None of the choices made by participants affected the length or the course of the overall VR experience. Both perspective-taking tasks, regardless of delivery method, lasted approximately 15 minutes. Upon completion of the post-intervention questionnaire, participants left the laboratory and received three follow up surveys over the next eight weeks.
The follow up surveys were sent via email exactly two, four, and eight weeks after the intervention took place. Each follow-up survey was automatically sent by the Qualtrics platform as a link that would expire after 24 hours of being sent. When participants completed the surveys, researchers were able to download the data from that same platform without any identifying information. Participants who did not meet the deadline were excluded from the analysis.
At Time 0 immediately after the intervention 2 participants were excluded due to technical difficulties. At Time 1 2 weeks after the intervention , 5 participants failed to complete part two within the given time frame. At Time 2 4 weeks after the intervention 2 participants did not complete part three. At Time 3 eight weeks after the intervention 4 participants did not complete the survey within the allotted time.
All participants were debriefed once the study had been completed. Interpersonal Reactivity Index. There were two main reasons why the fantasy subscale was excluded.
The first and main reason for excluding the fantasy subscale was that this was a mobile experiment. One of the limitations of having a mobile VR lab and running with volunteers mostly composed of attendees at museums and events is that time is an issue for most participants. Given we were already asking multiple questionnaires and the intervention lasted 15 minutes, we needed to be very selective about what questions to include. The fantasy subscale specifically measures the ability to embody through imagination a fictional character and feel what they are feeling, something that was less relevant to our intervention.
Beliefs about Empathy Scale.
Lee Pomeroy's family leave court as CCTV is played of fatal attack | Daily Mail Online
This scale is used as a sample check to make sure that there are no significant differences in beliefs about empathy across conditions, as previous research has demonstrated that participants who believe they can control their empathic responses actually exert more empathic effort than those who believe they have no control [ 61 ].
Manipulation Check. The coding scheme employed was deductive and adapted from the presence questionnaires used in Nowak and Biocca [ 62 ] and Bailenson and Yee [ 63 ]. Participants received a 1, 0, or -1 depending on their responses. Inclusion of the Other in the Self. In the IOS scale, participants select the picture that best represents their relationship with the average homeless person [ 64 ]. Pictures are Venn-like diagrams of two circles overlapping, with each circle representing a homeless person and the self, respectively. The pictures are coded from 1 to 7 with the larger numbers indicating a closer relationship with the homeless i.
The results of these four questions were used to create an index of empathic concern. This measure was adapted from Batson, Early and Salvarani [ 17 ]. Personal Distress. The results of these four questions were used to create an index of personal distress. This measure was also adapted from Batson, Early and Salvarani [ 17 ].
Dehumanization Scale. The Ascent of Man measure of Dehumanization is a single-item measure of blatant dehumanization [ 65 ]. This measure was chosen to examine whether or not traditional or VR perspective-taking tasks could prevent dehumanization toward the homeless since past research has demonstrated that people are willing to overtly describe outgroup members as less evolved than members of their own group [ 57 — 58 , 65 ]. Social Presence Scale.
The 6-item social presence scale assesses how present participants felt with virtual humans inside the IVE in the VRPT condition and was adapted from Nowak and Biocca [ 62 ]. Attitudes toward the Homeless. This scale adapted from Batson et al. Higher scores indicate more positive attitudes toward the homeless. Agreement with Proposition A.
- Network and Parallel Computing | SpringerLink;
- Jameela Jamil says boyfriend James Blake is a 'good feminist' [Video].
- IT consultant, 51, 'was stabbed 18 times in train rage murder';
- muslims most civilised by dr javed jamil.
- Frothy Coffee Stories.
- Gilbert Keith Chesterton (A Sheed & Ward Classic).
- Seducing the Sergeant: Scifi Shapeshifter Weredog Romance.
Proposition A, a real proposition at the time the study was conducted, supported increasing affordable housing for vulnerable populations in the San Francisco Bay Area Text B in S1 Appendix. This measure was implemented at Time 0 immediately after the intervention. Signing Petition Supporting Proposition A. Participants were also asked whether or not they were willing to sign a petition supporting Proposition A. At this point, participants were reminded that the passing of the proposition would mean an increase in their taxes.
Instead of simply selecting yes or no , participants either signed the petition or left the petition page blank This measure was also implemented at Time 0 and participants were debriefed that the petition was not a real petition upon completion of the study eight weeks later. Donation Question. Participants were compensated in full regardless of whether they chose to donate any money or not. However, participants were not aware they were going to receive full compensation until they were debriefed after the study had been completed.
Again, the researcher was not in the room with the participant while they chose whether or not to donate money. This measure was also implemented immediately after the intervention.
- 79 Best Leadership images | Inspiring quotes, Inspiration quotes, Inspire quotes.
