Current issue
Archive
About the Journal
About
Editorial Office
Scientific Board
Abstract & Indexing
Contact
Reviewers list
Editorial Policies
Authorship & COI
Ethical principles
Crossmark
Principles of Transparent Checklist
Open access
Reviewing procedure
Instruction for Authors
Guidelines for Authors
Manuscript Types
Manuscript structure
How to submit
SCIENCE ARTICLE
Integrating traditional and digital art through XR technologies: A qualitative study of artistic collaboration
and audience experience
1
Marketing Department, Faculty of Economics, Finance and Management, University of Szczecin, Poland
2
Management Department, Faculty of Economics, Finance and Management, University of Szczecin, Poland
3
Fakultät für Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Hochschule Wismar
University of Applied Sciences
Technology, Business and Design, Germany
4
Graphic, Academy of Art in Szczecin, Poland
Submission date: 2025-07-25
Final revision date: 2026-01-12
Acceptance date: 2026-03-09
Online publication date: 2026-04-08
Publication date: 2026-04-07
Corresponding author
Monika Spychalska-Wojtkiewicz
Marketing Department, Faculty of Economics, Finance and Management, University of Szczecin, Cukrowa 8, 71-004, Szczecin, Poland
Marketing Department, Faculty of Economics, Finance and Management, University of Szczecin, Cukrowa 8, 71-004, Szczecin, Poland
Management 2026;(1):151-172
KEYWORDS
JEL CLASSIFICATION CODES
M10
M11
M31
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Research background and purpose:
This study examines the emerging paradigm of collaboration between traditional and digital art forms through extended reality (XR), augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technologies. We identify critical research gaps including the need for integrated aesthetic theories, longitudinal impact studies, standardized evaluation frameworks, accessibility considerations, and sustainable production models. The primary objective of this study is to investigate how extended reality (XR) technologies, including augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR), can facilitate the integration of traditional and digital art forms. Specifically, the research seeks to examine how XR technologies influence artistic creation, exhibition practices, and audience reception, while preserving the original artistic intent. Furthermore, the study aims to identify the challenges and opportunities arising from interdisciplinary collaboration between traditional artists and technologists, as well as the managerial implications for cultural institutions navigating this hybrid paradigm.
Design/methodology/approach:
This research is guided by the following hypotheses: • H1: The integration of XR technologies with traditional art forms can successfully preserve the original artistic intent while simultaneously enhancing audience engagement and expanding opportunities for artistic expression. • H2: Effective interdisciplinary collaboration between traditional artists and technologists—grounded in user-centered design principles and mutual respect for artistic authenticity—is essential for achieving meaningful and sustainable integration of XR technologies into traditional art practices. Through qualitative analysis of expert interviews with artists, technologists, and cultural professionals, complemented by case study.
Findings:
Our findings suggest that successful integration depends on balancing artistic intent with technological capabilities, careful consideration of physical-virtual transitions, and user-centered design approaches. The study identifies five key themes: (1) hybrid reality experiences as artistic extensions rather than replacements; (2) site-specific issues in implementing XR art; (3) audience expansion and deepened engagement through interactive elements; (4) different attitudes of artists toward technological collaboration; and (5) technical challenges requiring interdisciplinary solutions.
Value added and limitations:
This research contributes to our understanding of an emerging artistic paradigm that respects tradition while embracing digital possibilities, suggesting that the future of art lies not in replacing one medium with another, but in their thoughtful integration.
This study examines the emerging paradigm of collaboration between traditional and digital art forms through extended reality (XR), augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technologies. We identify critical research gaps including the need for integrated aesthetic theories, longitudinal impact studies, standardized evaluation frameworks, accessibility considerations, and sustainable production models. The primary objective of this study is to investigate how extended reality (XR) technologies, including augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR), can facilitate the integration of traditional and digital art forms. Specifically, the research seeks to examine how XR technologies influence artistic creation, exhibition practices, and audience reception, while preserving the original artistic intent. Furthermore, the study aims to identify the challenges and opportunities arising from interdisciplinary collaboration between traditional artists and technologists, as well as the managerial implications for cultural institutions navigating this hybrid paradigm.
