Evaluating Social Buffering in Augmented Reality Using a Virtual Dog

Assigned Human-Computer Interaction Master Project No Affiliation

Motivation and Potential

This work considers the aspect of social buffering, where the presence of a conspecific reduces stress has been extensively studied across various species, including humans [1]. Qi et al. (2020) demonstrated that even the mere presence of another person can alleviate physiological stress responses to aversive stimuli [2]. Building on this, Qi et al. (2021) found that a virtual agent in a VR environment could similarly reduce stress, especially among females with high social concern [3]. This study aims to replicate these findings within an augmented reality (AR) setting, specifically using a virtual dog. The integration of a virtual dog in AR is motivated by research indicating that interactions with dogs can significantly lower stress levels in humans [4]. AR offers distinct advantages here by enhancing realism, minimizing content creation efforts, and maintaining physical context, thereby potentially increasing the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions [5,6].

Research Question

This study examines the impact of a virtual dog in augmented reality (AR), presented through a headset, on female participants’ fear responses to aversive auditory stimuli, comparing its effects across three experimental conditions: the presence of a virtual dog, the presence of a virtual human, and the absence of any co-presence (control).

Related Work

Research shows that dogs significantly reduce stress. Allen et al. (2002) found that dogs lower cardiovascular stress more effectively than humans [4]. Polheber and Matchock (2014) demonstrated that even without interaction, a dog’s presence reduces cortisol levels during stressful tasks [7]. Kertes et al. (2017) noted that dogs, more than other pets, mitigate stress due to strong emotional bonds with humans [8]. Norouzi et al. (2022) found that while participants favored virtual dogs for their non-judgmental nature, no significant physiological differences were observed, possibly due to the presence of a human experimenter. To address this, the current study will eliminate human presence to focus solely on the virtual dog’s impact. Additionally, a key criticism of Norouzi et al.’s study is the lack of physiological measurements, as self-reported data alone may not fully capture stress reduction effects. In response, this study will incorporate both physiological and self-reported measures to provide a more comprehensive analysis of stress reduction.

Hypotheses

1. The presence of a virtual dog in augmented reality alleviates physiological stress responses to aversive auditory stimuli, as evidenced by reductions in skin conductance responses.
2. A virtual dog reduces skin conductance responses equally as effectively as a virtual human.

Methodology

To ensure comparability with Qi et al. (2021), this study will replicate their methodology in the identical environment. Participants will be divided into three groups: one with a virtual dog present, one with a virtual human present, and one without any co-presence. Skin conductance responses (SCRs) will be recorded throughout the study, and participants will rate their emotional state after each stimulus. Following the experiment, participants will complete a questionnaire evaluating the virtual dog’s social presence, based on the Networked Minds Measure of Social Presence [10]. In addition, this study will include a range of psychometric assessments to account for individual differences in the participants’ responses to the virtual dog. Anxiety will be evaluated using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; Spielberger, 1983), providing insight into both the participants’ immediate and general levels of anxiety [11]. Emotional states will be assessed through the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988), which captures fluctuations in positive and negative emotions throughout the experiment [12]. To further examine how participants respond to anxiety-related symptoms, the Anxiety Sensitivity Index (ASI; Reiss et al., 1986) will be applied [13]. The Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ; Kennedy et al., 1993) will be used to determine the effects of the augmented reality environment on participants’ physical comfort and to assess potential symptoms of simulator sickness [14]. Given the use of a virtual agent, the study will also address potential discomfort related to the realism of the virtual dog by employing the Uncanny Valley Index (Mori, MacDorman, & Kageki, 2012) [15]. The Virtual Human Plausibility Scale (VHP; Mal et al, 2022) will be adapted to assess the believability of the virtual dog as a social presence within the augmented reality environment [16]. Furthermore, to control for pre-existing fear of dogs, the Dog Phobia Questionnaire (DPQ; Hong & Zinbarg, 1999) will be administered prior to the experiment, ensuring that any anxiety responses are not confounded by participants’ fear of dogs [17, 18]. The participant will also be asked to complete the Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977) in its German translation, the Allgemeine Depressionsskala (ADS; Hautzinger, & Bailer, 1993) [19, 20]. This scale will be evaluated prior to proceeding with the study to identify and potentially exclude participants with preexisting symptoms of depression. To provide a comprehensive comparison, the same measurements will also be taken in a condition where a human agent is present instead of the virtual dog. This will allow for an evaluation of whether the stress-reducing effects of social buffering differ between virtual and human agents. Together, these measures will ensure a thorough evaluation of both the emotional and psychological factors that may influence the effectiveness of social buffering in this context.

