The Effects of Virtual Reality on the Sense of Presence and Empathy’s Mediating Role
Kelly Hrechdakian
11351470
Master’s Thesis
Graduate School of Communication
Master’s programme Communication Science
Supervisor: Dr. Jessica T. Piotrowski
June 29, 2018
Abstract
The current study presents an exploration and understanding of the underlying mechanisms that drive individuals to reach a so-called sense of presence while consuming media content in virtual reality (VR). An experiment (N= 59) was conducted in a laboratory setting in order to determine whether viewing a short documentary in virtual reality leads to a higher sense of presence than watching the same documentary as a 360-degree Youtube video. Two different mediation effects were tested as competing pathways towards the main effect, namely through cognitive and affective empathy. Individuals’ tendency to get immersed in media activities was accounted for and tested as potentially moderating the effects of the 360-degree media technologies on the sense of presence. The results indicate that viewers’ sense of presence did not significantly differ between the virtual reality and 360-degree video conditions, and no moderation effect of immersive tendency was uncovered. Neither affective nor cognitive empathy were found to mediate the effects of virtual reality on the sense of presence. However, findings do show significant positive effects of affective empathy (p=.052) and immersive tendency (p=.035) on the sense of presence.
Introduction
The widespread and rising public access of highly engaging technologies for entertainment purposes, such as virtual reality (VR), have raised questions around the consequences of their cognitive and emotional disruptive aspects. Similar to but greater than traditional film, VR central characteristic is the capability to elicit emotional stimuli through its immersive properties (Vish, Tan & Molenaar, 2010). Since its first implementation in 1968 by Ivan Sutherland (Paush, Proffitt & Williams, 1997), the main goal of VR and immersive virtual environments (VEs) is to let the user experience a computer-generated world as if it was real by involving the senses of vision, hearing and touch (Bouwman & McMahan, 2007; Davis & Chapman, 2009; Fulcher, 2009). The latter experiential property is assumed to produce a sense of presence or “being there” in users’ mind, which is not exclusive to VEs as readers and viewers of fictional stories reported similar feeling of being transported into narratives (Bouwman & McMahan, 2007; Hand & Varan, 2008; Johnson, 2011; Yee & Bailenson, 2006). It comes to no surprise that the so-called immersive technology has recently became highly solicited in media production and speculatively praised as being a more effective medium than traditional media – i.e. television, film, books – in terms of message processing. Increasing conceptualization of films, games and other similar entertaining experiences using virtual reality call for a need to empirically research the underlying processes and factors leading to more immersive experiences or a higher sense of presence. For the purpose of this study, virtual reality is being studied in the context of immersive but non-interactive entertaining environment, thus as a potential immersive technology providing the sensory experience of being in a computer-generated and simulated space (Davis & Chapman, 2009). More specifically, the current research is aiming at understanding the underlying mechanisms that drive individuals to reach a so-called
sense of presence while experiencing media content in virtual reality. An experimental research was conducted in order to determine whether watching a short documentary in virtual reality leads to a higher sense of presence than if viewed on a computer screen in 360 degrees. Moreover, the study explores potential underlying mechanisms leading to this sense of presence. Two different mediation effects will be tested as competing pathways towards the main effect, namely through cognitive and affective empathy.
RQ: Do entertainment virtual reality experiences lead to a higher sense of presence
than non-virtual media experiences?
Study Aim and Theoretical Background Presence
Across academia, there are different terms and derivational definitions of what is and constitute “presence”. Some scholars refer to it as “telepresence”, “transportation”, “virtual presence” or “copresence”, but ultimately, all these terms represent a feeling of “being there” in a virtual environment (Lee, 2004; Schubert, 2009). Commonly researched within the realm of entertainment contexts and immersive narratives, presence has generally been used to assess the degree to which an individual is fully engaged in a story – in the case of book reading, film watching, gaming – and how immersive a virtual environment is (Jonhson, 2001; Lee, 2004; Yee & Bailenson, 2006). Blascovich et al. describe virtual environments as “synthetic sensory information that leads to perceptions of environments ad their contents as if they were not synthetic” (2002). This definition is in line with Bal & Veltkamp principle that believability is a key and central aspect of fictional narrative which leads to a sensation of feeling “transported” or “present” into a story (2013). This aspect of verisimilitude of fictional narrative is also true for immersive virtual experiences: it is the degree of realism, and thus believability, that leads individuals to feel transported into an experience - just like a reader is able to feel present into a story (Bal & Veltkamp, 2013).
Predominantly, it is the term “spatial presence” that is being used to describe the psychological phenomenon that is felt during VEs (Schubert, 2009). In his work and quest on explaining how the subjective experience of spatial presence emerges from unconscious
underlying cognitive processes, Schubert hence conceptualized spatial presence as being a cognitive feeling (2009). In his synthesis, Schubert discuss the two main current models attempting to explain the cognitive processes that lead to presence: the Regenbrecht and Schubert one (2002), and Writh et al’s (2007). According to Regenbrecht and Schubert, presence takes at least two cognitive components (2002). The first one is spatial presence and refers to a process where individuals construct a coherent spatial mental model of the virtual environment and their possible actions in it (Regenbrecht & Schubert, 2002). The second component, which reflects an attentional process, is involvement and refers to individuals’ ability to focus their attention within virtual environments on compatible information from the real environment while suppressing incompatible ones (Regenbrecht & Schubert, 2002). With a similar hypothetical two-cognitive-steps model, Writh et al. proposes that individuals first build a mental model of the simulated space, which he calls a spatial situation model (2007). In a second step, users hypothetically accept this spatial situation
model as their own egocentric viewpoint, which Writh ultimately calls the primary egocentric reference frame.
