TY - JOUR
AU - Cherchiglia,, Leticia
AB - Abstract We conducted an exploratory study to introduce, operationalize and test a theoretical conceptualization of interoceptive awareness (IA) in virtual worlds that aligns with neurobiological explanations of interoception. We examined the relationship between IA and the self-location subdimension of spatial presence. Experimental subjects experienced either a 10-min meditation designed to activate IA or a control condition designed to encourage mind wandering. Participants either wore a virtual reality (VR) headset (Samsung Gear VR or HTC Vive) or had their eyes closed. Results suggest that (i) IA was not different between eyes closed or eyes open in VR; (ii) VR display technology did not influence IA; and (iii) higher IA and visual clarity were associated with significantly stronger feelings of spatial presence, whereas display technology had no relationship to spatial presence. Further examination of the role of IA in virtual worlds experiences is warranted. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS This research explores the link between neurobiological processes and the experience of presence. Interoceptive awareness during a VR experience is measured via self-report using an adaptation of the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA) scale. Virtual world experiences can be designed to encourage interoceptive awareness. Interoceptive awareness can contribute to feelings of spatial presence. Visual clarity influenced spatial presence but VR display technology did not. Neither visual clarity nor VR display technology were related to IA. Feelings of motion sickness were negatively correlated with IA. Media effects researchers study presence in the context of virtual experiences, virtual reality and virtual worlds. Most theories of presence in virtual worlds focus on technological factors that help make mediated experiences feel like non-mediated experiences. Presence is the illusion of non-mediation (Lee, 2004; Lombard & Ditton, 1997). A corollary is that most theories of presence assume that limitations to experiencing presence are technological. An implicit assumption is that people are naturally and fully present when not in a virtual experience (Heeter, 2016). In contrast to presence in virtual worlds research, the construct of presence in neuroscience has nothing to do with whether what is being experienced is mediated. We feel present when we focus attention on present moment bodily sensations. We feel present when we are aware of ‘how I feel now’. Afferent nerves throughout the human neurological system receive a continuous stream of sensory information from inside the body (e.g. from viscera, muscles) and from outside (e.g. touch, pain, temperature) (Mahler, 2015). Interoception is the process of attending to, appraising and responding to bodily sensations. Through the process of interoception, we become aware of a body state, such as hunger or pain, or muscle tension or an emotion state, such as anger or excitement (Mahler, 2015). Neuroanatomist Bud Craig (2009, 2014) describes how the human anterior insular cortex can enable feelings of sentience and presence. Humans experience life through the lens of our bodies. Sensory activity is perceived, re-represented and interpreted through almost immediate vascular, metabolic and autonomic responses which themselves are perceived, re-represented, interpreted and integrated into a ‘global emotional moment’ (Craig, 2014). In addition to stimulus-activated feelings such as pain and touch, we feel the moment-to-moment flow of emotions and thoughts as they are expressed through and experienced by the body (Craig, 2014; Heeter, 2016). There is a catch, though. Even though the human system has evolved the capability of experiencing present moment awareness, we only feel present when our attention is focused on the present moment. Interoception is a continuous, largely unconscious process. Interoceptive awareness is when conscious attention focuses on the present moment state of body and emotion—on how we feel now. Despite inhabiting a continuously changing flow of bodily sensations associated with external and internal sensations, emotions and thoughts, most of the time our attention is focused elsewhere. The default mode of the human brain is mind-wandering such as self-criticism, mulling over past events or worrying about the future. We focus our attention on things other than present moment sensations (Killingsworth & Gilbert, 2010; Mitner et al., 2014; Mrazek et al., 2013). Our natural tendency is to not feel present. For parsimony and to avoid conflict with established constructs of presence in virtual worlds, this manuscript will use the term interoceptive awareness (IA) to refer to the process of directing sustained attention toward present moment bodily sensations. During IA, the mind focuses on a mode of perception (being), rather than action (doing) (Farb et al., 2015). IA occurs when attention is directed to the feeling of the present moment, whether the present moment involves a virtual world or not (Heeter, 2016). IA is also a skill. There are large individual differences in people’s ability to perceive and to direct and sustain attention toward present moment bodily sensations (Craig, 2014; Farb et al., 2015). People with good emotional awareness are able to perceive clear bodily signals associated with different emotion and body states; they easily notice when they feel nervous or angry, calm or happy. People with poor IA of their own emotional state have difficulty experiencing empathy for others (Mahler, 2015). Capacity for IA (i.e. ability to engage in IA) and the propensity to focus attention on interoception (i.e. natural tendency for IA) can both improve with mental training such as meditation programs (e.g. Bornemann et al., 2015; Heeter et al., 2017; Mehling et al., 2012). We conducted an experiment to explore possible relationships between IA and presence in virtual worlds. IA occurs in both mediated and non-mediated experiences, but presence, in media