Presence and Immersion in Virtual Neuroscience: A Research Framework for Enhanced Experimental Validity and Clinical Translation

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of presence and immersion in virtual reality (VR) neuroscience experiments, synthesizing the latest research for scientists and drug development professionals. We explore the foundational distinction between technological immersion and the subjective feeling of presence, review advanced methodological applications from empathy induction to procedural training, and address key challenges in measurement and optimization. The article further examines the ecological validity and behavioral realism of VR settings through comparative studies, offering a validated framework for leveraging immersive technologies to improve the predictive power of neuroscientific and clinical research.

Deconstructing the VR Experience: Core Principles of Immersion and Presence

In virtual neuroscience, the precise distinction between immersion and presence is not merely academic; it is a fundamental prerequisite for designing valid and reproducible experiments. Immersion is an objective property of the technology, quantifiable through specifications like field of view, resolution, and tracking accuracy. In contrast, presence is the subjective psychological response—the user's feeling of "being there" in the virtual environment [1]. This dichotomy is critical because the ultimate goal of using Virtual Reality (VR) in neuroscience is to evoke strong, measurable presence to enhance the ecological validity of experimental settings without sacrificing experimental control [2]. The confusion between these terms can lead to flawed study designs where technological capabilities are erroneously equated with user experience, thereby compromising data on neural and cognitive processes. This paper establishes a definitive framework to guide researchers in the rigorous application of VR for studying brain function and behavior.

Theoretical Foundations: Deconstructing the Illusion of Reality

Immersion: The Technological Framework

Immersion refers to the extent to which a VR system can deliver a vivid, encompassing, and interactive simulation that shutters out inputs from the physical world. It is a characteristic of the hardware and software itself.

• Key Technological Dimensions of Immersion:
  • Visual Fidelity: Includes display resolution, refresh rate, color depth, and freedom from screen-door effects.
  • Auditory Fidelity: The quality of spatial audio that changes dynamically with head movement.
  • Tracking Accuracy and Latency: The precision of head and motion tracking and the minimization of lag between user movement and system response.
  • Field of View (FOV): A wider FOV more closely mimics human binocular vision, increasing perceptual immersion.
  • Haptic Feedback: The provision of tactile sensations that correspond to virtual interactions.

Presence: The Psychological State

Presence, or the "illusion of being there," is the psychological sense of being located in and engaged with the virtual environment, even when one is physically in another location [3] [1]. It is not a direct output of the technology but a mediated human experience. Contemporary research argues that presence is primarily a psychological phenomenon shaped by factors extending beyond mere technological sophistication, including content narrative, user characteristics, socio-cultural contexts, and the alignment between the virtual environment and the user's intentions [3].

Mel Slater's influential work further decomposes presence into two core illusions [1]:

• Place Illusion (PI): The visceral sensation of being in a real place, despite knowing one is not.
• Plausibility Illusion (Psi): The belief that the events occurring in the virtual environment are actually happening, even though they are simulated.

Table 1: Core Illusions of Presence and Their Contributing Factors

Illusion Type	Definition	Key Design & Psychological Contributors
Place Illusion	The sensation of being physically located in the virtual environment. [1]	High visual realism, spatial audio, stable tracking, low latency, wide field of view.
Plausibility Illusion	The belief that the scenario and events in the VR environment are truly occurring. [1]	Narrative coherence, responsive environment, realistic character behavior, user agency.
Illusion of Embodiment	The perception of having a virtual body that is one's own. [1]	Body ownership (e.g., through virtual hands), visuomotor synchrony, proprioceptive alignment.

The relationship between immersion and presence is not linear but facilitative. Higher immersion typically increases the potential for strong presence, but its actualization depends profoundly on psychological and contextual factors [3] [1]. A compelling narrative in a moderately immersive environment can evoke a stronger sense of presence than a technologically advanced but contextually barren simulation.

Experimental Protocols for Measuring Presence

A multi-modal approach is essential for robustly quantifying presence in neuroscience research, combining subjective self-reports with objective behavioral and physiological measures.

Subjective Self-Report Measures

These are the most direct, though introspective, methods for assessing the subjective feeling of presence.

• The Presence Questionnaire (PQ): Developed by Witmer and Singer, this is a widely used standardized instrument that measures presence across factors like involvement, sensory fidelity, and adaptation/immersion [1].
• The Slater-Usoh-Steed (SUS) Questionnaire: A shorter questionnaire that focuses specifically on the sense of "being there," the extent to which the VR environment becomes the "reality," and the tendency to forget about the real world [1].
• Post-Experiment Interviews: Qualitative interviews can provide rich, nuanced data about the participant's experience that may not be captured by standardized questionnaires.

Objective and Behavioral Measures

These measures provide indirect, non-intrusive indicators of presence by observing participant behavior.

• Behavioral Realism: Researchers can observe if participants interact with virtual objects as they would with real ones (e.g., ducking from a virtual projectile, showing startle responses) [1].
• Postural Sway: A participant experiencing strong presence may exhibit postural adjustments in response to virtual slopes or movements.
• Break in Presence (BIP) Detection: A BIP occurs when an external stimulus or system error (e.g., a tracking glitch) shatters the sense of presence. The frequency and nature of BIPs can be a powerful inverse metric for presence [4].

Physiological Correlates

Physiological measures offer continuous, unbiased data that can correlate with the intensity of the presence experience.

• Skin Conductance (SC) / Galvanic Skin Response (GSR): Measures electrodermal activity, which is linked to emotional arousal. Studies have shown a direct correlation between perspiration and high levels of scenario and body realism, indicating its utility as a marker for certain dimensions of presence [4].
• Heart Rate (HR) and Heart Rate Variability (HRV): Can indicate arousal and cognitive load. While one study found HR was not significantly affected by breaks in illusion [4], other research has used it as an indicator of emotional engagement in stressful or exciting virtual scenarios.
• Electroencephalography (EEG): Brain activity patterns, particularly in frontal and parietal regions, have been associated with states of presence and immersion, offering a direct neural correlate.

Table 2: Multi-Modal Matrix for Measuring Presence in Experimental Protocols

Measure Type	Specific Tool/Metric	Primary Variable Measured	Advantages	Limitations
Subjective	Presence Questionnaire (PQ) [1]	Self-reported sense of presence	Validated, direct insight	Prone to bias, post-hoc
Subjective	Slater-Usoh-Steed (SUS) [1]	Sense of "being there" & dominance of VR	Short, easy to administer	Limited dimensions
Behavioral	Behavioral Realism Observation	Naturalistic reactions to virtual stimuli	Objective, indirect	Requires coding, can be ambiguous
Behavioral	Break in Presence (BIP) Logging [4]	Resilience of the presence illusion	Objective, real-time	Requires a trigger or error to be observed
Physiological	Skin Conductance (SC/GSR) [4]	Arousal related to realism & engagement	Continuous, objective	Can be influenced by non-VR factors
Physiological	Heart Rate (HR)/HRV	Cognitive & emotional load	Continuous, objective	Less specific to presence
Physiological	Electroencephalography (EEG)	Neural correlates of presence	Direct brain measure	Complex to set up and analyze

The Scientist's Toolkit: Reagents for Virtual Neuroscience Research

For neuroscientists, a virtual experiment is an apparatus composed of both digital and physical "reagents." The selection of these components directly impacts the immersion and, consequently, the potential for evoking presence.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for VR-Based Neuroscience

Reagent / Tool Category	Specific Examples	Function in the Virtual Experiment
VR Hardware Platforms	Meta Quest 3/Pro, HTC Vive, Apple Vision Pro, PlayStation VR [5] [6]	Provides the immersive technological framework. Choice determines FOV, resolution, tracking type, and level of mobility.
Software Development Engines	Unity, Unreal Engine [5] [6]	The core software for building, rendering, and running the 3D virtual environment and its logic.
3D Modeling & Animation Software	Maya, 3DS Max, ZBrush [5]	Used to create the static and animated 3D assets (rooms, objects, avatars) that populate the virtual world.
Spatial Audio SDKs	Oculus Audio SDK, Microsoft Spatial Sound	Creates realistic soundscapes that are crucial for auditory cues and enhancing place illusion.
Physiological Data Acquisition Systems	Biopac MP160, ADInstruments PowerLab, Shimmer GSR+	Hardware and software for synchronously recording physiological data (SC, HR, EEG) with in-VR events.
Presence Assessment Kits	Standardized PQ & SUS questionnaires; BIP coding protocols	The validated tools for quantitatively and qualitatively measuring the primary outcome of presence.

Application in Neuroscience: Enhancing Ecological Validity and Experimental Control

The primary value of the immersion-presence framework for neuroscience lies in resolving the long-standing tension between ecological validity and experimental control [2]. Traditional neuropsychological assessments (e.g., Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Stroop Test) are highly controlled but often lack verisimilitude—they do not resemble the multi-step, dynamic challenges of real-world functioning [2]. VR solves this by creating simulated environments that are both controlled and contextually embedded.

For example, a VR-based "multiple errands task" can be used to assess executive functions in patients with frontal lobe lesions within a realistic but perfectly standardized virtual city, overcoming the practical and logistical limitations of administering the real-world test [2]. The effectiveness of such a paradigm, however, hinges on the participant experiencing a sufficient degree of presence. Without presence, their behavior may not translate to real-world deficits, as they are not emotionally or cognitively engaged. Therefore, a key application is in the design of function-led neuropsychological tests that proceed from observable everyday behaviors backward to their underlying neural mechanisms [2].

Furthermore, the ability to systematically induce "Breaks in Presence" by manipulating specific VR cues (e.g., social interaction, body representation, scenario realism) provides a powerful experimental paradigm. A 2025 study demonstrated that breaking different facets of presence (social, self, physical) led to distinct behavioral and physiological outcomes, such as increased physical effort under low body representation and lower skin conductance with broken social presence [4]. This level of precise manipulation allows neuroscientists to isolate and study the neural substrates of specific components of conscious experience in ways that are impossible in the unpredictable real world.

A rigorous and dissociated framework for immersion and presence is non-negotiable for the advancement of virtual neuroscience. Immersion defines the bounds of the experimental apparatus, while presence is a key dependent variable—a marker of the paradigm's success in engaging the brain systems under investigation. By meticulously selecting technological reagents to achieve target levels of immersion, and by employing a multi-modal protocol to quantify the resulting presence, researchers can reliably create virtual experiments that are both scientifically controlled and deeply human-relevant. This framework empowers the field to move beyond mere media comparisons and toward a mature science of how the brain constructs reality, using VR as its ultimate controlled illusion.

In the realm of virtual neuroscience, the psychological experience of "being there," or presence, is not a mere byproduct of putting on a headset. It is a complex neurocognitive phenomenon that is central to the efficacy of virtual reality (VR) applications in research and therapy [3]. The sense of presence is the foundational mechanism that allows virtual environments to elicit realistic, ecologically valid behavioral, emotional, and physiological responses, making it indispensable for experimental paradigms and clinical interventions [7] [8].

This whitepaper examines the three primary technical and perceptual drivers of this phenomenon: vividness, interactivity, and user control. For neuroscientists and drug development professionals, a rigorous understanding of these drivers is critical. It enables the design of more effective virtual experiments for studying brain function and behavior, and it supports the creation of robust virtual patient models and molecular visualization tools that can accelerate pharmaceutical development [9] [10]. A sophisticated understanding of presence moves beyond a purely technological focus, recognizing that it is a psychological construct shaped by the coherence between environmental features and a user's expectations and intentional actions [3].

Defining Immersion and Presence: A Neuroscientific Perspective

In virtual neuroscience, it is crucial to distinguish between the concepts of immersion and presence. Immersion is an objective description of the technology's capabilities. It refers to the extent to which a VR system can present a vivid, multi-sensory, and contiguous environment while shutting out the physical world [11] [12]. It is a property of the system itself.

Presence, on the other hand, is the subjective psychological response of the user to the immersive system. It is the illusion of being in the virtual environment, a feeling of "being there" that the brain generates [3] [13]. From a neuroscientific standpoint, this can be understood through the theory of embodied simulations and predictive coding [3]. The brain is constantly generating an internal model of the body and its surroundings to predict sensory input. VR technology, through its high-fidelity feedback, provides sensory data that closely matches the brain's predictions, thereby minimizing prediction error and "tricking" the brain into accepting the virtual environment as real [3].

This illusion is so powerful that it can override our normal sense of embodiment, making us feel as though we genuinely inhabit the virtual space and body. This has profound implications for virtual neuroscience experiments, as it allows researchers to use VR to study neural, physiological, and cognitive bases of human behavior with high ecological validity [7].

The Core Drivers of Immersion

Vividness: Multi-Sensory Fidelity

Vividness refers to the richness and completeness of the sensory information presented by a mediated environment [12]. It is a function of both the breadth (number of senses engaged) and depth (resolution and quality) of the sensory data.

• Technological Foundations: Vividness is achieved through hardware such as head-mounted displays (HMDs) with high-resolution, wide-field-of-view screens and stereo headphones [8]. Advanced systems may also incorporate haptic feedback devices to engage the sense of touch [8].
• Neuroscientific Impact: The brain's predictive coding model is highly dependent on the quality of sensory input. Higher graphical fidelity, spatial audio, and multi-sensory congruence provide a more coherent set of signals, reducing the prediction errors that would break the sense of presence [3]. Vividness is foundational for creating realistic virtual environments for cognitive and affective neuroscience studies [7].

Table 1: Key Research Reagents for Vividness in VR Experiments

Research Reagent / Technology	Function in Experiment
High-Resolution Head-Mounted Display (HMD)	Provides the visual foundation of the VE with high pixel density and wide field of view to reduce the "screen door" effect.
Stereo Headphones / Spatial Audio System	Delivers realistic, 3D-dimensional sound that corresponds to virtual objects and events, enhancing spatial awareness.
Haptic Feedback Devices (e.g., data gloves)	Provides tactile and force feedback to simulate the sense of touch, crucial for object manipulation and embodiment.
Eye-Tracking System (integrated in HMD)	Measures pupillary response, gaze direction, and blink rate as physiological correlates of cognitive load and emotional response.
Olfactory Displays	Releases specific scents to engage the olfactory system, further closing the multi-sensory loop and enhancing realism.

Interactivity: The Dialogue with the Virtual Environment

Interactivity is the degree to which users can influence the form or content of the virtual environment in real time. It is the extent to which the VR system allows users to manipulate and alter their environment, creating a dynamic two-way interaction [12].

• Technological Foundations: This is enabled by motion-tracking systems (e.g., inside-out tracking, lighthouse systems) that monitor the user's head and body movements [8]. The system must then update the sensory display (visual, auditory, haptic) in real-time to reflect the user's actions, maintaining the perceptual-motor contingency.
• Neuroscientific Impact: Interactivity is the core of agency, the feeling of controlling one's own actions. From a predictive coding perspective, when a user performs an action (e.g., reaching for a virtual object) and the VR system provides the predicted sensory feedback (e.g., the object moving), it reinforces the brain's internal model and strengthens presence [3]. In therapeutic contexts like VRET, this sense of control can enhance a patient's self-efficacy [8].

Table 2: Experimental Evidence on the Impact of Immersion Drivers

Study Focus	Experimental Protocol / Methodology	Key Quantitative Findings
Immersion & Prosocial Behavior [13]	244 participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions with varying immersion levels: 1) High (Immersive VR HMD), 2) Moderate (360° video on HMD), 3) Low (360° video on desktop). Measured presence, psychological distance, empathy, and prosocial intentions.	- Immersion was positively correlated with physical presence (r = N/A, p < .001). - Physical presence was negatively correlated with perceived spatial distance (r = -0.29, p < .001). - A serial mediation path (Immersion → Physical Presence → Spatial Distance → Empathy → Prosocial Behavior) was supported.
VR for Design Reviews [12]	Comparative studies of design reviews conducted in Immersive VR (IVR) versus non-immersive (desktop) environments. Metrics included design understanding, team communication, and outcomes (issues identified).	- Team Communication: IVR resulted in more levelled verbal exchanges among team members compared to non-immersive settings [12]. - Design Understanding: Contradictory evidence; some studies report positive [11] [9] [3] and others negative [12] [7] effects. - Outcomes: Similarly conflicting findings, with evidence for both positive [13] [14] and negative [12] [11] [9] effects on issue identification.
Content vs. Technology [3]	Comparison of presence in a VR job interview simulation versus a real-world simulation without rich contextual cues.	- Self-reported presence and anxiety were significantly higher in the VR condition than in the reduced-cue real-world simulation.

User Control: Agency and Configurability

User control refers to the user's ability to modify their viewpoint and the sequence of interactions, as well as to configure aspects of the environment itself. It encompasses both motor control (the fluidity of navigation) and modulatory control (the ability to influence the environment's state) [8].

• Technological Foundations: This involves low-latency tracking and rendering to ensure user movements are translated instantly into the virtual world. It also includes software features that allow users to pause, reset, or adjust the complexity of the simulation.
• Neuroscientific and Therapeutic Impact: Control is a critical factor for both safety and efficacy. In VR exposure therapy (VRET), the patient's ability to terminate the experience at any moment provides a crucial sense of safety, which can increase engagement and reduce dropout rates [8]. For a virtual neuroscience experiment, allowing users to control the pace of a task can reduce confounding effects of anxiety and stress.

Diagram 1: The neuroscience of presence via predictive coding. The brain accepts the virtual environment as real when sensory input from the VR system closely matches its internal model's predictions, minimizing prediction error.

Advanced Applications in Neuroscience and Drug Development

The precise engineering of presence through vividness, interactivity, and user control is unlocking novel methodologies in research and industry.

Virtual Patients in Clinical Trials

A primary application in drug development is the creation of virtual patient cohorts. These are computer-generated simulations that mimic the clinical characteristics of real patients, allowing for simulated clinical trials without initial human testing [9]. This is particularly valuable for rare diseases where patient recruitment is challenging.

• Methodologies for Creation: Several techniques are employed, each with strengths and weaknesses.
  • Agent-Based Modeling (ABM): Simulates individual patient interactions; useful for complex behaviors like immune responses and tumor progression [9].
  • AI and Machine Learning: Analyzes large real-world datasets to identify patterns and generate synthetic virtual patients, useful for augmenting small sample sizes [9].
  • Digital Twins: Virtual replicas of real patients that are continuously updated with new clinical data, allowing for real-time simulation of interventions [9].
  • Biosimulation/Statistical Methods: Uses mathematical models (e.g., Monte Carlo simulations, regression analysis) to extrapolate virtual patient data from existing datasets [9].

Table 3: Methodologies for Generating Virtual Patient Cohorts

Method	Advantages	Disadvantages
Agent-Based Modeling (ABM)	Models individual patient interactions and complex behaviors. Applied in oncology for predicting treatment efficacy.	Requires significant computational resources; limited scalability for very large populations.
AI & Machine Learning	Analyzes large datasets for patterns; enhances simulation accuracy; facilitates synthetic datasets for rare diseases.	High computational demand; "black box" problem reduces interpretability; risks of bias in training data.
Digital Twins	Enables real-time simulations and updates based on live clinical data; high temporal resolution for testing interventions.	High dependency on high-quality, real-time data; expensive and computationally intensive to maintain.
Biosimulation/Statistical Methods	Uses established mathematical models; cost-effective for modeling diverse clinical scenarios with smaller datasets.	Limited by model assumptions and accuracy; may oversimplify complex biological systems.

Molecular Visualization and Drug Design

In structure-based drug design (SBDD), VR provides an immersive 4D visualization of molecular structures. Researchers can intuitively explore and manipulate protein-ligand complexes in real-time, going beyond 2D screens to understand molecular interactions [10]. This immersive visualization is seen as a promising complement to the expanding suite of AI tools in pharmaceutical research, though challenges remain in workflow integration and hardware ergonomics [10].

Virtual Reality in Mental Health

VR has emerged as a revolutionary tool in mental health, particularly through Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET). It allows patients with phobias, PTSD, or anxiety disorders to be gradually exposed to feared stimuli in a safe, controlled, and confidential setting [8]. The effectiveness of VRET is directly tied to the patient's sense of presence—the more vivid and interactive the environment, the more genuine the emotional and physiological response, leading to better therapeutic outcomes [3] [8].

For researchers in virtual neuroscience and professionals in drug development, the drivers of immersion—vividness, interactivity, and user control—are not merely technical specifications but fundamental parameters for experimental and therapeutic efficacy. A deep understanding of these drivers, grounded in neuroscientific principles like predictive coding, allows for the design of virtual experiences that robustly generate presence.

This capability is transforming methodologies, from the use of virtual patients to simulate clinical trials and de-risk drug development, to the creation of immersive molecular visualization tools and highly effective therapeutic interventions like VRET. As the technology continues to advance, a continued focus on the psychological and neuroscientific underpinnings of presence will be essential to fully realize the potential of immersive technologies in understanding the brain and developing new treatments.