H1(main effect): Individuals exposed to a short movie in virtual reality will experience a
higher sense of presence than individuals exposed to a 360-degree Youtube short movie
The concept of immersion is a central aspect of presence and should not be dissociated from it or perceived as a non-exhaustive factor. According to Witmer and Singer, immersion is a necessary condition to create a sense of presence in VE (1998). The authors describe immersion as a psychological state that depends on perceiving oneself as part of the VE stimulus flow (Witmer & Singer, 1998). Most authors agree as well that immersion refers to the psychological experience of feeling surrounded by an environment or transported to a simulated place (McMahan, 2003). Even though presence is often used synonymously with immersion, the former was specifically coined to describe the feeling of immersion or “being there” in virtual environments exclusively (McMahan, 2003; Slater, Linakis, Usoh & Kooper, 1996). Witmer and Singer found that individual’s immersive tendency was positively correlated with the sense of presence (1998). Bouwman and
McMahan perceive immersion as dependent to systems and display technology, thus being objective and measurable, while presence is the psychological result of immersion and reflects users’ experience of “being there” (2007). All and all, the traditional thinking and Bouwman & McMahan’s multidimensional approach of the implications of virtual environments establish that presence is a benefit of immersion (2007).
H2(moderating effect): A short video in virtual reality will lead to a higher sense of presence
in viewers than a 360-degree Youtube short video, and this effect will be positively affected
individuals level of immersive tendency.
Empathy and virtual reality
VR technology was found as well to increase emotional reaction due to its immersive aspect. Vish, Tan and Molenaar found that viewing a movie in CAVE, which is comparable to virtual reality, leads to more intense emotions than 3-dimensional experiences (2010). Riva et al. found a circular interaction between presence and emotions with reported greater sense of presence in “emotional” environments (2007). Most recently, VR research work revolved increasingly around empathy. Empathy consists of both affect and cognitive (Shen, 2010). Affective empathy refers to the understanding and sharing of other’s feelings, by experiencing or expression other’s affective reactions (Shen, 2010). Cognitive empathy is the comprehension of someone else’s point of view and refers more generally to perspective-taking (Shen, 2010). Davis defines the latter as the cognitive and intellectual ability to recognize others’ emotional states, and to emotionally respond to others – cognitive empathy is to express concern and sympathy for others (1983). Shen has recently coined a new term to define empathy experienced during media message processing: state empathy, which is the “process through which the recipients comprehend, process, and are influenced by persuasive media messages” (2010). When it comes to media message processing, such as visioning a documentary, there is a third component of empathy which is identification (Shen, 2010). This mechanism describes how audiences are able to internally receive and interpret messages as if they were happening to them (Shen, 2010) and thus, depending on the situational context, are able to identify with the protagonist of a story. The concept of
empathy, whereas state, cognitive or affective, parallels Zwaan immersed experiencer framework stating that readers or movie viewers often comprehend a story by assuming the
perspective of a character and mentally representing his or her emotions (2004). The framework is based on the idea that events presented in a media message activate neural events in individuals similar to those occurring during the actual experience of the referents (Zwaan, 2004).
As the main quality of virtual reality experiences requires users to get immersed in an artificial environment using a perspective-action process, it is assumed that the underlying processes leading to a sense of presence must have properties common to empathic abilities. The body of research so far has shown that virtual technologies are able to increase individuals’ pro-social behaviors or positive attitudes and traits, such as empathic abilities (Ann, Tran & Bailenson, 2013; Kalyanaraman, Penn, Ivory & Judge, 2010; Yee & Bailsenson, 2006). Indeed, being able to take the perspective of media characters and understand their emotional reactions is being supported in empirical work and communication theories. In the context of entertainment communication, fictional narratives and virtual reality technologies were found to increase the intensity of emotions as well as empathic and pro-social abilities through their immersive properties (Hand & Varan, 2008; Mar, Oatley et al 2006; de la Peña et al., 2010; Vish, Tan & Molenaar, 2010; Yee & Bailenson, 2009). According to the disposition theory of entertainment, the emotional relationships media users form with characters of fictional stories predict their sentiments towards final outcomes of the story (Zillmann & Vorderer, 2000). The theory explains why audiences have a negative sentiment when for instance a character they’ve bid a positive relationship with face negative outcomes. According to Zillmann and Vorderer, these emotional reactions are made possible because media users are able to empathize with the characters – usually with the protagonist or the hero (2000). Mar and Oatley’s comprehensive theory states that individuals experience empathic growth through the social interactions and experiences of story characters (2008). Based on this principle, Johnson found in a study that individuals who felt more transported in a story exhibited higher
affective empathy, even after controlling for dispositional empathy and tendency to get absorbed in a story (2011). Bal and Veltkamp found as well similar results in their experimental investigation of the role of emotional transportation in fiction reading in affecting cognitive empathy (2013). They concluded that individuals who felt less transported in the story became less empathetic towards to characters (Bal & Veltkamp, 2013). Argo, Zhu and Dalh found as well a strong mediating effect of transportation into a story in affecting empathy and story appreciation (2008).