research, is only considered in relation to mediated experiences. This study considers, in the context of virtual worlds, what the relationship is between IA (i.e. focusing attention to one’s present moment body and emotion state) and presence (i.e. the illusion of non-mediation). We specifically examined self-location spatial presence (the feeling of ‘being there’, of being located in the virtual world). This initial study used meditation in a VR world to maximize IA. We envision that IA plays a role in all virtual world experiences and discuss future research directions. We addressed the following questions: How might IA during virtual experiences be measured? Can we use meditation to activate IA? Is the experience of IA while meditating in a virtual world weaker than IA while meditating with eyes closed? Does IA contribute to spatial presence? Do virtual worlds display systems or perceived visual clarity impact IA? 1. LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1. Presence and virtual worlds Scholars have explicated several key elements of the multifaceted concept of presence. Heeter (1992) differentiated constructs of presence from a user experience perspective: personal, social and environmental presence. Lombard and Ditton (1997) and Lee (2004) conceptualized presence as the creation of a successful illusion—the individual does not realize they are in a virtual world. The International Society for Presence Research’s (2000) offers a similar definition, ‘[the user] fails to accurately acknowledge the role of technology in an experience’ (p. 1). In general, better technology (e.g. wider field of view, higher resolution, binaural 3D sound) creates a stronger illusion, thus increasing feelings of presence. Riva et al. (2004) proposed an approach to presence grounded in evolutionary biology (Damasio, 1999) that can be applied whether an experience is mediated or unmediated. Riva et al. (2004) describe three evolutionary layers of how the human organism experiences the self in relation to the external world: (i) ‘proto-presence’ is the most primitive layer of presence (simply differentiating self from not-self); (ii) ‘core presence’ differentiates self from the present moment’s external world; and (iii) ‘extended presence’, the most evolved layer, contemplates self in relation to the external world, including imagination and thoughts about the past and future. Proto-presence and core-presence, by definition, always focus on the present moment. Extended presence can involve cognition that is either related or unrelated to the present moment’s significant external world situation. When proto-presence, core-presence and extended presence are all focused on the present moment’s external world, optimal presence is achieved (Riva, 2009; Riva et al., 2004). 1.2. IA Similar to Riva et al.’s (2004) three layers or presence, interoception is a function of the human brain that occurs regardless of whether humans are experiencing a virtual world; however, being aware of interoceptive information about the state of the human system requires directing attention to interoception. The opposite of attention to present moment bodily sensations (IA) is mind-wandering. The natural state of the human brain is to wander—to jump from thought to thought (Buckner, Andrews-Hanna, & Schacter, 2008; Killingsworth & Gilbert, 2010). Mind-wandering is also known as ‘stimulus-independent thought’ (Schooler et al., 2011). In our neutral state of being, our minds are thinking about a wide range of topics that are not related to what is transpiring in the present moment. This is our brain’s default resting state (Killingsworth & Gilbert, 2010). When our actions do not require attention to the present moment, our minds tend to ruminate about the past, worry about the future or imagine events that may never happen. This is mind-wandering. There is an alternative: to pay attention to the interoceptive signals occurring within our bodies in the present moment. Our brain constantly receives neurological signals from our body sensing (i) the external world, (ii) stimuli on the boundaries between external and internal worlds and (iii) information about the state of our various internal systems including physiological reactions to (embodiments of) feelings and thoughts (Craig, 2014). Interoception can be conscious or unconscious. The process of listening to, evaluating and acting upon these bodily signals is called IA (Craig, 2014; Farb et al., 2015). Research by Farb, Segal and Anderson (2012) shows that the anterior insula is involved in both interoception and exteroception (i.e. responsiveness to external stimuli), by linking experiencing the outside world with the internal state of the body and generating emotional experiences or feelings. Interoceptive feelings range from strong emotional feelings (such as fatigue, anger, etc.) to more subtle feelings that can be difficult to pinpoint (such as trustworthiness or a sense of knowing). Even when we do not consciously notice physiological representations of feelings (such as fear or worry or shame), our bodies embody our continuously changing feelings from moment to moment (Heeter, 2016). IA refers to directing attention to present moment bodily sensations and feelings. Curiously, IA is distinct from interoceptive accuracy such as accurate perception of heartbeat. People with higher IA do not necessarily have higher interoceptive accuracy. Meditation training tends to increase IA, but not interoceptive accuracy (Khalsa et al., 2008). IA is associated with subjective well-being. Interoceptive accuracy is not (Ferentzi, Horváth & Köteles, 2019). IA is about where you are placing your attention and noticing how you feel. When an individual dons a VR device and enters a virtual world, their eyes and ears perceive the visual and auditory stimuli generated by the virtual environment. The entire human system (the mind and body) is involved in perceiving, interpreting and reacting to the simulation and perceiving and interpreting their reactions to their reactions. IA occurs when attention focuses on how we feel now (Craig, 2014; Heeter & Allbritton, 2015a, p. 4). IA is not occurring when attention focuses on something other than the present moment experience (such as what else you need to do today, or what happened last night, or strategies about how to win the next game). 