects.

3.3.2 Surveys

i) Sample Size: 10-15 respondents, selected through stratified random sampling to ensure

demographic diversity.

ii) Procedure: Physical distribution of questionnaires, the survey will include multiple-

choice questions, and open-ended questions.

iii) Topics to be covered: Viewing habits, VR cinema experiences, satisfaction levels, and

barriers to adoption.

3.4 Data Analysis Techniques

The research employs different data analysis techniques for qualitative and quantitative data.

3.4.1 Qualitative Data Analysis

Thematic Analysis: Transcribe interview and analyze them using thematic analysis to

identify key themes and patterns.

Content Analysis: Examine open-ended survey responses and qualitative feedback from

experiments to identify recurring themes and sentiments.

3.4.2 Quantitative Data Analysis

15
Descriptive Statistics: Use descriptive statistics to summarize survey responses, including

measures of central tendency and dispersion.

Inferential Statistics: Apply inferential statistical tests (e.g., t-tests, chi-square tests) to

compare responses between different groups and assess the significance of differences

observed.

3.5 Ethical Considerations

Ethical considerations are paramount to ensure the integrity and validity of the research.

Informed Consent: Obtain informed consent from all participants, ensuring they are aware

of the study's purpose, procedures, and their right to withdraw at any time.

Confidentiality: Ensure the confidentiality of participants' data by anonymizing responses

and securely storing data.

Minimizing Harm: Take steps to minimize any potential harm or discomfort to participants,

particularly in experiments involving biometric measures.

References

Abutabenjeh, S., & Jaradat, R. (2018). Clarification of research design, research methods,
and research methodology. Teaching Public Administration, 36(3), 237–258.
[Link]
Asenahabi, B. M. (2019). Basics of research design: A guide to selecting appropriate research
design. International Journal of Contemporary Applied Researches, 6(5), 76-89.
Babbie, E. (2016). The Practice of Social Research (14th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Datey, S. H., & Kuthe, S. S. (2015). Development of Recommendation System for Selecting a
Proper Sampling Technique for Researchers in Management Based On Objectives of
Research & Study Population. International Journal of Electronics, Communication
and Soft Computing Science & Engineering (IJECSCSE), 351.
16
Fink, A. (2019). How to Conduct Surveys: A Step-by-Step Guide (6th ed.). SAGE
Publications.
Fowler Jr., J. F. (2013). Survey research methods (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Haaksma, M. L., Vilela, L. R., Marengoni, A., Calderón-Larrañaga, A., Leoutsakos, J. M. S.,
Olde Rikkert, M. G., & Melis, R. J. (2017). Comorbidity and progression of late
onset Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review. PloS one, 12(5), e0177044.
[Link]
Martínez-Mesa, J., González-Chica, D. A., Duquia, R. P., Bonamigo, R. R., & Bastos, J. L.
(2016). Sampling: how to select participants in my research study?. Anais brasileiros
de dermatologia, 91, 326-330. [Link]
Mohajan, H. (2020). Quantitative Research: A Successful Investigation in Natural and Social
Sciences. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 9(4).
[Link]
Pedigo, L. P., & Buntin, G. D. (2020b). Handbook of Sampling Methods for Arthropods in
Agriculture. CRC Press.
Rahi, S. (2017). Research Design and Methods: A Systematic Review of Research
Paradigms, Sampling Issues and Instruments Development. International Journal of
Economics and Management Sciences, 06(02). [Link]
6359.1000403.
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research Methods For Business: A Skill Building
Approach. John Wiley & Sons.
Taherdoost, H. (2016). Sampling methods in research methodology; how to choose a
sampling technique for research. How to choose a sampling technique for research.
[Link]

17
18