360 video is considered an “empathy machine,” in part because it places audiences in the perspective of the other. Despite its popularity, its influence on empathy is not fully understood. Two possible mechanisms driving empathy within 360 video are social presence (sense of being with others) and interactivity (degree of control over media content). To elucidate how 360 videos can encourage empathic outcomes through these factors, a 2 (social presence: high/low) × 2 (interactivity: high/low) between-subjects experiment (N = 110) was conducted testing 360 videos about Alaskan climate change refugees. Results demonstrate that social presence contributes to prosocial behaviors (donations) through empathic concern, an effect augmented by interactivity. Unexpectedly, the social presence manipulation also contributed to greater perceived interactivity. Collectively, results are promising and elucidate the role of social presence and interactivity in immersive storytelling.
AhnSJGBostickJOgleE, et al. (2016) Experiencing nature: embodying animals in immersive virtual environments increases inclusion of nature in self and involvement with nature. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication26(6): 399–419.
BailensonJN (2018) Experience on Demand: What Virtual Reality Is, How It Works, and What It Can Do. New York: W.W. Norton.
4.
BailensonJNBlascovichJBeallAC, et al. (2003) Interpersonal distance in immersive virtual environments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin29(7): 819–833.
5.
BatsonCD (2009) These things called empathy: eight related but distinct phenomena. In: DecetyJIckesW (eds) The Social Neuroscience of Empathy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 3–16.
6.
BatsonCDEarlySSalvaraniG (1997) Perspective taking: imagining how another feels versus imaging how you would feel. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin23(7): 751–758.
7.
BenteGRüggenbergSKrämerNC, et al. (2008) Avatar-mediated networking: increasing social presence and interpersonal trust in net-based collaborations. Human Communication Research34(2): 287–318.
8.
BeselLDSYuilleJC (2010) Individual differences in empathy: the role of facial expression recognition. Personality and Individual Differences49(2): 107–112.
9.
BindmanSWCastanedaLMScanlonM, et al. (2018) Am I a bunny? In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Montreal, QC, Canada, 21–26 April, pp. 1–11. New York: ACM Press.
10.
BioccaFHarmsC (2002) Defining and measuring social presence: contribution to the networked minds theory and measure. In: Proceedings of 5th international workshop on presence, Porto, 9–11 October, pp. 1–36. New York: Springer.
11.
BioccaFHarmsCBurgoonJK (2003) Toward a more robust theory and measure of social presence: review and suggested criteria. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments12: 456–480.
12.
BioccaFHarmsCGreggJ (2001) The networked minds measure of social presence: pilot test of the factor structure and concurrent validity. Proceedings of the 4th annual international workshop on presence, Philadelphia, PA, 21–23 May, pp. 1–9.
13.
BuluST (2012) Place presence, social presence, co-presence, and satisfaction in virtual worlds. Computers & Education58(1): 154–161.
DavisMH (1983) The effects of dispositional empathy on emotional reactions and helping: a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality51(2): 167–184.
16.
DavisMHConklinLSmithA, et al. (1996) Effect of perspective taking on the cognitive representation of persons: a merging of self and other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology70(4): 713–726.
17.
DominguezE (2017) Going beyond the classic news narrative convention: the background to and challenges of immersion in journalism. Frontiers in Digital Humanities4(10): 1–11.
18.
FoxJBailensonJNTricaseL (2013) The embodiment of sexualized virtual selves: the Proteus effect and experiences of self-objectification via avatars. Computers in Human Behavior29(3): 930–938.
19.
GillathOMcCallCShaverPR, et al. (2008) What can virtual reality teach us about prosocial tendencies in real and virtual environments?Media Psychology11(2): 259–282.
20.
GreenMCJenkinsKM (2014) Interactive narratives: processes and outcomes in user-directed stories. Journal of Communication64(3): 479–500.
21.
HartmannTKrakowiakKMTsay-VogelM (2014) How violent video games communicate violence: a literature review and content analysis of moral disengagement factors. Communication Monographs81(3): 310–332.
22.
HayesAFPreacherKJ (2013) Conditional process modeling: using structural equation modeling to examine contingent causal processes. In: HancockGRMuellerRO (eds) Quantitative Methods in Education and the Behavioral Sciences: Issues, Research, and Teaching. Charlotte: IAP Information Age Publishing, pp. 219–266.
23.
HeeterC (1992) Being there: the subjective experience of presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments1(2): 262–271.
24.
HerreraFBailensonJWeiszE, et al. (2018) Building long-term empathy: a large-scale comparison of traditional and virtual reality perspective-taking. PLoS ONE13(10): e0204494.
25.
HoferMWirthWKuehneR, et al. (2012) Structural equation modeling of spatial presence: the influence of cognitive processes and traits. Media Psychology15(4): 373–395.
26.
HoffmanML (1977) Sex differences in empathy and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin84(4): 712–722.
ItenGHSteinemannSTOpwisK (2018) Choosing to help monsters. In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal, CA, 21–26 April, pp. 1–13. New York: ACM Press.
29.