- The Poor Mans Commentary-Book of Nahum!
- Ingredient Pairings, a cooking reference of complementary ingredients;
- MTVP on Facebook.
- 79 Best Leadership images | Inspiring quotes, Inspiration quotes, Inspire quotes.
- Assistive Technology For Students Who Are Blind or Visually Impaired.
- Lee Pomeroy's family leave court as CCTV is played of fatal attack.
Letter Writing. Participants were asked to write a letter to their elected officials regarding the issue of homelessness at Time 1 2 weeks after the intervention , and a letter to a friend describing how they felt and what they had learned about the issue of homelessness at Time 3 eight weeks after the intervention. For instructions see Text C in S1 Appendix. Past research demonstrated that analyzing the way that people write function words rather than what they write about content words , is a reliable measure of different psychological and emotional states [ 66 ].
We focused on analyzing 7 categories: word count, positive emotion, negative emotion, social, anxiety, I, and we. These categories were specifically chosen to quantify affect, and examine the extent to which participants included or excluded themselves as part of the solution when writing about the issue of homelessness [ 67 ]. Agreement with Measure B. This measure provided different, yet related, information about what can be done to help the homeless in order to assess support for helpful initiatives over time.
This behavioral measure was implemented at Time 2 4 weeks after the intervention. These results show that there was a balance across conditions in terms of the way that people think about empathy and in the way that they believe they are able to control their empathic responses, showing that random assignment was successful across conditions.
Data from the two coders were averaged together. A Chi-Squared test was used in order to test whether or not there was a significant difference in the proportion of participants who reported feeling present values equal to 1 and the participants who did not values smaller than 1 across conditions. In the NPT condition 5. The means and standard deviations for the outcome variables i. All continuous outcome variables were analyzed using a linear growth curve model with fixed effect of condition NPT vs VRPT on the intercept results right after the intervention and linear terms trend over the course of eight weeks.
Random effect of individuals on the intercept and the slopes were included in the models as well. Growth curve modeling analysis was chosen since it accounts for inter-participant variability between and intra-participant within patterns of change over time [ 69 — 70 ]. All analyses were carried out in R version 3. Fig 3 shows the data and model fit. The general trend for both conditions is that participants felt moderately connected to the homeless immediately after the intervention, but experienced a slight decline of.
Higher scores represent higher overlap between the self and the homeless. The difference was approximately 1. Fig 4 shows the data and model fit. Visual inspection of the residuals of the model testing the effect of condition and time on attitudes toward the homeless revealed a curvilinear relationship between these variables. Even though attitudes toward the homeless deteriorated over time, the attitudes deteriorated at a significantly slower rate and were consistently more favorable for participants in the VRPT condition than the participants in the NPT condition.
Fig 5 shows the data and model fit. Fig 6 shows the data and model fit. These results indicate that significant differences in personal distress only occurred immediately after the intervention. Fig 7 shows the data and model fit. Correlations among Dependent Variables. All simple Pearson correlations between dependent variables are included in Table 2. A Holm-Bonferroni correction was implemented to account for multiple comparisons.
Results show the adjusted p-values. The correlation analysis showed that IOS scores were not significantly correlated with attitudes toward the homeless immediately after the intervention. Moreover, attitudes toward the homeless were not correlated with personal distress immediately after the intervention. In other words, participants who reported more positive attitudes toward the homeless also reported more support for affordable housing four weeks after the intervention.
These results suggest that over time, the positive correlation between attitudes and support for helpful initiatives strengthens. Behavioral Measures at time 0. Even though participants in both conditions claimed to support Proposition A to the same extent, a significantly higher proportion of participants who performed the VRPT task physically signed the petition in support of affordable housing. On average, participants from both conditions donated about 5 dollars to a homeless shelter. Behavioral Measures at Time 1. Two weeks after the intervention, participants were asked to write a letter to their elected official on the issue of homelessness.
Means and standard deviations used for all the dictionaries by condition can be found in Table 3. Behavioral Measures at Time 2. Four weeks after the intervention, at Time 2, participants were asked to what extent they agreed with Measure B, a measure proposed in the San Francisco Bay Area supporting affordable housing. However, these results were only marginally significant. Behavioral Measures at Time 3. Eight weeks after the intervention, participants were asked to write a letter to a friend telling them what they had learned and thought about the issue of homelessness.
Both types of perspective-taking tasks led to similar results when it came to self-other overlap immediately after the intervention and over the course of eight weeks. Participants in the VRPT condition reported significantly more empathy and more personal distress immediately after the intervention. The results for attitudes toward the homeless and the dehumanization scale show the opposite pattern. Even though both conditions reported similar rates of dehumanization and attitudes toward the homeless at the time of the intervention, participants in the NPT condition thought of the homeless as less evolved over time, and the attitudes they had for the homeless deteriorated in the eight weeks that followed the intervention.