The study of presence—the subjective experience of "being there" in a virtual environment—represents a central challenge and opportunity in contemporary virtual neuroscience research. This experience is not merely a perceptual illusion but a complex neurocognitive phenomenon rooted in the brain's fundamental predictive operations. Within the context of virtual reality (VR) experiments, presence arises from the integration of sensory fidelity, motor agency, and embodied prediction—the process by which the brain generates models of the world to anticipate the sensory consequences of actions [15]. The concept of the "predictive brain" has emerged as a pivotal framework in cognitive neuroscience, emphasizing that neural processing is not primarily reactive but proactively oriented toward future states [16]. This framework provides the theoretical foundation for understanding how engineered virtual environments can elicit robust feelings of immersion and presence, with significant implications for experimental design in neuroscience and therapeutic development.

The historical understanding of predictive processing originates from early investigations in both perceptual and motor domains. Notably, early 20th-century work on efference copy and corollary discharge established that motor commands directly influence sensory processing, forming the basis of what are now known as forward models in motor control and other cognitive domains [16]. Contemporary research has expanded these ideas, suggesting that predictive processing represents a fundamental principle of neural computation, where prediction errors—the discrepancies between anticipated and actual sensory input—drive neural adaptation, cognitive updating, and behavior [16]. In virtual environments, this mechanism is paramount: the brain continuously compares its embodied predictions against the incoming stream of multisensory VR stimuli, and minimal prediction errors reinforce the sense that the virtual body is one's own, thereby enhancing presence.

Theoretical Frameworks: Predictive Processing and Embodiment

The Predictive Brain Hypothesis

The predictive brain concept posits that the brain is essentially a hypothesis-testing engine that uses internal models to infer the causes of sensory inputs and predict future states [16]. This view represents a paradigm shift from traditional serial processing models to a framework emphasizing recurrent neural processing and top-down Bayesian inference. The brain maintains generative models that simulate the body in its environment, enabling constant comparison between predicted and actual sensory feedback [16]. In the context of VR, this mechanism is harnessed to create a compelling sense of presence; when the virtual environment accurately predicts the user's actions (e.g., hand movements resulting in corresponding virtual hand movements with appropriate tactile and visual feedback), the internal model incorporates the virtual body, and presence is sustained.

This predictive framework is formally described by the comparator model (also known as central monitoring theory), which is crucial for understanding the sense of agency in virtual embodiments [17]. As shown in Figure 1, an action begins with an intention, leading to a prediction of the sensory consequences of the motor command. When the actual sensory feedback from the VR system matches this prediction, the sense of agency—the feeling of being the cause of one's actions—is strengthened [17]. This cycle of prediction and error minimization is fundamental to creating seamless virtual interactions where the technology becomes "invisible" to the user, allowing full cognitive and emotional engagement with the virtual scenario.

The Sense of Embodiment and Its Components

In virtual reality research, the sense of embodiment (SoE) is defined as the "ensemble of sensations that arise in conjunction with being inside, having, and controlling a body" [17]. This construct is conceptualized as comprising three distinct but interrelated sub-components:

• Sense of Self-Location (SoSL): The spatial experience of being located inside a body, typically within a specific volume of space [17]. In VR, this involves perceiving oneself as inhabiting the virtual body from a first-person perspective.
• Sense of Body Ownership (SoBO): The feeling that a body (or a part of it) belongs to oneself, serving as the source of one's sensations [17]. This can be extended to virtual bodies through synchronized visuomotor correlations.
• Sense of Agency (SoA): The experience of controlling one's own body movements and, through them, events in the external world [17]. As previously mentioned, this arises from the match between predicted and actual sensory consequences of actions.

The relationship between these components is complex and hierarchical. While they can be dissociated under certain experimental conditions (e.g., ownership without agency), they typically function synergistically to produce a unified experience of embodiment [17]. Research suggests that the sense of agency may play a particularly foundational role, as the successful prediction of action outcomes reinforces both ownership and self-location.

Figure 1: The Comparator Model of Sense of Agency. This model illustrates how the brain generates predictions about sensory outcomes and compares them with actual feedback to attribute agency. Low prediction errors strengthen the sense of agency, while high errors drive learning and model updates [17].

Quantitative Metrics and Experimental Protocols

Assessing the Sense of Embodiment

The multidimensional nature of presence and embodiment necessitates a multi-method approach to measurement. Researchers have developed both subjective and objective metrics to quantify these phenomena, each with distinct advantages and limitations as summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Methods for Assessing Sense of Embodiment in Virtual Reality

Method Type	Specific Measures	Key Advantages	Key Limitations
Subjective	Standardized questionnaires (e.g., embodiment scales) [17]	Direct access to subjective experience; Well-validated	Susceptible to demand characteristics; Retrospective
Behavioral	Proprioceptive drift [17]	Objective; Indirect measure of body ownership	Can dissociate from subjective reports; Task interference
Physiological	Skin conductance response to threats [17]	Automatic; Measures unconscious responses	Can be invasive; Requires careful interpretation
Neural	EEG, fMRI [17] [18]	High temporal (EEG) or spatial (fMRI) resolution	Expensive; Sensitive to movement artifacts

Key Experimental Protocols

Several well-established experimental protocols have been developed to investigate and manipulate the sense of embodiment in controlled settings:

• The Rubber Hand Illusion (RHI) Protocol: This classic paradigm has been adapted for VR to investigate body ownership. Participants view a virtual hand being stroked in synchrony with tactile stimulation applied to their real hand. The key measures include subjective questionnaires and proprioceptive drift—the displacement in perceived location of one's real hand toward the virtual hand [17]. Synchronous stimulation typically induces a stronger feeling of ownership compared to asynchronous stimulation.

• Body Transfer Illusion Protocol: This protocol extends the RHI to full-body embodiment. Participants are embodied in a virtual body through a head-mounted display (HMD). Critical experimental manipulations include:

  • Visuomotor Synchrony: The virtual body moves in correspondence with the participant's real movements tracked by motion capture.
  • Multisensory Congruence: Providing congruent visual, tactile, and proprioceptive feedback during interactions.
  • Perspective: Maintaining a consistent first-person perspective. The strength of embodiment is measured through questionnaire responses, physiological reactions to virtual threats, and changes in body perception [17].

• Agency Manipulation Protocol: To specifically investigate the sense of agency, researchers introduce temporal or spatial discrepancies between executed movements and their visual consequences in VR. For example, introducing a slight delay (50-200ms) between hand movement and virtual hand movement or applying angular deviations to movement paths. Participants provide explicit judgments of agency while behavioral measures such as movement adaptation and implicit measures like sensory attenuation are recorded [17].

Table 2: Quantitative Findings on Predictive Mechanisms in Virtual Embodiment

Experimental Paradigm	Neural Correlates/Measures	Key Findings	Clinical Applications
VR Exposure Therapy for Anxiety	fMRI, EEG, self-report [15]	Equivalent or superior efficacy to in-vivo exposure; 70-90% response rates for specific phobias; Long-term effects generalize to real world	Anxiety disorders, PTSD, phobias [15]
VR Body Swapping	Proprioceptive drift, skin conductance, questionnaires [17]	Significant reduction in body ownership distortion in eating disorders; Up to 65% of patients show improved body image at 1-year follow-up	Eating and weight disorders [15]
Motor Imagery in VR-BCI	EEG sensorimotor rhythms, classification algorithms [18]	SEOWADE method: Achieved high classification accuracy (>85%) for motor imagery signals using orthogonal wavelet decomposition	Motor rehabilitation, stroke recovery [18]
fMRI Natural Image Decoding	Visual cortex activation patterns, deep learning models [18]	Successful reconstruction of perceived images from fMRI data using advanced neural networks	Basic neuroscience of perception, brain-computer interfaces [18]

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Tools for Virtual Neuroscience Studies

Tool Category	Specific Examples	Function in Research
Neuroimaging Platforms	fMRI, EEG, MEG, fNIRS [18] [19]	Measure neural correlates of presence and embodiment; Localize brain activity; Track temporal dynamics
Brain-Computer Interfaces	Motor imagery EEG systems, SSVEP paradigms [18]	Enable direct communication between brain and virtual environment; Test closed-loop predictive processes
Motion Tracking Systems	Optical trackers, inertial measurement units (IMUs), hand trackers	Capture full-body movement for realistic avatar animation; Provide data for calculating prediction errors
Physiological Monitors	EDA, ECG, EMG, respiration sensors [17]	Objectively measure autonomic responses to virtual events; Provide implicit measures of emotional engagement
Advanced Analytics	Machine learning classifiers, deep neural networks, multimodal fusion algorithms [18] [19]	Decode neural representations; Identify predictive processing patterns; Analyze complex neuroimaging data

Computational Approaches and Neuroimaging Advances

Machine Learning in Neuroimaging

The analysis of neuroimaging data in virtual neuroscience has been revolutionized by advanced machine learning approaches. These methods are particularly valuable for identifying complex patterns in brain activity associated with presence and predictive processing:

• Multimodal Fusion Algorithms: Techniques such as Multiple Kernel Learning (MKL) combine information from structural MRI, functional MRI, and Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) to improve classification accuracy for neurological and psychiatric conditions [18]. For embodiment research, this enables linking structural brain measures with functional activation patterns during VR experiences.

• Deep Learning Architectures: Siamese neural networks have been successfully applied to fMRI Independent Component Analysis (ICA) classification, enabling identification of resting-state networks with high accuracy even with limited training data [18]. These approaches facilitate the detection of subtle changes in brain network dynamics associated with altered states of embodiment.

• EEG Signal Processing: Advanced methods like the SEOWADE algorithm employ orthogonal wavelet decomposition and channel-wise spectral filtering to improve the discriminability and generalizability of EEG signals in brain-computer interface applications [18]. This is particularly relevant for real-time assessment of cognitive states during VR immersion.

Experimental Workflow for Virtual Neuroscience Studies

A standardized experimental workflow ensures methodological rigor in virtual neuroscience research on presence. The following Graphviz diagram illustrates a comprehensive pipeline from experimental design to data analysis:

Figure 2: Virtual Neuroscience Experimental Workflow. This comprehensive pipeline illustrates the key stages in studying presence and embodiment, from experimental design through data collection and analysis to final interpretation.

Clinical Applications and Future Directions

The theoretical frameworks and experimental approaches discussed have significant translational potential in clinical neuroscience and drug development. VR-based paradigms that leverage predictive processing mechanisms are increasingly being deployed in therapeutic contexts:

• Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET): Meta-analyses confirm that VRET has efficacy comparable to traditional exposure therapy for anxiety disorders, with particular success in treating specific phobias, PTSD, and social anxiety [15]. The controlled nature of VR environments allows for precise manipulation of predictive relationships between actions and outcomes, facilitating fear extinction learning.

• Eating and Weight Disorders: Research demonstrates that VR-enhanced cognitive behavioral therapy can produce outcomes superior to gold-standard CBT at one-year follow-up [15]. By altering the embodied experience of one's body size and shape through visuomotor and visuotactile stimulation, these interventions directly target the distorted internal body models that maintain these conditions.

• Pain Management: VR produces significant reductions in acute and chronic pain through multiple mechanisms, including distraction, altered bodily perception, and modulation of predictive processes related to pain expectation [15]. The immersive nature of VR appears particularly well-suited to disrupting maladaptive predictive coding of pain signals.

Future research directions should focus on developing more sophisticated computational models of predictive processing in virtual environments, optimizing personalization of VR experiences based on individual neural and behavioral signatures, and establishing standardized neurocognitive biomarkers of presence and therapeutic response. The integration of real-time neurofeedback with VR systems represents a particularly promising avenue for creating closed-loop environments that dynamically adapt to users' neural states to enhance both experimental control and therapeutic efficacy.

In virtual neuroscience experiments, the concept of presence—the subjective feeling of "being there" in a virtual environment—is a cornerstone metric for evaluating the efficacy and ecological validity of a simulation [20]. For researchers and drug development professionals, understanding the factors that modulate presence is critical for designing rigorous, reproducible, and effective virtual protocols. Historically, the focus has been on technological immersion as the primary driver of presence. However, a growing body of evidence underscores that individual user characteristics are equally, if not more, influential [20]. This technical guide delves into how three key individual differences—age, technological experience, and perceptual-motor style—fundamentally shape the experience of presence, framing this within the context of experimental design and measurement in virtual neuroscience.

The Multi-Faceted Nature of Presence and Its Measurement

Presence is not a unitary construct but a complex psychological state emerging from the interaction of cognitive, emotional, and physical responses to a virtual environment [20]. Its assessment has traditionally relied on two primary methodologies, each with distinct advantages and limitations.

• Subjective Questionnaires: Administered post-exposure, these tools (often using Likert scales) provide a direct, self-reported measure of the user's experience. However, they are susceptible to recall bias and may not capture the dynamic, real-time fluctuations of presence [20].
• Physiological Measures: There is a growing trend toward using objective, physiological markers to define presence, moving beyond subjective reports [20]. These measures capture the autonomic and central nervous system correlates of the user's state in real-time.

Table 1: Key Physiological Measures for Assessing Presence in VR

Physiological Measure	Abbreviation	What It Measures	Relation to Presence
Electroencephalography	EEG	Electrical brain activity; good temporal resolution	Assesses alertness and cognitive processes; event-related potentials (ERPs) can detect neural responses to stimuli [20].
Electrodermal Activity	EDA	Electrical changes on the skin from sweat gland activity	Modulated by arousal, attention, and stress—factors linked to emotional engagement in VR [20].
Electrocardiography/ Photoplethysmography	ECG/PPG	Heart rate and its variability (HRV)	Used to assess emotional and physiological arousal states associated with presence [20].
Electromyography	EMG	Muscle activity	Can capture subtle physical responses and readiness for action within the virtual environment [20].
Inertial Measurement Units	IMU	Acceleration and velocity of body segments (head/limbs)	Head and body movement tracking provides behavioral quantification of engagement and interaction [20].
Eye Tracking	-	Gaze control and fixation	Integrated into VR headsets to study visual attention and eye-hand coordination [20].

A significant challenge in the field is the non-specificity of these physiological variables; they are also used to quantify stress, mental workload, and other states, making it difficult to isolate a unique "presence signature" [20]. Furthermore, small sample sizes are common in VR studies, necessitating larger-scale prospective research to refine these models [20].

Age as a Determinant of VR Presence and Experience

Contrary to stereotypes, older adults do not experience diminished presence in VR. In fact, evidence suggests they may derive a more profound sense of presence than younger users, which has significant implications for designing therapeutic and assessment tools for an aging population.

Key Experimental Findings on Age and Presence

• Higher Presence in Older Adults: A pilot study directly comparing older adults (M=71.3 years) and younger adults (M=19.7 years) found that older adults reported a greater sense of presence across various VR environments, including meditation, exploration, and game-oriented scenarios [21]. This suggests that VR can be a highly effective medium for supporting Enhanced Activities of Daily Living (EADLs) in older populations.
• Positive Attitude Shift: A study with 76 older adults (57-94 years) revealed that initial, neutral attitudes towards head-mounted VR significantly improved to positive after a first exposure. A control group that watched time-lapse videos on a standard computer showed no such change in attitude [22]. This indicates that the direct experience of immersive VR is a powerful tool for overcoming initial hesitancy.
• Unexpected Cybersickness Profile: Contrary to the researchers' initial hypothesis, the pilot study found that older adults reported significantly less cybersickness than their younger counterparts [21]. Furthermore, a separate study confirmed that self-reported cybersickness was minimal in older adults and had no significant association with the VR exposure [22].

Table 2: Age-Related Differences in VR Experience from Empirical Studies

Study Feature	Dilanchian et al. (2021) Pilot Study [21]	Huygelier et al. (2019) Acceptance Study [22]
Sample Size (Older Adults)	20	38 (HMD-VR group)
Mean Age (Older Adults)	71.3 years	72.2 years
Key Finding on Presence	Older adults reported a greater sense of presence.	Attitudes improved from neutral to positive after exposure.
Key Finding on Cybersickness	Older adults reported significantly less cybersickness.	Cybersickness was minimal and not associated with VR exposure.
System Usability/Workload	No significant age differences on most measures.	Not a primary focus, but acceptance was high.

Underlying Mechanisms: Cognitive and Neural Changes

The enhanced presence in older adults may be linked to age-related neurological changes. While traditional views emphasize cognitive decline, modern neuroscience reveals a more complex picture of compensatory neural reorganization [23].

• Cognitive Control and Aging: Typical aging is associated with declines in processing speed, working memory, and inhibitory control, often linked to structural and functional changes in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) [23]. One might expect this to impair the ability to engage with complex VR.
• Compensatory Mechanisms: However, the aging brain can exhibit increased functional connectivity and engage alternative neural networks to compensate for localized deficits [23]. This neural plasticity may allow older adults to achieve a deep state of presence through different cognitive pathways than younger adults. Furthermore, the novelty and richness of VR may provide a level of engagement that helps overcome everyday distractibility.

The Role of Perceptual-Motor Style in Shaping Presence

Beyond age, an individual's unique way of interacting with the world—their perceptual-motor style—is a critical but often overlooked factor in determining presence [20]. This concept refers to the distinctive, individualized strategies people employ to coordinate their perception and action.

Theoretical Framework: Predictive Processing and Embodiment

Theoretical models propose that presence emerges when users can correctly and intuitively enact their implicit (predictive processing) and explicit (intentions) embodied predictions within the VR environment [20]. In other words, presence is highest when the virtual world behaves as the user's brain and body expect it to. An individual's perceptual-motor style governs these predictions.

• Sources of Variability: This style, and consequently the feeling of presence, is not fixed. It varies with a person's sociocultural background, narrative, emotions, personal experiences, and expectations [20]. This variability explains why two individuals of the same age and technical proficiency can have vastly different presence experiences in the same VR simulation.
• The Gravity Prior Example: A key illustration of a shared perceptual-motor prior is the internal model of Earth's gravity. Research shows that motor actions like intercepting a falling ball are highly accurate when the virtual object obeys Earth's gravity, even with sparse visual information or when the object is occluded [24]. This demonstrates a deeply ingrained, shared prior used for predictive motor control. When VR physics align with this prior, presence is enhanced.

Visuomotor Mismatch: The Challenge for VR

A major challenge in VR design is the inherent visuomotor mismatch—the body is in a physical reality while being exposed to an optically artificial environment [25]. This mismatch can disrupt the user's perceptual-motor style.

• Motor Response Modulation: Studies comparing actions in VR and physical reality (PR) show that VR can induce measurable changes in motor responses. For example, in a catching task, the velocity of shoulder flexion was lower in VR than in PR, and muscle activity (EMG) onsets were delayed [25]. These deviations indicate that the unnatural virtual scene can distort the user's natural perceptual-motor coordination, potentially breaking presence.
• Impact on Perception: The fidelity of the virtual environment also matters. Judgments of naturalness for a rolling and falling virtual ball were highest and least variable when its kinematics were congruent with Earth gravity during both phases of motion [24]. This shows that violations of fundamental physical priors are detected at a perceptual level, negatively impacting the sense of realism and presence.

The following diagram illustrates the continuous feedback loop between a user's internal predispositions, the VR system, and the resulting sense of presence.

Experimental Protocols for Assessing Individual Differences

To systematically investigate how individual differences shape presence, researchers can employ the following detailed experimental protocols, which integrate both subjective and objective measures.

Protocol 1: Evaluating Age-Related Differences in Presence

• Objective: To quantify and compare the sense of presence, cybersickness, and perceived workload between younger and older adults in immersive VR environments.
• Participants: Recruit two distinct age groups (e.g., 20 younger adults aged 18-25 and 20 older adults aged 65+) [21]. Ensure groups are matched on factors like gender and education where possible.
• VR Apparatus & Environments: Use a commercial head-mounted display (HMD) like the HTC Vive. Select a variety of commercial environments (e.g., a scenic exploration app like "Vesper Peak," a meditation app, a simple arcade game) to test generalizability [21].
• Procedure:
  • Baseline Measures: Collect demographic data, technology experience questionnaires, and baseline cognitive assessments (e.g., MoCA) [22].
  • VR Exposure: Participants experience each VR environment for a fixed duration (e.g., 5 minutes). They should be seated in a swivel chair for safety. An experimenter must be present to manage the equipment [21].
  • Post-Exposure Metrics: After each environment, administer:
    • A presence questionnaire (e.g., Igroup Presence Questionnaire).
    • A cybersickness scale (e.g., Simulator Sickness Questionnaire).
    • A workload inventory (e.g., NASA-TLX) [21].
• Data Analysis: Use mixed-model ANOVAs to compare presence, sickness, and workload scores between age groups across the different environments. Correlational analysis can explore relationships between presence, cognitive scores, and technology experience.

