5 Surprising Psychology Findings from 30 Years of VR Research

5 Surprising Psychology Findings from 30 Years of Virtual Reality Research

Introduction

Virtual reality (VR) has gone from a sci-fi curiosity to a technology in millions of homes. In 1992 the first VR journal Presence launched, and researchers – first engineers, then social scientists – began studying how people behave in these new worlds. Today VR headsets (over 25 million in use) and big investments (Meta alone spent \~\$50 billion) mean VR is not just for gaming but also for training, therapy and more. A new review of 30 years of VR experiments distills five core findings about how people think and learn in VR. Here’s what they learned (and what it means for users and industry):

1. “Being There” Helps – But Only for the Right Activities

VR’s magic is *presence*: the feeling that you’re really “there” in the virtual scene. Classic studies show this feeling is powerful. For example, people who walked a virtual plank over a deep chasm literally felt real fear, even with old low-quality gear. That’s because VR can trick the brain into treating the scene as real. Presence is especially useful when the task is hands-on or high-risk. Meta-analyses find that VR training (in medicine, aviation, military drills, etc.) lets trainees practice realistic, dangerous scenarios without real danger. Similarly, VR “exposure therapy” for phobias (heights, flying, spiders, etc.) works well: patients repeatedly confront virtual fears until the panic fades. Even pain management benefits – burn patients playing VR games report much less pain during treatment.

By contrast, some activities don’t gain much from VR’s immersion. Attempts to use VR for everyday work and socializing have shown only modest results. Only niche VR apps have taken off: for example, the social VR world “VRChat” saw about 92,000 people online at once in 2023, and the VR game *Gorilla Tag* has a few million users. But during the COVID pandemic most people preferred Zoom over VR meetings, and few adults wear headsets for business calls. Likewise, VR films and casual entertainment have struggled to hold attention.

What this means: VR is great for experiences that benefit from immersion (hard-to-recreate or dangerous tasks), but it’s not a cure-all for every scenario. If you’re a developer or company, focus VR on training simulations, therapy, or workouts – activities that “feel real.” Don’t force VR on routine tasks (checking email or watching TV is better on a screen). For consumers, the advice is similar: have a clear goal for VR use. Most people who buy headsets end up using them rarely. If you pick a VR app with a purpose (like fitness or a skill practice), you’ll get more value than just browsing metaverse worlds with no end game.

2. Your Avatar Can Change You

In VR you usually control an avatar – a virtual body or character that represents you. Research shows these avatars can actually alter your thoughts and actions. One phenomenon is the *body ownership illusion*: people can be tricked into feeling a fake limb is theirs. In classic experiments, when a virtual hand was moved in sync with a hidden real hand, participants “felt” the virtual hand as their own. VR replicates this: even without touch, simply seeing your avatar’s body move as you do makes you feel embodied. This has real effects. For instance, students who saw a virtual hand write down information remembered it better than students with no visible hand movement.

Another famous effect is the Proteus effect: people take on traits of their avatar. In early VR studies, participants given taller avatars negotiated more confidently than those with short avatars. Similar results have been found for other avatar features (e.g. an athletic avatar can boost exercise, a friendly avatar can encourage cooperation). In fact, a meta-analysis found these avatar influences are quite robust, and stronger in VR than on flat screens.

*Be mindful:* Even if your VR session isn’t about avatars, the choice of appearance can matter. Researchers warn that avatar customization (or lack of it) can subtly shape how people behave. As a VR user, remember that “walking a mile in someone else’s shoes” might be literal: embodying a different body or identity can shift your attitudes over time. In short, your virtual self isn’t harmless fun – it can recalibrate your real self if you’re not careful.

3. VR Learning: Hands-On Wins Over Books

VR’s “learning by doing” promise has attracted schools and industries. It’s true that VR can supercharge experiential learning. The extra immersion and interactivity in VR help with spatial understanding, engagement and teamwork. For example, students in a VR museum remembered spatial layouts better, and learners reported higher motivation and enjoyment in active VR lessons.

However, the review highlights a caveat: VR can also overload the brain if misused. Simply copying slides or lectures into VR often backfires. The extra sensory information can distract or tire learners. Experiments show that if you port a boring 2D lesson directly into VR, students may learn *less* than with traditional methods, because they’re busy adjusting to the VR itself.