In contrast, the VRPT condition, which allowed participants to interact with the virtual environment in real-time, led to more positive, longer-lasting attitudes toward the homeless up to two months after the intervention. Past research has demonstrated that after a perspective-taking task, participants tend to feel empathetic toward a specific target immediately after the task, but over time, the empathic feelings wane while attitudes toward that target improve [ 71 ]. In a different study, Batson et al [ 3 ] found that participants who performed a perspective-taking task felt more empathy for convicted murderers than participants who were asked to remain objective.
There were no differences in attitudes toward the convicts between the two conditions immediately after the task, but there were significant differences in attitudes 1—2 weeks after the intervention, indicating that feeling empathetic toward a member of a stigmatized group may lead to better attitudes over time rather than immediately after the perspective-taking task. Our results replicate these findings since participants in the VRPT condition reported more empathy but similar attitudes when compared to the NPT participants immediately after the intervention, but significantly better attitudes toward the homeless over time.
Additionally, improved attitudes lasted longer than the empathic feelings themselves. It is also important to note that while there were no significant differences when it came to self-reported support for Proposition A between the two conditions, significantly more participants in the VRPT condition signed the petition in support of affordable housing even when it meant an increase in their taxes. Overall, these results show that immediately after the intervention, VRPT led to more self-reported empathy and personal distress. Over time, VRPT did not lead to more self-other overlap, self-reported empathy, personal distress, or donations to a homeless shelter than more traditional perspective-taking tasks.
However, VRPT did result in more positive, longer-lasting attitudes toward the homeless and significantly more signatures supporting helpful initiatives than the NPT condition. The results of Study 1 showed that, over time, participants in both the NPT and VRPT condition reported feeling empathetic and connected to the homeless at similar rates. However, VRPT led to more signatures supporting affordable housing and more positive, longer-lasting attitudes. These results show that perspective-taking aided by immersive VR media can effectively improve attitudes toward the homeless.
However, it is possible that less immersive media, such as desktop computers and laptops, produce similar effects without the need to fully surround participants with stimuli. Study 2 expands on Study 1 by comparing the effect of four different types of empathy interventions: a fact-driven information intervention Information , a traditional, narrative-based perspective-taking task NPT , a VR perspective-taking task VRPT , and a less immersive mediated perspective-taking task using a desktop computer Desktop in order to more accurately assess the effect of perspective-taking and examine the role immersion plays when attempting to promote empathy and prosocial behaviors.
Since past research demonstrates that perspective-taking leads to increased empathy and helping behaviors, we predict that any type of perspective-taking would be more effective at eliciting empathy and prosocial behaviors than receiving information i. Given the results obtained in Study 1, we also predict that mediated perspective-taking would be more effective than NPT i. Desktop and VRPT vs NPT , and that the most immersive perspective-taking task would be more effective than the less immersive perspective-taking tasks i.
VRPT vs Desktop. A total of participants were recruited to participate in this study. Thirteen participants were excluded from the analysis because they did not complete the study in its entirety.
Of the remaining participants men, women , participants were students recruited from a medium-sized western university and were recruited at mobile sites such as schools, museums, and senior citizen centers in the San Francisco Bay Area. The mean age of the participants was Participants recruited at mobile sites participated in the study inside a 3. Apart from the physical setting, all of the participants used the same equipment and followed the same procedures. There was no overlap between participants from Study 1 and Study 2. After random assignment, all participants completed a pre-intervention questionnaire which included demographic questions, the Interpersonal Reactivity Index IRI , and the Beliefs about Empathy scale.
Upon completing this questionnaire, participants in each condition received a different empathy intervention. The packet was a combination of written information, graphs, tables, maps, and pie charts. The packet provided information on the main causes for homelessness, obstacles faced by the homeless when trying to get a job, as well as the percentage of the population that were children, sick, or had a history of foster care.
To read all of the information provided in this packet please see Text E in S1 Appendix. After reading the packet, participants completed a post-intervention questionnaire consisting of self-report and behavioral measures. This fact-driven intervention was chosen in order to examine the effectiveness of perspective-taking mediated or not against a rigorous, real-world intervention that does not utilize perspective-taking at all and was specifically designed to increase awareness about the homeless.
The narrative that the participants followed was the same interactive narrative from the VRPT condition, except participants were only able to view the environment on the screen, navigate the online environment using the arrow keys on the computer keyboard, and select objects with their mouse. The functionality of this interactive narrative resembled that of an online game. Participants in this condition were given the same interactive tasks as the VRPT condition, and were able to make their own choices, navigate the virtual environment, and receive immediate feedback. All of the perspective-taking tasks, regardless of type, lasted approximately 15 minutes.
