Virtual Spaces, Real Benefits

Research increasingly finds that virtual spaces can help us live good lives—sometimes better ones than in the physical places available to us—as long as those virtual worlds are truly and actually realistically presented.

Studies completed include, for example: 

• Naz and colleagues (2017) verified that our experiences in real and comparable virtual worlds are fundamentally equivalent.  They report that “The emotional response a person has to a living space is predominantly affected by light, color and texture as space-making elements. . . . we conducted a user study in a six-sided projected immersive display that utilized equivalent design attributes of brightness, color and texture in order to assess to which extent the emotional response in a simulated environment is affected by the same parameters affecting real environments. . . . Data from the experiments confirmed the hypothesis that perceivable emotional aspects of real-world spaces could be successfully generated through simulation of design attributes in the virtual space. The subjective response to the virtual space was consistent with corresponding responses from real-world color and brightness emotional perception.”
• Yin and colleagues (2018) created two virtual reality indoor environments and had participants in their study spend 5 minutes in each. They also spent 5-minutes in the “real” environment presented via virtual reality; the virtual reality spaces were exact copies of these “real” places.  The researchers found that “The indoor biophilic environment was associated with a decrease in participants’ blood pressure.  . . .  Short-term memory improved by 14% [in the biophilic space compared to the non-biophilic one].  Participants reported a decrease in negative emotions and an increase in positive emotions after experiencing the biophilic setting.  . . . participants experiencing biophilic environment virtually had similar physiological and cognitive responses as when experiencing the actual environment.    This gives rise to the possibility of reducing stress and improving cognition by using virtual reality to provide exposures to natural elements in a variety of indoor settings where access to nature may not be possible.” The non-biophilic environment was described as “a classroom that does not have windows or indoor plants,” while the biophilic environment was “an office common area with plants, bamboo floor and external views of green space and a river.”
• Scates and colleagues (2020) studied the effects of a nature-inspired virtual reality simulation on the experiences of cancer patients during chemotherapy intravenous infusion treatments.  They identified a “significant increases in relaxation, feelings of peace, and positive distractions [when the virtual reality experience was in use, compared to when it was not]. While patients felt significantly less frustrated, measures for stress and pain were not significant. . . . The participants in this study felt significantly more distracted, relaxed, at peace, and less frustrated during their port/IV access when viewing the VR nature scene.”  The virtual reality experience was described; it utilized “local Florida scenes of trees, water features, creeks, animals, and local parks [people sometimes visible] using a 360-video camera. Nature sounds of chirping birds and running water were added to the video. . . . The simulation was designed as a 7-min loop because the average IV procedure takes 3 to 18 min. This allowed patients to view and hear the loop twice if desired.”
• Tanja-Dijkstra and colleagues (2018) linked seeing coastal scenes via virtual reality and experiencing less pain (even during dental treatments such as tooth extractions and fillings).  They report that “Virtual reality (VR) distraction has become increasingly available in health care contexts and is used in acute pain management. However, there has been no systematic exploration of the importance of the content of VR environments. Two studies tested how interacting with nature VR influenced experienced and recollected [remembered] pain after 1 week. . . . In Study 1, nature (coastal) VR reduced both experienced and recollected pain compared with no VR. In Study 2, nature (coastal) VR reduced experienced and recalled pain in dental patients, compared with urban VR and standard care [local anesthetics]. Together, these data show that nature can improve experience of health care procedures through the use of VR, and that the content of the VR matters: Coastal nature is better than urban. . . . even though we included natural elements [for example, vegetation] in the city to provide a conservative test.”  This finding is particularly important because VR experiences are possible when patients are in a number of different positions/situations.
• Schutte and team learned that time spent in virtual reality nature, compared to time spent in virtual reality urban spaces, can lead to better moods (2017).  Also, people who experience virtual reality nature believe that they are more refreshed mentally (in other words, that they are more cognitively restored) after spending time there than the people placed in the virtual urban places.  The researchers immersed users in 360-degree natural or urban interactive virtual environments and learned that “Virtual reality experience of a natural environment compared to virtual reality experience of an urban environment resulted in higher levels of positive affect [mood] and a greater perception of restorativeness. . . . Virtual reality technology may have the potential to enhance well-being.”  Schutte and colleagues’ insights may be particularly useful when virtual reality experiences are being developed to optimize workplace performance, etc.
• Browning and colleagues (2020) determined that virtual nature experiences can have the same effects on mental health as “real” ones.  The team reports that “Nature exposure in virtual reality (VR) can provide emotional well-being benefits for people who cannot access the outdoors. . . . the researchers compared] the effects of 6 min of outdoor nature exposure with 6 min of exposure to a 360-degree VR nature video, which is recorded at the outdoor nature exposure location. Skin conductivity, restorativeness, and mood before and after exposure are measured. We find that both types of nature exposure increase physiological arousal, benefit positive mood levels, and are restorative compared to an indoor setting without nature. . . . Settings where people have limited access to nature might consider using VR nature experiences to promote mental health.”
• An interview with Alan Kingstone and Andrew Gallup (“Experiments in Different ‘Worlds’,” 2019) sheds light on “how basic human behaviors differ between the real world and simulated environments.”  They report that “By demonstrating that yawning is just as contagious within VR [virtual reality] as it is in traditional laboratory settings, we show that people are indeed responsive to imbedded social cues in VR.” In addition, Kingstone and Gallup found that the sites in which VR research is done influence the data collected: “The fact that the mere presence of another person in real-life [in the physical room where people are wearing VR goggles, for instance] can dramatically alter behavioural responses in VR has profound implications for the use of this technology in psychological and cognitive science.”  
• Scents can enhance virtual experiences. Flavian and colleagues (2021) report that “Our experiences are constructed by the stimulation of all our senses. . . . This study analyzes how the addition of ambient scent to a VR experience affects digital pre-experiences in a service context (tourism). Results from a laboratory experiment confirmed that embodied VR devices, together with pleasant and congruent [consistent with experience] ambient scents, enhance sensory stimulation, which . . . influence affective [emotional] and behavioral reactions. . . . Using scents in closed, public spaces (e.g. exhibition centers, travel agencies) can be troublesome as the scents might mix with other odors in the environment. . . . A possible solution to these challenges could be to use isolated cabins for the entire multisensory experience. . . . In a nutshell, although a pleasant scent can improve the digital multisensory experience, congruency is key to fostering positive customer reactions.”
• Wang, Lu, Runco, and Hao’s work (2018) confirms the design-related power of metaphors—a topic that’s often discussed in Research Design Connections articles.  The Wang lead study “investigated whether the experience of “breaking the walls”, the embodiment of the metaphor “breaking the rules”, could enhance creative performance. . . . virtual reality technology was used to simulate the scenario where participants could “break the walls” while walking in a corridor. Participants were asked to solve the creativity-demanding problems. . . .  Results showed higher . . . originality . . . in the “break” condition than in the “no-break” condition.”  Study participants who broke through a virtual reality wall were more creative, when they were walking down the virtual hallway or immediately after walking down that hallway, than other participants who did break through a barrier wall. Many metaphor-based situations can be created in virtual worlds that would be challenging to develop elsewhere.