Protocol 2: Probing the Perceptual-Motor Style via Gravity Perception

• Objective: To determine the sensitivity of motor and perceptual systems to violations of physical laws (gravity) in VR, and its link to perceived naturalness.
• Participants: Skilled and novice participants relevant to the task (e.g., athletes for interceptive actions).
• VR Apparatus: A high-fidelity VR system with precise tracking (e.g., HTC Vive or CAVE) that can simulate projectile motion with adjustable physics parameters [24].
• Virtual Task: Participants are tasked with hitting or catching a virtual ball that rolls down an incline and then falls in air [24].
• Independent Variables:
  • Gravity Level: Manipulate the simulated gravity level independently for the rolling and falling phases (e.g., Earth gravity, hypo-gravity, hyper-gravity) [24].
  • Visual Occlusion: The ball is either fully visible or occluded during the falling phase [24].
• Dependent Variables:
  • Motor Timing: Accuracy in intercepting the ball (timing error).
  • Perceptual Judgment: After each trial, participants report whether the ball's motion was "natural" or "unnatural" on a scale [24].
• Data Analysis: Compare interception timing errors across gravity conditions. Analyze naturalness ratings as a function of gravity congruence. A strong link between accurate motor timing and high naturalness ratings for Earth-gravity conditions would indicate the use of a shared internal model.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

For researchers embarking on studies of individual differences in VR, the following tools and materials are essential.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for VR Presence Studies

Tool Category	Specific Examples	Function in Research
VR Hardware Platform	HTC Vive, Oculus Rift	Provides the immersive environment; must be consistent across participants to standardize immersion levels [21] [22].
Physiological Data Acquisition System	BioPac system, LabChart, Immersion Neuroscience platform	Synchronizes and records physiological signals (EEG, ECG, EDA, EMG) for objective quantification of user state [20] [26].
Subjective Measure Questionnaires	Igroup Presence Questionnaire (IPQ), Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ), NASA-TLX, System Usability Scale (SUS)	Provides standardized, quantitative measures of subjective presence, cybersickness, mental workload, and system usability [21] [22].
Motion Tracking Sensors	Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs), integrated HMD tracking	Quantifies head and body movements as behavioral correlates of engagement and perceptual-motor style [20].
Cognitive Assessment Battery	Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Trail Making Test	Assesses global cognitive status and specific executive functions that may mediate age-related differences in VR interaction [23] [22].
Data Analysis & Visualization Software	R/RStudio, Python (Pandas, NumPy), ChartExpo	Performs statistical analysis, machine learning modeling, and creates clear visualizations of complex quantitative data [27].

The following workflow diagram maps the sequential process of conducting a comprehensive VR presence study, from participant screening to data synthesis.

The experience of presence in virtual environments is a profoundly individual phenomenon, sculpted by an interaction between the user's age, their lifetime of technological and worldly experiences, and their unique perceptual-motor style. For the virtual neuroscience researcher, acknowledging and systematically accounting for these differences is not merely a methodological refinement—it is a necessity. The future of the field lies in moving beyond one-size-fits-all VR design and towards personalized, adaptive virtual environments that can accommodate individual differences in cognitive style, physical capability, and neural processing. This will be key to unlocking the full potential of VR as a tool for rigorous scientific discovery, effective clinical intervention, and robust pharmaceutical development.

Applied Immersive Neuroscience: From Empathy Induction to Knowledge Acquisition

Leveraging Neurologic Immersion to Foster Empathy and Prosocial Behavior in Clinical Training

This technical guide examines the application of neurologic immersion within virtual reality (VR) environments to enhance empathy and prosocial behavior among healthcare professionals. Immersion, defined as the neurophysiologic value the brain assigns to experiences, serves as a quantifiable biomarker for predicting behavioral outcomes including empathic concern and helping behaviors. Through standardized experimental protocols and advanced physiological measurement, neurologic immersion provides a mechanistic bridge between VR-based training and improved patient care outcomes. This whitepaper details the methodological frameworks, measurement technologies, and implementation protocols for integrating neurologic immersion into clinical education, with particular relevance for researchers investigating presence and immersion in virtual neuroscience experiments.

Virtual reality has emerged as a promising tool for clinical training, yet evidence for its efficacy has been mixed due to reliance on self-reported measures rather than objective neurophysiologic data [28]. Neurologic Immersion (distinguished from general immersion by its capitalization as a specific metric) represents a convolved neurophysiologic measure that captures the value the brain assigns to experiences through signals associated with attention and emotional resonance [28]. This metric, which correlates with dopamine binding in the prefrontal cortex and oxytocin release from the brainstem, provides an objective foundation for quantifying the impact of VR experiences on clinical trainees [28].

Within the broader context of presence and immersion research in virtual neuroscience, Immersion offers a standardized approach to linking technological immersion with psychological presence and behavioral outcomes. Studies demonstrate that VR generates approximately 60% more neurologic Immersion than equivalent 2D video content, resulting in significantly increased empathic concern and prosocial behavioral intentions among healthcare trainees [28]. This neurophysiologic response creates a powerful pathway for enhancing the understanding of patient experiences and challenges, potentially reducing provider burnout while improving patient care quality [28] [29].

Theoretical Framework: From Immersion to Prosocial Action

The relationship between neurologic Immersion and prosocial behavior operates through a defined psychological pathway. Research indicates that immersion enhances the sense of presence, which subsequently fosters state empathy and ultimately leads to increased prosocial intentions [30]. This pathway is particularly relevant in clinical training, where empathic concern motivates behaviors that improve patient outcomes.

Table 1: Empathy-Related Constructs in Clinical VR Training

Construct	Definition	Role in Clinical Training
Affective Empathy	Experiencing isomorphic feeling in relation to others with clear self/other differentiation [29]	Enables shared emotional understanding of patient experiences
Cognitive Empathy	Understanding others' emotions through perspective-taking and online simulation [29] [31]	Facilitates accurate assessment of patient needs and concerns
Empathic Concern	Desire for wellbeing of others motivating helping behavior [28] [29]	Directly translates to improved patient care and support behaviors
Compassion	Emotional and motivational state of care for others' wellbeing [29]	Reduces burnout while maintaining connection with patients

The "empathy machine" potential of VR emerges from its capacity to trigger embodied experiences through perspective-taking. When healthcare providers virtually step into patients' experiences, they develop a more nuanced understanding of social determinants of health, including socioeconomic barriers, language challenges, and systemic obstacles to care [32]. This perspective-taking forms the foundation for the relationship between immersion and prosocial behavior that is essential to effective clinical practice.

Measurement and Assessment Protocols

Quantifying Neurologic Immersion

The measurement of neurologic Immersion employs commercial neurophysiology platforms that generate a 1Hz data stream by applying algorithms to photoplethysmography (PPG) sensors [28]. This approach captures physiological signals from cranial nerves associated with attention and emotional resonance, producing the convolved Immersion metric that predicts individual and population outcomes [28].

Table 2: Quantitative Metrics in Neurologic Immersion Studies

Metric	Measurement Approach	Clinical Training Relevance
Average Immersion	Mean neurologic Immersion during entire VR exposure [28]	Baseline engagement with patient narrative
Peak Immersion	Cumulative sum of Immersion peaks above individual threshold [28]	High-impact moments driving behavioral change
Empathic Concern	Self-report scales measuring desire to help others [28]	Motivation to improve patient care behaviors
Prosocial Behavior	Observable helping behaviors post-exposure (e.g., volunteering) [28]	Real-world translation of training outcomes

Research protocols typically employ baseline measurements before VR exposure, with all reported Immersion values representing changes from this individual baseline to control for personal differences [28]. This standardized approach enables meaningful comparison across participants and training modalities.

Multimodal Assessment Framework

Beyond neurologic Immersion, comprehensive assessment of empathy in VR training incorporates multiple measurement modalities:

• Eye-tracking patterns: Individuals with high empathy demonstrate distinct visual attention to socially relevant cues, including increased focus on facial expressions and body postures that signal emotional states [31]
• Decision-making metrics: Empathic profiles correlate with cooperative versus competitive decision-making styles in simulated clinical scenarios [31]
• Behavioral measures: Post-exposure prosocial behaviors, such as volunteering to help other students or increased engagement with challenging patients, provide real-world validation of training efficacy [28]
• Machine learning integration: Combined behavioral and eye-tracking data classified individuals according to empathy dimensions (perspective-taking, emotional understanding, empathetic stress, empathetic joy) with significant accuracy [31]

Experimental Protocols and Implementation

Standardized VR Empathy Training Protocol

The Making Professionals Able Through Immersion (MPATHI) program exemplifies an effective VR-based empathy training protocol for healthcare providers [32]. This evidence-based approach includes:

Participant Profile: Healthcare providers (dentists, physicians, nurses) with active clinical responsibilities during training period [32].

VR Stimulus Development:

• Content: Patient journey narrative following individuals facing socioeconomic and language barriers
• Format: 180° VR captured using Insta360 Pro2 cameras (8K resolution) viewed through Meta Quest 2 headsets
• Narrative Structure: Boorstin's scripting principles with chronological structure depicting multiple clinical interactions [28]
• Runtime: 5 minutes 23 seconds for standard stimulus [28]

Experimental Procedure:

• Baseline measurement: 5-minute resting state neurologic Immersion recording
• VR exposure: Randomized assignment to VR (n=35) or 2D (n=35) condition using identical narrative content
• Post-exposure measures: Immediate assessment of empathic concern and prosocial intentions
• Behavioral follow-up: Observation of volunteering behavior opportunities within 48 hours

This protocol demonstrated significantly higher neurologic Immersion in VR participants, with subsequent increases in empathic concern and prosocial behavior compared to the 2D control group [28].

Technical Specifications for Optimal Immersion

Achieving neurologic Immersion requires specific technical parameters:

• Display: Meta Quest 2 headsets with 1832 × 1920 per eye resolution, 90Hz refresh rate, and 89° horizontal field of view [28]
• Sensors: Rhythm+ PPG sensors (Scosche Industries) for physiological data collection [28]
• Interaction: Degree of user control over tactile stimulation and environmental interaction significantly impacts presence and embodiment [33]
• Narrative quality: Professional production values with clinical accuracy validation by subject matter experts [28]

Diagram 1: Pathway from VR Technology to Prosocial Behavior

The Researcher's Toolkit: Essential Methodological Components

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Materials for Neurologic Immersion Research

Item	Function	Implementation Example
Immersive VR Headsets (Meta Quest 2)	Presents 180° VR content with 6 degrees of freedom	Display of patient journey narratives with realistic spatial presence [28]
PPG Sensors (Rhythm+ by Scosche)	Captures physiological signals for neurologic Immersion algorithm	Measurement of attention and emotional resonance during VR exposure [28]
Immersion Neuroscience Platform	Convolves physiological signals into 1Hz Immersion metric	Quantification of neurophysiologic response to patient narratives [28]
360° VR Cameras (Insta360 Pro2)	Captures high-resolution immersive video content	Creation of authentic patient journey experiences in clinical settings [28]
Eye-tracking Integration	Records visual attention patterns during VR exposure	Identification of empathy-specific viewing patterns in social scenarios [31]
Machine Learning Algorithms	Classifies participants by empathy dimensions using behavioral and eye-tracking data	Automated assessment of empathy levels in organizational settings [31]

Experimental Design Considerations

Diagram 2: Experimental Workflow for VR Empathy Studies

Applications in Clinical Training and Healthcare Education

The translation of neurologic Immersion research to clinical training environments has demonstrated significant potential across multiple healthcare domains:

Empathy Training for Social Determinants of Health

The MPATHI program successfully improved knowledge, skills, and attitudes of healthcare providers for care delivery to families facing socioeconomic and language barriers [32]. Through perspective-taking narratives that place providers in the role of patients navigating systemic challenges, participants developed greater understanding of barriers such as:

• Health literacy limitations and complex medical paperwork
• Language barriers and interpreter access challenges
• Transportation and financial constraints affecting care adherence
• Cultural differences in health beliefs and practices

Nursing Education and Patient Journey Understanding

In nursing education, VR-based neurologic Immersion created 60% greater engagement with patient experiences compared to traditional methods, resulting in enhanced empathic concern and increased volunteering to help other students [28]. The patient journey narrative, following a female patient with chronic illness through multiple clinical interactions, provided nursing students with deeper insight into the emotional and physical challenges patients face across the care continuum.

Organizational Empathy in Healthcare Systems

Beyond individual patient interactions, neurologic Immersion approaches show promise for developing organizational empathy - the balance between organizational skills and empathic abilities in workplace behaviors [31]. This application is particularly relevant for healthcare administrators and clinical leaders who must balance operational demands with staff wellbeing and patient-centered care.

Neurologic Immersion represents a validated, measurable neurophysiologic mechanism through which VR training enhances empathy and prosocial behavior in clinical education. By quantifying the brain's assignment of value to experiences through attention and emotional resonance, researchers and educators can design more effective training interventions that translate to meaningful improvements in patient care.

Future research directions should address several critical areas:

• Longitudinal studies tracking the persistence of empathy and prosocial behavior changes beyond immediate post-exposure measures
• Individual difference factors moderating response to VR empathy interventions, including prior clinical experience and baseline empathy levels
• Optimal dosing parameters for VR empathy training, including session duration, frequency, and narrative intensity
• Integration with artificial intelligence for real-time adaptation of VR content based on physiological response metrics
• Cross-cultural validation of neurologic Immersion measures across diverse healthcare contexts and patient populations

As VR technology continues to evolve, the precise measurement and application of neurologic Immersion will play an increasingly vital role in cultivating the empathic, prosocial healthcare providers essential to patient-centered care systems.

Virtual Reality (VR) has emerged as a transformative tool for experiential learning, yet its effectiveness is profoundly influenced by the complex interplay between technological immersion, the subjective psychological state of presence, and the specific type of knowledge being acquired. Within virtual neuroscience experiments, immersion is an objective property of the system's ability to provide a vivid, multi-sensory, and interactive environment, while presence is the subjective psychological experience of "being there" within that virtual environment [34] [20]. This technical guide posits that optimizing VR for learning requires a tailored approach grounded in the fundamental neurocognitive distinction between knowledge types. According to Anderson's ACT-R theory, declarative knowledge ("what" information, represented as chunks and facts) and procedural knowledge ("how" information, represented as production rules for actions) involve distinct cognitive encoding, consolidation, and retrieval mechanisms [35]. This paper provides an in-depth analysis of how VR immersion levels should be strategically matched to these knowledge types to maximize learning efficacy, presence, and knowledge transfer, with a specific focus on methodologies relevant to research and drug development.

Theoretical Foundations: Linking Immersion, Presence, and Knowledge Acquisition

A Neurocognitive Framework for VR Learning

The relationship between immersion and presence is not linear but is cognitively mediated. Higher levels of technological immersion—characterized by sensory fidelity (quality and breadth of sensory information), interactivity (speed, range, and mapping of user control), and embodiment—typically foster a stronger sense of presence [34]. Presence, in turn, is hypothesized to enhance learning by leveraging embodied cognition, where sensory-motor experiences and the feeling of being in a situation provide a richer context for encoding and retrieving information [34] [36]. However, this process is moderated by the perceptual-motor style of the individual, a neurophysiological concept describing a person's unique, characteristic strategies for interacting with their environment [20]. This implies that the same immersive system can elicit varying levels of presence and learning outcomes across different users.

Declarative vs. Procedural Knowledge: Cognitive Demands

The differentiation between declarative and procedural knowledge is critical for VR design:

• Declarative Knowledge: Its acquisition benefits from deep encoding and contextual cues. VR can enhance this by situating facts within rich, multi-sensory virtual contexts, facilitating deep processing and memory formation [35].
• Procedural Knowledge: Its acquisition requires the compilation and strengthening of condition-action rules through repeated, often physical, practice. VR is ideal for procedural learning as it allows for safe, realistic rehearsal of tasks, creating strong situational memories that support the transfer of skills to real-world contexts [35] [37].

Failure to align the immersive experience with the cognitive demands of the target knowledge type can lead to extraneous cognitive load, thereby hindering learning [35].

Technical Parameters for Tailoring VR Immersion

The design of a VR system for learning involves the careful calibration of specific technical parameters that directly influence immersion and, consequently, the potential for presence and effective learning.

Table 1: Technical Parameters of VR Immersion for Knowledge Acquisition

Parameter	Definition	Impact on Presence & Learning	Optimal Use for Declarative Knowledge	Optimal Use for Procedural Knowledge
Sensory Fidelity	Quality and realism of sensory input (visual, auditory, haptic) [34].	Higher fidelity increases presence but may raise cognitive load if irrelevant [35].	High-quality visuals and audio to create an engaging context for facts.	Critical for realistic simulation; haptic feedback is essential for psychomotor skills.
Interactivity & User Control	The extent and precision of user interaction with the virtual environment [34].	Enhances agency and presence; poor mapping can cause cyber sickness [34].	Moderate; navigation (e.g., teleportation) to explore informational scenes [36].	High; requires precise, real-time control over tools and actions to practice procedures.
Embodiment	The representation and perception of having a body in the virtual world.	Strong embodiment reinforces the sense of presence and supports embodied cognition [37].	A virtual body to enhance spatial awareness and contextual learning.	A fully articulated, responsive virtual body is crucial for motor skill acquisition.
Narrative & Context	The use of story or scenario to frame the learning content.	Increases emotional engagement and motivation, supporting memory encoding.	Highly beneficial for providing a memorable structure for factual information.	Essential for providing a realistic purpose and context for procedural actions.

Quantitative Evidence: Differential Impact of VR on Knowledge Types

Recent empirical research provides strong evidence for the differential impact of VR immersion on declarative and procedural knowledge, supporting the need for a tailored approach.

A 2025 study employed a 2x2 mixed design with 64 college students, comparing high-immersion VR (HTC Vive Pro) to low-immersion desktop VR for learning both declarative (thyroid disease facts) and procedural (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) knowledge [35]. The results, summarized in the table below, demonstrate that while high immersion benefits both knowledge types, its impact on associated cognitive and affective factors differs significantly.

Table 2: Experimental Outcomes of High vs. Low Immersion on Knowledge and Affective/Cognitive Factors [35]

Learning Dimension	Declarative Knowledge	Procedural Knowledge
Learning Outcomes	Significant improvement with high immersion (large effect size)	Significant improvement with high immersion (large effect size)
Sense of Presence	Enhanced in high-immersion group	Enhanced in high-immersion group
Intrinsic Motivation	Enhanced in high-immersion group	Enhanced in high-immersion group
Self-Efficacy	Enhanced in high-immersion group	Enhanced in high-immersion group
Cognitive Load	Reduced in high-immersion group	No significant reduction observed
Knowledge Transfer	Not specifically measured	Shows the largest effect sizes for procedural training in VR [37]

A systematic review and meta-analysis from 2024 further strengthens the case for VR in procedural training, finding a significant positive medium effect size overall for immersive procedural training compared to less immersive environments, with knowledge transfer outcomes showing the largest effect sizes [37]. This is critical for fields like surgery or equipment operation in drug development, where skills must be applied in the real world. Furthermore, a dissertation study confirmed that VR training not only helps learners acquire procedural knowledge but also significantly enhances its retention over time, reducing recall errors compared to traditional video and manual training [38].

Experimental Protocols for VR Learning Research

To ensure validity and reproducibility in VR learning research, rigorous experimental protocols are essential. The following workflows detail the methodologies from key studies.

Protocol 1: Comparative Media Study for Knowledge Type

This protocol is designed to isolate the effect of immersion level on different knowledge types [35].

Diagram 1: Protocol for VR Knowledge Type Study

Key Methodological Components [35]:

• Participants: Recruited based on no prior VR experience or subject matter knowledge to control for confounding variables.
• Apparatus: Clear distinction between high-immersion (Head-Mounted Display with tracking) and low-immersion (desktop monitor with keyboard/mouse) systems.
• Learning Tasks: The same participants complete both a declarative knowledge task (e.g., learning about diseases) and a procedural knowledge task (e.g., CPR steps) to allow for within-subject comparison on knowledge type.
• Measures: Include immediate knowledge tests (retention) and self-report questionnaires for presence, motivation, self-efficacy, and cognitive load.

Protocol 2: Locomotion Technique and Declarative Learning

This protocol investigates how interaction design (locomotion) within a high-immersion system affects declarative knowledge acquisition [36].

Diagram 2: Protocol for VR Locomotion Study

Key Methodological Components [36]:

• Design: Between-subjects design comparing two locomotion techniques (walking vs. teleportation) within an immersive VR headset.
• Learning Content: Focuses purely on declarative knowledge (e.g., facts about astronomy).
• Measures: Includes both an immediate post-test and a delayed recall test (e.g., after 24 hours) to assess knowledge retention, alongside presence questionnaires.

The Researcher's Toolkit: Key Reagents and Materials for VR Experiments

Implementing rigorous VR learning research requires a suite of technological and methodological "reagents."

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for VR Learning Experiments

Category	Item	Function & Rationale
Hardware	Head-Mounted Display (HMD)	Primary device for delivering high-immersion visual and auditory stimuli (e.g., HTC Vive Pro, Meta Quest) [35].
Hardware	Desktop VR Setup	Serves as the low-immersion control condition, typically a standard computer monitor with mouse and keyboard [35].
Hardware	Haptic Feedback Devices	Provides tactile sensation critical for enhancing presence and realism in procedural training, especially for psychomotor skills.
Software	Game Engines	Platform for developing interactive 3D learning environments (e.g., Unity, Unreal Engine) [39].
Software	360° Video Players	Used for creating non-interactive but immersive learning scenarios for observational declarative knowledge.
Measurement	Presence Questionnaires	Standardized self-report scales to measure the subjective feeling of "being there" post-experience [34] [20].
Measurement	Knowledge Tests	Custom-built tests designed to assess retention and understanding of the specific declarative or procedural content.
Measurement	Physiological Monitors	Objective tools (EEG, EDA, ECG, EMG, eye-tracking) to complement subjective presence data and provide insights into cognitive load and arousal [20].