All participants completed the same post-intervention questionnaire immediately after the intervention. The same manipulation check employed in Study 1 was used in Study 2 to assess how spatially present participants felt across the three perspective-taking conditions. The behavioral measures used were self-reported support for Proposition A, whether or not participants signed a petition supporting Proposition A, and the homeless shelter donation question. The lack of significant differences across conditions for our population variables suggests that all of the conditions were well balanced in terms of individual differences, and that random assignment to the four conditions was successful.
A Chi-Squared test was used in order to test whether or not there was a significant difference in the proportion of participants who reported feeling present and the participants who did not between conditions. These results confirm that our experimental conditions are significantly different from each other in terms of presence with the VRPT condition being the most immersive, followed by the Desktop condition, and then the NPT condition. The Information condition responses were not coded because participants in this condition did not perform any kind of perspective-taking task. The means and standard deviations for the continuous variables i.
A one-way, between-subjects analysis of variance ANOVA was carried out to compare the effect of condition on all of the continuous outcome variables. All significant effects of condition on the outcome variables were followed up with three planned orthogonal contrasts that specifically tested our hypotheses. We predicted 1 that any type of perspective-taking would be more effective at eliciting empathy and prosocial behaviors than receiving information i. Information , 2 that mediated perspective-taking would be more effective than NPT i. Participants felt closer and more connected to the homeless after any type of perspective-taking than when they just received information about the homeless.
This result replicates extant research highlighting the effectiveness of perspective-taking tasks on self-other overlap [ 73 ]. These results replicate the findings from Study 1, highlighting that mediated perspective-taking tasks, regardless of how immersive they are, do not result in participants feeling more connected to the homeless than traditional perspective-taking tasks. Taken together, these results showed that just receiving information about the current state of the homeless population did not result in participants feeling closer or more connected to the homeless population.
However, perspective-taking tasks, regardless of delivery medium or level of immersion, had a positive effect in that participants felt more connected to the homeless after taking their perspective. The dehumanization scale measured how evolved participants felt the average member of the homeless population was at the time of the study. Similar to the self-other overlap results, there was no difference between the participants in the NPT condition and the two mediated conditions Desktop and VRPT.
These results show that participants in the three perspective-taking conditions reported feeling more empathetic and connected to the homeless than participants who only received information about the current state of homeless population. Participants in the three perspective-taking conditions also reported feeling more personally distressed after taking the perspective of a homeless person than participants in the Information condition.
Social Presence. Social presence, or the feeling of being inside a virtual environment with others was only measured for the Desktop and VRPT conditions. Replication of Study 1. Both of these results replicate the findings from Study 1. All simple correlations are included in Table 6. In other words, participants who reported feeling more connected to the homeless also reported more empathy, and felt more copresent with virtual humans in the mediated perspective-taking tasks i. Support for Proposition A.
However, participants in the mediated perspective-taking conditions i. Signing Petition supporting Proposition A. These results show that mediated perspective-taking, regardless of immersion level, is more effective at encouraging political action in the form of signed petitions than NPT. However, increased immersion leads to significantly more signed petitions significantly more participants in VRPT condition signed the petition than participants in the Desktop condition. Since such a large percentage of participants chose the highest possible amount, this measure was at ceiling, and did not let us accurately conclude whether or not a specific type of empathy intervention was more effective at promoting prosocial behaviors in the form of donations than the others.
However, there was no significant difference in support for Proposition A in Study 1. Overall, the self-report results show that the Information condition, which solely provided facts about the homeless population, was less effective at making participants feel empathetic and connected to the homeless than any of the perspective-taking conditions.
Participants in the Information condition also reported feeling significantly less distressed and rated the homeless as less evolved than any of the perspective-taking participants. However, there was no significant difference between the Information condition and the VRPT condition in the proportion of people who signed the petition. These results show that information interventions can help promote prosocial behaviors, however, it is unclear whether empathy, social desirability, or increased awareness motivated these behaviors. Showing the opposite pattern, participants in the NPT and Desktop condition reported feeling as empathetic and connected to the homeless as the participants in the VRPT condition.
The immersive experience of becoming homeless in an IVE resulted in a significantly higher proportion of participants exhibiting helpful behaviors toward the homeless in the form of signing a petition when compared to traditional and less immersive perspective-taking tasks.
Across two studies, we compared the effect of VR perspective-taking tasks against more traditional and less immersive perspective-taking tasks.test3.expandit.io/fractal-apertures-in-waveguides-conducting-screens-and.php
From Sources to Solution
We hypothesized that the more immersive the perspective-taking task, the more empathy and prosocial behaviors participants would exhibit toward the homeless. Study 1 was a longitudinal investigation that compared the effects of a VR perspective-taking task against a more traditional, narrative-based perspective-taking task at the time of the intervention and over the course of eight weeks. Results showed that there was no significant difference in self-other overlap i. At the time of the intervention, participants in the VRPT condition reported feeling more empathy toward the homeless and more personal distress than participants in the NPT condition.