While empirical research points towards a strong relation between transportation and empathy, concerns and questions are raised on the actual causal direction between the two concepts. Scholars do agree that transportation, or the sense of presence, is strongly related to empathy. They nevertheless deliberate on which one affects the other – whether individuals express more empathy as a result of transportation, or is it the case that people who are high in empathy are more prone to feeling transported into a narrative. Since virtual reality physically requires viewers to adopt an inside perspective, the current research tests the approach where empathy leads to a higher sense of presence and takes on a mediating role in the effects of VR on the sense of presence. I thus sought to understand whether individuals reach a sense of presence during immersive experiences because they are able to take story characters’ perspectives, understand and feel their emotions. In other words, the study will test for both affective empathy, based on Johnson’s findings (2011), and cognitive empathy as an alternative mediator,
H3(mediation): Cognitive empathy will mediate the effects of virtual reality on the sense of
presence.
H4(mediation): Affective empathy will mediate the effects of virtual reality on the sense of
presence.
Method Participants
A total of 59 individuals participated in an experiment in a laboratory setting at the University of Amsterdam. The research was carried out under the auspices of the ASCoR
research institute, which forms part of the University of Amsterdam. Participants were randomly selected from a student sample and were recruited via the official university laboratory recruitment website. Demographic information is as follow: gender (79.3% female); between the age of 18 and 30 (M = 21.25, SD = 2.4); native language (30.5% Dutch, 10.2% Italian, 6.8% Chinese, 6.8% Other, 6.8% French, 3.4% English, etc.); and country one has lived the longest in (28.8% Dutch, 8.5% China, 8.5% Italy, 3.4% Bulgaria, 3.4% Finland, 3.4% Lithuania, 3.4% Romania, etc.).
Stimuli and Procedure
Participants were randomly assigned to one of two experimental conditions: (a) watching a short documentary filmed in 360 degrees on a computer screen, requiring the use of a computer mouse to move around the space, and (b) watching the same short documentary filmed in 360 degrees, requiring to wear a virtual reality headset. After reading a fact sheet giving general information about the study – without disclosing any details leading to potential social desirability behaviors – and signing an informed consent form, participants took part in a preliminary five-minute short online questionnaire on Qualtrics. They were asked to provide basic demographic information, how involved they were about current world news affairs and issues, and about their immersive tendency. Participants were then redirected to the main experimental task. Those who were assigned to the virtual reality condition were warned about potential motion sickness effects due to the highly immersive aspect of the technology, and were required to withdraw from the study in the case of historical epileptic attacks. In both conditions, participants watched the same eight-minute long documentary Cloud Over Sidra, a project by the United Nation and Samsung and produced by Gabo Arora and Bary Pousman (2015). The documentary tells the story of Sidra, a 12-year old Syrian refugee girl and shows how her life in a Jordanian refugee camp looks like on a daily basis.
Participants in the first group (n = 29) were exposed to the short documentary, which was played from Youtube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUosdCQsMkM) and used earphones to avoid any auditory external distractions and the computer mouse to move
around the space (i.e. left, right, top, bottom). Participants in the second group (n = 30) were exposed to the exact same documentary but watched it using a HTC Vive virtual reality headset. At the end of the documentary, participants in both conditions were redirected to a two-minute short online questionnaire. They were asked about their experience with the technology they just used to watch the short film – sense of presence – and their understanding of the protagonist’s perspective.
Independent variables
Immersive Tendency. The measure assesses the degree to which individuals
normally get involved in and immersed while performing certain activities, as well as their ability to focus and redirect their attention (Witmer & Singer, 1998). The scale is based on Witmer and Singer’s 1998 Immersive Tendency Questionnaire. Seven items from the Witmer & Singer’s scale were included (see Appendix) and selected based upon unique factor loadings higher than .40, in addition of being non-exhaustive and of universal relevancy (1998). The items reflect two constructs: involvement, the tendency to become involved in activities and focus, the tendency to maintain focus on current activities (Witmer & Singer, 1998). The answers were given using a seven-point Likert scale, such as the question “Do you easily become deeply involved in movies or TV dramas?” would be answered on a scale from 1= Not at all to 7=Very easily, “Do you ever become so involved in a television program or book that people have problems getting your attention?” would be answered from 1= Never to 7=All the time, and “How good are you at blocking out external distractions when you are involved in something?” from 1= Very bad to 7= Very good.
