ArticleScientific reports2024
Virtual reality is only mildly effective in improving forest conservation behaviors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
- The Application of VR Technology in Engineering Issues: Geodesy and Geomatics, Mining, Environmental Protection and Occupational Safety.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Kahneman's Insights for Climate Risks: Lessons from Bounded Rationality, Heuristics and Biases.Environmental & resource economics · 2025Article
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
Virtual Reality (VR) enables immersive experiences that can enhance awareness about environmental problems. We measure the effectiveness of VR versus 2D in an environmental campaign using a field experiment in Brazil. 617 passers-by at a mall were randomly assigned to watch a video clip about the Amazon Forest through VR or a traditional 2D device, with some being randomly interviewed before watching the movie (control group). We find that both the 2D and VR interventions increase individuals' propensity to (i) contribute to an Amazonian humanitarian campaign, (ii) share contact information, (iii) interact with a conservation campaign, and (iv) state pro-conservation opinions. We find no additional impact of VR compared to 2D, but VR participants were more likely to engage with pro-conservation content online 3 months later. Our findings provide cautionary evidence about the additional potential of using immersive technologies, like VR, to improve conservation behaviors compared to 2D methods.
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.