However, over the course of the eight weeks after the intervention, these differences dissipated and there was no significant difference between conditions in self-reported empathy or personal distress. These findings add to the literature by providing empirical evidence showing that imagine-self perspective-taking tasks, regardless of delivery medium, result in a combination of other-oriented empathy and self-oriented distress. Unlike reported empathy and personal distress, there were no significant differences between conditions in blatant dehumanization or attitudes toward the homeless immediately after the intervention.
- Advances in Plant Breeding Strategies: Fruits.
- Little Wing.
- Declutter Now!: Uncovering the Hidden Joy and Freedom in Your Life!
Over time, however, participants in the VRPT condition had more positive attitudes and thought of the homeless as more evolved than participants in the NPT condition. Even though there was no significant difference of blatant dehumanization at the time of the intervention, these results show that the positive effect of traditional perspective-taking on perceptions of the homeless i.
These results are consistent with past research showing that attitudes toward a specific social target increase significantly over time even as empathic feelings dissipate [ 3 , 71 ]. However, a significantly higher proportion of participants in the VRPT condition signed the petition supporting Proposition A.
These results are consistent to those of Rosenberg, Baughman, and Bailenson [ 55 ], who saw no significant difference in intention to help but saw significant differences in actual helping behaviors. Two weeks after the intervention, participants were asked to write a letter to their elected officials about the issue of homeless.
Participants in the VRPT condition used significantly more first-person plural pronouns e. Four weeks after the intervention, participants were asked the extent to which they agreed with Measure B, a measure that advocated for affordable housing just like Proposition A. These results showed that over time, participants in the VRPT condition continued to support political initiatives that could actually benefit the homeless population, whereas the level of support for these kinds of initiatives decreased significantly over time for the participants in the NPT condition.
Study 2 expanded on Study 1 by further exploring the mechanisms that caused differences between the narrative-based perspective-taking and the VR perspective-taking task. We compared the effect of three different types of perspective-taking tasks, each varying in levels of immersion, against each other and against a fact-driven information intervention in order to more accurately explore the effect of immersion and type of empathy intervention on elicited empathy and prosocial behaviors toward the homeless.
Study 2 also differed from Study 1 in that we used a larger, more racially diverse sample with participants ranging from 15 to 88 years old. In line with our predictions, and replicating past studies [ 3 ], the results of Study 2 showed that participants in all three perspective-taking conditions reported feeling more empathetic toward the homeless compared to participants in the Information condition who did not perform a perspective-taking task at all.
When comparing the three different types of perspective-taking tasks, it was participants in the VRPT condition who reported feeling more connected and empathetic toward the homeless than the less immersive Desktop condition and the NPT condition. Replicating results of Study 1, a significantly higher proportion of participants in the VRPT condition signed the petition supporting efforts to increase affordable housing than participants in the Desktop or NPT conditions.
On most outcome variables i. At first glance, these results were expected since past research has shown that giving people information does not always change their attitudes [ 29 , 74 ]. When it comes to petition signatures, more participants in the VRPT condition signed the petition than participants in the Information condition. However, this difference was not statistically significant. These results show that fact-driven interventions can also be successful at promoting prosocial behaviors.
Additionally, the discrepancy in self-reported empathy results and signed petitions for participants in the Information condition suggests that empathy or self-other overlap were not the only mechanisms that led to prosocial behaviors.
Books by Mistress Jessica
In terms of dehumanization, there was no significant difference between the Information condition and the PT conditions. However, there was a significant difference between the immersive conditions and the NPT condition. This result was expected since we hypothesized that higher levels of immersion would lead to more empathy and more positive attitudes. There was also a marginally significant difference between the Desktop and the VRPT conditions, with Desktop participants evaluating the homeless as more evolved than the VRPT participants immediately after the intervention.
This result was unexpected, but could potentially be explained by the fact that participants in the VRPT condition viscerally experienced harassment in one of the bus scenes from a fellow rider. This experience may have influenced how participants thought of the homeless since they were personally accosted by someone inside the VR experience.
IMPACT Mathematics: Algebra and More, Course 1, Student Edition
While participants in the Desktop condition went through the exact same scene, they were not immersed in the environment, and their personal space was not violated. However, these results did not negatively affect prosocial behaviors. A significantly higher proportion of participants in the VRPT condition signed the petition in support of Proposition A than participants in the Desktop condition.
The dehumanization score results in Study 2 may be an example of how depicting a real scenario, such as being accosted by someone inside an IVE, can have undesirable or unintended effects when compared to depicting the same scenario through a less immersive medium e. This concern becomes particularly salient as consumer adoption of VR systems continues to increase and empathy-driven VR experiences become more available to the public.