Design/methodology/approach:
This research is guided by the following hypotheses: • H1: The integration of XR technologies with traditional art forms can successfully preserve the original artistic intent while simultaneously enhancing audience engagement and expanding opportunities for artistic expression. • H2: Effective interdisciplinary collaboration between traditional artists and technologists—grounded in user-centered design principles and mutual respect for artistic authenticity—is essential for achieving meaningful and sustainable integration of XR technologies into traditional art practices. Through qualitative analysis of expert interviews with artists, technologists, and cultural professionals, complemented by case study.
Findings:
Our findings suggest that successful integration depends on balancing artistic intent with technological capabilities, careful consideration of physical-virtual transitions, and user-centered design approaches. The study identifies five key themes: (1) hybrid reality experiences as artistic extensions rather than replacements; (2) site-specific issues in implementing XR art; (3) audience expansion and deepened engagement through interactive elements; (4) different attitudes of artists toward technological collaboration; and (5) technical challenges requiring interdisciplinary solutions.
Value added and limitations:
This research contributes to our understanding of an emerging artistic paradigm that respects tradition while embracing digital possibilities, suggesting that the future of art lies not in replacing one medium with another, but in their thoughtful integration.
REFERENCES (37)
1.
Anggraini, D., Handayaningrum, W., Rahayu, E. W., Suryandoko, W., & Sabri, I. (2024). Kolaborasi seniman dan kecerdasan buatan (AI) dalam membangkitkan gelombang kreativitas di era revolusi seni digital [Collaboration between Artists and Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Generating a Wave of Creativity in the Era of the Digital Art Revolution]. Imaji (Yogyakarta), 22(2), 111–119. https://doi.org/10.21831/imaji....
2.
Akten, M., & Grierson, M. (2016). Real-time interactive sequence generation and control with recurrent neural network ensembles. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv....
3.
Benjamin, W. (2008). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction (J. A. Underwood, Trans.). Penguin. (Original work published 1935).
4.
Bishop, C. (2012). Artificial hells: Participatory art and the politics of spectatorship. Verso.
5.
Briggs, J., & Blythe, M. (2013). Apps for art’s sake: Resistance and innovation. In MobileHCI ’13: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (pp. 45–54). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/249319....
6.
Bucher, J. (2018). Storytelling for virtual reality: Methods and principles for crafting immersive narratives. Routledge.
7.
Bylieva, D., & Krasnoschekov, V. V. (2023). The original and a copy: A technological challenge to art. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofskie nauki, 2, 77–91. https://doi.org/10.18384/2310-....
8.
Candy, L. (2007). Constraints and creativity in the digital arts. Leonardo, 40(4), 366–367. https://doi.org/10.1162/leon.2....
9.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.
10.
Dekker, A. (2018). Collecting and conserving net art: Moving beyond conventional methods. Routledge.
11.
Dellepiane, M., & De Matteis, M. (2014). Site-specific art and 3D: An example of spatial analysis and reconstruction. In Eurographics Workshop on Graphics and Cultural Heritage 2014 – Short Papers (pp. 29–34). The Eurographics Association. https://doi.org/10.2312/gch.20....
12.
Doukianou, S., & Lalioti, V. (2024). Ethical extended reality: Bridging technology and cultural heritage. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Metrology for Extended Reality, Artificial Intelligence and Neural Engineering (MetroXRAINE) (pp. 301–306). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/metrox.... 2024.10796742.
13.
Fogliaroni, P. (2018). Mixed reality for archeology and cultural heritage. In 2nd Workshop on Computing Techniques for Spatio-Temporal Data in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage (pp. 13–19). CEUR-WS. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2230/pa....
15.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/152582....
16.
He, Z., Wu, L., & Li, X. (2018). When art meets technology: The role of augmented reality in enhancing museum experiences and purchase intentions. Tourism Management, 68, 127–139.
17.
Hürst, W. O., Tan, X. J., & de Coninck, F. (2016). Using digital extensions to create new VR museum experiences. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology (ACE 2016), 45, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/300177....