Issue Involvement. The variable measures individuals’ familiarity with the Syrian refugee crisis. According to empirical research on persuasive communication, individuals tend to be more affected by messages containing factors of high personal relevance to them (Petty & Cacciopo, 2001). Since the topic of the experimental stimuli revolved around a Syrian refugee girl, the hereby measure reflects the degree to which individuals are involved – directly or not – with the Syrian refugee crisis. In order to capture the concept, two items were employed. The first required participants to indicate how closely they usually follow a
set of issues on the news (e.g. European affairs, the ongoing ecological crisis, etc), including the war in Syria. The answers were given using a five-point Likert scale running from 1=Not at All to 5=Very Closely. The second item required participants to indicate in what type of
charitable or pro-social activities they have recently partaken in, including helping Syrian refugees. The statements and choices of answers were randomized when administrated to avoid the affecting participants judgement when answering. The variable was computed by summing the score of both items.
Control variables. The demographic control variables that were measured included
Gender, Age, Native language and Country where someone has predominantly lived. To measure gender, participants were asked to indicate if their gender is (1) male, (2) female. Age and country where respondents had lived in for the longest part of their lives, were measured by open-ended questions. Finally, participants could indicate their native language by clicking on a list of thirty-one different languages and an “other” option.
Dependent variables
Empathy towards the protagonist. The variable measures individuals’ cognitive and affective empathy towards the main character in the documentary. In other words, it measures the degree to which participants were able to take the perspective of Sidra and to understand her feelings (Shen, 2010). The scale was taken from Shen State’s Empathy Scale (2010), which is based on Davis 1980’s one. For the purpose of the research, only items measuring the constructs of affective and cognitive empathy were included, and items measuring the construct of associative empathy was omitted from Shen’s scale (see Appendix). Participants were asked to indicate to what extent they agree to eight statements, administrated randomly, using a five-point Likert scale from 1= Strongly disagree to 5=Strongly agree.
Sense of Presence. Presence was measured using a reduced and revised version of
Witmer and Singer’s Presence Questionnaire which was specifically developed to measure the degree of presence in virtual environments (1998). This is thus a measure of subjective
presence, as physiological measures – such as heart rate variability and changes in skin conductance – were shown to add no value to the measurement of presence when the virtual environment did not require individuals to perform tasks (Dillion et al., 2001). Eleven items from the Witmer & Singer’s scale were included (see Appendix) and selected based upon unique factor loadings higher than .40, in addition of being non-exhaustive and of universal relevancy (1998). The items reflect and measure four different components – or factors – of presence: sensory, distraction, realism and control factors (Witmer & Singer, 1998). Participants were asked to answer to question statements about the media technology they just used to watch the documentary “Clouds Over Sidra” and how they felt about this 360-degree experience. The answers were given using a seven-point Likert scale, such as the question “How natural did your interactions with the environment involve you?” would be answered on a scale from 1= Not at all natural to 7=Very natural, “How much did the visual aspects of the environment involve you?” would be answered from 1= It did not involve me to 7=It very much involved me, and “How quickly did you adjust to the virtual environment experience?” from 1= Slowly to 7= Very quickly.
Data Analysis Randomization check
A cross tabulation analysis was conducted to assess whether participants were evenly assigned to one or another experimental condition, with exposure to VR or 360-degree video as the independent variable and gender, country lived the longest in and native language as dependent variables. The analysis showed that participants’ gender, country lived the longest in and native language in the VR condition (n= 30) did not significantly differ from participants in the 360-degree video condition (n=29) with p=.52 for gender, p=.18 for country they lived the longest in and p=.20 for native language. In order to check as well if participants’ age was comparable across conditions, an independent t-test was conducted with age the dependent variable. The analysis showed that age of participants in VR condition (M= 21.23, SD=2.4) did not significantly differ from participants’ age in the
360-degree video condition (M= 21.28, SD=2.4), t(57) = -.07, p=.94, 95% CI [-1.29, 1.20]. In addition, equal variances were assumed with Levene’s test not being significant, p = .99. Scales
Immersive tendency. A principal component analysis (PCA) shows that the 7 items
form a three-dimensional scale: there are three components with Eigenvalue above 1 with the first component explaining 36.5% of the total variance (EV = 2.55). After an Oblimin rotation with Kaiser normalization, all three components each positively correlated with three different items except for the last component which correlated with two items only (see Table 1 in Appendix A). The first component was proven to be the only reliable scale with a Cronbach’s alpha of .72. The immersive tendency variable was thus computed using the average score of items 1, 2, and 4.
Sense of Presence. A principal component factor analysis shows that the 11 items
form a four-dimensional scale: the four components have Eingenvalues above 1 and the first one explains 32% of the total variance (EV = 3.52). A Viramax rotation was performed showing 10 items over 11 were positively correlating with one or another component (see Table 2 in Appendix B). The first component was proven to be the only reliable scale with a Cronbach’s alpha of .81. Therefore, the sense of presence variable was computed using the average score of items 2, 3, 5, 8 and 10.
Cognitive Empathy. A principal component analysis (PCA, forced on one factor,
shows that the 3 items form a unidimensional scale (see Table 3 in Appendix C). The reliability test shows that the scale is not reliable, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .03. However, the scale becomes quite reliable if item 3 (“I recognize Sidra’s situation”) is deleted with a Cronbach’s alpha of .58. For the purpose of the hypotheses testing, items 1 and 4 were used to compute the cognitive empathy variable by creating an average score.