Past research has demonstrated that short VR experiences can have visceral reactions that affect the way a person thinks, feels, and behaves [ 38 , 53 , 55 ]. There is also cogent evidence that virtual humans, such as the man in the bus scene, exert social influence over users [ 75 ]. In general, as VR scales up and more people have access to it, it is important for designers and researchers to pilot test their experiences to ensure the experiences they create are having the intended effect.
Study 2 replicated the IOS and dehumanization scale findings from Study 1. The results of both of these studies provide more evidence suggesting that when VR perspective-taking tasks are employed, valuations of the social target do not increase significantly at the time of the intervention, but tend to increase over time, and last up to two months after the intervention. However, when comparing the empathy and personal distress results, Study 2 did not replicate the findings from Study 1. Study 1 found that participants in the VRPT condition reported more empathy and personal distress immediately after the intervention, but Study 2 found no significant differences between these two conditions.
One of the likely reasons the empathy and personal distress findings from Study 1 were not replicated is that the sample used in Study 2 was much larger and more demographically diverse than the sample used in Study 1. The Study 2 sample was also mostly composed of volunteers that had never used a VR headset before.
It is possible that the novelty of the equipment acted as a distraction and prevented participants from focusing on the experience itself, resulting in lower empathy and personal distress scores. In a longitudinal study, Bailenson and Yee [ 76 ] found that, over time, VR users change the way they behave inside virtual environments and suggest that the novelty of VR technology has an effect on virtual social interactions. They also propose that the way experienced VR users go through a VR experience and use the technology is different from the way that first-time users experience the technology [ 76 ].
As VR empathy-driven interventions begin to be used at scale, it will be important to control for the level of experience of the users. Overall, these findings replicate past VR studies in which participants who embodied the perspectives of other groups e. Results from the present investigation further confirm that VR, compared to other types of traditional or mediated perspective-taking, often leads to better attitudes and a higher proportion of users signing petitions in support of helpful initiatives for outgroup members.
There are a number of limitations to these studies. Additionally, this investigation only included a quantitative measure of social presence. In future studies, participants will be explicitly asked to rate the extent to which they felt spatially present, socially present, and self-present to better understand how these different dimensions of presence impact empathic and behavioral outcomes after VR perspective taking tasks.
The donation question was flawed in that it did not give a wide enough range of possible answers in order to address the possible differences between conditions or between different types of prosocial behaviors i. Even though on average most participants donated around the same amount of money, the standard deviations were high for each condition. Such high variability in amount donated across conditions prevented the researchers from being able to examine whether or not different types of perspective-taking tasks led to different levels of prosocial behaviors.
Future studies should ask participants how much money out of their own pocket they would like to donate or allow for a wider range of possible answers e. It is important to note that the VR experience used immersed participants in an environment specifically designed to provide a visceral experience of what it would be like to be homeless from the first person perspective. However, the VR experience lasted approximately 15 minutes and was not able to simulate some of the psychological and physiological burdens that homeless people experience e.
These limitations prevent participants from actually experiencing what it would be like to become homeless. Another limitation of the technology is that despite the high level of interactivity within the experience, it still did not allow to participants to interact with the virtual world the way they naturally interact with the real world.
Another limitation of these studies is that attitudes toward the homeless were not measured before the intervention. Even though the participants were randomly selected into each condition, it is possible that participants already had set views regarding the homeless that the researchers were not aware of. Future studies should measure pre-existing biases and attitudes toward the homeless in order to more accurately assess the effect of the different types of empathy interventions.
Additionally, the design of the present investigation lacked a pure control condition. In Study 2, the Information condition led to an unexpected number of donations and proportion of signatures supporting affordable housing. A pure control condition, without any kind of empathy intervention, would be necessary in order to address the mechanism that led to these prosocial behaviors.
Results of Study 2 found that a similar proportion of participants in the VRPT and the Information conditions signed the petition supporting affordable housing for vulnerable populations. Given participants in any of the perspective-conditions reported feeling more connected, more empathetic, and more personally distressed than participants in the Information condition, it is unlikely that empathy led to these behavioral outcomes.
It is possible that social desirability or increased awareness about the homeless led to these results. Future studies should compare a pure control condition, an information condition, and a perspective-taking task condition to try to understand the mechanism that makes information-driven interventions successful at promoting prosocial behaviors. Despite these limitations, the results of this investigation provide encouraging evidence supporting the use of IVEs to promote empathy and prosocial behaviors toward extreme outgroup members. However, it is important to note the small effect sizes, and the fact that for most of the self-report measures in Study 2 there were no significant differences between the three perspective-taking conditions.
This might be due to the fact that the content was as rigorous in all of these conditions, and that the level of immersion did not have as much of an effect eliciting more empathy. Future studies should try to replicate these results while targeting a different social group in order to assess the generalizability of VR as a perspective-taking tool, and test whether it is the content and context that allows perspective-taking to promote empathy or rather the modality of the medium by which the intervention is administered.
