## 5 Discussion  
The first novel contribution of the present research is to demonstrate that teachers from CABEI countries rate the usability and user experience dimensions of VR higher than teachers from non-CABEI countries (Table 4). In addition, the level of VR disadvantage perceived by CABEI members is lower than that of non-CABEI members (Table 4). This allows us to conclude, in response to RQ1, that belonging to the CABEI certainly influences professors' acceptance of VR, although not in all the dimensions analyzed. If there are no differences in the ratings of technical or didactic aspects, it is probably because these ratings are not so much conditioned by the digitization of the country or the experience of use, which seems to condition the rating of usability. This implies that professors in CABEI countries probably have greater knowledge and experience in the use of technologies such as VR. In any case, the above results are in line with previous work that identifies the geographic variable as an influential factor in VR valuations [19; 22; 35]. Also, it is shown that CABEI policies regarding the egalitarian digital development of member states lead to higher acceptance of VR technologies by university professors. However, this higher acceptance, while significant, is still small (around 3.37% for usability aspects of VR and 3.16% for disadvantages; Table 4). In contrast, digital competence in CABEI countries is about 7% higher than in non-CBEI countries (Table 4). These two data together imply that membership in CABEI leads to an increase in the digital integration of its universities, but this increase has probably not yet sufficiently reached specific VR technologies. However, these university tenure gaps behave differently in CABEI and non-CABEI countries. Specifically, in CABEI countries, there is a larger gap in digital competence for VR use between private and public universities than in non-CABEI countries (Table 6). Indeed, the digital competence of professors at private universities is 7.23% higher than that of professors at public universities within CABEI countries. In contrast, the digital competence of professors at public universities is 1.6% higher than that of professors at private universities within countries outside the CABEI. This implies, in response to RQ2, that the gaps by university tenure are different depending on whether or not one belongs to the CABEI in terms of self-concept of digital competence, but not in the assessment of the different technical, didactic, or usability dimensions of VR. This probably means that CABEI countries are pursuing more determined university digitization policies than non-CABEI countries, but the impact of these policies is evident mostly in private universities. Again, the reality of the student body of these universities may explain this gap [32]. The implications of this study are as follows: (i) supranational alliances of an economic nature, such as CABEI, have a significant and positive impact on the digitization process in the region in which they are established; (ii) the previous digitization process carried out by CABEI countries has had very little impact on the use and acceptance of specific VR technologies in higher education; and (iii) the policies carried out by CABEI generate inequalities in terms of the digitization process between private and public universities, at least in terms of the digital training of faculty. Based on this second implication, it is suggested that CABEI member states take measures to ensure an increasing use of digital technologies in public universities, for example, by encouraging the design of protocols for their use in lessons.