## 5 Results  
S Sixty-five customers entered the shop during the session days, but only \(n=50\) (32 males and 18 females, with an age distribution \(n\)= 18, 18-30; \(n=22\), 30-45; \(n=10\), 45-70) accepted to take part in the experiment. The time duration in the VE was generally below 10 min (average 7.03 min \(\pm\) 1.63 min).  
Participants had little or any experience with VR. A total of 30 participants had never experienced VR experiences while 20 participants had previous experience with VR. To assess the level of familiarity with VR, users answered the following question on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (=not very familiar) to 7 (=very familiar), \"What is your level of familiarity with VR?\". Results indicated that the familiarity level was not very high (av. Sc. 3.45; \(\sigma^{2}\) = 0.94).  
We observed that all participants changed their position from sitting to standing while immersed in the VE. Moreover, changing PoV (see Figure 6) was the most prevalent user behavior (82%, \(n\) = 41). This result may have implications related to the immersiveness of the scene. Indeed, using the HMD allows users to be completely immersed in the VE and discover the furniture collection in a completely different way than browsing it through traditional printed furniture catalogs.  
A minor but interesting aspect is how eight participants tried to touch the virtual objects as proof of the realism of the experience. The observation of the user targets (see Figure 7) shows that almost all participants could have an overview of the virtual catalog (88%, \(n\) = 44) and focus on some details of the furniture (94%, \(n\) = 47), such as hand rests, legs, and stitching. Some customers tried to look at the bottom of the sofa to evaluate the \"quality of construction\".  
We observed a common surprise and excitement reaction from most of the users, as reported by their expressions: \"I feel well in here!\", \"It's crazy I can look around the sofa!\", \"Amazing, I want to touch it!\", \"It's fun!\", \"Very helpful, I want to see also my home with this technology\", \"My wife is very happy, so I'm the happiest man in the world\", \"When I will buy my sofa and my furniture I want to use this technology\", \"It's a good overview of  
Figure 6: User behavior during the Multi-Sensory In-Store Virtual Reality Customer Journey.  
Figure 7: User targets during the Multi-Sensory In-Store Virtual Reality Customer Journey.  
the product and it's better for me to take a decision\", \"Technology is amazing, I never saw so clearly!\".  
The survey shows a good level of satisfaction from the customers (av. sc. 6.12, \(\sigma^{2}\) = 0.71) [33] engaged with the MSISVRCJ, as also seen during the observation.  
The perceived realism results are very positive (av. sc. 5.98, \(\sigma^{2}\) = 0.59). Moreover, the results suggest that users were immersed in the VE. The third question led to positive results (av. sc. 6.54, \(\sigma^{2}\) = 0.73), also supported by the following reasons:  
* They saw products and configurations not physically available in the shop.
* They observed the models arranged in a pleasant environment or in a place that reminded them of simulated their home.
* They increased confidence by better visualization of spatial configurations and material combinations.