Future studies should also consider using implicit measures of empathy in addition to explicit self-report measures in order to further understand the patterns exhibited between self-report and behavioral measures. In the current version of the VR experience, participants are able to make choices about what they want to sell, what search strategy they implement in the car, how they react and respond to the men in the bus, and who and how they interact with the other homeless people in the bus. Participants are constantly seeing how their decisions affect the narrative and this, in turn, provides a highly individualized and interactive experience for the participant.
Future studies should compare this type of VR experience to one in which participants do not have agency i. We speculate that highly interactive and responsive IVEs, where participants are able to see how their own actions manifest in the IVE in real-time, may lead to higher levels of spatial and social presence, more self-reported empathy, better attitudes, and more prosocial behaviors. However, whether or not this difference is significant requires more empirical evidence. Moreover, future research should compare imagine-self and imagine-other VR perspective-taking tasks.
The present study employed imagine-self perspective-taking tasks and found some effects on behavioral measures, however, the motivation that led to these behaviors is not clear. Past research suggests that imagine-self tasks evoke both other-oriented empathy and self-oriented distress, and that this combination of emotions can lead to a stronger motivation to help when compared to imagine-other tasks [ 17 ]. Thus, it would be expected that more helping behaviors would be performed with an imagine-self task than an imagine-other task.
A study comparing these two types of perspective-taking would be able to discern whether the motivation to help was altruistic or egoistic, and compare the amount of prosocial behaviors performed by participants. Finally, future research should examine the effect of novelty on experimental outcomes. Past research has demonstrated that users change the way they behave inside virtual environments once they have been exposed to the technology a number of times [ 76 ]. These results suggest that the level of experience or familiarity with VR technology may have an effect on the way users interact with each other and in the way that they experience VR in general.
However, more research is needed in order to assess the impact of novelty on empathy-driven VR experiences and interventions. Future studies should control for the number of times participants have used VR technology to see if novelty moderates elicited empathy and prosocial behaviors after a VR perspective-taking task. The present investigation found that over the course of eight weeks, participants who completed a VR perspective-taking task had more positive attitudes and signed a petition supporting helpful initiatives toward the homeless at significantly higher rates than the participants who just imagined what it would be like to become homeless or performed a less immersive perspective-taking task.
The investigation also found that narrative-based and mediated perspective-taking interventions, regardless of immersion level, are more effective at increasing self-reported empathy than interventions without any perspective-taking tasks. The results of this investigation provide evidence suggesting that VR perspective-taking tasks may be more effective at improving attitudes toward specific social targets and motivating prosocial behaviors in the form of signed petitions in support of helpful initiatives than traditional and less immersive perspective-taking tasks.
Contains all of the raw data and open-ended responses used for analysis in Study 1. Contains all of the raw data and open-ended responses used for analysis in Study 2. Browse Subject Areas? Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field. Positive and negative effects of perspective-taking Traditional perspective-taking tasks i.
Media and empathy Apart from traditional perspective-taking, researchers have tried to promote empathy through a variety of mediated perspective-taking tasks i. Perspective-taking tasks and VR An IVE is a fully immersive and interactive computer-generated environment that gives the user the feeling of being somewhere other than where they are in the physical world. Overview of studies Two studies were conducted in order to compare the effects of different types of perspective-taking interventions on empathy and prosocial behaviors. Study 1 Study 1 compared the short and long-term effects of a traditional, narrative-based perspective-taking NPT task and a VR perspective-taking VRPT task at the time of the intervention and over the course of eight weeks.
Participants Individuals recruited from a medium-sized western university and from around the San Francisco Bay Area formed an initial sample of participants. Download: PPT. Measures Population variables. Outcome variables. Behavioral measures. Outcome variables Manipulation check. Continuous variables. Table 1. Means and standard deviations for all outcome variables by condition and time. Fig 3. Mean values of self-other overlap with the homeless as a function of condition over time.
Fig 4. Mean values of blatant dehumanization of the homeless as a function of condition over time. Fig 5. Mean values of attitudes toward the homeless as a function of condition over time. Megan and Christopher Fieberg were sitting in the secon carriage which Pencille and Mr Pomeroy entered half-way through their argument. Mrs Fieberg said: 'The victim carried on saying 'Please, I want you to apologise to me because you humiliated me in front of my child' and then the defendant carried on saying 'Touch me, touch me, I dare you.
You'll see what happens at the next station'. Referring to Mr Pomeroy, she added: 'He was obviously a bit angry, but he tried to calm down the black man so that they obviously didn't get into a physical fight. He just wanted to talk and get an apology out of him. She told jurors Pencille looked as if he 'wanted to have a fight' and described how she saw the pair of them 'holding each other by the collars of their shirts' as she and her husband left.