1.3. IA, sense of self and virtual worlds Virtual world researchers use the word presence to mean something different than what ‘presence’ connotes in common parlance, in psychology, and in neuroscience. The illusion of non-mediation may be a great achievement for a virtual world, but illusion of non-mediation is not the kind of peak human experience implied by the idea of ‘being fully present’. IA occurs in the anterior insular cortex, the location in the brain that Craig (2014) argues is the place where the sense of self and sense of being alive are generated. ‘The homeostatic agent’ (me) ‘feels its own actions in complete detail and feels the actions of the outside world’ (IA). Interoceptive integration generates the feeling of being alive (Craig 2014, p. 182). The sense of self and sense of being alive occur only when we are experiencing IA. One of the aspects of presence in a virtual world is the feeling of being in that world. Feeling yourself in a virtual world implies feeling yourself. IA and a sense of presence (the illusion of non-mediation) are both continuums ranging from low to high. Imagining the overlap between IA and presence in a virtual world, IA can occur without the illusion of non-meditation, especially when IA sensations are unpleasant such as motion sickness or heavy headsets. Presence can occur without IA if the illusion of non-mediation occurs because the mind is occupied either with a task or the mind is wandering. IA and presence can also co-occur, when the participant is feeling fully present and alive in a world that happens to be virtual. IA and presence are independent constructs. However, optimal experiences may involve both IA and presence being high—see Fig. 1. FIGURE 1 Open in new tabDownload slide Relationship between occurrence of IA and Presence. FIGURE 1 Open in new tabDownload slide Relationship between occurrence of IA and Presence. 1.4. Self-location Spatial presence is an important construct in virtual worlds research (Lombard, Biocca, Freeman, IJsselsteijn, & Schaevitz, 2015). Slater (2009) suggested two separate components of spatial presence: Place Illusion (PI) and Plausibility Illusion (Psi). PI is the sensation of being in a real place. Psi is the credibility of the experience, of whether what happens is consistent with what the user expects would happen (if they were actually in the place). Two consistent pillars of spatial presence are possible actions and self-location (Hartmann et al., 2016; Wirth et al., 2007). Possible actions relate to feelings of interaction between the user and the virtual environment, and self-location refers to feelings of ‘being there’ in the virtual environment. Both pillars contribute to the illusory feeling of being bodily present in the virtual environment (Kilteni, Groten, & Slater, 2012; Lenggenhager, Tadi, Metzinger, & Blanke, 2007; Slater, 2009; Wirth et al., 2007). The feeling of being in a place sounds a lot like interoception and IA. Feelings are the result of IA. Feelings are experienced when we direct attention to present moment bodily sensations to perceive a global body state and emotion state. Thus, IA is the process through which we would experience a strong sense that ‘I am in a (virtual or real) place’. Spatial presence constructs include two dimensions—self-presence and agency. In this exploratory study of IA and presence, the current research focuses only on the self-location dimension of spatial presence. Virtual worlds often allow users to walk or fly or otherwise move in the world. Users may be able to take actions such as collecting objects or shooting at them. Other people may also appear inside the virtual world, whether they are controlled by other users or the computer. Some virtual experiences afford no possible actions other than looking around. There is no way to move around in the virtual world. There is no way to interact with objects in the virtual world. Limiting agency in a virtual experience allows research to focus only on self-presence. The following hypothesis is proposed: H1: During a VR experience with limited agency, individuals who experience higher IA will also experience higher self-location spatial presence. 1.5. VR motion sickness Propensity to experience motion sickness varies; about one third of adults have high susceptibility, although almost everyone will become motion sick under extreme conditions (Genetics Home Reference, 2019). When what you see does not match what you feel (sensory conflict), VR motion sickness can occur (Suarez, 2018); for example, if the motion of the head does not precisely match the motion perceived by the eyes. Conflicting information from peripheral vision (which is constrained by current VR headsets) and central vision also contributes to VR motion sickness. The implications for IA if one is experiencing unpleasant bodily sensations that characterize VR motion sickness (such as nausea, sweating, headache) probably depend on the intensity of the symptoms. Those who are aware of their bodily sensations will be more likely to notice the discomfort than someone whose attention is focused on other things. On the other hand, severe nausea probably interferes with attention. RQ1: What is the relationship between VR motion sickness and IA? 1.6. Immersion Up until this point, we have discussed the role of attention, interoception and self-location in relationship to IA, which brings us to the final facet of the current study: immersion. In virtual worlds, research many factors can impact immersion. Cummings and Bailenson (2016) conducted an extensive meta-analysis of the major aspects, dimensions and constructs that research has shown to impact immersion. To our study, the most relevant dimensions are (i) ‘image quality’ or visual fidelity; (ii) overall high versus low