ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Virtual Real.

Sec. Virtual Reality in Medicine

Volume 6 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/frvir.2025.1536968

Automated interaction may reduce emotional reactivity in VR: a randomized study with healthy participants

Provisionally accepted
Julia  Elisabeth DiemerJulia Elisabeth Diemer1,2*Magdalena  SichMagdalena Sich1Bastian  LangeBastian Lange3Mathias  MüllerMathias Müller3Marius  KollerMarius Koller4Philip  SchäferPhilip Schäfer4,5Gerrit  MeixnerGerrit Meixner4Alexander  BrunnauerAlexander Brunnauer1,6Peter  ZwanzgerPeter Zwanzger1,6
  • 1kbo Inn Salzach Klinikum, Wasserburg am Inn, Germany
  • 2Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Education, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
  • 3VTplus GmbH, Wuerzburg, Germany
  • 4UniTyLab, Heilbronn University, Heilbronn, Germany
  • 5RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • 6Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Virtual reality (VR) has been investigated as a psychotherapy tool for three decades, with the most recent developments introducing automated self-help programmes without direct therapeutic assistance. In particular, a number of publications have presented therapist-free VR exposure therapy for anxiety disorders as a way of improving patient access to psychological therapy. However, it is unknown whether the removal of interaction with a real person during VR exposure changes emotional experience. The aim of this study was to test the effect of automated interaction on presence and emotion in VR. Both are important processes in VR-supported exposure therapy, with stronger emotional arousal and greater presence considered necessary for successful therapy. This is a monocentric, randomized study comparing automated (auto) interaction in VR with experimenter-led (live) interaction during emotionally relevant VR scenarios (spiders, public speaking). The presence or absence of a psychophysiological recording device (smartwatch) was included as a second between-subjects factor. N=64 healthy participants gave ratings of subjective emotional arousal and presence in VR.In the spider scenario, arousal, our primary outcome measure, was significantly reduced in the auto condition, with no effect of the factor smartwatch. This effect was not seen in the public speaking scenario. For presence, in both scenarios, an interaction (condition x smartwatch) was significant, with participants in the auto condition reporting greater presence if they wore a smartwatch.We found that design features of our VR system critically influenced presence and emotional effects. In particular, the reduced emotional arousal in the spider scenes means that automated setups might not be as suited for exposure therapy as therapist-led VR scenarios. To our knowledge, a direct comparison between automated and natural communication during emotional exposure in VR has not been done. However, our data indicate the importance of such comparisons. Our study thus addresses an important gap in the current VR literature. Future research will need to establish whether similar effects can be found in the target populations of exposure therapy, i.e. patients with anxiety disorders, and whether such emotional effects might impact therapeutic outcome.

Keywords: virtual reality, Automation, emotion, presence, Exposure therapy

Received: 29 Nov 2024; Accepted: 05 May 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Diemer, Sich, Lange, Müller, Koller, Schäfer, Meixner, Brunnauer and Zwanzger. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Julia Elisabeth Diemer, kbo Inn Salzach Klinikum, Wasserburg am Inn, Germany

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.