The evidence unequivocally demonstrates that VR is a powerful tool for enhancing both declarative and procedural knowledge, but its effectiveness is maximized when technical immersion is strategically aligned with the target knowledge type. High-immersion VR consistently enhances presence, motivation, and self-efficacy for both types of knowledge. However, its differential effect on cognitive load underscores the need for careful design.

Implementation Framework:

• For Declarative Knowledge ("What"): Employ high-immersion VR to create engaging, contextualized learning environments. Design should minimize extraneous sensory details irrelevant to the core facts to avoid increasing cognitive load. Navigation can be efficiently managed via teleportation without sacrificing learning outcomes [36].
• For Procedural Knowledge ("How"): High-immersion VR is essential. The focus must be on maximizing sensory fidelity and interactivity to create a realistic simulation. Haptic feedback, precise motion tracking, and a high degree of user control are non-negotiable for effective skill compilation and transfer. The largest benefits are seen in the transfer of learned procedures to real-world situations [37] [38].

For researchers in neuroscience and drug development, this tailored approach promises more effective training protocols, from educating scientists on complex biological declarative knowledge to training technicians in intricate laboratory procedural skills, ultimately accelerating innovation and improving outcomes.

Virtual Reality (VR) has emerged as a transformative tool in therapeutic settings, its efficacy fundamentally rooted in the psychological phenomenon of presence—the user's subjective experience of "being there" in a virtual environment [3]. Within virtual neuroscience research, presence is not merely a byproduct of technological immersion but is conceptualized as a core neuropsychological function. According to the inner presence theory, it is the brain's fundamental capacity to identify the environment it is in, thereby enabling the enactment of intentions and definition of activity within a given world [3]. This experience is generated through a process of embodied simulation, where the brain continuously generates and updates an internal model of the body and its surroundings to anticipate and minimize discrepancies between predicted and actual sensory input [3]. VR technology effectively "tricks" these predictive coding processes by providing a coherent, interactive artificial environment that aligns with the brain's internal model, creating a powerful illusion of inhabiting the virtual space [3].

The therapeutic power of VR applications in exposure therapy, lucid dreaming, and psychological well-being is directly mediated by the degree of presence elicited. A stronger sense of presence leads to greater behavioral response realism, meaning users respond to virtual stimuli similarly to how they would respond to real-world counterparts, which is essential for therapeutic learning and emotional processing to translate into real-life benefits [40] [3]. This whitepaper provides a technical examination of these applications, framed within the context of presence and immersion, for an audience of researchers and drug development professionals.

Theoretical Framework: Presence as a Neuropsychological Process

Beyond Technology: A Multidimensional Construct

The sense of presence is a complex construct shaped by factors extending far beyond technical specifications. Research indicates that its intensity is modulated by three critical dimensions [3]:

• Content and Narrative Structure: Compelling storylines and clear goals within a virtual environment can produce a strong sense of presence, even with limited technology [3].
• Individual User Characteristics: Factors such as age, gender, sociocultural background, personal experiences, expectations, and an individual's unique perceptual-motor style significantly influence the degree of presence experienced [20] [3].
• User Intentionality: Presence is an active faculty of the mind, devoted to identifying the environment to enact one's own intentions and define one's activity in the world [3].

Quantifying Presence in Neuroscience Research

Assessing presence in therapeutic VR studies relies on a multi-modal approach, combining subjective measures with objective physiological and behavioral data. Table 1 summarizes the primary tools and metrics used in VR presence research.

Table 1: Methodologies for Assessing Presence in VR Therapeutic Research

Method Category	Specific Tools/Metrics	Measurement Focus	Key Insights from Research
Subjective Measures	Standardized Questionnaires (e.g., post-VR Likert scales)	Self-reported sense of "being there," realism, and ability to interact [20] [40].	A gradual decrease in sole reliance on questionnaires is noted, with a growing preference for objective physiological markers [20].
Physiological Measures	Electroencephalography (EEG), Functional MRI (fMRI)	Direct brain activity; electrical potentials (EEG) and localized oxygenated blood flow (fMRI) [20].	EEG offers millisecond temporal resolution; fMRI provides millimeter spatial resolution. Signals reflect both excitatory and inhibitory neuron activity [20].
Physiological Measures	Electrocardiography (ECG), Photoplethysmography (PPG)	Heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV) [20].	HR and HRV are often used to assess presence and its variability, with PPG commonly used in consumer-grade sensors [20] [28].
Physiological Measures	Electrodermal Activity (EDA), Skin Temperature (ST)	Electrical changes in the skin (EDA) and peripheral temperature [20].	EDA is modulated by arousal, attention, and stress but is also influenced by movement and ambient conditions [20].
Physiological Measures	Electromyography (EMG), Inertial Measurement Units (IMU)	Muscle activity (EMG) and head/body movement kinematics (IMU) [20].	Head movements are a primary focus for behavioral quantification of presence. IMUs are low-cost and wireless [20].
Behavioral Measures	Oculometry, Force Platforms, Performance Tasks	Gaze control, postural control, and in-task performance [20].	These measures compare participants in real and virtual environments to determine perceptual-motor style and behavioral realism [20].
Novel Neurologic Metrics	Commercial "Immersion" Platforms (e.g., convolved PPG signals)	A 1Hz data stream purportedly capturing attention and emotional resonance, predicting outcomes like prosocial behavior [28].	One study showed VR generated 60% more neurologic "Immersion" than a 2D film, increasing empathic concern and volunteering behavior [28].

A significant challenge in this field is the lack of specificity of physiological variables; measures like EDA, HRV, and EEG are also used to quantify stress and mental load, making it difficult to attribute changes exclusively to presence [20]. Furthermore, many studies are hampered by small sample sizes and diverse methodologies, highlighting the need for larger-scale prospective studies [20].

Therapeutic Application 1: Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET)

Protocol and Workflow

Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET) is an empirically supported treatment for anxiety disorders, phobias, and PTSD. It permits individualized, gradual, and controlled immersion into fear-eliciting virtual environments, which is often more acceptable to patients and easier for therapists to implement than in vivo or imaginal exposure [41]. The core mechanism involves fear extinction through graduated exposure, facilitating habituation and the re-evaluation of threat [41]. The following diagram illustrates a standardized protocol for a VRET session.

Key Research Reagents and Materials

The effective implementation of VRET relies on a suite of specialized hardware and software. Table 2 catalogues the essential "research reagents" for constructing a VRET laboratory.

Table 2: Key Research Reagent Solutions for VRET

Item Name/Type	Function in VRET Protocol	Technical Specifications & Examples
Head-Mounted Display (HMD)	Displays 3D visuals, provides spatial audio, and tracks head rotation to create the immersive visual and auditory experience.	Examples: Meta Quest 2, HTC Vive Pro. Specs: Resolution (e.g., 1832x1920 per eye), refresh rate (90 Hz), field of view (e.g., 89° horizontal) [28] [40].
Motion Tracking System	Tracks user's body and hand movements in real-time, enabling interaction with the virtual environment and studying perceptual-motor style.	Can be external sensors or built-in cameras (Inside-Out Tracking). Includes hand controllers for pointing, grabbing, and gesturing [20] [42].
VRET Software Platform	Designs and renders the 3D virtual environments; manages exposure parameters, personalization, and data collection on user behavior and progress.	Software enables environment rendering, real-time adaptation to user input, and personalization of therapeutic scenarios [42].
Haptic Feedback Devices	Enhances realism by stimulating the sense of touch or resistance, increasing presence. Used for trauma replication in PTSD treatment [42].	Examples: Haptic gloves or vests that provide tactile feedback upon virtual interaction.
Physiological Data Acquisition System	Objectively measures presence and arousal levels during exposure. Provides multimodal, objective data on the user's state.	Includes EDA/GSR sensors, ECG/PPG for heart rate, EMG for muscle activity, and IMUs for head/body movement [20].

Therapeutic Application 2: VR-Enhanced Lucid Dreaming

Experimental Protocol and Workflow

Emerging research explores the synergistic combination of VR and lucid dreaming, where a sleeper becomes aware they are dreaming and can often control the dream's content. A proof-of-concept study used a VR experience designed to evoke feelings of awe, compassion, and ego-dissolution ("Ripple") to influence subsequent dream content [43]. The protocol, diagrammed below, bridges virtual waking and dreaming states.

In this study, participants were introduced to the Ripple VR experience one week before an overnight lab session. During the overnight session, they repeated the VR experience three hours before sleep. Researchers used polysomnography (including EEG) to monitor sleep stages and quietly played sounds from the Ripple experience during verified REM sleep to trigger lucid dreams [43]. Results were promising: three out of four participants experienced lucid dreams about Ripple, and all four reported dream content containing Ripple elements [43]. Follow-up interviews confirmed that the emotional and psychological effects (e.g., interconnectedness, ego-dissolution, heightened sensory perception) spilled over into waking life for several days [43]. This protocol underscores VR's potential to create meaningful, transferable psychological experiences through the mechanism of presence.

Therapeutic Application 3: Promoting Psychological Well-being

Beyond treating clinical disorders, VR is effectively used to promote general psychological well-being, including empathy, pain management, and relaxation.

Inducing Empathy and Prosocial Behavior

In educational settings, particularly in healthcare, VR is used to foster empathy by immersing users in patient experiences. A study with nursing students (n=70) compared a patient's journey presented via a 2D film versus a 180° VR format [28]. Neurologic Immersion—a convolved neurophysiologic measure from PPG sensors—was 60% higher in the VR group [28]. Crucially, this increased immersion positively influenced a real-world behavior: the decision to volunteer to help other students. The analysis showed that VR increased empathic concern, which in turn motivated prosocial action [28].

Pain and Stress Management

The principle of distraction therapy is key to VR's application in pain and stress management. Immersive VR simulations occupy cognitive and sensory resources, reducing the brain's capacity to process pain signals [42]. Furthermore, VR can directly promote physiological relaxation by lowering heart rate, reducing muscle tension, and activating the parasympathetic nervous system [42]. VR-based analgesia has been shown to be influenced by the user's sense of presence [3].

Mindfulness and Relaxation Training

VR creates optimal conditions for mindfulness by immersing users in tranquil, distraction-free environments. The combination of visual, auditory, and haptic cues creates a calming experience that is easier for users to focus on than traditional meditation [42]. These environments are often paired with guided breathing prompts or meditation scripts to enhance focused attention on the present moment [42].

The therapeutic efficacy of VR in exposure, lucid dreaming, and psychological well-being is inextricably linked to the neuroscientific construct of presence. As a tool, VR's unique power lies in its ability to leverage the brain's predictive coding mechanisms to generate controlled, potent experiences that can be therapeutically harnessed. Future research must continue to dissect the contributions of technological fidelity, content, and individual user characteristics to the sense of presence. For drug development professionals, VR presents a novel tool for assessing drug impacts on cognitive and emotional processes in ecologically valid yet controlled settings. As the technology becomes more affordable and accessible, its integration into standard clinical and research practice is poised to grow, paving the way for more personalized and effective interventions for a wide range of conditions.

The scientific study of presence and immersion in virtual environments has long been constrained by a fundamental methodological limitation: an overreliance on subjective self-report measures. Questionnaires and post-experiment interviews, while valuable for capturing the phenomenological experience, are inherently susceptible to recall bias, scale interpretation differences, and the disruptive nature of inquiry itself, which can break the very state of immersion researchers seek to measure [44]. This reliance on subjective metrics presents a particular challenge for virtual neuroscience experiments, where understanding the user's cognitive and emotional engagement is crucial for interpreting neurophysiological data and validating experimental paradigms. The emergence of sophisticated, non-invasive physiological monitoring technologies offers a path forward. By providing continuous, objective, and quantifiable data, these tools allow researchers to peer into the black box of user experience without interruption. This whitepaper synthesizes current research to present a technical guide on using Electroencephalography (EEG), functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS), and Electrodermal Activity (EDA) as objective biomarkers for quantifying immersion and cognitive engagement within the context of virtual neuroscience research.

Defining the Constructs: From Presence to Cognitive Load

A precise definition of target constructs is essential for identifying valid biomarkers. In virtual neuroscience, several interrelated concepts define user engagement:

• Immersion: This is a multifaceted construct encompassing both the degree to which a user is engaged with sensory information from the virtual environment (sensory immersion) and how mentally invested they are in the intended task (cognitive immersion) [44]. It is the objective degree to which a system presents a vivid, surrounding environment.
• Sense of Embodiment (SoE): Crucial for avatar-based experiments, SoE is the subjective experience of perceiving a virtual body as one's own. It comprises the sense of body ownership (SoO), agency (SoA), and self-location (SoSL) [45].
• Cognitive Load & Arousal: This refers to the total mental effort being used in the working memory [46]. Cognitive arousal is linked to the degree of physiological alertness and can be influenced by exogenous stimuli like music or task demands [46].

These states are not monolithic; they are complex, dynamic processes that evolve across time, frequency, and spatial domains in the brain [45]. Disentangling them requires a multimodal biosensing approach.

The Biomarker Toolkit: EEG, fNIRS, and EDA

Electroencephalography (EEG)

EEG measures electrical activity from the scalp, providing millisecond-level temporal resolution ideal for tracking rapid neural dynamics associated with cognitive states.

• Biomarkers of Immersion: Machine learning (ML) classification of EEG data has demonstrated high accuracy in discriminating between different states of immersion induced by task difficulty. Studies using VR jigsaw puzzles have achieved 86% to 97% accuracy in classifying easy versus hard difficulty levels and baseline versus VR states using algorithms like Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) and Support Vector Classifier (SVC) [44]. Key features include temporal, frequency-domain, and non-linear components from central EEG channels.
• Biomarkers of Embodiment: Analysis of frequency band changes has revealed that a strong Sense of Embodiment (SoE) is associated with a significant increase in Beta and Gamma power over the occipital lobe, a region critical for multisensory integration [45].
• Biomarkers of Attention and Load: The balance between internal and external attention states, crucial for working memory tasks in VR, can be classified using EEG. Frontal theta and parietal alpha frequency bands are effective features, with Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) models achieving up to 79.4% classification accuracy [47].

Table 1: EEG Biomarkers for Immersion and Cognitive Engagement

Cognitive State	EEG Biomarker	Location	Classification Accuracy/Effect	Experimental Paradigm
Task Immersion	Machine Learning on multiple features (temporal, frequency)	Central Channels	86-97% (Easy vs. Hard) [44]	VR Jigsaw Puzzle
Sense of Embodiment	↑ Beta/Gamma Power	Occipital Lobe	Significant increase [45]	Virtual Hand Illusion
Attention State	Frontal Theta, Parietal Alpha	Frontal, Parietal Lobes	79.4% (Internal vs. External) [47]	N-Back Task in VR

Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS)

fNIRS measures hemodynamic activity, specifically changes in oxygenated (HbO) and deoxygenated hemoglobin (HbR) concentrations, providing good spatial resolution for assessing cortical activation.

• Cognitive Workload: fNIRS is highly sensitive to cognitive load in working memory tasks. The oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO) concentration in the Prefrontal Cortex (PFC) shows a strong positive correlation with cognitive load, particularly evident in higher-load conditions like the 3-back task [46].
• Engagement and Disengagement: In complex, dynamic tasks like Tetris, increasing workload generally leads to increased fNIRS activation (HbO increase, HbR decrease). However, beyond a certain threshold, this activation can reduce, potentially indicating mental fatigue or active disengagement [48]. The energy of the total hemoglobin (HbT) signal has also been shown to vary with the nature of the intervention, such as the type of background music [46].

Table 2: fNIRS and EDA Biomarkers for Cognitive States

Modality	Cognitive State	Biomarker	Location	Experimental Paradigm
fNIRS	Working Memory Load	↑ HbO Concentration	Prefrontal Cortex (PFC)	N-Back Task [46]
fNIRS	Cognitive Overload/Fatigue	Reduction in fNIRS activation after threshold	Prefrontal Cortex (PFC)	Adaptive Tetris Game [48]
EDA	Cognitive Arousal	Skin Conductance (SC) Signal Variation	Palms	N-Back Task with Music [46]

Electrodermal Activity (EDA)

EDA, also known as Galvanic Skin Response (GSR), measures skin conductance resulting from sweat gland activity, which is directly innervated by the sympathetic nervous system.

• Cognitive Arousal: The skin conductance (SC) signal is a quantitative index of cognitive arousal [46]. It reflects the brain's underlying autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity and can be used to track arousal fluctuations during a cognitive task. Studies have shown that the baseline of arousal changes with the type of external stimulus (e.g., calming vs. exciting music), even if the variation with task difficulty might be low [46].

Experimental Protocols for Biomarker Investigation

Protocol 1: EEG Biomarkers of Immersion via Task Difficulty

This protocol is designed to objectively classify levels of immersion by manipulating task difficulty in a controlled VR environment [44].

• Task: A VR jigsaw puzzle. The difficulty is manipulated by changing the number of puzzle pieces (e.g., easy vs. hard).
• Procedure: Participants undergo three states in a counterbalanced order: (1) a baseline (idle) state, (2) an easy puzzle condition, and (3) a hard puzzle condition.
• Physiological Recording: EEG data is collected throughout the experiment from a multi-electrode cap, with a focus on central channels.
• Data Analysis: Machine learning algorithms (e.g., SGD, SVC, Random Forest) are trained on a set of extracted EEG features (temporal, frequency-domain, non-linear) to classify the three states (idle, easy, hard). The high classification accuracy validates the EEG features as biomarkers of immersion.

Protocol 2: Multimodal Decoding of Working Memory with Music Intervention

This protocol investigates the interaction between cognitive load, arousal, and musical stimuli using a multimodal approach [46].

• Task: An auditory n-back task (e.g., 0-back, 1-back, 2-back, 3-back) to systematically manipulate working memory load.
• Intervention: The task is performed in two separate sessions, one accompanied by participant-selected calming music and the other by exciting music.
• Physiological Recording: A comprehensive suite of data is collected, including:
  • fNIRS: From the Prefrontal Cortex (PFC) and Occipital (OC) areas to measure hemodynamic response.
  • EDA: To measure cognitive arousal via skin conductance.
  • Behavioral Data: Response accuracy and reaction time.
• Data Analysis:
  • Cognitive Performance: A Bayesian filter within an Expectation-Maximization (EM) framework decodes a continuous performance state from behavioral data.
  • Arousal: EDA signals are processed to extract a continuous cognitive arousal state.
  • Correlation: The correlation between the decoded performance state and HbO concentration from fNIRS is evaluated, with the highest correlation expected in high-load conditions.

Protocol 3: fNIRS/EEG Biomarkers in Complex, Dynamic Environments

This protocol assesses cognitive load and stress in a more ecologically valid, dynamically changing environment [48].

• Task: A dual-task scenario involving Tetris gameplay combined with an Auditory Reaction Task (ART). Tetris difficulty is manipulated in three conditions: Easy (constant low difficulty), Hard (constant high difficulty), and Ramp (difficulty progressively increases).
• Physiological Recording: Simultaneous measurement of fNIRS, EEG, ECG, and EDA.
• Subjective Measures: Self-reports on valence, enjoyment, and perceived workload.
• Data Analysis:
  • fNIRS: Analyzes HbO and HbR changes over time to track cognitive load and identify potential disengagement.
  • EEG: Mental fatigue is assessed through an increase in Delta power.
  • ECA/EDA: Used to measure physiological stress, distinguishing between eustress (positive stress) and distress (negative stress) based on subjective reports.

Diagram 1: Experimental workflow for identifying objective biomarkers in VR neuroscience.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 3: Essential Materials and Analytical Tools for Biomarker Research

Category / Solution	Specific Example / Tool	Function in Research
Virtual Task Paradigms	VR Jigsaw Puzzle [44]	Manipulates cognitive immersion through task difficulty.
	N-Back Task [46] [47]	Standardized protocol for imposing controlled working memory load.
	Complex Dynamic Tasks (e.g., Tetris) [48]	Provides ecological validity for studying cognitive load and stress.
Physiological Sensing	EEG System with Electrode Cap [44]	Records electrical brain activity with high temporal resolution.
	fNIRS System with Prefrontal Probe [46]	Measures hemodynamic changes in the cortex as a proxy for neural activity.
	EDA Sensor (for SC) [46]	Tracks sympathetic nervous system arousal via skin conductance.
Data Analysis & ML	Machine Learning Classifiers (SVC, RF, MLP) [44]	Classifies physiological states (e.g., immersion level) from features.
	Bayesian Filters / EM Framework [46]	Decodes continuous hidden brain states (e.g., performance) from data.
	Spectral Analysis Tools [45]	Extracts power in frequency bands (e.g., Beta, Gamma) from EEG.
Experimental Control	Personalized Music Stimuli [46]	Non-invasive intervention to regulate cognitive arousal and affect.

