The current meta-analysis aims to investigate and clarify existing research on virtual reality (VR) as a medium to elicit empathy. An exhaustive literature search (updated to February 29, 2020) enabled us to locate seven published articles, yielding a total of nine independent samples. The results reveal statistically significant positive changes in perspective-taking outcomes after VR exposure (d+ = 0.51 [95 percent CI: 0.15–0.88]) but they did not note in empathy (d+ = 0.21 [95 percent confidence interval, CI: −0.37–0.79]). A potential limitation of this work is the low number of studies included. Implications and directions for theoretical development and empirical research are also discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GladsteinGA.Understanding empathy: integrating counseling, developmental, and social psychology perspectives. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1983; 30:467–482.
2.
HarariH, Shamay-TsoorySG, RavidM, et al.Double dissociation between cognitive and affective empathy in borderline personality disorder. Psychiatry Research, 2010; 175:277–279.
3.
DavisMH.A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalogue of Selected Documents in Psychology, 1980; 10:85–103.
4.
Teding van BerkhoutE, MalouffJM. The efficacy of empathy training: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2016; 63:32.
5.
ShanafeltTD, WestC, ZhaoX, et al.Relationship between increased personal well-being and enhanced empathy among. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2005; 20:559–564.
6.
NienhuisJB, OwenJ, ValentineJC. et al. Therapeutic alliance, empathy, and genuineness in individual adult psychotherapy: A meta-analytic review. Psychotherapy Research, 2018; 28:593–605.
7.
BlairRJR.Traits of empathy and anger: implications for psychopathy and other disorders associated with aggression. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2018; 373:20170155.
8.
MayerSV, JusyteA, Klimecki-LenzOM, et al.Empathy and altruistic behavior in antisocial violent offenders with psychopathic traits. Psychiatry Research, 2018; 269:625–632.
9.
EliasMJ, ZinsJE, WeissbergR.P. Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for educators. Adolescence, 2000; 35:221.
10.
GürGC, YilmazE. The effects of mindfulness-based empathy training on empathy and aged discrimination in nursing students: A randomized controlled trial. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 2020; 39:101140.
11.
JacksonAL, BonackerN. The effect of victim impact training programs on the development of guilt, shame and empathy among offenders. International Review of Victimology, 2006; 13:301–324.
12.
HildebrandtLK, McCallC, SingerT. Differential effects of attention-, compassion-, and socio-cognitively based mental practices on self-reports of mindfulness and compassion. Mindfulness, 2017; 8:1488–1512.
13.
KlimeckiOM, LeibergS, LammC, et al.Functional neural plasticity and associated changes in positive affect after compassion training. Cerebral Cortex, 2012; 23:1552–1561.
14.
HerreraF, BailensonJ, WeiszE, et al.Building long-term empathy: A large-scale comparison of traditional and virtual reality perspective-taking. PLoS One, 2018; 13:e0204494.
15.
DavisMH, ConklinL, SmithA, et al.Effect of perspective taking on the cognitive representation of persons: a merging of self and other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996; 70:713.
16.
SchultheisMT, RizzoAA. The application of virtual reality technology in rehabilitation. Rehabil Psychol, 2001; 46:296–311.
17.
RivaG, BañosRM, BotellaC, et al.Transforming experience: the potential of augmented reality and virtual reality for enhancing personal and clinical change. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2016; 7:164.
18.
HassanR.Digitality, virtual reality and the “Empathy Machine.”. Digital Journalism, 2020; 8:195–212.
19.
AhnSJ, LeAMT, BailensonJ. The effect of embodied experiences on self-other merging, attitude, and helping behavior. Media Psychology, 2013; 16:7–38.
20.
SeinfeldS, Arroyo-PalaciosJ, IruretagoyenaG. et al. Offenders become the victim in virtual reality: impact of changing perspective in domestic violence. Scientific Reports, 2018; 8:2692.
21.
PeckTC, SeinfeldS, AgliotiSM, et al.Putting yourself in the skin of a black avatar reduces implicit racial bias. Consciousness and Cognition, 2013; 22:779–787.
OhSY, BailensonJ, WeiszE, et al.Virtually old: embodied perspective taking and the reduction of ageism under threat. Computers in Human Behavior, 2016; 60:398–410.
24.
AndrejevicM, VolcicZ.Virtual empathy. Communication, Culture and Critique, 2019. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1093/ccc/tcz035.
25.
BollmerG.Empathy machines. Media International Australia, 2017; 165:63–76.
26.
MoherD, LiberatiA, TetzlaffJ, et al.Prisma group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med, 2009; 6:e1000097.
27.
FurlanAD, MalmivaaraA, ChouR. et al. Updated method guideline for systematic reviews in the cochrane back and neck group. Spine, 2015; 40:660–73.