immersion; (iii) update rate, more commonly referred to as refresh rate; and (iv) field of view. Visual fidelity refers to the quality of an image, level of detail and resolution. Overall high versus low immersion is often operationalized by examining the effects of contrasting display systems across different conditions (i.e. comparing a game played using a head tracking VR device to that same game played using a handheld controller and a computer monitor, or comparing two variants of VR displays). Refresh rate is the speed at which hardware can redraw a screen per second; this can impact the smoothness of movement within a virtual environment. Field of view is the total visible area present to the user at any one time in the virtual environment. According to Cummings and Bailenson (2016), refresh rate was the construct with the biggest effect size in promoting spatial presence, followed by overall high versus low immersion, field of view and visual fidelity. The current research compares two consumer VR headsets (HTC Vive and Samsung Gear VR) that have different technical specifications for the constructs mentioned above (for more details, see the Methods section). Based on Cummings and Bailenson’s (2016) meta-analysis, users wearing the HTC Vive may feel more immersed in the virtual world and thus report higher feelings of self-location because the HTC Vive has a faster refresh rate and larger field of view. However, that might not be the case because the Samsung Gear VR provides higher image fidelity per eye. Also, it should be noted that Cummings and Bailenson (2016) mention that a possible limitation of their findings is that results might not carry over to other variations of presence (e.g. self-presence, social presence), or in our case, IA. Technical specifications are one way to characterize VR display systems. The user experience can vary due to vision characteristics that may impact how well adjusted the focus is for that individual user and whether the user experiences motion sickness. Due to the exploratory nature of this study and based on previous literature, the following research question is proposed: RQ2: Do differences in consumer VR headsets (HTC Vive and Samsung Gear VR) impact the experience of (i) IA, (ii) perceived visual clarity and (iii) VR motion sickness in a virtual world? H2: IA, VR display technology, perceived visual clarity and absence of VR motion sickness will contribute to self-location spatial presence in a virtual environment. 1.7. Mindfulness and IA Mindfulness in the west usually refers to a secularized adaptation of the Buddhist concept. In psychological research, mindfulness is described as non-judgmental present moment awareness (Kabat-Zinn, 1994). More specifically, the goal of mindfulness is ‘a kind of non-elaborative, non-judgmental, present-centered awareness in which each thought, feeling, or sensation that crosses the attentional field is acknowledged and accepted as is’ (Bishop et al., 2004, p. 232). IA overlaps with western ideas of mindfulness, but the constructs are not synonymous. Both emphasize present moment awareness of sensations and feelings. IA describes a habit of mind that can be adopted in daily life. Unlike mindfulness, IA does not require being non-judgmental and accepting as is. From an IA perspective, bodily sensations associated with negative or positive judgment are part of the mix of present moment sensations. IA and mindfulness also diverge in subtle ways regarding non-elaboration and thoughts. Practicing mindfulness stipulates a conscious effort not to elaborate on (or catastrophize) thoughts and feelings. IA does not require non-elaboration. However, when thoughts move away from present moment sensations and into self-narrative thought (mind-wandering), IA is no longer happening. 1.8. Meditation and IA Mindfulness and other meditation practices often involve focusing attention on interoception, such as breath and bodily sensations (Farb et al., 2015). Many meditation practices encourage IA during the meditation experience. However, this does not mean that everyone doing a meditation will experience continuous IA throughout the meditation, since humans have different capacities to direct and maintain attention toward interoception and to interpret bodily sensations, as a result of nature and nurture (Craig, 2014). For example, in a brain activation study of experienced and novice meditators doing a 10-min breath meditation, all participants’ attention focused on the breath for a majority of the meditation, while long time meditators shifted between focus on the breath and mind wandering (self-referential processing), they shifted less frequently than novice meditators (Weng et al., 2018). A valid, reliable instrument to measure self-reported IA would be useful for virtual worlds research on presence. Activation of the anterior insular cortex (IA) can be measured using fMRI brain scans (Craig, 2014). Presence survey instruments assess self-reported presence that was experienced while in virtual worlds. IA during a particular experience could be thought of as State IA. The authors are not aware of a survey instrument for assessing IA during a particular experience (State IA). The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA) scale was developed to measure the effectiveness of long-term meditation interventions to increase general propensity to engage in interoception (i.e. attention to present moment bodily sensations during everyday life, including self-awareness and self-regulation (Mehling, 2014; Mehling, 2016; Mehling et al., 2009; Mehling et al., 2012). MAIA does not measure whether someone is currently experiencing IA. Instead, MAIA measures general propensity to engage in IA during daily life. Pre-post studies of the effects of meditation programs show significant increases in MAIA after weeks or months of regular meditation practice (e.g. Bornemann et al., 2015; Heeter et al., 2017; Mehling et al., 2012). 