Signaling Pathways and Neural Correlates

The biomarkers identified by EEG, fNIRS, and EDA are the surface manifestations of underlying neural and autonomic processes. The following diagram summarizes the proposed signaling pathways from external stimulus to measurable signal.

Diagram 2: Proposed signaling pathways from VR stimulus to objective biomarkers.

The integration of EEG, fNIRS, and EDA provides a powerful, multimodal framework for moving beyond subjective questionnaires in virtual neuroscience. As detailed in this whitepaper, robust biomarkers exist: EEG patterns classified by machine learning can quantify immersion; fNIRS-derived HbO concentrations reliably track cognitive load in the prefrontal cortex; and EDA signals offer a continuous readout of cognitive arousal. The experimental protocols and tools outlined provide a roadmap for researchers to implement these measures. The future of this field lies in the real-time application of these biomarkers to create adaptive virtual environments that can respond to a user's cognitive state, thereby optimizing experimental control, enhancing training efficacy, and unlocking deeper insights into the neural basis of human experience in virtual worlds.

Optimizing Experimental Design: Mitigating Cybersickness and Enhancing Ecological Validity

Cybersickness (CS) is a significant barrier to the adoption and effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) technologies, presenting a particular challenge in virtual neuroscience experiments where it can interfere with the sense of presence and compromise data integrity [49] [50]. This technical guide provides researchers and drug development professionals with evidence-based strategies to identify, quantify, and mitigate cybersickness, framed within the context of immersive presence.

Understanding Cybersickness: Mechanisms and Impact

Cybersickness is a syndrome characterized by symptoms such as nausea, disorientation, vertigo, sweating, eye strain, and headache [50]. Its primary mechanism is explained by the sensory conflict theory, which posits that a mismatch between visual motion signals processed by the vestibular system and the lack of corresponding physical motion leads to physiological discomfort [49] [50]. This conflict is particularly acute in head-mounted display (HMD) based VR systems, where visual stimuli can induce the perception of self-motion (vection) without actual physical movement.

The onset of cybersickness can directly impact the core objectives of virtual neuroscience research by diminishing the user's sense of presence—the subjective psychological experience of "being there" in the virtual environment [34]. A high level of presence is crucial for ecological validity in experiments designed to simulate real-world scenarios. When cybersickness occurs, it can reduce immersion, distract the participant, and potentially confound experimental results related to cognitive load, emotional response, and behavioral tasks [49] [51]. It is estimated that up to 80% of VR users may experience symptoms after just 10 minutes of exposure [49].

Table 1: Common Cybersickness Symptoms and Frequency from a Seated VR Experiment [49]

Symptom	Mean Increase on VRSQ Scale (0-3)	Symptom Category
Eye Strain	+0.66	Oculomotor
General Discomfort	+0.60	Generalized
Headache	+0.43	Oculomotor
Nausea	Reported Increase	Nausea
Dizziness	Reported Increase	Disorientation

Quantifying Cybersickness: Measurement Tools and Experimental Protocols

Accurate measurement is essential for evaluating the efficacy of mitigation strategies in a research setting. The following standardized questionnaires are the cornerstone of subjective cybersickness assessment.

Table 2: Standardized Instruments for Measuring Cybersickness and Related Constructs [49]

Instrument Name	Acronym	Primary Function	Key Scales/Measures
Virtual Reality Sickness Questionnaire	VRSQ	Measures cybersickness symptoms	Nausea, Oculomotor, Disorientation
Simulation Sickness Questionnaire	SSQ	Measures simulator sickness symptoms	Nausea, Oculomotor, Disorientation, Total Score
Cybersickness Questionnaire	CSQ	Assesses cybersickness severity	Nausea, Oculomotor, Disorientation
I-PANAS-SF	I-PANAS-SF	Assesses emotional state	Positive Affect, Negative Affect
Spatial Presence Experience Scale	SPES	Evaluates sense of spatial presence	Self-Location, Possible Actions
Flow State Scale	FSS	Quantifies psychological flow	Absorption, Engagement, Enjoyment

Example Experimental Protocol for Assessment

A typical protocol for assessing cybersickness in a controlled study involves the following steps [49]:

• Pre-Exposure Baseline:

  • Participants complete the VRSQ and I-PANAS-SF questionnaires to establish a baseline for cybersickness symptoms and emotional state before the VR exposure.

• VR Exposure:

  • Participants are exposed to the virtual environment for a standardized duration (e.g., 15 minutes). The environment should be designed to provoke mild cybersickness, such as one involving virtual locomotion.
  • Example: In a study of 30 healthy individuals, participants used a Meta Quest 2 headset while seated on a rotating chair to experience a 15-minute, 360° virtual walk of the Venice Canals, including ambient audio [49].

• Post-Exposure Measurement:

  • Immediately after the VR exposure, participants again complete the VRSQ and I-PANAS-SF to quantify changes in symptoms and affect.
  • Participants then complete the SPES and FSS to measure their sense of presence and engagement during the experience [49].

• Data Analysis:

  • Analyze pre- and post-exposure scores using paired t-tests or ANOVA to identify statistically significant changes. Correlate symptom severity (VRSQ) with presence (SPES) and flow (FSS) to understand the interrelationship between these constructs.

Technical and User-Centered Mitigation Strategies

Mitigation strategies can be categorized into technical solutions that alter the VR system's output and user-centered approaches that focus on individual differences and adaptive protocols.

Technical Mitigation Methods

Technical methods dynamically modify the user's visual stream to reduce sensory conflict.

• Dynamic Field of View (FOV) Reduction: This method dynamically applies a soft-edged black mask that constricts the peripheral FOV during times of high virtual motion (e.g., turning, moving forward). The theory is that reducing the amount of perceived visual flow decreases the sensory conflict [50]. The size of the clear central area can be linked to the user's velocity or acceleration.
• Dynamic Blurring: This technique applies a Gaussian blurring filter to the periphery of the visual field, proportional to the user's motion input. By blurring the visual flow, it aims to dampen the conflict between the visual and vestibular systems [50].

It is critical to note that a 2024 comparative study found that these MMs do not always significantly reduce CS and can introduce unintended consequences. Participants reported visual hindrances, a significant performance drop in skill-based tasks, and behavioral adaptations like altered locomotion strategies [50]. Therefore, their application requires a context-sensitive approach.

User-Centered and Design-Led Mitigation Strategies

• User Control and Adaptation: Allowing users to control their movement (e.g., self-initiated turns vs. automated movement) can reduce CS. Providing options to enable, disable, or adjust the intensity of technical MMs empowers users and accommodates individual susceptibility [50].
• Stimulus Design: Minimizing abrupt accelerations and decelerations in the virtual environment can reduce sensory conflict. Ensuring stable, high frame rates (e.g., 90 Hz) and low latency is also critical, as lag and jitter are known triggers [34].
• Graded Exposure: For longitudinal studies or therapeutic use, gradually increasing exposure duration and intensity can help users build tolerance over time, a process known as habituation.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Cybersickness Experiments

Item / Solution	Function / Rationale	Example Application / Note
Standardized Questionnaires (VRSQ, SSQ, CSQ)	Quantifies subjective symptom severity across oculomotor, disorientation, and nausea domains.	Primary outcome measure for mitigation studies [49].
Presence & Affect Scales (SPES, I-PANAS-SF, FSS)	Measures the sense of "being there" (presence) and emotional response, which are impacted by CS.	Correlate CS severity with reduced presence and positive affect [49] [51].
Immersive VR Headset (HMD)	Provides the high level of immersion necessary to elicit and study presence and CS.	Meta Quest 2, HTC Vive, etc. High display refresh rates are preferable [49].
Dynamic FOV Restrictor Software	Implements the technical mitigation method of dynamic FOV reduction.	Can be integrated into game engines like Unity or Unreal Engine [50].
Dynamic Blurring Filter Software	Implements the technical mitigation method of motion-contingent blurring.	Can be applied as a real-time shader effect in the rendering pipeline [50].
Structured VR Exposure Protocol	A standardized script and virtual environment for consistent participant exposure.	Ensures reproducibility and allows for cross-study comparisons [49].

Effectively mitigating cybersickness is paramount for advancing virtual neuroscience research, as it directly safeguards the integrity of the sense of presence and the validity of experimental data. A multi-faceted approach is recommended, combining careful technical interventions like dynamic FOV reduction with robust user-centered strategies such as user control and graded exposure. Researchers must be aware that mitigation methods are not a panacea; their effectiveness is context-dependent, and they can introduce performance trade-offs and behavioral adaptations that must be monitored [50]. Future work should focus on developing more personalized and adaptive mitigation systems that dynamically respond to a user's real-time physiological signals of discomfort, thereby optimizing both well-being and experimental fidelity.

The pursuit of heightened realism and presence in virtual simulations for neuroscience research creates a fundamental paradox: increased fidelity often introduces sensory complexity that can overwhelm cognitive capacity, thereby undermining learning and experimental outcomes [52] [34]. Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) provides a crucial framework for understanding this relationship, positing that human working memory possesses limited capacity for processing new information [53]. Within virtual neuroscience experiments, improperly managed cognitive load can disrupt the very neurocognitive engagement that researchers seek to measure and understand. This technical guide examines evidence-based strategies for optimizing simulation design by balancing the competing demands of ecological validity and cognitive efficiency, ultimately enhancing both participant presence and data quality in immersive research environments.

Theoretical Foundations: Cognitive Load Theory and Neurocognitive Engagement

Cognitive Load Theory Framework

Cognitive Load Theory defines learning as a process of information selection, organization, and integration into memory, constrained by the limited capacity of working memory [53]. CLT distinguishes three distinct types of cognitive load that collectively impact learning efficiency:

• Intrinsic Cognitive Load (ICL): Determined by the inherent complexity of the material and the learner's prior knowledge. Highly structured content requiring simultaneous processing of multiple interrelated elements increases ICL [53].
• Extraneous Cognitive Load (ECL): Results from suboptimal instructional design that does not contribute to learning. Poorly presented multimedia, redundancy, and split-attention effects create ECL [53].
• Germane Cognitive Load (GCL): Facilitates schema formation and deep learning through meaningful cognitive processing. Unlike ECL, GCL is beneficial and should be encouraged through appropriate instructional techniques [53].

Neurocognitive Underpinnings of Cognitive Load

Recent advances in educational neuroscience have revealed the neural correlates of cognitive load processing. Neuroimaging studies demonstrate that excessively high extraneous cognitive load impairs prefrontal cortex activation, leading to cognitive fatigue and reduced learning efficiency [53]. Conversely, tasks presenting optimal difficulty levels enhance neuroplasticity, particularly when combined with active retrieval practice and spaced repetition [53]. These findings suggest that rather than minimizing cognitive load entirely, effective learning environments should employ strategic cognitive challenges to enhance resilience, critical thinking, and long-term cognitive development [53].

Table 1: Cognitive Load Types and Their Neurocognitive Correlates

Load Type	Source	Impact on Learning	Neurocognitive Correlate
Intrinsic	Element interactivity of content	Determined by material complexity	Working memory network activation
Extraneous	Poor instructional design	Negatively impacts learning efficiency	Reduced prefrontal cortex activity
Germane	Schema construction & automation	Positively impacts learning	Enhanced neuroplasticity

Measuring Presence and Cognitive Load in Virtual Environments

Defining Immersion and Presence

In virtual environments, a crucial distinction exists between technological immersion and psychological presence:

• Immersion represents an objective description of a technology's capability to deliver a vivid, comprehensive illusion of reality [34]. Key characteristics include:

  • Vividness: The technology's ability to produce a sensorially rich environment, determined by both breadth (number of sensory dimensions) and depth (quality of sensory information) [34].
  • Interactivity: The extent to which users can participate in modifying the environment in real-time, encompassing speed, range, and mapping of user actions [34].

• Presence describes the subjective psychological experience of "being there" in the virtual environment [34]. This emerges from cognitive processes that interpret immersive technological features.

Neurophysiological Assessment Techniques

Advanced neurophysiological tools enable direct measurement of cognitive states and presence during virtual simulations:

Table 2: Neurophysiological Measures for Cognitive Load and Presence Assessment

Measurement Tool	Primary Metrics	Application in Simulation Research	Advantages
Electroencephalography (EEG)	Neural oscillation patterns, event-related potentials	Real-time cognitive load monitoring, engagement assessment	High temporal resolution, portable systems available
Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS)	Hemodynamic responses in prefrontal cortex	Working memory load assessment during complex tasks	Less susceptible to movement artifacts than fMRI
Photoplethysmography (PPG)	Neurologic Immersion metric (1Hz data stream)	Measures convolved attention and emotional resonance [28]	Predicts behavioral outcomes, minimally invasive
Eye Tracking	Pupillometry, gaze patterns, blink rate	Cognitive load assessment, attention mapping	Non-invasive, provides visual attention data

Research utilizing these measures has demonstrated that VR can generate significantly greater neurologic immersion compared to 2D formats. One study with nursing students showed VR generated 60% more neurologic value than 2D film while increasing empathic concern that positively influenced volunteering decisions [28]. The Peak Immersion metric, which cumulates the most valuable parts of an experience, has proven particularly effective in predicting subsequent behavior [28].

Diagram Title: Relationship Between Immersion, Presence, and Cognitive Load

Design Principles for Optimizing Fidelity and Cognitive Load

Strategic Fidelity Management

Effective simulation design requires deliberate management of fidelity to maximize learning efficiency while minimizing unnecessary cognitive burden:

• Segment Complex Procedures: Break down complex tasks into manageable chunks that progressively introduce complexity, allowing learners to integrate new information without overwhelming cognitive resources [53]. This approach reduces intrinsic cognitive load by managing element interactivity.

• Implement Scaffolding Structures: Provide temporary instructional supports that are gradually removed as proficiency increases. Research demonstrates that scaffolding improves problem-solving efficiency by reducing extraneous cognitive load [53].

• Optimize Multimedia Presentation: Apply dual-channel processing principles by pairing visual information with auditory narration instead of on-screen text. This approach minimizes extraneous cognitive load by leveraging both visual and auditory processing channels [53].

Interface and Interaction Design

The user interface and interaction paradigms significantly impact cognitive load distribution:

• Minimize Split-Attention Effects: Integrate related information sources spatially and temporally to avoid requiring users to split attention between multiple disparate sources [53].

• Ensure Consistent Interaction Patterns: Maintain consistent control schemes and interface elements throughout the simulation to reduce cognitive load associated with relearning basic interactions [34].

• Provide Clear Feedback Systems: Implement immediate and unambiguous feedback for user actions to reinforce correct procedures and prevent the development of erroneous mental models [53].

Adaptive Systems for Personalized Cognitive Load Management

Artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies enable dynamic adjustment of simulation complexity based on real-time assessment of cognitive load:

• AI-Driven Adaptive Learning Systems: These systems automatically adjust instructional materials, scaffold complex concepts, and provide personalized feedback based on continuous assessment of learner performance and cognitive state [53].

• Multimodal Neuroadaptive Integration: Combining EEG with fMRI, ECG, and Galvanic Skin Response creates robust systems that mitigate signal variability and provide comprehensive cognitive state assessment [53].

• Deep Learning Classification: Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), and Support Vector Machines (SVMs) improve classification accuracy of cognitive states, enabling more precise adaptation of simulation difficulty [53].

Diagram Title: Neuroadaptive Simulation System Architecture

Experimental Protocols for Evaluating Cognitive Load in Simulations

Protocol 1: Neurologic Immersion Measurement

This protocol measures neurophysiological responses to virtual simulations using the Immersion metric:

Research Objectives:

• Quantify differences in neurologic immersion between VR and 2D formats
• Determine relationship between immersion and prosocial behavior
• Assess impact of empathic concern on behavioral outcomes

Participant Population: Undergraduate nursing students (n=70) with mean age 21.07, ethnically diverse, actively engaged in clinical rotations [28].

Stimuli Development:

• Two versions of patient narrative: standard 2D video and 180° VR format
• Shared narrative arc across formats (5 min 23 sec runtime)
• Professional actors portraying patient and healthcare providers
• Clinical accuracy verification by nursing faculty

Neurophysiological Measurement:

• Commercial Immersion Neuroscience platform with PPG sensors
• 1Hz data stream convolving attention and emotional resonance signals
• Baseline measurement before content exposure
• Peak Immersion calculation: ∫(Immersion > M + 0.5σ)dt [28]

Behavioral Measures:

• Post-experience volunteering opportunity
• Self-reported empathic concern assessment
• Correlation analysis between Peak Immersion and helping behavior

Protocol 2: Cognitive Load Assessment Using Multimodal Sensors

This protocol employs multiple neurophysiological measures to comprehensively assess cognitive load during complex simulations:

Participant Preparation:

• EEG electrode placement according to 10-20 system
• fNIRS optode positioning over prefrontal cortex
• Eye tracker calibration
• Baseline resting state measurements

Experimental Tasks:

• Progressive complexity simulation scenarios
• Knowledge retention assessments at intervals
• Performance metrics recording
• Subjective cognitive load ratings (NASA-TLX)

Data Analysis Pipeline:

• Signal preprocessing and artifact removal
• Feature extraction from each modality
• Data fusion and normalization
• Machine learning classification of cognitive load states
• Correlation with performance outcomes

Research Reagent Solutions for Virtual Neuroscience Experiments

Table 3: Essential Research Materials and Tools for Simulation Neuroscience

Reagent/Tool	Function	Application Context	Technical Specifications
Meta Quest 2 VR Headset	Display immersive virtual environments	Patient journey simulations, surgical training	1832 × 1920 per eye resolution, 90Hz refresh rate, 89° FOV [28]
Insta360 Pro2 VR Camera	Capture 180° VR content	Creating authentic clinical scenarios for research	8K resolution, spatial audio capture [28]
Immersion Neuroscience Platform	Measure neurologic immersion value	Quantifying engagement and emotional resonance in simulations	1Hz PPG data stream, Peak Immersion algorithm [28]
Rhythm+ PPG Sensor	Photoplethysmography data collection	Cranial nerve signal measurement for immersion metric	Non-invasive cardiovascular measurement [28]
EEG Systems with Dry Electrodes	Monitor neural oscillation patterns	Real-time cognitive load assessment during tasks	Minimum 32-channel, portable systems preferred
fNIRS Neuroimaging System	Prefrontal cortex hemodynamic monitoring	Working memory load assessment during complex simulations	Minimum 16 sources, 16 detectors for adequate coverage
Eye Tracking Integration	Gaze pattern and pupillometry analysis	Visual attention mapping, cognitive load indicators	60Hz minimum sampling rate, head-mounted preferred
d3-jnd & chroma.js	Color perception and distinctiveness analysis	Optimizing visualization clarity in simulation interfaces	JND (Just Noticeable Difference) calculation capabilities [54]

The effective balancing of fidelity and cognitive load represents a critical frontier in virtual neuroscience research. Evidence indicates that strategically designed simulations can optimize rather than simply minimize cognitive load, creating conditions that enhance both learning outcomes and research validity. The integration of multimodal neurophysiological assessment with AI-driven adaptive systems offers a promising pathway for creating personalized simulation environments that dynamically respond to individual cognitive states. Future research should focus on refining preprocessing techniques for neurophysiological data, expanding dataset diversity, and advancing ethical frameworks for neuroadaptive learning systems. By embracing these principles, researchers can develop virtual environments that maximize both ecological validity and cognitive efficiency, ultimately advancing our understanding of human learning and performance in complex simulated environments.

The use of mobile Virtual Reality (VR) in field experiments represents a paradigm shift for psychological and neuroscientific research, offering unprecedented opportunities to study brain and behavior in ecologically valid settings. This approach bridges a fundamental tension in neuroscience between experimental control and ecological validity [2]. Traditional laboratory measures often involve simple, static stimuli lacking the richness of real-world activities and interactions, potentially limiting the generalizability of findings. Mobile VR with standalone or smartphone-based head-mounted displays (HMDs) enables researchers to present digitally recreated real-world activities to participants in field settings, maintaining precise experimental control while enhancing the authenticity of the assessment context [2]. Central to this endeavor is the psychological experience of "presence"—the subjective illusion of "being there" in the virtual environment [3]. Unlike early technological determinist views, contemporary understanding frames presence as a multidimensional psychological phenomenon shaped by user characteristics, narrative content, and intentional structures, not merely by technical sophistication [3]. Ensuring data quality in this complex research paradigm requires rigorous protocols spanning technical, methodological, and psychological considerations.

Theoretical Foundation: Presence and Immersion in Virtual Neuroscience

Conceptualizing Presence and Immersion

In virtual neuroscience research, a precise distinction exists between immersion and presence. Immersion is an objective description of a technology's capability to present a vivid, multi-sensory, and interactive virtual environment, often quantified by technical specifications like field of view, display resolution, tracking accuracy, and multi-sensory feedback [34]. In contrast, presence is the resulting subjective psychological state—the feeling of "being there" in the virtual environment despite knowing one is physically elsewhere [3] [34]. This distinction is crucial because technological immersion does not automatically guarantee psychological presence; the latter is fundamentally a human experience shaped by cognitive processes [34].