Matthew Browning, Katherine Mimnaugh, Carena van Riper, Heidemarie Laurent, and Steven LaValle.  2020.  “Can Simulated Nature Support Mental Health?  Comparing Short, Single-Does of 360-Degree Nature Videos in Virtual Reality with the Outdoors.”  Frontiers in Psychology, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02667                

“Experiments in Different ‘Worlds’.”  2019.  Observer, vol. 32, no. 3, p. 45.

Carlos Flavian, Sergio Ibanez-Sanchez, and Carlos Orus.  2021. “The Influence of Scent on Virtual Reality Experiences:  The Role of Aroma-Content Congruence.”  Journal of Business Research, vol. 123, pp. 289-301, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.036

Asma Naz, Regis Kopper, Ryan McMahan, and Mihai Nadin. 2017.  “Emotional Qualities of VR Space.” IEEE Virtual Reality Conference, March 18-22, Los Angeles, CA https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7892225/authors

Diana Scates, Joan Dickinson, Kathleen Sullivan, Holly Cline, and Rama Balaraman.  2020.  “Using Nature-Inspired Virtual Reality as a Distraction to Reduce Stress and Pain Among Cancer Patients.”  Environment and Behavior, vol. 52, no. 8, pp. 895-918, https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916520916259

Karin Tanja-Dijkstra, Sabine Pahl, Mathew White, Melissa Auvray, Robert Stone, Jackie Andrade, Jon May, Ian Mills, and David Moles. 2018.  “The Soothing Sea:  A Virtual Coastal Walk Can Reduce Experienced and Recollected Pain.”  Environment and Behavior, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 599-625.

Xinyue Wang, Kelong Lu, Mark Runco, and Ning Hao. 2018.  “Break the ‘Wall’ and Become Creative:  Enacting Embodied Metaphors in Virtual Reality.”  Consciousness and Cognition, vol. 62, pp. 102-109, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2018.03.004

Jie Yin, Shihao Zhu, Piers MacNaughton, Joseph Allen, and John Spengler. 2018.  “Physiological and Cognitive Performance of Exposure to Biophilic Indoor Environment.”  Building and Environment, vol. 32, pp. 255-262, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.01.006.