18.
Kaushik, R., & Amer, T. (2020). From passive to active spectators: Understanding the transformation of audience engagement in the performing arts. International Journal of Arts Studies, 9, 231–245.
19.
Kenderdine, S. (2021). Embodiment, entanglement, and immersion in digital cultural heritage. In S. Schreibman, R. Siemens, & J. Unsworth (Eds.), A new companion to digital humanities (2nd ed.,pp. 22–41). Wiley Blackwell.
20.
Knapp, J., Zeratsky, J., & Kowitz, B. (2016). Sprint: How to solve big problems and test new ideas in just five days. Simon & Schuster.
21.
Kong, L., Guo, X., & Liu, Y. (2024). The impact of digital media, virtuality and computer-generated art on traditional art forms. SHS Web of Conferences, 183, 01004. https://doi.org/ 10.1051/shsconf/202418301004.
22.
Latour, B., & Lowe, A. (2011). The migration of the aura: Exploring the original through its facsimiles. In T. Bartscherer & R. Coover (Eds.), Switching codes: Thinking through digital technology in the humanities and the arts (pp. 275–297). University of Chicago Press.
23.
Li, Y. (2025). Embodied experiences in virtual reality artworks [Doctoral dissertation, UCL Institute of Education, University College London]. UCL Discovery. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id....
24.
Łukaszewicz, A., & Petri, J. (2022). Reshaping aesthetics and aesthetic sensibility in a hybrid environment. Contemporary Aesthetics, Special Volume 10, 4. https://contempaesthetics.org /2022/11/29/reshapingaestheticsandaestheticsensibilityinahybridenvironment.
25.
Moloney, J. (2010). Mixed reality and curatorial design: From existing practice to the nomad_tech museum. In Electronic Visualisation and the Arts (EVA 2010) (pp. 185–189). BCS Learning & Development.
26.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (2012). Phenomenology of perception (D. A. Landes, Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published 1945).
27.
Milovanovic, J., Moreau, G., Siret, D., & Miguet, F. (2017). Virtual and augmented reality in architectural design and education: An immersive multimodal platform to support architectural pedagogy. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures (CAAD Futures 2017) (pp. 513–532). Istanbul, Turkey.
28.
Narayan, A. D., Caillard, D., Matthews, J., & Nairn, A. (2022). Artificial imagination: Industry attitudes on the impact of AI on the visual effects process. Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, 13(2), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1386/iscc_0....
29.
Ostrowicki, M. (2018). The question concerning cyberaesthetics: One world – hybrid reality. Art Inquiry – Recherches sur les arts, 24, 73–85.
30.
Panneels, I., & Marshall, J. (2020). Exploring digital craftsmanship: Design and making of tangible and intangible artefacts using digital technologies. Craft Research, 11(2), 185–209.
31.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage.
32.
Porcher, A., Vacherand-Revel, J., Bobillier Chaumon, M.-E., Moktari, M., & Cuvillier, B. (2016). (In) visibilité de l’art sur les réseaux sociaux numériques (RSN): Analyser l’acceptation des RSN par les artistes [The (in)visibility of art on social network sites: analysis of SNS acceptance by artists]. Activités, 13(2), 4. https://doi.org/10.4000/activi...
33.
Prince, P. D. (1995). Digital art: The new literacy, a personal view of the evolution of art issues. Communications of the ACM, 29(4), 30–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/216876....
34.
Rouse, A., Jenkinson, E., & Warner, C. (2022). The use of “art” as a resource in recovery from the impact of sexual abuse in childhood: A qualitative systematic review. Arts & Health, 15(1), 86–109.
35.
Schweibenz, W. (2018). The work of art in the age of digital reproduction. Museum International, 70, 8–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/muse.1....
36.
Slayton, J. A. (2002). Collaboration as media. Leonardo, 35(3), 231–232. https://doi.org/10.1162/002409....
37.
Walmsley, B. (2019). The death of arts marketing: A paradigm shift from consumption to enrichment. Arts and the Market, 9(1), 32–49.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 2299-193X |
| ISSN: | 1429-9321 (1997-2019) |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