1.9. Meditation and VR Many forms of meditation involve directing attention internally to present-moment bodily sensations, feelings and thoughts. Thus, meditation techniques could theoretically be used in VR as a way to activate AI. Meditation is an emergent genre of VR experiences. For example, VR Today rated Cubicle Ninja’s Guided Mediation VR the best VR meditation app in 2019 (Rasmussen, 2019). Meditation is typically practiced with eyes closed whereas virtual reality is typically experienced with eyes open. Opening the eyes activates the exteroception network (used for processing the external world). Specifically, opening the eyes activates the ocular motor networks used to control the position, gaze, focus and other activities of the eye (Marx et al., 2004). Attention and alertness are activated to support orienting to visual locations. Physiological arousal is activated to prepare the body to react to the outside world. Closing the eyes suppresses the exteroception network and activates the interoceptive neural network including touch, proprioception (vibration and position), pain and temperature (Jao et al., 2013). Closing the eyes also activates olfaction (smell) and gustatory systems (taste), even in the absence of olfactory or gustatory stimuli (Wiesmann et al., 2006). The interoceptive benefits of closing the eyes raise a potential conflict when we want to evoke IA in virtual worlds. Dominance of the interoceptive network is not a requirement for IA; the mind can still be wandering, worrying or daydreaming with eyes closed. However, IA is easier when the eyes are closed because it is easier to pay attention to internal bodily sensations and feelings. Opening the eyes switches the brain from interoception to exteroception, but having eyes closed is not a requirement for IA. The MAIA scales measure integration of IA into daily life, usually with eyes open. Previous literature has not yet explored the connection between VR and IA, leading to the following research question: RQ3: Is IA higher during meditation with eyes closed than during meditation in a virtual world with eyes open? 2. METHODS AND DATA This study used a 2 × 3 experimental design. Participants were assigned to one of two audio-guided experiences: (i) a yoga-based seated meditation designed to activate IA by directing attention to present moment bodily sensations and feelings or (ii) a relaxation experience mostly parallel to the meditation except at the times when the meditation directed attention to IA, where the instructions were to relax and allow the mind to wander. Participants were assigned to listen to the audio-guided experience in one of three display conditions: (i) none, simply listen to the recording with eyes closed or (ii) listen to the recording while wearing a Gear VR headset, immersed in an animated, peaceful Colorado River environment or (iii) same as Condition 2 but wearing a Vive headset experiencing the same Colorado River VR environment. 2.1. Participants Participants were college students from a large Midwest university in the USA; the sample was suitable for this research because of (i) availability, (ii) likely interest in virtual reality and (iii) likely limited experience with meditation. Participants were recruited through an extra credit online system within the college. The study was approved by the Michigan State University Institutional Review Board (project ID 16-898). All participants provided informed consent prior to participation. Participant average age was 19.7 with a range from 18 to 25. By gender, 59.5% were female, 40.5% male. By race/ethnicity, 57.9% were white or Caucasian, 23.1% Asian, 10.7% Black or African American, 0.8% American Indian or Alaskan Native and 0.8% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. Regarding prior experience with meditation, 23.1% had engaged in meditation within the last month, 28.9% sometime this year and 24.8% more than 1 year ago, and 30.6% had never meditated. Regarding prior experience with virtual reality, 23.1% had experienced VR within the last month, 22.3% sometime this year and 5.8% more than 1 year ago, and 48.8% had never experienced VR. Table 1 compares baseline characteristics of the final sample between the IA and control groups. Only one baseline characteristic (prior experience with VR) was significantly different between experimental and control groups based on independent sample t-tests (t (119) = 4.474, P = .015). Participants in the control group were less likely to have experienced VR than those in the IA group. TABLE 1. Basic demographic characteristics of IAa and control groups. Study variable . IA (Meditation) (n = 60) . Control (Relax and Move) (n = 61) . Age band  18–21 85% (n = 51) 90.2% (n = 55)  22–25 15% (n = 9) 9.7% (n = 6) Gender  Female 63.3% (n = 38) 55.7%(n = 34)  Male 36.7% (n = 22) 44.3% (n = 27) Ethnicity  White 55% (n = 33) 60.7% (n = 37)  Asian 21.7% (n = 13) 24.6% (n = 15)  Black or African American 11.7% (n = 7) 9.8% (n = 6)  Hispanic or Latino 1.7% (n = 1) 1.6% (n = 1)  American Indian or Alaskan Native 1.7% (n = 1) 0% (n = 0)  Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 1.7% (n = 1) 0% (n = 0)  Mixed race 6.7% (n = 4) 3.3% (n = 2) Prior meditation experience  This week or this month 13.3% (n = 8) 18.0% (n = 11)  This year 31.7% (n = 19) 26.2% (n = 16)  More than a year ago 26.7% (n = 16) 23% (n = 14)  Never meditated 28.3% (n = 17) 32.8% (n = 20) Prior VRb experience  This week or this month 31.7% (n = 19) 14.8% (n = 9)  This year 23.3% (n = 14) 21.3% (n = 13)  More than a year ago 8.3% (n = 5) 3.3% (n = 2)  Never tried VR 36.7% (n = 22) 60.7% (n = 37) Study variable . IA (Meditation) (n = 60) . Control (Relax and Move) (n = 61) . Age band  18–21 85% (n = 51) 90.2% (n = 55)  22–25 15% (n = 9) 9.7% (n = 6) Gender  Female 63.3% (n = 38) 55.7%(n = 34)  Male 36.7% (n = 22) 44.3% (n = 27) Ethnicity  White 55% (n = 33) 60.7% (n = 37)  Asian 21.7% (n = 13) 24.6% (n = 15)  Black or African American 11.7% (n = 7) 9.8% (n = 6)  Hispanic or Latino 1.7% (n = 1) 1.6% (n = 1)  American Indian or Alaskan Native 1.7% (n = 1) 0% (n = 0)  Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 1.7% (n = 1) 0% (n = 