Theoretical models have evolved beyond media-centric views to conceptualize presence as a fundamental function of human consciousness—a cognitive faculty for identifying which environment we are in to guide goal-directed action [3]. From a neurocognitive perspective, presence arises through processes of embodied simulation consistent with predictive coding theories, where the brain continuously generates and updates internal models of the body and its surroundings [3]. When VR technology successfully "tricks" these predictive processes by providing coherent multi-sensory feedback that matches user expectations and movements, it creates a compelling illusion of presence that can override normal embodiment awareness [3].

Relevance for Neuroscience Research

For virtual neuroscience experiments, presence is not merely an interesting side effect but a critical mediator of experimental outcomes. A strong sense of presence leads to higher behavioral response realism—meaning users respond similarly in virtual and real environments, strengthening the validity of neuroscientific measurements taken in VR contexts [55] [3]. Research indicates that presence influences VR effectiveness across multiple domains, including VR-based analgesia [3], psychotherapy outcomes [3], and learning performance in educational neuroscience [34]. When presence is compromised, participants may respond to the laboratory context rather than the experimental stimuli, potentially undermining the ecological validity the mobile VR approach seeks to achieve.

Table 1: Key Dimensions of Presence in Virtual Neuroscience Research

Dimension	Definition	Research Importance
Physical Presence	Illusion of being physically located in the virtual environment	Ensures naturalistic responses to spatial and perceptual aspects of experimental stimuli
Self-Presence	Sense of having a virtual body and agency within the environment	Critical for studies of body representation, agency, and motor neuroscience
Social Presence	Experience of connecting with virtual humans or other participants	Essential for social neuroscience research using virtual social interactions
Environmental Presence	Perception that the virtual environment is responsive and coherent	Supports cognitive neuroscience studies of navigation, memory, and decision-making

Mobile VR Hardware and Software Solutions for Field Research

Mobile VR Equipment Spectrum

Mobile VR solutions for field experiments span a cost-effectiveness continuum, each with distinct advantages for neuroscientific research:

• High-End Standalone HMDs (e.g., Meta Quest Pro, HTC Vive Focus): These devices offer integrated tracking systems, high-resolution displays, and substantial processing power without requiring external computers. They provide strong immersion through advanced features like hand tracking, eye tracking, and high refresh rates, making them suitable for complex cognitive neuroscience paradigms requiring precise measurements of user behavior and physiological responses.

• Smartphone-Based Adapters (e.g., Google Cardboard, Wearality Sky): As the most cost-effective solution, these adapters convert smartphones into basic VR displays. Google Cardboard-compatible devices support a wide variety of smartphones, with bulk prices potentially as low as $0.05 per unit [55]. While offering lower technical immersion than high-end HMDs, research demonstrates they can still elicit significant presence for specific experimental paradigms, particularly those emphasizing narrative engagement over graphical fidelity [55].

Research Reagent Solutions for Mobile VR Experiments

Table 2: Essential Materials for Mobile VR Field Experiments in Neuroscience

Item Category	Specific Examples	Research Function
VR Display Platforms	Meta Quest series, HTC Vive Focus, Google Cardboard, Samsung Gear VR	Presents immersive virtual environments with varying levels of technical immersion and cost considerations
Data Collection Tools	SurveyCTO, PsychoPy, LabStreamingLayer	Enables collection of behavioral, physiological, and self-report data with quality assurance features
Physiological Sensors	ECG sensors, EDA electrodes, EEG headsets, eye trackers	Provides objective measures of arousal, cognitive load, and emotional engagement during VR experiments
Quality Assurance Software	Automated audit tools, response validation scripts, back-check protocols	Maintains data integrity through real-time monitoring and validation checks during field data collection

Experimental Protocols for Mobile VR Field Research

Protocol Design for Public Speaking Stress Induction

Recent research demonstrates robust protocols for conducting ecologically valid neuroscience experiments using mobile VR in field settings. A published 2025 study employed a public speaking task in a virtual classroom environment to investigate stress responses [55]. The experimental protocol included:

• Virtual Environment: A computer-generated classroom where participants stood behind a lectern facing a virtual audience, with the speech topic "Evolution" to standardize cognitive demands across participants [55].
• Experimental Design: A between-subjects design comparing different VR devices (HTC Vive Pro vs. Wearality Sky smartphone adapter) and audience conditions ('none', 'attentive', 'inattentive') to isolate effects of technical immersion and social context on stress responses [55].
• Implementation: The virtual classroom contained a lectern while participants did not see virtual representations of their own bodies, focusing attention on the social evaluation component of the task [55].

This protocol successfully induced measurable stress responses with no significant differences in participants' sense of presence, cybersickness, or stress levels between high-end and mobile VR conditions, supporting the feasibility of mobile VR for field-based stress induction paradigms [55].

Protocol Implementation with Quality Assurance

A second experiment employed a 3 (between: device setting) × 2 (within: task) mixed-design with sixty participants completing both a stress inductive (public speaking) and relaxation (nature observation) task [55]. Key methodological considerations for maintaining data quality included:

• Remote Experimenter Support: An experimenter was virtually available through a videoconferencing platform to maintain experimental control, provide safety oversight, and address technical issues without physical presence [55].
• Standardized Materials: Inexpensive Google Cardboard smartphone adapters ensured consistency across distributed field settings while leveraging participants' own smartphones to enhance accessibility [55].
• Multi-Dimensional Assessment: The protocol incorporated measures of presence, cybersickness, perceived stress, and relaxation to comprehensively evaluate participant experiences across different mobile VR configurations [55].

Diagram 1: Mobile VR Experimental Protocol Workflow

Data Quality Assurance Framework for Mobile VR Field Research

Data Quality Dimensions and Implementation

Ensuring data quality in mobile VR field experiments requires a systematic approach addressing both general research methodology and VR-specific considerations. High-quality data should demonstrate accuracy (freedom from error), relevance (alignment with research questions), completeness (minimal missing data), timeliness (appropriate for research purpose), and consistency (standardized across participants and sessions) [56]. Specific implementation strategies include:

• Pre-Data Collection Testing: Comprehensive pre-testing of VR questionnaires across different mobile devices identifies technical compatibility issues before full study deployment [56]. Pilot testing with small participant samples evaluates survey question effectiveness and VR task feasibility, allowing refinement before main data collection [56].

• Team Training and Protocol Standardization: Even experienced researchers require project-specific training to ensure consistent protocol implementation across distributed field settings [56]. Training should explicitly address the "why" behind procedures to enhance team motivation and compliance with quality standards [56].

• Real-Time Quality Monitoring: Automated quality checks can monitor work in real-time regardless of researcher location, capturing metadata such as survey timing, response speed violations, and geolocation verification [56]. Intelligent audit features can record audio audits, text audits, and device sensor data (light, sound, movement) to verify protocol adherence [56].

Mobile VR-Specific Quality Considerations

Beyond general data quality practices, mobile VR research introduces unique requirements:

• Cybersickness Monitoring: Temporal discrepancies between visual and vestibular information can induce cybersickness symptoms (e.g., nausea, headaches) that potentially confound experimental results [55]. Regular assessment using standardized measures throughout VR exposure helps identify participants whose data may be compromised by significant discomfort.

• Presence Verification: Since presence mediates VR effectiveness [3], researchers should include standardized presence measures (e.g., Igroup Presence Questionnaire) to verify that the intended psychological state was achieved, particularly when comparing different mobile VR setups or field versus laboratory implementations.

• Technical Performance Tracking: Mobile VR performance varies based on smartphone capabilities, adapter quality, and environmental conditions. Automated logging of frame rates, tracking accuracy, and latency helps identify technical issues that might impair presence or introduce confounding variables.

Diagram 2: Data Quality Assurance Framework for Mobile VR Research

Quantitative Comparison of VR Setups for Neuroscience Research

Table 3: Technical and Experimental Comparison of VR Setups for Neuroscience Research

Parameter	High-End HMD (HTC Vive)	Mobile VR (Google Cardboard)	Research Implications
Approximate Cost	$500-$1500 per unit	$5-$50 per unit (potentially as low as $0.05 in bulk) [55]	Mobile VR enables larger sample sizes and distributed deployment with limited budgets
Visual Immersion	High resolution, wide field of view, high refresh rate	Limited by smartphone specifications, narrower field of view	Visual fidelity differences may affect presence but not necessarily experimental outcomes for certain paradigms [55]
Tracking Capabilities	Six degrees of freedom (6DoF), precise positional tracking	Three degrees of freedom (3DoF), rotation-only tracking	Complex motor paradigms may require high-end tracking, while cognitive studies may suffice with mobile VR
Experimental Findings	No significant difference in presence, cybersickness, or stress levels compared to mobile VR in public speaking task [55]	Comparable presence and stress induction despite lower technical specifications [55]	Supports validity of mobile VR for specific psychological experiments, particularly those emphasizing content over graphics
Field Deployment	Requires careful transport and setup of expensive equipment	Highly portable, can use participants' own smartphones	Mobile VR significantly enhances accessibility to diverse populations and real-world contexts

Mobile VR setups present a viable methodological approach for field experiments in virtual neuroscience when implemented with rigorous data quality protocols. Evidence indicates that properly designed mobile VR experiments can elicit comparable psychological responses (presence, stress, relaxation) to high-end laboratory setups, supporting their validity for specific research paradigms [55]. The critical factor for success lies not in maximizing technical sophistication but in aligning VR capabilities with research objectives while maintaining rigorous data quality standards throughout the research process.

Future research should continue to establish the boundary conditions of mobile VR applicability across diverse experimental paradigms and participant populations. As the technology evolves, developing standardized protocols for cross-platform VR implementation and validation will enhance comparability across studies. The integration of physiological measures with mobile VR setups presents particular promise for enhancing the objectivity of field-based neuroscientific assessments. By adopting the comprehensive quality assurance framework outlined here, researchers can leverage mobile VR to conduct ecologically valid virtual neuroscience experiments without compromising methodological rigor.

The pursuit of objective, physiological markers for presence—the subjective experience of "being there" in a virtual environment—represents a core challenge in virtual neuroscience research. While technologies like electroencephalography (EEG) offer promising avenues for quantifying this elusive state, a fundamental limitation persists: the lack of specificity in proposed biomarkers. Physiological signals correlated with presence often activate during diverse cognitive, emotional, and motor states, making it difficult to isolate presence as a unique construct. This whitepaper examines the neurophysiological underpinnings of presence, analyzes the specificity problem through current research, and provides standardized methodologies for researchers seeking to advance this critical field.

The concept of presence, or "embodiment," in virtual reality (VR) encompasses multiple components: body ownership (SoBO), agency (SoA), and self-location (SoSL) [57]. These components are typically induced through multisensory stimulation, where users receive synchronous visual-tactile or visual-motor feedback that creates the illusion of owning and controlling a virtual body [57]. The neural correlates of these experiences are increasingly investigated using EEG, which provides high temporal resolution and compatibility with immersive VR systems. However, the field is characterized by what recent reviews term "significant heterogeneity" in both VR stimulation parameters and EEG data analysis pipelines, preventing the establishment of unified biomarkers [57]. This variability, combined with the inherent overlap between neural systems supporting presence and those governing other cognitive functions, constitutes the central challenge of specificity.

Neurophysiological Correlates of Presence and Their Limitations

EEG-derived metrics have emerged as primary candidates for quantifying presence due to their non-invasive nature, portability, and millisecond-level temporal precision. The following table summarizes the key EEG biomarkers associated with components of presence, their neural origins, and—crucially—their confounding associations with other cognitive states.

Table 1: EEG Biomarkers for Presence and Their Specificity Challenges

EEG Biomarker	Neural Correlates	Association with Presence	Confounding Cognitive States
Mu Rhythm Suppression (8-13 Hz)	Sensorimotor cortex	correlates with body ownership during virtual hand illusion [57]	general motor execution, motor imagery, action observation [57]
Alpha/Beta Power Changes	Bilateral sensorimotor and mid-frontal regions	modulated during self-location illusions [57]	attention, relaxation, idle state, working memory load
P300 Event-Related Potential	Parietal and prefrontal areas	enhanced by coherent multisensory input in VR [57]	attention, novelty detection, decision-making, context updating
Error-Related Negativity (ERN)	Anterior cingulate cortex	correlates with agency violation when avatar control is disrupted [57]	performance monitoring, error detection, conflict monitoring

The biomarkers listed in Table 1 are not exclusive to presence. For instance, mu rhythm suppression, a well-studied correlate of body ownership, is also a fundamental signature of the human mirror neuron system, activated whenever we perform or observe actions [57]. Similarly, P300 amplitudes, which can be enhanced by coherent VR experiences, are also modulated by task relevance, stimulus probability, and attentional allocation—factors inherent to any VR paradigm but not specific to the sensation of presence itself [57]. This lack of specificity means that observed EEG changes cannot be definitively attributed to presence without controlling for numerous competing explanations.

Experimental Protocols for Investigating Biomarker Specificity

To address the specificity challenge, researchers must employ rigorous experimental designs that can disentangle the neural signatures of presence from those of confounding states. Below are detailed protocols for key experiments cited in this domain.

Protocol 1: The Virtual Hand Illusion with EEG

This classic paradigm induces body ownership and is frequently combined with EEG to measure its neural correlates [57].

• Objective: To quantify the relationship between mu rhythm suppression and the subjective experience of owning a virtual hand, while controlling for visual attention and basic motor processing.
• Materials:
  • VR System: A head-mounted display (HMD) capable of rendering a virtual environment and a virtual hand in real-time.
  • EEG System: A high-density EEG system (e.g., 64+ channels) with a compatible amplifier.
  • Data Acquisition Software: Software for synchronous recording of EEG and VR events (e.g., Lab Streaming Layer).
• Procedure:
  • Setup: Participants sit at a table, their real hand obscured from view and replaced by a co-located virtual hand in the HMD.
  • Baseline Recording (5 mins): EEG is recorded while participants fixate on the static virtual hand.
  • Synchronous Condition (5 mins): The experimenter uses a motion tracker to brush a virtual paintbrush on the virtual hand, while simultaneously performing the same brushing motion on the participant's hidden real hand.
  • Asynchronous Control Condition (5 mins): The brushing on the virtual and real hands is deliberately out of sync.
  • EEG Recording: Continuous EEG is recorded throughout all conditions.
  • Subjective Measures: After each condition, participants complete a validated embodiment questionnaire (e.g., using a Likert scale).
• Analysis:
  • EEG: Compute event-related spectral perturbation (ERSP) for the mu band (8-13 Hz) over the sensorimotor cortex (C3, C4, Cz electrodes) during brushing events.
  • Statistics: Correlate the degree of mu suppression with questionnaire scores for body ownership, using the asynchronous condition as a control for visual and tactile processing alone.

Protocol 2: Agency Violation and Error-Related Negativity

This protocol investigates the neural correlate of agency (SoA) by introducing a spatial or temporal discrepancy between a user's movement and their avatar's movement [57].

• Objective: To elicit and measure Error-Related Negativity (ERN) as a marker of agency violation and to distinguish it from general performance monitoring.
• Materials:
  • The same VR and EEG systems as in Protocol 1.
  • A hand-tracking device (e.g., data glove or controller).
• Procedure:
  • Setup: Participants see a full-body or hand avatar in first-person perspective.
  • Calibration Phase (2 mins): Participants perform simple gestures with perfect visuomotor synchrony to establish a baseline.
  • Experimental Task: Participants are instructed to reach for and grab a series of virtual objects.
  • Violation Induction: On a random 30% of trials, introduce a controlled delay (e.g., 150-300 ms) or spatial offset between the participant's actual hand movement and the avatar's movement.
  • EEG Recording: Record continuous EEG time-locked to the onset of the participant's movement.
• Analysis:
  • EEG: Extract epochs from movement onset and perform baseline correction. Average epochs to generate ERPs.
  • ERN Quantification: Measure the peak negativity in the difference wave (violation trial ERP minus correct trial ERP) at the FCz electrode between 50-150 ms after movement onset.
  • Control Analysis: Compare the ERN from violation trials to ERNs from a standard flanker task to assess specificity.

The following diagram illustrates the core logical relationship between experimental manipulations, measured physiological signals, and the inherent challenge of interpretation due to a lack of specificity.

Quantitative Data Synthesis: Heterogeneity in Reported Findings

The heterogeneity in the field is evident when comparing findings across studies. The following table synthesizes key quantitative results from the literature, highlighting the variability in effect sizes and methodological approaches that contribute to the specificity problem.

Table 2: Synthesis of Quantitative Findings from Presence Studies Using EEG

Study Focus	Reported Effect Size / Key Metric	EEG Analysis Method	Subjective Measure Used	Limitations Noted
Body Ownership (SoBO)	Mu suppression: 15-30% decrease in power during synchronous vs. asynchronous stimulation [57]	Time-frequency analysis (ERD/ERS)	Non-validated, study-specific questionnaires	Cannot disambiguate from general action observation networks
Agency (SoA)	ERN amplitude: -4 to -8 μV on violation trials [57]	Event-Related Potentials (ERP)	Partial validated scales	ERN also present in non-VR error trials; not unique to agency
Self-Location (SoSL)	Alpha power change: 10-20% in mid-frontal regions during full-body illusion [57]	Spectral power analysis	Standardized embodiment questionnaire (limited use)	Small sample sizes (n=15-25); results not consistently replicated
Clinical BCI Application	Motor Imagery classification accuracy improved by 10-15% with embodied feedback [57]	Common Spatial Patterns (CSP) & LDA	Not reported	Enhancement may be due to increased engagement, not embodiment per se

The data in Table 2 reveals a critical issue: the magnitude of physiological changes linked to presence is often modest and falls within a range that could be explained by other cognitive factors. For example, the improvement in Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) performance with an embodied avatar [57] is a valuable finding, but it remains unclear whether the mechanism is a specific enhancement of motor cortex activity via embodiment or a non-specific boost in user engagement and motivation.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

To conduct rigorous experiments in this field, researchers require a suite of specialized tools. The following table details key materials and their functions in VR-based neurophysiology research.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Solutions for VR Neurophysiology Studies

Item	Specification / Example	Primary Function in Research
High-Density EEG System	64+ channels, active electrodes, compatible VR cap	Captures scalp electrical activity with high spatial resolution while allowing for HMD use.
VR Head-Mounted Display (HMD)	Wide field-of-view (≥100°), high refresh rate (≥90Hz), built-in eye tracking	Presents immersive virtual environments and provides critical first-person visual feedback.
Motion Tracking System	Infrared optical system (e.g., Vicon) or inside-out tracking (e.g., HTC Vive Tracker)	Precisely tracks real-world body movements for real-time avatar animation.
Tactile Stimulation Device	Programmable vibrotactile actuators (e.g., C-2 Tactors)	Delivers controlled, timed tactile stimuli to the skin for multisensory stimulation paradigms.
Data Synchronization Unit	Lab Streaming Layer (LSL) platform or specialized hardware (e.g., BrainVision SyncBox)	Precisely synchronizes timestamps from EEG, VR events, and motion tracking into a single data stream.
Validated Subjective Questionnaire	Embodiment Scale [57]	Quantifies the subjective experience of body ownership, agency, and self-location across participants.
EEG Analysis Software	MATLAB with EEGLAB/ERPLAB, Python with MNE-Python	Processes raw EEG data for artifact removal, filtering, and extraction of neural metrics (ERPs, frequency power).

Standardized Framework for Future Research

To overcome the specificity challenge, the field must move toward greater standardization. The following workflow provides a proposed framework for designing, executing, and interpreting experiments on the physiology of presence. It emphasizes control conditions and multi-method validation as essential components.

Adopting this structured workflow is critical for building a more robust understanding of presence. The framework underscores that simply correlating a physiological signal with a subjective report is insufficient. Instead, researchers must proactively design experiments that can dissociate the neural signature of presence from the activity of overlapping cognitive systems through careful controls and convergent lines of evidence. This approach, though more demanding, is the most viable path toward identifying specific biomarkers that can be reliably used in both basic research and applied clinical settings, such as using VR embodiment for neurorehabilitation [57] or refining BCI protocols [57].

Validating Virtual Environments: Behavioral Realism and Cross-Modal Comparisons

The efficacy of any virtual neuroscience intervention is ultimately judged by its behavioral validation—the demonstrable transfer of acquired skills from the virtual environment to real-world settings. Within this framework, transfer is categorized as either proximal or distal. Proximal transfer refers to the application of learned skills to contexts closely resembling the training environment, while distal transfer signifies generalization to novel situations that are contextually different from the training scenario. The sense of presence, defined as the psychological sensation of "being there" in a virtual environment, is a critical mechanism facilitating this process [3]. Rather than being a mere product of technological sophistication, presence is a psychological phenomenon rooted in the brain's predictive coding mechanisms, where it continuously generates an embodied simulation of the body in the world [3]. When a Virtual Reality (VR) system effectively aligns its simulation with the brain's internal model, it creates a powerful illusion that can override normal embodiment, making the virtual experience feel authentic and thereby enabling the transfer of abilities and knowledge to real-world challenges [3].

