The Impact of Virtual Reality on Social Interaction and Relationship via Statistical Analysis
Abstract
The digital environment is rapidly expanding with the advancement of technologies. This research aims to quantitatively measure the impact of Virtual Reality (VR) on social interactions and relationships by focusing on variables such as duration and frequency of VR use, type of VR headset, and user demographics (age and gender). Qualitative data was collected from online data repositories and previous studies. Statistical analysis was employed on data from 1,000 participants using SPSS to uncover significant patterns in VR social experiences. The findings reveal that age, motion sickness, and immersion levels have minimal impact on VR usage duration, while these factors significantly determine user engagement levels and social interaction. These results challenge previous assumptions about the role of demographic variables in VR experiences. The research provides valuable insights for VR creators, social scientists, and policymakers, highlighting the need for further exploration of additional factors that may influence VR's social impact. Utilizing both descriptive and inferential statistics, this study offers a comprehensive understanding of VR's influence on social dynamics. The limitations of the research are acknowledged, and recommendations for future studies are proposed to enhance the responsible integration of VR into social contexts.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Opriş, D., Pintea, S., García‐Palacios, A., Botella, C., Szamosközi, Ş., & David, D. (2012). Virtual reality exposure therapy in anxiety disorders: a quantitative meta‐analysis. Depression and anxiety, 29(2), 85-93.
Diemer, J., Alpers, G. W., Peperkorn, H. M., Shiban, Y., & Mühlberger, A. (2015). The impact of perception and presence on emotional reactions: a review of research in virtual Reality. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 111605.
Powers, M. B., & Emmelkamp, P. M. (2008). Virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety disorders: A meta-analysis. Journal of anxiety disorders, 22(3), 561-569.
Parsons, T. D., & Rizzo, A. A. (2008). Affective outcomes of virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety and specific phobias: A meta-analysis. Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry, 39(3), 250-261.
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. Psychological inquiry, 13(2), 103-124.
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students' learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers & education, 70, 29-40.
Latoschik, M. E., Kern, F., Stauffert, J. P., Bartl, A., Botsch, M., & Lugrin, J. L. (2019). Not alone here?! scalability and user experience of embodied ambient crowds in distributed social virtual Reality. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 25(5), 2134-2144.
https://ib.cricket/the-story-of-virtual-reality
Cummings, J. J., & Bailenson, J. N. (2016). How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media psychology, 19(2), 272-309.
Slater, M., & Sanchez-Vives, M. V. (2016). Enhancing our lives with immersive virtual Reality. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 3, 74.
Mikropoulos, T. A., & Natsis, A. (2011). Educational virtual environments: A ten-year review of empirical research (1999–2009). Computers & education, 56(3), 769-780.
McKenna, K. Y., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. E. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What's the big attraction?. Journal of social issues, 58(1), 9-31.
Freeman, D., Reeve, S., Robinson, A., Ehlers, A., Clark, D., Spanlang, B., & Slater, M. (2017). Virtual Reality in the assessment, understanding, and treatment of mental health disorders. Psychological medicine, 47(14), 2393-2400.
Rosenthal, R., Schäfer, J., Hoffmann, H., Vitz, M., Oertli, D., & Hahnloser, D. (2013). Personality traits and virtual reality performance. Surgical endoscopy, 27, 222-230.
Wilson, C. J., & Soranzo, A. (2015). The use of virtual Reality in psychology: A case study in visual perception. Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2015(1), 151702.
Wang, H., & Lee, K. (2020). Getting in the flow together: The role of social presence, perceived enjoyment and concentration on sustainable use intention of mobile social network game. Sustainability, 12(17), 6853.
Seymour, N. E., Gallagher, A. G., Roman, S. A., O'brien, M. K., Bansal, V. K., Andersen, D. K., & Satava, R. M. (2002). Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Annals of surgery, 236(4), 458-464.
Seymour, N. E., Gallagher, A. G., Roman, S. A., O'brien, M. K., Bansal, V. K., Andersen, D. K., & Satava, R. M. (2002). Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Annals of surgery, 236(4), 458-464.
Biocca, F., & Delaney, B. (1995). Immersive virtual reality technology. Communication in the age of virtual Reality, 15(32), 10-5555.
Schultheis, M. T., & Rizzo, A. A. (2001). The application of virtual reality technology in rehabilitation. Rehabilitation psychology, 46(3), 296.
Curtis, P. (2014). Mudding: Social phenomena in text-based virtual realities. In Culture of the Internet (pp. 121-142). Psychology Press.
Radu, I. (2014). Augmented Reality in education: a meta-review and cross-media analysis. Personal and ubiquitous computing, 18, 1533-1543.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 International Journal of Machine Learning for Sustainable Development
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Impact Factor :
JCR Impact Factor: 5.9 (2020)
JCR Impact Factor: 6.1 (2021)
JCR Impact Factor: 6.7 (2022)
JCR Impact Factor: 7.6 (2023)
JCR Impact Factor: 8.6 (2024)
JCR Impact Factor: Under Evaluation (2025)
A Double-Blind Peer-Reviewed Refereed Journal