Affective Empathy. A principal component analysis (PCA) shows that the 4 items
form a bidimensional scale. An Oblimin rotation was performed showing that one component positively correlated with three items (see Table 4 in Appendix C). The reliability test for the
first component indicates a Cronbach’s alpha of .70. The affective empathy variable was thus computed using the average score of items 2, 3 (recoded) and 4.
Results
Figure 2: Effect of exposure to a virtual reality short documentary and a 360-degree Youtube video on the sense
of presence
An independent sample t-test analysis (Figure 2) indicates that there is no statistically significant difference in effects between watching a short video in virtual reality (M= 5.39, SD= 0.95) and watching a short 360 Youtube video (M= 5.15, SD= 1.07) on the sense of presence, t(44) = .71, p = .43, 95% CI [-0.37, 0.84]. An analysis of the frequency distribution of the variable sense of presence indicated an initial skewness of -1.64 (N= 46, M= 5.27, SD= 1.01) and 0.350 after transformation using a log10 function. Hence, the first
hypothesis has to be rejected.
A bootstrapping technique was used to estimate the indirect effects of both affective and cognitive empathy as mediators and immersive tendency as a moderator of the effects
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Virtual Reality 360 Youtube video
M e an SE N SE OF PRE SE N CE
VR EXPOSURE: experimental condition (0 = 360 Youtube video, 1 = Virtual reality video)
of exposure to virtual reality on the sense of presence. More specifically, a PROCESS Macro in SPSS was used to test a conditional indirect analysis (see Figure 1).
First, a parallel multiple mediation analysis was conducted with PROCESS using model 4 as a baseline, then a conditional direct analysis using model 1 (Hayes, 2013). Results show that there is no direct effect of exposure to virtual reality on the sense of presence (c’), with p=.770, which is in line with the results of the previous independent sample t-test. The OLS regression analyses showed no significant effects of virtual reality on affective empathy (a1), p= .767, nor on cognitive empathy (a2), p=.463. The results showed a significant moderate effect of affective empathy on the sense of presence (b1), b*=.46, p=.052, 95% CI [-0.01; 0.92], but this was not case for cognitive empathy (b2) (see Figure
2). Therefore, both H3 and H4 have to be rejected as neither affective empathy, nor cognitive empathy significantly mediate the effects of virtual reality exposure on the sense of presence.
The conditional direct analysis did not show any interaction effect between virtual reality and immersive tendency on the sense of presence, p=.639. However, immersive tendency did have a significant positive and moderate direct effect on the sense of presence, b*=.49, p=.035, 95% CI [0.04; 0.94]. Therefore, H2 has to be rejected as immersive tendency does not significantly moderate the effects of virtual reality exposure on the sense of presence.
Virtual Reality (1) vs. 360 Video (0) (X) Affective Empathy (M1) Sense of Presence (Y) Immersive Tendency (Mo) a1= 0.199 c’’=-.209 b1= 0.459* c’=0.157
*p<.05
Figure 2: Parallel multiple mediation and moderated model for the effect of virtual reality/360
video on the sense of presence via the mediators affective and cognitive empathy, when taking into account the moderator immersive tendency.
c’ indicates the direct effect of the independent variable X (virtual reality vs. 360 video) on the dependent variable Y (sense of presence) or the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable when the mediator and moderator variables are controlled for. The indirect effect of the mediators M1 (affective empathy) and M2 (cognitive empathy) on the effect of VR on the sense of presence is quantified as a1, b1 and a2, b2. The indirect effect of the moderator Mo (immersive tendency) on the effect of VR on the sense of presence is quantified as c’’. The total effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable is the sum of the direct effect and the specific indirect effects (see Preacher and Hayes, 2008).
Conclusion
The aim of this study was to determine whether individuals experience a higher sense of presence when they watch a short documentary using virtual reality compared to watching the same documentary as a Youtube 360-degree video. It was hypothesized as well that this relation would be influenced by individuals’ natural tendency to get immersed in media experiences. In addition, the experimental research sought to understand and assess if people who watch short media content in 360-degree reach a sense of presence through their ability to cognitively and affectively empathize with the protagonist of the story. Analyses demonstrated than none of the above were the case. Indeed, there were no reported differences in how much people experienced a sense of presence between the two experimental conditions. Individuals who watched the documentary in virtual reality and those who watched it in 360-degree on a computer screen all expressed a sense of presence of similar intensity. No mediation effects were uncovered between media exposure, affective and cognitive empathy, and sense of presence and there was no direct effect of virtual reality on the sense of presence. However, it was discovered that people
Cognitive Empathy
(M2)
a2= - 0.064
who expressed higher affective empathy had a higher sense of presence. Immersive tendency does not moderate the effects of media exposure on the sense of presence, but it does lead to a higher sense of presence meaning the more people have a high tendency to get immersed the more intense their sense of presence will be.