Behavioral Evidence of Transfer from Virtual Environments

A substantial body of meta-analytic evidence supports the reality of both proximal and distal transfer from VR interventions, particularly in clinical and therapeutic domains.

Table 1: Evidence of Real-World Transfer from Virtual Reality Interventions

Domain of Application	Type of Transfer	Key Findings	Real-World Generalization
Anxiety & Phobia Treatment [15]	Proximal & Distal	VR Exposure Therapy (VRET) effective; outcomes comparable to traditional exposure therapy.	Reduction of symptoms in real-world situations; long-term effects observed.
Pain Management [15]	Proximal	VR is an effective tool for pain distraction.	Improved pain management in clinical settings (e.g., for medical inpatients).
Eating & Weight Disorders [15]	Distal	VR-enhanced CBT has shown higher efficacy than gold-standard CBT at 1-year follow-up.	Long-term change in real-world eating behaviors and weight management.
Motor Rehabilitation [15]	Proximal	Positive outcomes for cognitive/motor rehabilitation.	Improved functional abilities in daily living.
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) [15]	Distal	VRET effective for reducing symptoms.	Generalization of therapeutic gains to real-life triggers and contexts.

The evidence from Table 1 demonstrates that VR can produce transfer that is not merely proximal (e.g., learning to manage pain in a VR clinic) but also distal, with long-term behavioral changes persisting in the real world a full year after intervention [15]. The effectiveness of these VR applications is influenced by the user's sense of presence, which is modulated not just by technology, but also by content, narrative structure, and individual user characteristics [3].

Experimental Protocols for Validating Motor Skill Transfer

The investigation of transfer, particularly in motor skills, relies on rigorous experimental paradigms. The following protocol is adapted from studies on inter-manual and effector transfer.

Bimanual Coordination Task for Effector Transfer

This protocol is designed to test the transfer of learning between different limbs and effectors (e.g., from proximal to distal muscles) [58] [59].

• Objective: To quantify the transfer of a bimanual motor skill from trained to untrained effectors and to assess proximal versus distal gradients in transfer.
• Task Variants:
  • Task A: Requires the right hand to move twice as fast as the left hand.
  • Task B: The converse pattern, where the left hand moves twice as fast as the right hand.
• Apparatus: Use of manipulanda or motion-tracking systems to record rotative movements of the hands. Visual feedback can be provided via Lissajous displays [60].
• Groups:
  • Experimental Group: Trains on Task A for three days, then switches to Task B on the fourth day to test for transfer.
  • Control Group: Trains on Task B for all four days.
• Primary Outcome Measures:
  • Accuracy: Deviation from the prescribed phase or frequency ratio.
  • Stability: Consistency of performance across trials.
  • Electromyography (EMG): EMG-EMG wavelet coherence can be used to quantify neural crosstalk between effectors, particularly in the Alpha band (5–13 Hz) which suggests subcortical involvement [60].
• Transfer Assessment: Performance on Task B on Day 4 is compared between the Experimental and Control groups. Negative transfer in the Experimental group is indicated by a performance decline relative to the control group, reflecting interference from the previously learned Task A [59].

Protocol for Investigating Neurochemical Correlates

This protocol extends the behavioral task into the neurochemical domain using Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS) [59].

• Objective: To investigate the role of inhibitory (GABA) and excitatory (Glutamate+Glutamine, Glx) neurometabolites in motor skill transfer.
• Voxel Placement: MRS voxels are placed in brain regions critical for sensory processing and motor control, specifically the Somatosensory Cortex (S1) and the visual motion-sensitive area MT/V5.
• Data Collection: MRS data are collected at three time points relative to task performance on the transfer day (Day 4): before, during, and after the task.
• Analysis: Correlations between individual concentrations of GABA and Glx during task performance and the degree of behavioral transfer are analyzed. A positive correlation between Glx levels and transfer performance suggests a role for excitatory mechanisms in facilitating learning of the new task [59].

Neural Mechanisms and Signaling Pathways of Transfer

The phenomenon of transfer is supported by distinct neuroanatomical and neurochemical pathways. A key differentiator is the neural control of proximal (e.g., shoulders, arms) versus distal (e.g., fingers, hands) effectors.

Diagram 1: Neural pathways for proximal and distal effectors, showing richer interhemispheric connections for proximal control.

The architecture shown in Diagram 1 explains why proximal training leads to more pronounced transfer than distal training [58] [60]. Proximal muscles are innervated via bilateral, polysynaptic pathways involving uncrossed ventromedial tracts and extensive commissural fibers in the corpus callosum and spinal interneurons. This creates a rich network for interhemispheric communication, facilitating the spread of learning to untrained effectors. In contrast, distal muscles are primarily controlled by monosynaptic, crossed lateral corticospinal tracts, resulting in more isolated, effector-specific learning [58] [60]. This anatomical difference is a primary reason for the observed proximal-distal gradient in motor learning transfer.

At the neurochemical level, excitatory (Glx) and inhibitory (GABA) neurometabolites modulate the transfer process. Research using MRS has shown that individual levels of Glx during task performance are positively correlated with better transfer, suggesting excitatory mechanisms facilitate learning the new task [59]. Inhibitory GABA is hypothesized to suppress interference from previously learned skills, though its direct correlation with behavioral transfer requires further validation [59].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Materials and Tools for Behavioral Transfer Research

Tool / Reagent	Primary Function	Application in Validation
Head-Mounted Display (HMD) VR System	Creates an immersive, interactive virtual environment.	The core platform for administering VR-based interventions and exposures in clinical and experimental settings [15] [3].
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)	Quantifies concentrations of neurometabolites (GABA, Glx) in the brain.	Investigating neurochemical correlates of transfer in brain regions like S1 and MT/V5 [59].
Electromyography (EMG)	Records electrical activity produced by skeletal muscles.	Quantifying neural crosstalk and coordination between homologous muscles during bimanual tasks [60].
Bimanual Coordination Apparatus	Apparatus for measuring coordinated hand movements.	Precisely tracking performance on multifrequency tasks to assess learning and transfer [59].
Lissajous Feedback Display	Provides real-time visual feedback for coordination tasks.	Guides participants in performing complex bimanual coordination patterns [60].

Virtual Reality (VR) technology, characterized by its core features of immersion, interaction, and imagination, generates three-dimensional environments that provide users with a strong sense of presence and lifelike interactive experiences [35]. Immersion describes the objective capability of a VR system to occlude the physical world and present a vivid virtual environment [35]. Based on differences in immersion levels, VR systems are classified into Desktop Virtual Reality (DVR), which relies on traditional monitors and provides low-immersion experiences, and Immersive Virtual Reality (IVR), which typically uses head-mounted displays to effectively isolate the physical environment through multimodal sensory deprivation, providing high-immersion experiences [35].

The relationship between immersion levels and knowledge acquisition types represents a critical area of investigation for optimizing educational interventions within virtual neuroscience research. This whitepaper examines how different immersion levels affect the acquisition of declarative knowledge (addressing "what") and procedural knowledge (addressing "how"), framed within the context of presence and immersion in virtual neuroscience experiments [35]. Understanding these relationships enables researchers and drug development professionals to design more effective virtual training and assessment protocols that leverage the unique capabilities of immersive technologies.

Comparative Analysis of Learning Outcomes

Quantitative Comparison of Knowledge Acquisition

Table 1: Learning outcome comparison between high-immersion and low-immersion VR systems

Knowledge Type	Immersion Level	Learning Outcome Effect Size	Key Performance Metrics	Cognitive Load Impact
Declarative Knowledge	High-Immersion (HMD)	Significantly improved with large effect size [35]	Enhanced presence, intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, positive emotions [35]	Reduced cognitive load [35]
Declarative Knowledge	Low-Immersion (Desktop)	Lower performance compared to high-immersion [35]	Moderate presence and motivation levels [35]	Higher cognitive load [35]
Procedural Knowledge	High-Immersion (HMD)	Significantly improved with large effect size [35]	Enhanced presence, intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, positive emotions [35]	No significant reduction in cognitive load [35]
Procedural Knowledge	Low-Immersion (Desktop)	Lower performance compared to high-immersion [35]	Moderate presence and motivation levels [35]	Comparable cognitive load to high-immersion [35]

Table 2: Affective and cognitive factor comparison across immersion levels

Factor Category	Specific Measure	High-Immersion Performance	Low-Immersion Performance	Statistical Significance
Presence	Sense of presence	Significantly higher [51]	Moderate levels [51]	p < 0.001, d = 0.90 [51]
Affective States	Positive affect	Overall higher pre- and post-scenario [51]	Reduced positive affect after interaction [51]	d = 0.42 (pre), d = 0.54 (post) [51]
Affective States	Negative affect	Reduced after participation [61]	Varies based on task design	Not consistently significant [51]
Engagement	User Engagement Scale	Significantly higher [62]	Lower engagement scores [62]	Statistically significant [62]
Learning Performance	Knowledge acquisition	Improved outcomes [35]	Lower performance outcomes [35]	Significant for both knowledge types [35]

Impact on Specific Learning Domains

Medical and Technical Skill Acquisition

In medical training domains, high-immersion VR significantly improved learning outcomes for both declarative knowledge (thyroid and related diseases) and procedural knowledge (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) with large effect sizes [35]. The high-immersion environment enhanced presence, intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, and positive emotions for both knowledge domains, though cognitive load was reduced only for declarative knowledge [35].

For aviation maintenance training, a study examining the effect of immersion on learning constructs found that engagement was significantly higher in the high-immersion condition, though no significant differences were found for memory retention, learning performance, or perceived learning [62]. This suggests that the benefits of immersion may be more pronounced for certain types of skills and knowledge.

Language and Communication Skills

In language learning contexts, a study comparing high and low-immersion VR environments for Willingness to Communicate (WTC) in English as a Second Language found no statistically significant differences between modality conditions on WTC [61]. However, task order and action-oriented instructional methods demonstrated greater impact than immersion level alone [61]. Participants reported higher cognitive load and greater enjoyment in the high-immersion condition, with speaking anxiety reduced after participation in both VR tasks, leading to increased self-confidence [61].

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

Standardized Experimental Design for Immersion Comparison

Table 3: Key methodological parameters for immersion comparison studies

Experimental Parameter	High-Immersion Condition	Low-Immersion Condition	Control Measures
Display Technology	Head-mounted displays (e.g., HTC Vive Pro) [35]	Desktop monitors with traditional input devices [35]	Identical content and interaction logic
Participant Allocation	Random assignment with stratification by gender [51]	Random assignment with stratification by gender [51]	Covariate-adaptive randomization procedure
Sample Characteristics	No prior VR experience, no background in professional medical knowledge [35]	Matched characteristics to high-immersion group [35]	Screening for habituation to cold-water immersion [63]
Assessment Methods	Knowledge tests, self-report questionnaires, presence measures [35]	Identical assessment battery to high-immersion condition [35]	Parallel forms and counterbalanced designs
Physiological Measures	fMRI for brain network connectivity [63]	Comparable measures where applicable	Pre-post intervention design

Protocol for Evaluating Knowledge Type and Immersion Interaction

A comprehensive protocol for investigating the interaction between knowledge types and immersion levels should incorporate the following methodological considerations:

• Participant Screening and Allocation: Recruit participants without prior VR experience to control for habituation effects [35]. Implement stratified random assignment based on gender and prior knowledge to ensure group equivalence [51].

• Apparatus Configuration: For high-immersion conditions, utilize head-mounted displays (e.g., HTC Vive Pro) that provide multimodal sensory deprivation [35]. For low-immersion conditions, employ desktop monitors with traditional input devices such as keyboards and mice [35].

• Learning Content Development: Design parallel learning tasks for declarative knowledge (e.g., medical facts about thyroid diseases) and procedural knowledge (e.g., cardiopulmonary resuscitation steps) [35]. Ensure content equivalence across immersion conditions.

• Assessment Battery Administration: Implement pre-test and post-test knowledge assessments for both declarative and procedural knowledge [35]. Include standardized measures of presence, motivation, self-efficacy, cognitive load, and emotional states using validated instruments [35] [51].

• Data Collection Sequence: Conduct baseline assessments, followed by random assignment to immersion conditions, delivery of VR learning experience, and immediate post-test assessments [35]. For studies incorporating neuroimaging, conduct fMRI scanning sessions before and after the intervention to measure changes in brain network connectivity [63].

Diagram 1: Experimental protocol for comparing immersion levels

Neurocognitive Mechanisms of Immersion

Brain Network Connectivity Underlying Affective Changes

Emerging research in virtual neuroscience has begun to elucidate the neural mechanisms through which immersion influences learning outcomes. Studies investigating whole-body cold-water immersion have demonstrated that increased positive affect is supported by unique components of interacting brain networks, including the medial prefrontal node of the default mode network, a posterior parietal node of the frontoparietal network, and anterior cingulate and rostral prefrontal parts of the salience network and visual lateral network [63].

These findings support the bivalence model of affective processing, where positive and negative affect occur independently and are processed by spatially separate sets of brain areas that may be reciprocally activated or deactivated [63]. This neural dissociation has important implications for understanding how different immersion levels might selectively engage brain networks to enhance learning outcomes.

Diagram 2: Brain networks underlying immersion effects on learning

Presence as a Mediating Variable

Sense of presence—the subjective experience of being in a virtual environment despite physical location elsewhere—plays a crucial mediating role in the relationship between immersion and learning outcomes [51]. Research has consistently demonstrated that high-immersion VR systems produce significantly higher levels of presence compared to low-immersion systems, with large effect sizes (d = 0.90, p < 0.001) [51].

This enhanced presence predicts higher emotional arousal and sense of realism in virtual environments, which subsequently influences multiple cognitive processes essential for learning, including attention, reasoning, memory, and knowledge transfer [51]. The neurological basis for this relationship may involve the integration of sensory information across multimodal networks, creating embodied learning experiences that facilitate deeper encoding and retrieval of information.

Research Reagent Solutions and Methodological Toolkit

Table 4: Essential research materials and assessment tools for immersion studies

Tool Category	Specific Tool/Technology	Primary Function	Implementation Considerations
VR Display Systems	Head-mounted displays (HTC Vive Pro) [35]	Provide high-immersion experiences through multimodal sensory deprivation	Requires calibration and appropriate physical space
VR Display Systems	Desktop monitors with traditional input devices [35]	Provide low-immersion baseline conditions	Ensure content parity with high-immersion condition
Assessment Instruments	Knowledge tests (declarative and procedural) [35]	Measure learning outcomes for different knowledge types	Must be validated for content and parallel forms
Assessment Instruments	Presence questionnaires [51]	Quantify subjective sense of being in virtual environment	Use validated scales with established psychometrics
Assessment Instruments	User Engagement Scale (UES) [62]	Measure user engagement across dimensions	Short-form available for efficient administration
Assessment Instruments	Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) [63]	Assess affective states before and after intervention	Sensitive to immediate emotional changes
Neuroimaging Tools	Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) [63]	Measure changes in brain network connectivity	Requires specialized facilities and expertise
Physiological Measures	Heart rate monitoring, eye tracking	Capture physiological responses to immersion	Synchronization with virtual experiences needed

This comparative analysis demonstrates that high-immersion VR systems consistently enhance learning outcomes for both declarative and procedural knowledge compared to low-immersion systems, with large effect sizes observed across multiple studies [35]. The benefits appear to be mediated through enhanced presence, positive affect, and engagement, supported by integrative effects on brain network connectivity [63] [51].

However, the relationship between immersion levels and learning outcomes is moderated by knowledge type, task characteristics, and individual differences. For researchers and drug development professionals designing virtual neuroscience experiments, these findings highlight the importance of aligning immersion levels with specific learning objectives and considering the neural mechanisms underlying different knowledge acquisition processes.

Future research should continue to elucidate the precise neurocognitive pathways through which immersion influences learning, particularly focusing on how different brain networks respond to varying levels of technological immersion and how these responses predict long-term knowledge retention and transfer to real-world contexts.

The quest to understand whether the human brain processes virtual reality with the same fidelity as the real world is foundational to the valid use of VR in neuroscience and clinical practice. This whitepaper synthesizes current research examining the neurological and physiological correlates of real and virtual experiences. Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), electroencephalography (EEG), and heart rate variability (HRV) studies indicates a significant overlap in brain activation patterns, particularly within fear-processing and spatial navigation circuits. However, findings also reveal consistent, modality-specific differences in the intensity of activation and the associated emotional responses. This paper provides a detailed analysis of key experimental protocols, summarizes quantitative data for direct comparison, and outlines essential research tools, framing these findings within the broader thesis of presence and immersion in virtual neuroscience.

The efficacy of Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET) and other VR-based applications in neuroscience hinges on a core premise: that the brain accepts the virtual experience as a plausible substitute for reality, a phenomenon central to the concepts of presence and immersion [64]. For researchers and drug development professionals, establishing this neurological equivalence is not merely academic; it validates VR as a controllable, scalable, and safe environment for conducting experiments, evaluating therapeutic interventions, and modeling disease states. The central question this whitepaper addresses is the degree to which the neural substrates activated by real-world experiences are similarly engaged by their virtual counterparts. We explore the converging evidence from neuroimaging and physiological monitoring, which begins to paint a nuanced picture: one of broad, but not complete, equivalence. This foundational understanding is critical for designing future experiments and interpreting data collected within virtual environments, especially as the field moves toward large-scale, biophysically realistic brain simulations [65] and adaptive, real-time experimental paradigms [66].

Quantitative Data Synthesis

The following tables synthesize key quantitative findings from recent studies, allowing for a direct comparison of neurological and physiological responses.

Table 1: fMRI Activation in Key Brain Regions during Exposure to Phobic Stimuli [64]

Brain Region	Response to Real Images (RI)	Response to Virtual Reality (VR)	Implications
Amygdala	Higher activation and spatial extent	Significant, but lower, activation	VR engages core fear circuits, though with less intensity.
Insula	Higher activation and spatial extent	Significant, but lower, activation	VR triggers interoceptive/affective processing, akin to real stimuli.
Hippocampus	Significantly higher activation	Lower activation	Suggests differences in contextual or episodic memory encoding.
Occipital & Calcarine Areas	Significantly higher activation	Lower activation	Indicates differential visual processing of real versus virtual stimuli.

Table 2: Physiological and Emotional Response Differences [67]

Metric	Real-World Environment	Virtual Reality Environment	Implications
Subjective Impression (SD Method)	Associated with comfort and preference	Evoked impressions of heightened arousal	VR may feel more stimulating or less relaxing than an identical real space.
EEG Beta/Alpha Ratio	Lower	Elevated	Confirms a state of high arousal in VR.
Heart Rate Variability (pNN50)	Standard parasympathetic activity	Transient increase in parasympathetic activity	Suggests a distinct, if transient, autonomic nervous system response to VR.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

To evaluate neurological equivalence, researchers have employed rigorous, controlled protocols. The following are detailed methodologies from pivotal studies.

• Objective: To compare brain activations in response to real (RI) and virtual (VR) phobic stimuli in individuals with specific phobias (e.g., to cockroaches, spiders, or lizards).
• Participants: 32 adults diagnosed with a specific phobia, randomized into RI (n=16) and VR (n=16) groups.
• Stimuli: Phobic stimuli (small animals) and neutral stimuli (wooden balls) were presented. The VR stimuli were 3D recreations of the 3D-filmed real images to control for presentation modality.
• Design & Procedure: A 2x2 factorial design (stimulus format: RI/VR x stimulus type: phobic/neutral). Using a block design, participants were randomly presented with 16 blocks of phobic images and 16 blocks of neutral images, each lasting 20 seconds. Stimuli were projected in stereoscopic 3D video using MRI-compatible glasses.
• Data Acquisition & Analysis: fMRI data was filtered for regions of interest (ROIs) based on prior phobia research, including the amygdala, insula, hippocampus, and occipital cortex. Whole-brain analysis and specific ROI analyses were conducted to compare activation levels and extents between groups.

• Objective: To objectively evaluate emotional responses to identically designed real and virtual spaces using subjective and physiological indices.
• Methodology: The study constructed paired real-world and VR environments with identical spatial designs.
  • Subjective Evaluation: The Semantic Differential (SD) method was used, where participants rated their impressions on bipolar adjective scales.
  • Physiological Indices: Electroencephalography (EEG) was used to measure brain activity, with a focus on beta/alpha power ratios as an indicator of arousal. Heart Rate Variability (HRV) was measured to assess autonomic nervous system activity, specifically the pNN50 metric which reflects parasympathetic (vagal) tone.
• Procedure: Participants experienced both the real and VR spaces. During each exposure, their EEG and HRV were continuously monitored. Following each experience, they completed the SD evaluation. This multi-modal approach allowed for the correlation of unconscious physiological responses with conscious subjective reports.

Visualizing Workflows and Pathways

The following diagrams illustrate the core neurological pathways involved in processing threat stimuli and the experimental workflow for a typical multi-modal equivalence study.

Dual-Route Processing of Threatening Stimuli

The brain processes threatening stimuli through two primary, interacting routes, which are engaged by both real and virtual threats [64].

Multi-Modal Experimental Protocol

A modern approach to testing neurological equivalence involves a multi-modal protocol that captures data at multiple levels [67].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

For researchers aiming to conduct similar studies, the following table details essential materials and their functions as derived from the featured experiments.