0)  Mixed race 6.7% (n = 4) 3.3% (n = 2) Prior meditation experience  This week or this month 13.3% (n = 8) 18.0% (n = 11)  This year 31.7% (n = 19) 26.2% (n = 16)  More than a year ago 26.7% (n = 16) 23% (n = 14)  Never meditated 28.3% (n = 17) 32.8% (n = 20) Prior VRb experience  This week or this month 31.7% (n = 19) 14.8% (n = 9)  This year 23.3% (n = 14) 21.3% (n = 13)  More than a year ago 8.3% (n = 5) 3.3% (n = 2)  Never tried VR 36.7% (n = 22) 60.7% (n = 37) Open in new tab TABLE 1. Basic demographic characteristics of IAa and control groups. Study variable . IA (Meditation) (n = 60) . Control (Relax and Move) (n = 61) . Age band  18–21 85% (n = 51) 90.2% (n = 55)  22–25 15% (n = 9) 9.7% (n = 6) Gender  Female 63.3% (n = 38) 55.7%(n = 34)  Male 36.7% (n = 22) 44.3% (n = 27) Ethnicity  White 55% (n = 33) 60.7% (n = 37)  Asian 21.7% (n = 13) 24.6% (n = 15)  Black or African American 11.7% (n = 7) 9.8% (n = 6)  Hispanic or Latino 1.7% (n = 1) 1.6% (n = 1)  American Indian or Alaskan Native 1.7% (n = 1) 0% (n = 0)  Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 1.7% (n = 1) 0% (n = 0)  Mixed race 6.7% (n = 4) 3.3% (n = 2) Prior meditation experience  This week or this month 13.3% (n = 8) 18.0% (n = 11)  This year 31.7% (n = 19) 26.2% (n = 16)  More than a year ago 26.7% (n = 16) 23% (n = 14)  Never meditated 28.3% (n = 17) 32.8% (n = 20) Prior VRb experience  This week or this month 31.7% (n = 19) 14.8% (n = 9)  This year 23.3% (n = 14) 21.3% (n = 13)  More than a year ago 8.3% (n = 5) 3.3% (n = 2)  Never tried VR 36.7% (n = 22) 60.7% (n = 37) Study variable . IA (Meditation) (n = 60) . Control (Relax and Move) (n = 61) . Age band  18–21 85% (n = 51) 90.2% (n = 55)  22–25 15% (n = 9) 9.7% (n = 6) Gender  Female 63.3% (n = 38) 55.7%(n = 34)  Male 36.7% (n = 22) 44.3% (n = 27) Ethnicity  White 55% (n = 33) 60.7% (n = 37)  Asian 21.7% (n = 13) 24.6% (n = 15)  Black or African American 11.7% (n = 7) 9.8% (n = 6)  Hispanic or Latino 1.7% (n = 1) 1.6% (n = 1)  American Indian or Alaskan Native 1.7% (n = 1) 0% (n = 0)  Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 1.7% (n = 1) 0% (n = 0)  Mixed race 6.7% (n = 4) 3.3% (n = 2) Prior meditation experience  This week or this month 13.3% (n = 8) 18.0% (n = 11)  This year 31.7% (n = 19) 26.2% (n = 16)  More than a year ago 26.7% (n = 16) 23% (n = 14)  Never meditated 28.3% (n = 17) 32.8% (n = 20) Prior VRb experience  This week or this month 31.7% (n = 19) 14.8% (n = 9)  This year 23.3% (n = 14) 21.3% (n = 13)  More than a year ago 8.3% (n = 5) 3.3% (n = 2)  Never tried VR 36.7% (n = 22) 60.7% (n = 37) Open in new tab 2.2. Experimental conditions One hundred twenty participants were randomly assigned to one of six conditions, balancing to ensure an equal number of participants in each condition—see Table 2. There were three immersion conditions: eyes closed, VR using Gear VR and VR using HTC Vive. There were two IA conditions: one designed to activate IA through the Stability Meditation and one designed not to cue IA through the Relax and Move experience. TABLE 2. Study groups and conditions. VRaImmersion . . IAbMeditation . Control . n . Eyes closed 21 20 41 VR Gear VR 21 20 41 HTC Vive 18 21 39 n 60 61 121 VRaImmersion . . IAbMeditation . Control . n . Eyes closed 21 20 41 VR Gear VR 21 20 41 HTC Vive 18 21 39 n 60 61 121 Open in new tab TABLE 2. Study groups and conditions. VRaImmersion . . IAbMeditation . Control . n . Eyes closed 21 20 41 VR Gear VR 21 20 41 HTC Vive 18 21 39 n 60 61 121 VRaImmersion . . IAbMeditation . Control . n . Eyes closed 21 20 41 VR Gear VR 21 20 41 HTC Vive 18 21 39 n 60 61 121 Open in new tab 2.3. Types of VR headsets In this study, two types of VR headsets were used: the Samsung Gear VR, which is powered by a smartphone, and the HTC Vive headset, which is connected to a high-end gaming computer. Technically, the Samsung Gear VR provides a higher resolution per eye than the HTC Vive. However, the Gear VR has a lower refresh rate and narrower field of view than HTC Vive—see Table 3. TABLE 3. VRa headset characteristics. Characteristic . Gear VR . HTC Vive . Resolution (pixels) per eye 1280 × 1440 1080 × 1200 Refresh rate 60 Hz 90 Hz Field of view 96° 110° Characteristic . Gear VR . HTC Vive . Resolution (pixels) per eye 1280 × 1440 1080 × 1200 Refresh rate 60 Hz 90 Hz Field of view 96° 110° Open in new tab TABLE 3. VRa headset characteristics. Characteristic . Gear VR . HTC Vive . Resolution (pixels) per eye 1280 × 1440 1080 × 1200 Refresh rate 60 Hz 90 Hz Field of view 96° 110° Characteristic . Gear VR . HTC Vive . Resolution (pixels) per eye 1280 × 1440 1080 × 1200 Refresh rate 60 Hz 90 Hz Field of view 96° 110° Open in new tab 2.4. Virtual world Cubicle Ninjas Guided Meditation VR product for Gear VR, Vive and Oculus Rift emphasizes being, not doing, in a virtual environment (Cubicle Ninjas, 2015). We worked with Cubicle Ninjas to add our own meditations to some of their worlds. Collaborating in this way leverages their VR world designs while giving us the opportunity to design the meditation experiences. The Colorado River virtual nature environment software for VR used in the VR conditions was designed and developed by Cubicle Ninjas (2016) as part of their award winning Guided Meditation VR app. Specifically, the Colorado River environment was selected from the suite of 10 Cubicle Ninjas nature environments to accompany the meditation (described in the next section) because the prominent grassy river bank, large rock formations and distant mountains complimented the stability focus of the meditation. Some of the other possible nature scenes were rejected because there was too much motion (waterfall, ocean), too dry (desert), too cold (snowy forest), not grounded (outer space, looking down on canyons) or introduced other feelings (cave, fall leaves, Japanese garden). The Colorado River scene provides a 360° environment with computer graphics, animation (the river flowing, grass and flowers blowing in the wind, butterflies), and nature sounds. See Fig. 2. FIGURE 2 Open in new tabDownload slide Screenshot of virtual environment. FIGURE 2 Open in new tabDownload slide Screenshot of virtual environment. 