References

• [1] Kikusui, T., Winslow, J. T., & Mori, Y. (2006). Social buffering: Relief from stress and anxiety. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 361(1476), 2215–2228. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2006.1941
• [2] Qi, Y., Kong, F., Zhao, W., Yu, X., & You, X. (2020). The mere physical presence of another person reduces human autonomic responses to aversive sounds. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 287(1925), 20192241. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.2241
• [3] Qi, Y., Gao, F., Kong, F., & Yu, X. (2021). Social buffering of human fear is shaped by gender, social concern, and the presence of real vs virtual agents. Translational Psychiatry, 11(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-021-01257-8
• [4] Allen, K., Shykoff, B. E., & Izzo, J. L. (2002). Pet ownership, but not ACE inhibitor therapy, blunts home blood pressure responses to mental stress. Hypertension, 38(4), 815–820. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.0000027411.18571.D1
• [5] Baus, O., & Bouchard, S. (2014). Moving from Virtual Reality Exposure-Based Therapy to Augmented Reality Exposure-Based Therapy: A Review. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 112. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00112
• [6] Albakri, G., Alharthi, M., Al-Ghamdi, A., & Smith, S. (2022). Phobia Exposure Therapy Using Virtual and Augmented Reality: A Systematic Review. Applied Sciences, 12(3), 133. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12031133
• [7] Polheber, J. P., & Matchock, R. L. (2014). The presence of a dog attenuates cortisol and heart rate in the Trier Social Stress Test compared to human friends. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 37(5), 860–867. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-013-9546-1
• [8] Kertes, D. A., Liu, J., Hall, N. J., Hadad, N. A., Wynne, C. D. L., & Bhatt, S. S. (2017). Effect of pet dogs on children’s perceived stress and cortisol stress response. Social Development, 26(2), 382–401. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12203
• [9] Norouzi, N., Kim, C., Lee, J., & Bruder, G. (2022). The Advantages of Virtual Dogs Over Virtual People: Using Augmented Reality to Provide Social Support in Stressful Situations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 165, 102838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102838
• [10] Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Gregg, J. (2001). The Networked Minds Measure of Social Presence: Pilot Test of the Factor Structure and Concurrent Validity. In Proceedings of the 4th annual International Workshop on Presence, Philadelphia, 1–9.
• [11] Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., Lushene, R. E., Vagg, P. R., & Jacobs, G. A. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Form Y1–Y2). Consulting Psychologists Press.
• [12] Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
• [13] Reiss, S., Peterson, R. A., Gursky, D. M., & McNally, R. J. (1986). Anxiety sensitivity, anxiety frequency, and the prediction of fearfulness. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 24(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(86)90143-9
• [14] Mori, M., MacDorman, K. F., & Kageki, N. (2012). The Uncanny Valley [From the Field]. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 19(2), 98–100. https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2012.2192811
• [15] Groom, V., Bailenson, J. N., & Nass, C. (2009). The influence of racial embodiment on racial bias in immersive virtual environments. Social Influence, 4(3), 231–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510802643750
• [16] Hong, N. N., & Zinbarg, R. E. (1999, November). Assessing the fear of dogs: The Dog Phobia Questionnaire. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Advancement of Behavior Therapy, Toronto, ON.
• [17] Vorstenbosch, V., Antony, M. M., Koerner, N., & Boivin, M. K. (2012). Assessing dog fear: Evaluating the psychometric properties of the Dog Phobia Questionnaire. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 43(2), 780–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2011.10.006

Contact Persons at the University Würzburg