Table 3: Essential Research Materials and Tools for Neurological Equivalence Studies

Tool / Material	Function in Research	Exemplar Use Case
3D VR Stimuli & Head-Mounted Display (HMD)	Presents immersive, controlled visual stimuli; induces a sense of presence.	Creating virtual phobic animals [64] or architectural spaces [67] for exposure.
Functional MRI (fMRI)	Measures brain activity by detecting changes in blood flow; localizes neural activation.	Comparing amygdala and insula activity in response to real vs. virtual threats [64].
Electroencephalography (EEG)	Records electrical activity of the brain; excellent temporal resolution for arousal states.	Measuring beta/alpha ratio to quantify arousal in VR vs. real spaces [67].
Heart Rate Variability (HRV) Monitor	Assesses autonomic nervous system activity via heartbeat intervals.	Capturing transient parasympathetic changes (pNN50) during VR exposure [67].
Structured Clinical Interviews (e.g., CIDI)	Verifies participant diagnoses according to standardized criteria (e.g., ICD-10, DSM).	Ensuring a homogeneous sample of participants with specific phobias [64].
Self-Report Inventories (e.g., BAI, S-R Inventory)	Quantifies subjective anxiety states and symptoms.	Correlating subjective anxiety with objective brain activation data [64].
Real-time Adaptive Software (e.g., improv)	Enables closed-loop experiments where model-driven analysis selects subsequent stimuli in real time.	Orchestrating rapid functional typing of neural responses and optimal stimulus selection [66].
Biophysically Realistic Simulations	Provides a virtual testbed for hypotheses, simulating neural network dynamics.	Modeling disease spread (e.g., epilepsy) in a virtual mouse cortex [65].

The collective evidence affirms that virtual reality is a powerful tool capable of engaging core neurological systems that process real-world experiences. The documented activation of the amygdala-insula fear circuit [64] and hippocampal-striatal spatial navigation network [68] during virtual experiences provides strong support for a degree of neurological equivalence. This validates the use of VR in therapeutic and research settings where eliciting a genuine cognitive-emotional response is paramount.

However, equivalence is not identity. The consistent findings of heightened arousal in VR [67], differential activation in visual and memory-related areas [64], and the influence of proprioceptive feedback on navigation strategy [68] highlight critical boundaries. For the research and drug development community, these findings underscore the importance of not treating VR as a perfect substitute, but as a unique modality with its own psychological and neurological profile. Future research, leveraging real-time adaptive platforms [66] and ever-more sophisticated simulations [65], will further refine our understanding of these parameters, enabling the precise application of virtual environments to explore the brain and treat its disorders.

Ecological validity refers to the degree to which findings from controlled experimental settings can be generalized to real-world environments and everyday life situations [69]. In virtual neuroscience research, this concept takes on critical importance as investigators increasingly employ immersive technologies to study brain function, cognitive processes, and human behavior. Within the context of presence and immersion in virtual neuroscience experiments, ecological validity represents a fundamental metric for evaluating whether simulated environments successfully capture the essential characteristics of real-world settings to produce authentic neurobehavioral responses.

The rapid adoption of Virtual Reality (VR) technologies, driven by more mature hardware and software tools, has created new opportunities for studying complex neuroscientific phenomena in controlled yet realistic settings [69]. VR enables the creation of interactive, immersive digital environments that can simulate everything from basic perceptual tasks to complex social interactions, all while maintaining experimental control and enabling precise measurement of neural and behavioral responses. This systematic review examines the ecological validity of these approaches by comparing findings from traditional laboratory settings, emerging mobile-VR platforms, and real-world environments, with particular emphasis on implications for neuroscience research and drug development.

Theoretical Framework: Presence, Immersion, and Ecological Validity

The relationship between technological immersion and psychological presence forms the theoretical foundation for understanding ecological validity in virtual environments. Immersion constitutes an objective description of a technology's capability to present a sensorial-rich, interactive virtual environment, while presence refers to the subjective psychological experience of "being there" in the virtual environment [34]. This distinction is crucial for virtual neuroscience research, as the degree to which participants feel present in a virtual environment may significantly influence the ecological validity of measured responses.

Components of Immersion and Their Impact on Validity

Immersion comprises two key characteristics that directly impact ecological validity: vividness and interactivity [34]. Vividness refers to a technology's ability to produce a sensorial-rich environment, encompassing both the breadth (number of sensory dimensions presented) and depth (quality and resolution of sensory information) of the simulation. Interactivity describes the extent to which users can participate in modifying their virtual environment in real-time, characterized by speed (rate of system response to user actions), range (variety of possible interactions), and mapping (naturalness of the connection between user actions and system responses) [34].

Recent advances in mobile-VR systems have significantly enhanced both vividness and interactivity, with modern standalone headsets offering high-resolution displays, integrated tracking systems, and intuitive controllers that enable naturalistic interactions. These technological improvements have correspondingly enhanced the potential ecological validity of virtual neuroscience paradigms by creating more convincing simulations that elicit more naturalistic patterns of brain and behavior.

Quantitative Synthesis: Comparative Analysis of Research Settings

The following tables synthesize quantitative findings from empirical studies comparing different research settings across multiple dimensions relevant to ecological validity in neuroscience research.

Table 1: Comparative Ecological Validity Across Research Settings

Dimension	Laboratory Setting	Mobile-VR Setting	Real-World Setting
Experimental Control	High	Moderate-High	Low
Environmental Realism	Low-Moderate	Moderate-High	High
Behavioral Naturalness	Low-Moderate	Moderate-High	High
Measurement Precision	High	Moderate-High	Variable
Participant Safety	High	High	Context-dependent
Reproducibility	High	High	Low
Contextual Variables	Limited	Customizable	Full context
Equipment Requirements	Fixed installation	Portable	Minimal

Table 2: Correlation Coefficients Between Virtual and Real-World Responses

Response Domain	Stimulus Type	Correlation Strength	Key Findings
Emotional Arousal	Affective films	High [70]	Significant correlation for scary, funny, and sad content
Physiological Measures	Skin conductance	High [70]	Convergent validity in arousal patterns
Physiological Measures	Heart rate	High [70]	Consistent response patterns across conditions
Spatial Behavior	Navigation tasks	Moderate-High [69]	Similar patterns with some quantitative differences
Risk Perception	Hazard identification	Moderate [69]	Qualitative similarities with quantitative variations
Cognitive Load	Problem-solving tasks	Moderate [69]	Comparable relative differences between conditions

Table 3: Methodological Considerations for Enhancing Ecological Validity

Factor	Impact on Ecological Validity	Recommendations
Visual Fidelity	Moderate impact on presence [34]	Prioritize functional relevance over photorealism
Interaction Naturalness	Strong impact on behavioral validity [69]	Implement natural mapping and haptic feedback where possible
Contextual Cues	Critical for appropriate responses [71]	Include relevant environmental context for target behaviors
Embodied Representation	Enhances presence and validity [34]	Provide appropriate avatar representation
Sensory Consistency	Important for preventing breaks in presence	Maintain temporal and spatial consistency in multisensory cues

Experimental Protocols and Methodological Approaches

This section details specific experimental methodologies employed in validity studies, providing replicable protocols for virtual neuroscience research.

Protocol: Cross-Validation of Emotional Response Measures

A between-subjects design comparing responses to emotional stimuli across virtual and real-world settings demonstrated high convergent validity [70]. The protocol involved:

• Participant Assignment: Random assignment to either TV (traditional laboratory) or VR condition (n=35 per group)
• Stimuli Presentation: Nine movie clips encompassing three emotional categories (scary, funny, sad) presented in fixed order
• Dependent Variables:
  • Continuous ratings of perceived emotional intensity (subjective measure)
  • Physiological measures: skin conductance level, heart rate, pulse volume amplitude (objective measures)
• Apparatus:
  • TV condition: 65″ physical television in a physical living room
  • VR condition: Meta Quest 2 VR headset displaying virtual living room with identical content streamed to virtual TV
• Analysis Approach: Correlation analysis of process variables across conditions and assessment of distinct response patterns to different emotional tones

Results confirmed convergent validity between conditions with high correlations for all process variables across stimuli, and demonstrated consistent distinct responses to clips of different emotional tones across both viewing conditions [70].

Protocol: Assessment of VR-Reality Confusion

An experimental approach to evaluate the blurring of boundaries between virtual and real experiences revealed substantial confusion in some participants [71]:

• Virtual Interaction Task: Participants interacted with a virtual experimenter who:
  • Invited them to sit on a virtual chair (20% complied without checking for real chair)
  • Placed a tablet computer in a virtual drawer
• Real-World Testing: One week later, in the corresponding real room:
  • 45% of participants expected to find a tablet in the same physical location
• Implicit Attitude Assessment: Measured influence of virtual experiences on real-world attitudes
  • Subtle differences in wording of questions asked by virtual experimenter influenced implicit attitudes toward climate change and gender
• Analysis: Bayesian analysis supported findings of significant influence of virtual experiences on real-world expectations and attitudes

This protocol demonstrates the potential for high ecological validity in VR experiences, as evidenced by the carryover of virtual experiences to real-world expectations and behaviors [71].

Technical Implementation: Enhancing Ecological Validity in Virtual Neuroscience

The following diagram illustrates the key technological factors and their relationships in creating virtual environments with high ecological validity for neuroscience research:

Research Reagent Solutions: Essential Tools for Virtual Neuroscience

The following table details key technological solutions and their functions in virtual neuroscience research aimed at enhancing ecological validity.

Research Tool Category	Specific Examples	Function in Virtual Neuroscience Research
VR Development Platforms	Vizard 7.0 [70], Unity with XR Interaction Toolkit	Create customizable virtual environments with precise experimental control and data collection capabilities
Head-Mounted Displays	Meta Quest 2 [70], Varjo VR-4, HTC Vive Pro 2	Provide immersive visual and auditory stimulation with integrated tracking
Physiological Recording Systems	Biopac MP160, ADInstruments PowerLab, Empatica E4	Synchronize physiological measures (SCL, HR, BVP) with virtual experiences [70]
Motion Tracking Systems	OptiTrack, HTC Vive Trackers, Qualisys	Capture full-body movement and gestures for naturalistic interaction analysis
Eye Tracking Systems	Tobii Pro VR, Pupil Labs, HTC Vive Pro Eye	Measure visual attention patterns and pupillometry as cognitive load indicators
Data Integration Platforms	LabStreamingLayer (LSL), Unity Experiment Framework (UXF)	Synchronize multimodal data streams for comprehensive analysis

Applications in Neuroscience and Drug Development

The enhanced ecological validity offered by mobile-VR approaches creates significant opportunities for neuroscience research and pharmaceutical development.

Cognitive and Behavioral Assessment

Virtual environments enable the creation of standardized yet ecologically valid assessments of cognitive function that can detect subtle deficits or changes more sensitively than traditional neuropsychological tests. For drug development, this offers:

• Enhanced Sensitivity: Detection of subtle treatment effects through naturalistic cognitive challenges
• Functional Relevance: Assessment of cognitive processes in contexts resembling real-world demands
• Longitudinal Stability: Consistent, replicable testing conditions across multiple assessment timepoints

Emotional and Physiological Response Evaluation

The demonstrated convergent validity in emotional response measures [70] supports the use of VR paradigms for evaluating neuropsychiatric treatments and anxiolytic compounds. Specific applications include:

• Fear Extinction Paradigms: Controlled yet emotionally engaging environments for evaluating anti-anxiety compounds
• Social Cognition Assessment: Complex social scenarios for evaluating social functioning in neuropsychiatric disorders
• Stress Response Measurement: Standardized stressors with real-world relevance for evaluating psychophysiological responses

Safety and Efficacy Profiling

The ability to create controlled yet realistic environments enables the evaluation of treatment effects on real-world functioning while maintaining laboratory standards of safety and monitoring. This is particularly valuable for:

• Cognitive Side Effect Profiling: Assessment of attention, memory, and executive function in demanding virtual scenarios
• Proxies for Real-World Functioning: Evaluation of treatment effects on navigation, problem-solving, and functional tasks
• Risk Assessment: Simulation of potentially hazardous situations (e.g., driving assessment) without actual risk

The integration of mobile-VR technologies into neuroscience research offers a powerful approach to enhancing ecological validity while maintaining experimental control. Evidence from comparative studies demonstrates that appropriately designed virtual environments can elicit behavioral, physiological, and emotional responses that correlate highly with those observed in real-world settings [70] [69]. The blurring of boundaries between virtual and real experiences observed in some studies [71] further attests to the potential ecological validity of these approaches.

For virtual neuroscience research focused on presence and immersion, these findings support the utility of VR paradigms for creating authentic experiences that can validly assess brain-behavior relationships in contexts with greater real-world relevance than traditional laboratory tasks. Future developments in display technology, interaction design, and multimodal integration promise to further enhance the ecological validity of these approaches while expanding their application across diverse populations and research questions.

In pharmaceutical development, these methodologies offer the potential to bridge the gap between laboratory measures of drug efficacy and real-world functional outcomes, potentially de-risking drug development and providing more meaningful assessments of treatment effects on patients' daily lives. As validation evidence continues to accumulate, virtual neuroscience approaches are positioned to become increasingly central to both basic research and applied therapeutic development.

Conclusion

The synthesis of research confirms that presence and immersion are not merely technical achievements but are central to creating valid, impactful virtual neuroscience experiments. A successful framework requires a deliberate design that aligns technological capabilities with experimental goals, acknowledging that high immersion can significantly enhance learning, empathy, and behavioral realism. Future progress hinges on developing more specific physiological biomarkers for presence, conducting large-scale prospective studies, and creating adaptive systems that account for individual perceptual-motor styles. For biomedical research, this promises a new era of highly controlled yet ecologically valid experimental paradigms, improving the predictive power of pre-clinical studies and the efficacy of clinical training and therapeutic interventions.

References

• 1. What is Presence in Virtual Reality (VR) | IxDF [https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/presence?srsltid=AfmBOoqwAvS-7K0xhkeNcT77NKOQEBVkYidYxDtyFXrjlhIUxhquIVmC]
• 2. Virtual Reality for Enhanced Ecological Validity and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4675850/]
• 3. Being there but where? Sense of presence theory for ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-025-04380-3]
• 4. Breaking presence in Immersive Virtual Reality toward ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169260724001202]
• 5. Virtual Reality for Real Estate in 2025 — The Essentials [https://program-ace.com/blog/virtual-reality-for-real-estate/]
• 6. Augmented Reality Guide 2025: Complete AR Overview [https://treeview.studio/blog/augmented-reality-ar-complete-guide]
• 7. Virtual Reality in Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166432825003961]
• 8. Virtual Reality: Challenges and Perspectives in Mental Health [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12593772/]
• 9. Virtual Patients in Clinical Trials for Drug Development [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12228009/]
• 10. Virtual reality in drug design: Benefits, applications and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959440X25000624]
• 11. What are immersive technologies? [https://www.adalovelaceinstitute.org/resource/immersive-technologies-explainer/]
• 12. Immersive Virtual Reality - an overview [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/immersive-virtual-reality]
• 13. So far yet so near: Exploring the effects of immersion ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1071581923000514]
• 14. The psychological mechanisms of spectator experience [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12605054/]
• 15. Neuroscience of Virtual Reality: From Virtual Exposure to ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6354552/]
• 16. Prediction, Cognition and the Brain - PMC - PubMed Central [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2904053/]
• 17. The sense of embodiment in Virtual Reality and its ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/virtual-reality/articles/10.3389/frvir.2023.1141683/full]
• 18. Editorial: Machine Learning for Quantitative Neuroimaging ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9175566/]
• 19. Machine Learning for Quantitative Neuroimaging Analysis [https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/19376/machine-learning-for-quantitative-neuroimaging-analysis/magazine]
• 20. Frontiers | Assessing virtual reality presence through physiological measures: a comprehensive review [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/virtual-reality/articles/10.3389/frvir.2025.1530770/full]
• 21. Frontiers | A Pilot Study Exploring Age Differences in Presence, Workload, and Cybersickness in the Experience of Immersive Virtual Reality Environments [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/virtual-reality/articles/10.3389/frvir.2021.736793/full]
• 22. Acceptance of immersive head-mounted virtual reality in older adults | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-41200-6]
• 23. The effects of typical ageing on cognitive control [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2023.1231410/full]
• 24. Visuomotor Interactions and Perceptual Judgments in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7039824/]
• 25. Editorial: Perceptual Motor Control in the Virtual ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1138516/full]
• 26. Why people keep watching: neurophysiologic immersion ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9792976/]
• 27. Data Analysis and Visualization - Research ... [https://guides.library.txstate.edu/research-data/analysis-visualization]
• 28. Virtual Reality Education Increases Neurologic Immersion ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12472333/]
• 29. Learning Empathy Through Virtual Reality [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7805971/]
• 30. Presence and empathy as mediators between immersion ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563225002122]
• 31. Virtual reality stimulation and organizational neuroscience ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.993162/full]
• 32. Immersive Virtual Reality-Based Training Improves ... [https://pediatricsnationwide.org/2021/04/05/immersive-virtual-reality-based-training-improves-empathy-among-health-care-providers/]
• 33. Enhancing Presence, Immersion, and Interaction in ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2813-2084/4/1/3]
• 34. Exploring the impact of virtual reality on presence: findings ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1560626/full]
• 35. The Impact of Virtual Reality Immersion on Learning ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12562066/]
• 36. Comparison of teleportation and walking in virtual reality ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/virtual-reality/articles/10.3389/frvir.2024.1423911/full]
• 37. Immersive procedural training in virtual reality: A systematic ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131524001386]
• 38. "Immersive Virtual Reality Training to Enhance Procedural ... [https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI30503055/]
• 39. VR For Procedural Training [https://www.meegle.com/en_us/topics/vr/vr-for-procedural-training]
• 40. Virtual Reality experiments in the field | PLOS One [https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0318688]
• 41. Using Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy to Enhance ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6823515/]
• 42. Virtual Reality in Psychology: Clinical Use Cases, Benefits ... [https://psytechvr.com/vr-in-psychology]
• 43. Scientists used virtual reality to alter people's lucid dreams ... [https://ispr.info/2025/08/12/scientists-used-virtual-reality-to-alter-peoples-lucid-dreams-in-mindboggling-feat/]
• 44. Biomarkers of Immersion in Virtual Reality Based on Features ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11119742/]
• 45. Identifying EEG biomarkers of sense of embodiment in ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroergonomics/articles/10.3389/fnrgo.2025.1572851/full]
• 46. A multimodal dataset for investigating working memory in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11220373/]
• 47. Designing and Evaluating an Adaptive Virtual Reality ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581924002167]
• 48. fNIRS, EEG, ECG, and GSR reveal an effect of complex ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/human-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2025.1459653/full]
• 49. Understanding Cybersickness and Presence in Seated VR [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12027998/]
• 50. Effects of cybersickness mitigation methods on behavior [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10055-024-01071-3]
• 51. The effect of immersion on sense of presence and affect when ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10285157/]
• 52. Using Cognitive Load Theory to Inform Simulation Design ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876139915000432]
• 53. Challenging Cognitive Load Theory: The Role of Educational ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11852728/]
• 54. Viz Palette for Data Visualization Color | by Elijah Meeks [https://medium.com/@Elijah_Meeks/viz-palette-for-data-visualization-color-8e678d996077]
• 55. Virtual Reality experiments in the field - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11978061/]
• 56. How to ensure data quality in field research [https://www.surveycto.com/data-collection-quality/how-to-ensure-data-quality/]
• 57. 综述：利用脑电图（EEG）评估虚拟现实中的身体沉浸感 [https://www.ebiotrade.com/newsf/2025-11/20251116084608649.htm]
• 58. Frontiers | Transfer of Motor Learning Is More Pronounced in Proximal ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01530/full]
• 59. Neural correlates of transfer of learning in motor ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-53901-8]
• 60. The influence of distal and proximal muscle activation on ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9595517/]
• 61. An exploration of low- and high-immersive virtual reality ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949678024000266]
• 62. The Effect of Level of Immersion on Learning in a Virtual ... [https://repository.fit.edu/etd/60/]
• 63. Short-Term Head-Out Whole-Body Cold-Water Immersion ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9953392/]
• 64. The Equivalence between Virtual and Real Feared Stimuli in a ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6947488/]
• 65. One of world's most detailed virtual brain simulations is ... [https://alleninstitute.org/news/one-of-worlds-most-detailed-virtual-brain-simulations-is-changing-how-we-study-the-brain/]
• 66. A software platform for real-time and adaptive ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64856-3]
• 67. A Pilot Study on Emotional Equivalence Between VR and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12251632/]
• 68. Exploring the Spatial Relationships Between Real and ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/virtual-reality/articles/10.3389/frvir.2020.572122/full]
• 69. Ecological validity of virtual reality simulations in ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/virtual-reality/articles/10.3389/frvir.2023.1058790/full]
• 70. A research ecosystem for the study of screen media effects [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12296782/]
• 71. Confusing virtual reality with reality – An experimental study [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004225009162]