28.
Van LoonA, BailensonJ, ZakiJ, et al.Virtual reality perspective-taking increases cognitive empathy for specific others. PLoS One, 2018; 13:e0202442.
HigginsJPT, GreenS. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. The cochrane collaboration: Version 5.1.0; 2019. www.cochrane-handbook.org (accessed July13, 2020).
31.
CohenJ.The effect size index: d. New York: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 1988, 2:284–288.
32.
OrwinRG, VeveaJL. Evaluating coding decisions. The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis, 2009; 2:177–203.
33.
Sánchez-MecaJ, Marín-MartínezF. Confidence intervals for the overall effect size in random-effects meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 2008; 13:31–48.
34.
BorensteinM, HedgesLV, HigginsJP, et al.Fixed-effect versus random-effects models. Introduction to Meta-Analysis, 2009; 77:85.
35.
HigginsJP, ThompsonSG, DeeksJJ, et al.Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ, 2003; 327:557–560.
36.
Huedo-MedinaTB, Sánchez-MecaJ, Marín-MartínezF, et al.Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index?. Psychological Methods, 2006; 11:193–206.
37.
DuvalS, TweedieR. Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics, 2000; 56:455–463.
38.
SterneJA, EggerM. (2005) Regression methods to detect publication and other bias in meta-analysis. In: RothsteinHR, SuttonAJ, BoresteinM, eds. Publication bias in metaanalysis: prevention, assessment and adjustments, in Wiley. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 99–110.
39.
BorensteinM, HedgesL, HigginsJ, et al. (2014) Comprehensive meta-analysis version 3.3. 070. Englewood, NJ: Biostat, p. 104.
40.
RaijA, KotranzaA, LindDS, et al. (2009) Virtual experiences for social perspective-taking. In IEEE virtual reality conference. Lafayette, LA: IEEE, pp. 99–102.
41.
FormosaNJ, MorrisonBW, HillG, et al.Testing the efficacy of a virtual reality-based simulation in enhancing users' knowledge, attitudes, and empathy relating to psychosis. Australian Journal of Psychology, 2018; 70:57–65.
42.
AdefilaA, GrahamS, ClouderL, et al.myShoes—the future of experiential dementia training?. The Journal of Mental Health Training, Education and Practice, 2016; 11:91–101.
43.
BouchardS, BernierF, BoivinE, et al.Empathy toward virtual humans depicting a known or unknown person expressing pain. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 2013; 16:61–71.
44.
Hamilton-GiachritsisC, BanakouD, QuirogaMG, et al.Reducing risk and improving maternal perspective-taking and empathy using virtual embodiment. Scientific Reports, 2018; 8:2975.
45.
WijmaEM, VeerbeekMA, PrinsM, et al.A virtual reality intervention to improve the understanding and empathy for people with dementia in informal caregivers: results of a pilot study. Aging and Mental Health, 2018; 22:1121–1129.
46.
RommeM, EscherS, DillonJ, et al.Living with Voices: 50 stories of recovery. Tijdschrift Voor Psychiatrie, 2011; 53:439–440.
47.
HojatM, DeSantisJ, ShannonSC, et al.The Jefferson Scale of Empathy: a nationwide study of measurement properties, underlying components, latent variable structure, and national norms in medical students. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 2018; 23:899–920.
48.
Sanchez-VivesMV, SlaterM. From presence to consciousness through virtual reality. Nature Review Neuroscience, 2005; 6:332–339.
49.
LongoMR, SchüürF, KammersMPM, et al.What is embodiment? A psychometric approach. Cognition, 2008; 107:978–98.
50.
CareyJC, FoxEA, SpragginsEF. Replication of structure findings regarding the Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 1988; 21:102–105.
51.
BavolekSJ, KeeneRG. (2001) Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory AAPI-2: Administration and development handbook. Park City, UT: Family Development Resources, Inc.
52.
SchutteNS, StilinovićEJ. Facilitating empathy through virtual reality. Motivation and Emotion, 2017; 41:708–712.
53.
ShinD.Empathy and embodied experience in virtual environment: to what extent can virtual reality stimulate empathy and embodied experience?. Computers in Human Behavior, 2018; 78:64–73.
54.
BertrandP, GueganJ, RobieuxL, et al.Learning empathy through virtual reality: Multiple strategies for training empathy-related abilities using body ownership Illusions in embodied virtual reality. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 2018; 5:26.
55.
StefG.Nicovich GW, Boller T, et al. Experienced presence within computer-mediated communications: initial explorations on the effects of gender with respect to empathy and immersion. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2005; 10:00–00.
56.
RivaG, WiederholdB, MantovaniF. Neuroscience of virtual reality: from virtual exposure to embodied medicine. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 2019; 22:82–96.
