| Literature DB >> 29426819 |
S Seinfeld1,2, J Arroyo-Palacios2,3, G Iruretagoyena1,2, R Hortensius4,5, L E Zapata1, D Borland1,2,6, B de Gelder4, M Slater2,7, M V Sanchez-Vives8,9,10.
Abstract
The role of empathy and perspective-taking in preventing aggressive behaviors has been highlighted in several theoretical models. In this study, we used immersive virtual reality to induce a full body ownership illusion that allows offenders to be in the body of a victim of domestic abuse. A group of male domestic violence offenders and a control group without a history of violence experienced a virtual scene of abuse in first-person perspective. During the virtual encounter, the participants' real bodies were replaced with a life-sized virtual female body that moved synchronously with their own real movements. Participants' emotion recognition skills were assessed before and after the virtual experience. Our results revealed that offenders have a significantly lower ability to recognize fear in female faces compared to controls, with a bias towards classifying fearful faces as happy. After being embodied in a female victim, offenders improved their ability to recognize fearful female faces and reduced their bias towards recognizing fearful faces as happy. For the first time, we demonstrate that changing the perspective of an aggressive population through immersive virtual reality can modify socio-perceptual processes such as emotion recognition, thought to underlie this specific form of aggressive behaviors.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29426819 PMCID: PMC5807352 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-19987-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1The immersive virtual reality scenario. (a) The participant looks at his female virtual body in the mirror. (b) The participant looks down towards his own body from a first-person perspective. (c) The participant touches the virtual balls. (d) The male virtual character enters the room and starts to verbally abuse the female virtual character. (e) The male virtual character throws a telephone on the floor. (f) The male virtual character invades the personal space of the participant.
Figure 2Face-body compound test to assess emotion recognition. Example of the emotionally congruent and incongruent face-body compounds of fearful and happy emotional expressions.
Response variables from the signal detection analysis included in the Bayesian Analysis.
| Variable | Meaning |
|---|---|
| d′ score for anger recognition in male faces. Higher scores indicate more sensitivity to detect angry faces in male stimuli. | |
| Same for female faces. | |
| d′ score for fear recognition in male faces. Higher scores indicate more sensitivity to detect fearful faces in male stimuli. | |
| Same for female faces. | |
| c-criterion for anger recognition in male faces. 0 = no bias, positive value = tendency to answer with happiness, negative value = tendency to answer with angry. | |
| Same for female faces | |
| c-criterion for fear recognition in male faces. 0 = no bias, positive value = tendency to answer with happiness, negative value = tendency to answer with fear. | |
| Same for female faces. |
Posterior Probabilities that the Offenders and the Control groups differed in social desirability and in emotion recognition before (B) the immersive virtual reality (VR) experience and the change afterwards (post-pre).
| Response Variable | Posterior Probability that Offenders > Controls on corresponding response variable | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Social Desirability | 0.98 | Very strong evidence that Offenders exhibit greater Social Desirability than Controls. |
| B_ | 0.16 | Some evidence that Controls better recognize male angry faces on a baseline level compared to the Offenders. |
| B_ | 0.53 | No evidence either way. |
| B_ | 0.15 | Some evidence that Controls better recognize male fearful faces on a baseline level compared to the Offenders. |
| B_ | 0.03 | Strong evidence that Controls better recognize female fearful faces on a baseline level compared to the Offenders. |
| B_ | 0.65 | No evidence either way. |
| B_ | 0.41 | No evidence either way. |
| B_ | 0.99 | Overwhelming evidence that Offenders have a greater bias towards classifying male faces as happy rather than fearful on a baseline level when compared to the Controls. |
| B_ | 0.80 | Good evidence that Offenders have a greater bias towards classifying female faces as happy rather than as fearful on a baseline level when compared to the Controls. |
| 0.58 | No evidence either way. | |
| 0.10 | Strong evidence that the VR experience produced a greater increase in the recognition of angry female faces in Controls than in Offenders. | |
| 0.41 | No evidence either way. | |
| 0.99 | Overwhelming evidence that the VR experience produced a greater increase in the recognition of fearful female faces in Offenders than it did in Controls. | |
| 0.51 | No evidence either way. | |
| 0.74 | Some evidence that the VR experience increased the tendency to classify female faces as expressing happiness to a greater extent in Offenders than it did in Controls. | |
| 0.04 | Strong evidence that the VR experience increased the tendency to classify male faces as expressing fear to a greater extent in Offenders than it did in Controls. | |
| 0.17 | Good evidence that the VR experience increased the tendency to classify female faces as expressing fear to a greater extent in Offenders than it did in Controls. |
Bayesian statistical model using Group as the independent variable. B, baseline (before VR); c, bias towards classifying faces as expressing a particular emotion; d′, sensitivity to recognize a particular facial expression.
Means (Standard Errors) of Baseline (B) Sensitivity (d′) to recognize facial emotions and Baseline (B) Response Bias (c) towards classifying faces as depicting a particular emotion in domestic violence male offenders and non-offender male controls.
| Offenders | Controls | |
|---|---|---|
| B_ | 2.42 (0.17) | 2.62 (0.11) |
| B_ | 2.66 (0.18) | 2.65 (0.12) |
| B_ | 2.48 (0.15) | 2.61 (0.11) |
| B_ | 2.44 (0.14) | 2.73 (0.09) |
| B_ | 0.02 (0.04) | 0.00 (0.04) |
| B_ | 0.05 (0.04) | 0.07 (0.04) |
| B_ | 0.03 (0.06) | −0.13 (0.04) |
| B_ | 0.17 (0.07) | 0.11 (0.04) |
See Table 2 for statistical interpretations using a Bayesian model.
Figure 3Change in sensitivity d′ (facility) to recognize facial emotions and in bias (c) towards classifying faces as depicting a particular facial emotion after the immersive virtual reality experience in domestic violence male offenders and non-offender male controls. (a) Means and standards errors of the differences (post-VR minus baseline) in sensitivity index d-prime (d′) scores obtained in the Face Body Compound Test, a higher value indicating a higher increase. (b) Means and standard errors of the differences in bias (c) in the Face-Body Compound test, where a c value of 0 indicates no change; a positive value of c indicates an increase in bias towards classifying faces as happy, and a negative c value shows an increase in bias towards classifying faces as angry or fearful after the VR experience. See Table 2 for statistical interpretations using a Bayesian model.