Discussion
In the case of this study, it seems that no matter what type of 360 media technology people use, they will have similar sensations of “being there” in the virtual environment. The results came to contradict participants’ reactions observed during their virtual reality experience. Indeed, several participants expressed spontaneous emotional reactions– i.e. surprise, amusement, awe – to the point that two were even brought up to tears. At the end of most VR viewings, there were records of participants feeling disoriented and surprised about their actual physical position in the room. None of these reactions were observed in participants exposed to the 360-degree Youtube video. Nevertheless, the results still point towards a non-significant relation between the technologies and sense of presence. The discrepancies between what has been observed in the laboratory and the results could be explained by the choices of scale and material. Indeed, Witmer & Singer’s scale was specifically designed to measure presence in virtual and interactive environments (1998). Participants were required to move around the virtual space either by moving their heads or a computer mouse but did not perform any more demanding and interactive tasks. Even though the scale was adapted to the circumstances of the experiment and proven reliable, the items constituting the presence variable best reflected situations particular to interactive VEs (see Appendix B), while the media content failed to be interactive in its nature. Literature shows that virtual reality is more effective in influencing presence when interactivity is present (North & North, 2016). Therefore, it is thus possible that none of the technologies were interactive enough to statistically affect presence, but immersive enough to display high mean score of reported sense of presence in the VEs. The positive relation found between immersive tendency and sense of presence parallels the literature and reaffirm traditional and contemporary thinking about the implications of immersion on
presence within VEs (Bowman & McMahan, 2007; Slater, Linakis, Usoh & Kooper, 1996; Witmer & Singer, 1998).
While no mediations were uncovered as expected, the positive relation between affective empathy and presence that was revealed is a step towards a better understanding of what are the necessary conditions to create a sense of presence. Similar to Jonhson’s findings, only affective empathy was found to have an effect, excluding cognitive empathy as a factor of presence (2011). Therefore, this implies that for individuals processing media messages, their ability to feel absorbed in a story or narrative stems from their faculty to feel and share characters’ feelings, not in their comprehension of the character’s point of view. Feeling for other’s and expressing similar emotions is a more committing psychological act and process than understanding and taking one’s perspective. Thus, being able to understand characters’ situations and perspectives does not suffice to elicit a sense of presence – shared cognition without shared affect would be sympathy, not empathy (Eisenberg & Miller, 1987; Goldie, 1999). It is like imagining oneself in someone’s else shoes, knowing they are comfortable but not feeling it. Importantly, no mediations were found in the research, which force us to retrospect on the current debate in media and communication research around affective empathy and presence’s direction of association: which one came first? It could be that they are inclusive and affective empathy is a component of presence. Future research should redirect their focus on building a more reliable construct of presence, placing affective empathy as one central component.
Consequently, one important limitation of the study is its lack of emotional measurement, which should have been taken into account considering the emotionally charged content of the documentary used as material. Disagreements in the literature on how to best describe the sense of presence and a lack of established measurements also made the process of selecting a scale subjective to speculations. In addition, some participants had troubles understanding some terms and questions in the initial presence questionnaire, which might have influence the scale reliability test and explain why only five items over eleven loaded with one another.
When building off of this research in the future, there are some recommendations to take into consideration. First, following the findings, a new model could be tested for with affective empathy mediating the effects of immersive tendency on presence. The current study highlights as well the need to create a standardized and reliable scale of the sense of presence by further researching elements that constitute the concept, including affective empathy. Emotions should be a central theme for similar types of research dealing with emotional non-interactive VR content. A measure of emotional transportation for VEs could be developed and tested for as an alternative to presence. The assessment of physiological measures, such as heart rate variability or skin conductance, should be integrated in future research on emotional VR content. Psychophysiological measures have been widely used in media research as a way to better understand individuals’ emotional responses while processing media messages (Ravaja, 2004). According to the arousal hypothesis states, “intense emotions can be physiologically differentiated from less intense emotions by increased arousal level” (Rickard, 2004). A psychophysiological approach should be considered for most future VEs studies as the use of physiological measures is regarded as more reliable and objective than the single use of self-reports.
Moreover, I believe that the level of immersion and interactivity of the media technologies should be quantified and tested as potential key factors of presence (North & North, 2016). It would pave the way towards comparative studies and deep dives into the specific features of immersive media content, how do they compare across technologies and affect the sense of presence.
Finally, I wanted to stress out that the initial aim of the research was to compare the effects of virtual reality to two-dimensional (i.e. television) media content. Unfortunately, a lack of time and resources did not allow for customized material. Indeed, in order to compare between the two media technologies, two versions of the same film would have been produced and edited specifically to fit the purpose of the research. Nevertheless, the findings are still good news for communication practitioners aiming at optimization their reach of media campaigns by considering 360-media experiences. Indeed, they do not have to worry
about the accessibility and effectiveness of their VR campaigns, since it makes no real difference whether their audience are exposed to a 360-video displayed on a computer screen or via a virtual reality set.
References
Argo, J. J., Zhu, R. J. & Dahl, D. W. (2008). Fact or Fiction: An Investigation of Empathy Differences in Response to Emotional Melodramatic Entertainment. Journal of Consumer Research, 34:5, 614-623
Arora, G., Prousman, B., Kakoulides, S., Storr, S., Fabien, C., & Keating, K. (Producers), Arora, G. & Prousman, B. (Directors). (2015). Cloud Over Sidra [Documentary]. United States: Virtual Reality Production Company.