KalyanaramanSBailensonJ (2019) Virtual reality in media effects. In: OliverMBRaneyAABryantJ (eds) Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. New York: Routledge, pp. 404–418.
30.
KalyanaramanSSundarSS (2006) The psychological appeal of personalized content in web portals: does customization affect attitudes and behavior?Journal of Communication56(1): 110–132.
31.
KalyanaramanSWojdynskiBW (2015) Affording control: how customization, interactivity, and navigability affect psychological responses to technology. In: SundarSS (eds) The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 425–444.
32.
LombardMDittonT (1997) At the heart of it all: the concept of presence. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication3(2): JCMC321.
33.
MarshAAKozakMNAmbadyN (2007) Accurate identification of fear facial expressions predicts prosocial behavior. Emotion7(2): 239–251.
34.
MartinLJHathawayGIsbesterK, et al. (2015) Reducing social stress elicits emotional contagion of pain in mouse and human strangers. Current Biology25(3): 326–332.
MyersMWLaurentSMHodgesSD (2014) Perspective taking instructions and self-other overlap: different motives for helping. Motivation and Emotion38(2): 224–234.
37.
NassCMasonL (1990) On the study of technology and task: a variable-based approach. In: FulkJSteinfieldC (eds) Organizations and Communication Technology. London: SAGE Publications, pp. 46–68.
38.
OhCSBailensonJWelchGF (2018) A systematic review of social presence: definition, antecedents, and implications. Frontiers in Robotics and AI5: 114.
39.
OhJSundarSS (2015) How does interactivity persuade? An experimental test of interactivity on cognitive absorption, elaboration, and attitudes. Journal of Communication65(2): 213–236.
40.
OhSYBailensonJWeiszE, et al. (2016) Virtually old: embodied perspective taking and the reduction of ageism under threat. Computers in Human Behavior60: 398–410.
41.
PengWLeeMHeeterC (2010) The effects of a serious game on role-taking and willingness to help. Journal of Communication60(4): 723–742.
42.
PiernoACBecchioCTurellaL, et al. (2008) Observing social interactions: the effect of gaze. Social Neuroscience3(1): 51–59.
SchroederDADovidioJFSibickyME, et al. (1988) Empathic concern and helping behavior: egoism or altruism?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology24(4): 333–353.
45.
Schulte-RütherMMarkowitschHJFinkGR, et al. (2007) Mirror neuron and theory of mind mechanisms involved in face-to-face interactions: a functional magnetic resonance imaging approach to empathy. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience19(8): 1354–1372.
46.
SeibertJShaferDM (2018) Control mapping in virtual reality: effects on spatial presence and controller naturalness. Virtual Reality22(1): 79–88.
47.
SelverianMMHwangHS (2003) In search of presence: a systematic evaluation of evolving VLEs. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments12(5): 512–522.
48.
ShaferDMCarbonaraCPPopovaL (2014) Controller required? The impact of natural mapping on interactivity, realism, presence, and enjoyment in motion-based video games. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments23(3): 267–286.
49.
ShinDBioccaF (2018) Exploring immersive experience in journalism. New Media & Society20(8): 2800–2823.
50.
SingerTKlimeckiOM (2014) Empathy and compassion. Current Biology24(18): R875–R878.
51.
SivunenANordbäckE (2015) Social presence as a multi-dimensional group construct in 3D virtual environments. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication20(1): 19–36.
52.
SteedAPanYWatsonZ, et al. (2018) “We Wait”—the impact of character responsiveness and self embodiment on presence and interest in an immersive news experience. Frontiers in Robotics and AI5: 112.
53.
SteinemannSTItenGHOpwisK, et al. (2017) Interactive narratives affecting social change. Journal of Media Psychology29: 54–66.
SunSZuoBWuY, et al. (2016) Does perspective taking increase or decrease stereotyping? The role of need for cognitive closure. Personality and Individual Differences94: 21–25.
56.
SundarSSKalyanaramanSBrownJ (2003) Explicating web site interactivity. Communication Research30(1): 30–59.
57.
SundarSSKangJOpreanD (2017) Being there in the midst of the story: how immersive journalism affects our perceptions and cognitions. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking20(11): 672–682.
58.
SundarSSXuQBellurS (2010) Designing interactivity in media interfaces : a communications perspective. In: 28th international conference on human factors in computing, Atlanta, GA, 10–15 April, pp. 2247–2256. New York: ACM.
59.
van LoonABailensonJZakiJ, et al. (2018) Virtual reality perspective-taking increases cognitive empathy for specific others. PLoS ONE13(8): e0202442.
WallachHSSafirMPSamanaR (2010) Personality variables and presence. Virtual Reality14(1): 3–13.
62.
WelchRBBlackmonTTLiuA, et al. (1996) The effects of pictorial realism, delay of visual feedback, and observer interactivity on the subjective sense of presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments5(3): 263–273.
63.
ZahaviDRochatP (2015) Empathy≠ sharing: perspectives from phenomenology and developmental psychology. Consciousness and Cognition36: 543–553.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
