ArticleScientific reports2022
The effects of embodying wildlife in virtual reality on conservation behaviors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Five canonical findings from 30 years of psychological experimentation in virtual reality.Nature human behaviour · 2025Review
- Virtual reality is only mildly effective in improving forest conservation behaviors.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efforts to mitigate environmental threats are often inversely related to the magnitude of casualty, human or otherwise. This "compassion fade" can be explained, in part, by differential processing of large- versus small-scale threats: it is difficult to form empathic connections with unfamiliar masses versus singular victims. Despite robust findings, little is known about how non-human casualty is processed, and what strategies override this bias. Across four experiments, we show how embodying threatened megafauna-Loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta Caretta)-using virtual reality can offset and reverse compassion fade. After observing compassion fade during exposure to non-human casualty in virtual reality (Study 1; N = 60), we then tested a custom virtual reality simulation designed to facilitate body transfer with a threatened Loggerhead sea turtle (Study 2; N = 98). Afterwards, a field experiment (Study 3; N = 90) testing the simulation with varied number of victims showed body transfer offset compassion fade. Lastly, a fourth study (N = 25) found that charitable giving among users embodying threatened wildlife was highest when exposed to one versus several victims, though this effect was reversed if victims were of a different species. The findings demonstrate how animal embodiment in virtual reality alters processing of environmental threats and non-human casualty, thereby influencing conservation outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.