Bal, P.M., & Veltkamp, M. (2013). How Does Fiction Reading Influence Empathy? An Experimental Investigation on the Role of Emotional Transportation. PLoSONE, 8:1, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0055341
Blascovich, J., Loomis, J., Beall, A.C., Swinth, K.R., Hoyt, C.L., & Bailenson, J.N. (2002). Immersive virtual environment technology as a methodological tool for social psychology. Psychol Inq. 13:103–124.
Bowman, D. A., & McMahan, R. P. (2007). Virtual Reality: How Much Immersion Is Enough? IEE Computer Society, 40:7, 36-43.
Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85.
Davis, D. N. & Chapman, P. M., (2009). Emerging applications in immersive technologies. Encyclopedia of artificial intelligence, 536-540
De la Peña, N. et al (2010). Immersive Journalism: Immersive Virtual Reality for the First-Person Experience of News. Presence, 19:4, 291-301
Dillon, C., Keogh, E., Freeman, J. & Davidoff, J. (2001). Presence: Is Your Heart in It? Proceedings of the 4th Annual International Workshop on Presence, Philadelphia,
USA.
Eisenberg, N. (2003). Prosocial behavior, empathy, and sympathy. In M. Bornstein, L. Davidson, C. Keyes, & K. Moore (Eds.), Well-being: Positive development across the life course, 253–265
Fulcher, J. (2009). User interface issues in multimedia. Encyclopedia of multimedia technology and networking, 2, 1493-1498
Goldie, P. (1999). How we think of others’ emotions. Mind and Language, 14, 394–423. Hand, S. & Varan, D. (2008). Interactive Narratives: Exploring the Links between Empathy,
Interactivity and Structure. Interactive Television Research Institute (ITRI), 11-19 Hayes, A. (2013). Model templates for PROCESS for SPSS and SAS. The Guilford
Press
Johnson, D. R. (2011). Transportation into a story increases empathy, prosocial behavior, and perceptual bias toward fearful expressions. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 150-155
Lee, K. M. (2004). Presence, Explicated. Communication Theory, 14:1 27-50
Mar, R. A., Oatley, K., Hirsh, J., Dela Paz, J. & Peterson, J. B., (2006). Bookworms versus nerds: Exposure to fiction versus non-fiction, divergent associations with social ability, and the simulation of fictional social worlds. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 694-712
McMahan, A. (2003). Immersion, Engagement, and Presence: A Method for Analyzing 3-D Video Games. The Video Game, Theory Reader, 67-86
North, M. M. & North, S. (2016). A Comparative Study of Sense of Presence of Traditional Virtual Reality and Immersive Environments. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 20, 1-15
Pausch, R., Proffitt, D. & Williams, G. (1997). Quantifying Immersion in Virtual Reality. Proceedings of the 24th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive
techniques, 13-18
Petty, R. E. & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001). Issue Involvement As A Moderator Of The Effects On Attitude Of Advertising Content And Contex., Association for Consumer Research, 20-24
Preacher, K., & Hayes, A. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.
Schen, L. (2010). On a Scale of State Empathy During Message Processing. Western Jounral of Communication, 74:5, 504-524
Schubert, T. W. (2009). A New Conception of Spatial Presence: Once Again, with Feeling. Communication Theory, 19, 161-187.
Slater, M., Linakis, V., Usoh, M., Kooper, R., Street, G. (1996). Immersion, Presence, and Performance in Virtual Environments: An Experiment with Tri-Dimensional Chess. ACM Virtual Reality Software and Technology (VRST), 66-3
Ravaja, N., (2004). Contributions of psychophysiology to media research: Review and recommendations. Media Psychology, 6, 193‐235.
Regenbrecht, H., & Schubert, T. (2002). Real and illusory interaction enhance presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments. Presence, 11, 425–434.
Rickard, N. S., (2004). Intense emotional responses to music: a test of the physiological arousal hypothesis. Psychology of Music, 32:4, 371-388
Riva, G., Mantovani, F., Capideville, C S., Preziosa, A., Morganti, F., Villani, D., Gagglioli, A., Botella, C. & Acañiz, M. (2007). Affective Interactions Using Virtual Reality: The Link between Presence and Emotions. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 10:1, 45-56 Vish, V. T., Tan, E. S. & Molenaar, D. (2010). The emotional and cognitive effect of
immersion in film viewing, Cognition and Emotion, 24:8, 1439-1445
Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998). Measuring Presence in Virtual Environments: A Presence Questionnaire. U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 7:3, 225-240.
Wirth, W., Hartmann, T., B¨ocking, S., Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., Schramm, H., et al. (2007). A process model of the formation of spatial presence experiences. Journal of Media Psychology, 9, 493–525
Yee, N. & Bailsenson, J. (2006). Walk A Mile in Digital Shoes: The Impact of Embodied Perspective-Taking on The Reduction of Negative Stereotyping in Immersive Virtual Environments. Stanford University: Virtual Human Interaction Lab
Zillmann, D. & Vorderer, P. (2000). Media Entertainment: The Psychology of Its Appeal, 39-163
Zwaan, R. A. (2004). The Immersed Experiencer: Toward an Embodied Theory of Language Comprehension. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 44, 35-62
Appendices Appendix A
Immersive Tendency Questionnaire (revised)
Items were taken from Witmer and Singer’s original Immersive Tendency Questionnaire. (1998).
