The addictive charm of AR experiences
By Fiona van Iersel
Minerva Empowerment
E-Services Marketing
4 June 2025

AR can provoke very strong reactions. I find myself pulled in two directions: excited by what it makes possible and conscious of how much of my life already happens through a phone.

Part of its appeal is how practical it can feel. Trying on sunglasses through a camera or seeing whether a virtual sofa fits a room makes the technology less abstract. You do not necessarily need a headset; many experiences use the phone already in your hand.

Creation tools such as Camera IQ lower another barrier. A visual interface can make it easier for marketers to assemble an AR experience without building everything from code. I appreciate that personally. Coding could leave me stuck in a loop or spending hours hunting for a bug. An accessible creation tool changes who can participate.

During the pandemic, interactive digital experiences also offered play and connection when physical options were limited. Through Vargo and Lusch’s (2004) service-dominant logic, the interesting part is co-creation: the user helps make the experience by trying, moving, choosing and responding. The value does not sit in an image alone.

For a marketer, the attraction is the combination of creation, distribution and feedback. A campaign can invite an interaction and provide information about how people respond. Camera IQ (2022) reported gains in purchase intent from its platform. That is a promising vendor-reported measure, although intent and a completed purchase are different outcomes. The “Show me the money!” question still matters.

Pine and Gilmore’s (1999) work on experiences helps explain the appeal. AR can offer a personal, immersive encounter in which the audience has something to do. It is an invitation to play rather than another message to scroll past.

There are social possibilities too. Cultural spaces, learning experiences and creative tools could reach people for whom a physical visit is difficult. That potential is exciting, provided the design also considers who has the device, connection and ability to use it.

Then there are the concerns. Beauty filters raise questions about self-image, particularly for younger users. Data use needs to be understandable. And as someone who already spends too much time on her phone, I wonder what happens when another digital layer is added to every ordinary moment.

I sometimes feel like a split human being, giving half of myself to my physical world and half to my virtual one. An engaging experience is not automatically an experience I need more of.

Platforms could respond through clear standards for effects, transparent data practices and design that respects attention. I would love to see more AR that encourages real-world interaction, rather than only an escape from it. The creative opportunity is enormous. So is the responsibility to make the experience worth the time it asks from us.