Advice: Use VR for procedural or spatial learning, not abstract lectures. In practice, this means give learners clear, physical tasks in VR (assembling a virtual engine, practicing a dance routine, simulating a walk through a museum). Keep VR sessions shorter and focused. Teachers should be cautious: as the review notes, “simply putting a headset on” doesn’t guarantee better learning. VR works best when it’s designed *for* VR – for example, flight simulators or surgical trainers where doing beats listening. For routine content (math theory, history facts), a tablet or video may actually be more effective.

4. VR’s Tracking: Powerful Data and Privacy Risks

Every VR headset is packed with sensors: inside-out cameras and motion trackers record your head movements, hand gestures, even eye gaze. This continuous tracking (headset says “where are you looking?” and “what is your body doing?”) is what makes VR feel alive. It allows the system to update the graphics in real time so you can naturally look around and move. This tracking is also a goldmine for data. Researchers have used headset data to analyze behavior – even diagnose conditions. For example, head and hand movement patterns have been shown to distinguish children with ADHD when they play VR games. Other studies use gaze data to see what grabs attention or when people understand a task.

Yet there’s a flip side. All that tracking data is uniquely “you.” A recent VR study trained a model on 5 minutes of people’s motion data and then identified the same person among 50,000 users with over 90% accuracy. In other words, your VR movements are like a fingerprint. VR headsets also have external cameras to map your room, which can capture bystander images or private spaces.

What you should do: Treat VR data carefully. Researchers must anonymize movement data, and developers should minimize data collection. Users should know their headset may record more than they think – always read privacy policies and consider what’s stored. The upside is that this tracking also makes VR a unique lab: designers can intentionally design experiences that encourage certain movements (for example, exercises that require turning or reaching) to achieve training goals. Game and app makers can also leverage head/hand data to personalize content or track progress, but must handle it ethically.

5. Heads-Up: VR Makes Distances Look Shorter

VR is inherently spatial – you walk around and look in 360° – but it has a trick: people underestimate distances in VR. In many experiments, users consistently think objects are closer than they really are. For example, if a virtual tree is 10 meters away, people might act as if it’s only 8 meters away. This is true even with modern high-end headsets; the effect was seen in old low-res gear and still holds now.

Why? Partly because of technical limits like a restricted field of view, fixed focus distance, and imperfect depth cues. These factors force your brain to unconsciously “shrink” the space. The classic vergence-accommodation conflict (your eyes focus on a fixed screen distance while trying to converge on virtual depth) also contributes.

Implications: Any VR application that relies on accurate distance must compensate. For instance, aiming games, sports trainers, or architecture simulations need calibration. Researchers should account for this bias when studying social space (like how far people stand from each other). There are workarounds: some VR apps add shadows or floor textures to improve distance cues, or use external depth cameras or adjust your virtual eye height. Notably, the newest “mixed reality” headsets (Apple’s 2024 Vision Pro calls itself a *spatial computer*) aim to blend real depth with VR display. Still, be aware: your VR world can feel a bit *compressed*, so don’t be surprised if you find yourself reaching too short for things.

Looking Ahead: Where VR Research Goes Next

This review doesn’t just summarize past findings – it also guides future work. The authors stress that VR is most valuable in situations that are Dangerous, Impossible, Counterproductive or Expensive (the “DICE” framework). In other words, use VR for fire evacuation training, climate-change simulations, treating phobias, etc., rather than for checking email or making reports.

They also urge scientists to use VR themselves. VR is a complex medium, and designers should spend many hours *in VR* to understand its quirks before crafting studies. More longitudinal studies are needed too: almost all existing VR experiments are one-off, but effects can change as people get used to VR. Future research should recruit diverse samples (different ages, body types, abilities) because VR hardware fits people differently. And importantly, the field should study VR’s downsides – things like addiction, harassment or misinformation in virtual environments – areas that are largely unexplored.

By focusing on VR’s strengths and addressing its challenges, researchers and developers can make VR safer and more effective. For industry and consumers, that means we can expect better VR training tools, smarter apps, and hardware that improves on today’s limits. After 30 years of experiments, the message is clear: VR is powerful, but it’s not magic. Used wisely, it can achieve things no other medium can – from curing fears to fine-tuning our understanding of the mind itself.

Sources: Based on Bailenson *et al.*, *Nature Human Behaviour* (2025) – a review of three decades of VR psychology experiments. Each finding above is illustrated with examples and data from this paper and related studies.

References

Bailenson, J. N., DeVeaux, C., Han, E., Markowitz, D. M., Santoso, M., & Wang, P. (2025). Five canonical findings from 30 years of psychological experimentation in virtual reality. Nature Human Behaviour.