Involvement: items 1, 3, 5 and 6. Focus: items 2, 4 and 7
“You will be asked to answer several questions about different situations in your life and how you normally approach these situations. For each, please answer as honestly as possible using the given seven-point scale.”
1. Do you easily become deeply involved in movies or TV dramas?
2. Do you ever become so involved in a television program or book that people have problems getting your attention?
3. How mentally alert do you feel at the present time?
4. How frequently do you find yourself closely identifying with the characters in a story line?
5. How good are you at blocking out external distractions when you are involved in something?
6. When watching sports, do you ever become so involved in the game that you react as if you were one of the players?
7. Do you ever have dreams that are so real that you feel disoriented when you awake?
Table 1
Results of the PCA for the Immersive Tendency scale: Pattern Matrix
1 2 3
1. Do you easily become deeply involved in movies or TV dramas?
.933 2. Do you ever become so involved in a
television program or book that people have problems getting your attention?
.593
3. How mentally alert do you feel at the present time?
.421 4. How frequently do you find yourself closely
identifying with the characters in a story line?
.805 5. How good are you at blocking out external
distractions when you are involved in something?
.888
6. When watching sports, do you ever become so involved in the game that you react as if you were one of the players?
.920
7. Do you ever have dreams that are so real that you feel disoriented when you awake?
.504 .539
Rotation Method: Oblimin with Kaiser Normalization Appendix B
Sense of Presence Questionnaire (revised)
Items were taken from Witmer and Singer’s original Presence Questionnaire (1998).
Control factors: items 1,5,7,9 and 10. Sensory factors: items 2,3,4 and 8. Distraction factor: item 11. Realism factor: item 6
“You will be asked several questions about the media technology you just used to watch the documentary "Clouds Over Sidra" and how you felt about this 360-degree experience. For each, please answer as honestly as possible using the given seven-point scales.”
1. How responsive was the environment to actions that you initiated (or performed)? 2. How natural did your interactions with the environment involve you?
3. How much did the visual aspects of the environment involve you? 4. How much did the auditory aspects of the environment involve you?
5. How natural was the mechanism which controlled movement through the environment?
6. How inconsistent or disconnected was the information coming from your various sense?
7. Were you able to anticipate what would happen next in response to the actions you performed?
8. How compelling was your sense of moving around inside the virtual environment? 9. How quickly did you adjust to the virtual environment experience?
10. How proficient in moving and interacting with the virtual environment did you feel at the end of the experience?
11. How well could you concentrate on the assigned tasks or required activities rather than on the mechanism used to perform those tasks or activities?
Table 2
Results of the PCA for the Sense of Presence scale: Rotated Component Matrix
1 2 3 4
1. How responsive was the environment to actions that you initiated (or
performed)?
.783
2. How natural did your interactions with the environment involve you?
.802 3. How much did the visual aspects of
the environment involve you?
.553 4. How much did the auditory aspects of
the environment involve you?
.820 5. How natural was the mechanism
which controlled movement through the environment?
.811
6. How inconsistent or disconnected was the information coming from your various sense?
.930
7. Were you able to anticipate what would happen next in response to the actions you performed?
.799
8. How compelling was your sense of moving around inside the virtual environment?
.795
9. How quickly did you adjust to the virtual environment experience?
.518 10. How proficient in moving and
interacting with the virtual environment did you feel at the end of the
experience?
.719
11. How much did the visual display quality interfere or distract you from performing assigned tasks or required activities?
-.672
Appendix C
Empathy Questionnaire
This is a revised version of Shen’s empathy scale (2010).
Cognitive Empathy: items 1,4,6 and 8. Affective Empathy: items 2,3,5 and 7.
“Thinking back about the video you just watched about Sidra, the 12-year old Syrian refugee girl, to what extent do you agree with the following statement (1 = Not at All to 5= Completely):”
1. I can see Sidra’s point of view 2. Sidra’s emotions are genuine
3. I was in a similar emotional state as Sidra 4. I can understand what Sidra is going through 5. I can feel Sidra’s emotions
6. I recognize Sidra’s situation
7. I experienced the same emotions as Sidra
8. Sidra’s reactions to the situation are understandable
Table 3
Results of the PCA for the Cognitive Empathy scale: Pattern Matrix 1
1. I can see Sidra’s point of view .702 2. I can understand what Sidra is going
through
3. I recognize Sidra’s situation -.500 4 Sidra’s reactions to the situation are
understandable CE
.821
Table 4
Results of the PCA for the Affective Empathy scale: Pattern Matrix
1 2
1. Sidra’s emotions are genuine . .964
2. I was in a similar emotional state as Sidra .850
3. I can feel Sidra’s emotions .579
4. I experienced the same emotions as Sidra .904 Rotation Method: Oblimin with Kaiser Normalization