But during cross-examination by Pencille's barrister Justin Rouse QC, Mrs Fieberg recalled hearing him twice telling Mr Pomeroy to 'leave me alone' as they entered the carriage. The jury have seen a picture of the coat Pencille discarded as he fled the scene of the attack. Pencille arrived a few minutes later. Following a brief exchange, Mr Pomeroy could be seen on the carriage's CCTV to get up and walk after Pencille, who was wearing a zipped-up jacket, sunglasses and hat.
Jurors were played footage of the two men walking through the carriage into the adjoining one before they stop and continue arguing in a standing area close to a set of doors. Mr Pomeroy could be seen pointing back over his shoulder and holding his palm up towards Pencille. Other passengers described hearing him pressing for an apology, saying: 'You shouldn't have humiliated me in front of my kid. Pencille could then be seen pulling his phone out and holding it up to his ear, a call jurors were told he made to his girlfriend Chelsea Mitchell warning: 'I'm going to kill this man.
He'll be dead. Within 10 seconds of putting the phone away, Pencille had pulled out a knife. The blade was visible before a bloodied Mr Pomeroy walks back down the carriage following a scuffle. Police detective Marc Farmer, from the British Transport Police, told the court that, aside from the clear image of the first blow to Mr Pomeroy's neck, it was initially difficult to determine the extent of the attack. It was only once the medical examination detailing all the separate wounds was completed that detectives were able to review the footage and identify some of the other blows.
Svetlana Pomeroy outside court today. She wept as the video of her husband's final moments was played. A police map shows the route they believe Pencille took as he fled the scene. The green line shows him going towards a field from where a coat was recovered. The orange and blue lines are said to show where he went as he tried to meet his girlfriend to get away. After the first blow had been struck, Mr Pomeroy could be seen struggling with Pencille, as blood quickly began to cover the floor around them.
One of the cameras clearly caught Mr Pomeroy's bloodied face and torso as he walked back down the carriage and sat down. As he did so Pencille could be seen picked up his phone, hat and glasses before getting off the train when it stopped at Clandon. The court heard he was picked up soon after by his girlfriend Chelsea, Mitchell and whisked to Chichester where she bought him a set of clippers from a Tesco Extra along with razors and food bits including fruit juice, some mac and cheese, a packet of Quavers and a Pot Noodle.
Another witness said Pencille was swearing and accusing Pomeroy of following him up the train. Chelsea Mitchell, who is on bail, is accused of assisting an offender. She is pictured, right, arriving at court. Pencille called the victim racist, even though he had not said anything racist, according to the eyewitness. Mr Pomeroy allegedly responded: 'I've never dealt with someone with special needs before. Go, put your hand on me. I dare you. The prosecutor said: 'It was a fight that only one of them was going to win.
He is in the dock and the losing man is dead. Pencille had boarded the train at 1. It is said he disposed of his sunglasses, hat and his jacket, which was probably stained with the victim's blood. The court heard that a witness asked him: 'Are you all right? The defendant replied: 'I've just been in an accident, I have to get back to work.
Mitchell came to Clandon and her phone was used to carry out internet searches about what had happened that day, it is alleged. She is also said to have bought Pencille a razor which he used to shave off his beard. The pair were arrested at Mitchell's house in Farnham at 6am on January 5. Pencille, of no fixed address, denies murder.
His girlfriend, Chelsea Mitchell, of Farnham, Surrey, has pleaded not guilty to assisting an offender. Mr Pomeroy's year-old son described the attack in which his father was killed. He told police: 'When we got onto the carriage my dad didn't say anything he just said 'sit there'. We got on the train pretty much immediately. But he had to slow down he had to stop. He said "Ignorance is bliss" as my dad sat down and he said "you what?
Then my dad said "I hate men like you", but I wasn't paying attention again. Mr Pomeroy's son said the pair then went into the next carriage and he could hear 'shouting' but not what was said. He said: 'My dad is very menacing because he's tall. The guy was taller than me but shorter than my dad. My dad was taller so they were next to the glass by the seats and I assumed they were shouting. I didn't see them actually throwing punches. Then briefly I'm not sure how long it was I looked behind again and I see them punching each other.
I wasn't paying attention to how long was. I looked around again and they are still punching. When I walked up I could see the blood so I was like, okay that looks bad, and I could see blood down the side of his face. The boy said: 'Normally when someone says something to my dad, he won't let it go, he won't just let it roll over.
Whenever someone says something to my dad it's normally because they are trying to start something. But I have never seen my dad every really start a fight. The pair were on a day out Darren Pencille is on trial for murder but is pleading self-defence This morning, a jury at the Old Bailey was shown CCTV footage of the incident It shows father and son boarding the train before 'attacker' brushes past them Pencille's girlfriend accused of aiding getaway.
Share this article Share.