2.5. Stimuli For our study we developed a 10-min meditation experience designed to activate IA and a parallel 10-min experience designed to encourage mind wandering (control group). The meditation was designed and recorded by the lead author for use in this study. The meditation is grounded in the tradition of Viniyoga and yoga therapy (Chandrasekaran, 2012; Desikachar, Bragdon, & Bossart, 2005; Mohan & Mohan, 2004). The meditation is very similar to the 10-min eyes closed meditations the first author designed and used in 6-week program for hospice clinicians. The program was found to significantly increase IA (Heeter et al., 2017). For the experiment, we needed a meditation object that would not contradict the VR environment. In other words, the object could not involve mentally visualizing something tangible like the morning sun, since a morning sun was not present in the virtual environment. The meditation also could not involve focusing attention on objects visible in the virtual environment (such as the rock formation) because it needed to work equally well with eyes closed. Stability was chosen as the meditation object because stability is a feeling, rather than something visible and because feeling physically stable directly involves IA. The object of the meditation was the feeling of stability. The tools of yoga (including breath, movement, attention and meditation) were sequenced in a progression of eight steps, designed to be done seated in a chair. Table 4 summarizes the steps in the Stability Meditation. The complete scripts and the audio recordings are available online (Heeter, 2018). Throughout the meditation, the participant is guided to direct attention to interoception. The first and last steps start with noticing how the body and breath feel, and then to moving the body slightly to find the point where the participant feels most stable. Steps 2, 3, 5 and 7 involve synchronizing gentle arm movements with inhale and exhale. Participants try to match the length of the movement with the length of the breath, which requires keeping attention focused on both body and breath. In Steps 4 and 6, the participant is guided to call to mind what it feels like to feel stable, and then to feel stability with each inhale and exhale. A short pause after inhale and exhale in Step 6 calls for added concentration and can reinforce the feeling of stability that has developed throughout the practice. TABLE 4. Summary of the stability meditation progression. Steps . Description . Step 1 Check in, transition into the experience, feel stability. Steps 2 & 3 Gentle arm movements, synchronizing inhale and exhale with the movements. Step 4 Call to mind what it feels like when you feel stable. Inhale. Exhale, feel stability. Step 5 Gentle arm movements, synchronizing inhale and exhale with the movements. Step 6 Connect with what it feels like to feel stable. Pausing for a moment or two at the end of each inhale and exhale. Connecting with how you feel when you feel stable. Step 7 Gentle arm movement, pausing for a moment or two at the end of each inhale and exhale. Step 8 Check in. Feel stability. Transition out of experience. Steps . Description . Step 1 Check in, transition into the experience, feel stability. Steps 2 & 3 Gentle arm movements, synchronizing inhale and exhale with the movements. Step 4 Call to mind what it feels like when you feel stable. Inhale. Exhale, feel stability. Step 5 Gentle arm movements, synchronizing inhale and exhale with the movements. Step 6 Connect with what it feels like to feel stable. Pausing for a moment or two at the end of each inhale and exhale. Connecting with how you feel when you feel stable. Step 7 Gentle arm movement, pausing for a moment or two at the end of each inhale and exhale. Step 8 Check in. Feel stability. Transition out of experience. Open in new tab TABLE 4. Summary of the stability meditation progression. Steps . Description . Step 1 Check in, transition into the experience, feel stability. Steps 2 & 3 Gentle arm movements, synchronizing inhale and exhale with the movements. Step 4 Call to mind what it feels like when you feel stable. Inhale. Exhale, feel stability. Step 5 Gentle arm movements, synchronizing inhale and exhale with the movements. Step 6 Connect with what it feels like to feel stable. Pausing for a moment or two at the end of each inhale and exhale. Connecting with how you feel when you feel stable. Step 7 Gentle arm movement, pausing for a moment or two at the end of each inhale and exhale. Step 8 Check in. Feel stability. Transition out of experience. Steps . Description . Step 1 Check in, transition into the experience, feel stability. Steps 2 & 3 Gentle arm movements, synchronizing inhale and exhale with the movements. Step 4 Call to mind what it feels like when you feel stable. Inhale. Exhale, feel stability. Step 5 Gentle arm movements, synchronizing inhale and exhale with the movements. Step 6 Connect with what it feels like to feel stable. Pausing for a moment or two at the end of each inhale and exhale. Connecting with how you feel when you feel stable. Step 7 Gentle arm movement, pausing for a moment or two at the end of each inhale and exhale. Step 8 Check in. Feel stability. Transition out of experience. Open in new tab Table 5 shows the script for Step 1 to exemplify how the meditation encourages interoception. Even though participants in the VR conditions wore a VR headset displaying a virtual world, we started Step 1 of the meditation by having them close their eyes. Closing the eyes activates the interoceptive network. Participants were instructed to have their feet flat on the floor, to bring their attention to their body and to notice the feeling of the ground beneath their feet. These and other particular focuses of attention were chosen to encourage IA, including attention to the feeling of stability. TABLE 5. Comparing the first step of the IA1 and control conditions. IA condition (Stability Meditation) . Control condition (Relax and Move) . To begin, sit comfortably. Please close your eyes if it is comfortable for you to do so. Have your feet flat on the floor. Bring your attention to your body. Notice the feeling of the ground beneath your feet. Notice the feeling of the chair you are sitting on. Shift your weight slightly from right to left. Continue to shift gently back and forth like this, stopping when you find the center point where you feel stable. Notice what it feels like when you feel stable. Now lean a little bit forward. Then lean slightly back. Find the center point where you feel stable. Again, notice what it feels like when you feel stable. Now bring your attention to your breathing. Notice the quality of your breathing as you breathe in And as you breathe out. Bring your attention to your thinking. Notice the level of activity of your thinking. Slowly bring your attention back. In the VRbconditions only: Gently, open your eyes. Notice what the world around you feels like. Let your thoughts go wherever they go. Just relax and enjoy this time. You’ll lean and stretch a few times to help you relax. First, you’ll lean to the left a little bit and stretch. Then, lean to the right a little bit and stretch. Lean to the left and stretch. Lean to the right and stretch. Now lean a little bit forward and stretch. Then lean a little bit back and stretch. Lean forward and stretch. Lean back and stretch. Do this one more time. Then go back to relaxing. IA condition (Stability Meditation) . Control condition (Relax and Move) . To begin, sit comfortably. Please close your eyes if it is comfortable for you to do so. Have your feet flat on the floor. Bring your attention to your body. Notice the feeling of the ground beneath your feet. Notice the feeling of the chair you are sitting on. Shift your weight slightly from right to left. Continue to shift gently back and forth like this, stopping when you find the center point where you feel stable. Notice what it feels like when you feel stable. Now lean a little bit forward. Then lean slightly back. Find the center point where you feel stable. Again, notice what it feels like when you feel stable. Now bring your attention to your breathing. Notice the quality of your breathing as you breathe in And as you breathe out. Bring your attention to your thinking. Notice the level of activity of your thinking. Slowly bring your attention back. In the VRbconditions only: Gently, open your eyes. Notice what the world around you feels like. Let your thoughts go wherever they go. Just relax and enjoy this time. You’ll lean and stretch a few times to help you relax. First, you’ll lean to the left a little bit and stretch. Then, lean to the right a little bit and stretch. Lean to the left and stretch. Lean to the right and stretch. Now lean a little bit forward and stretch. Then lean a little bit back and stretch. Lean forward and stretch. Lean back and stretch. Do this one more time. Then go back to relaxing. Open in new tab TABLE 5. Comparing the first step of the IA1 and control conditions. IA condition (Stability Meditation) . Control condition (Relax and Move) . To begin, sit comfortably. Please close your eyes if it is comfortable for you to do so. Have your feet flat on the floor. Bring your attention to your body. Notice the feeling of the ground beneath your feet. Notice the feeling of the chair you are sitting on. Shift your weight slightly from right to left. Continue to shift gently back and forth like this, stopping when you find the center point where you feel stable. Notice what it feels like when you feel stable. Now lean a little bit forward. Then lean slightly back. Find the center point where you feel stable. Again, notice what it feels like when you feel stable. Now bring your attention to your breathing. Notice the quality of your breathing as you breathe in And as you breathe out. Bring your attention to your thinking. Notice the level of activity of your thinking. Slowly bring your attention back. In the VRbconditions only: Gently, open your eyes. Notice what the world around you feels like. Let your thoughts go wherever they go. Just relax and enjoy this time. You’ll lean and stretch a few times to help you relax. First, you’ll lean to the left a little bit and stretch. Then, lean to the right a little bit and stretch. Lean to the left and stretch. Lean to the right and stretch. Now lean a little bit forward and stretch. Then lean a little bit back and stretch. Lean forward and stretch. Lean back and stretch. Do this one more time. Then go back to relaxing. IA condition (Stability Meditation) . Control condition (Relax and Move) . To begin, sit comfortably. Please close your eyes if it is comfortable for you to do so. Have your feet flat on the floor. Bring your attention to your body. Notice the feeling of the ground beneath your feet. Notice the feeling of the chair you are sitting on. Shift your weight slightly from right to left. Continue to shift gently back and forth like this, stopping when you find the center point where you feel stable. Notice what it feels like when you feel stable. Now lean a little bit forward. Then lean slightly back. Find the center point where you feel stable. Again, notice what it feels like when you feel stable. Now bring your attention to your breathing. Notice the quality of your breathing as you breathe in And as you breathe out. Bring your attention to your thinking. Notice the level of activity of your thinking. Slowly bring your attention back. In the VRbconditions only: Gently, open your eyes. Notice what the world around you feels like. Let your thoughts go wherever they go. Just relax and enjoy this time. You’ll lean and stretch a few times to help you relax. First, you’ll lean to the left a little bit and stretch. Then, lean to the right a little bit and stretch. Lean to the left and stretch. Lean to the right and stretch. Now lean a little bit forward and stretch. Then lean a little bit back and stretch. Lean forward and stretch. Lean back and stretch. Do this one more time. Then go back to relaxing. Open in new tab The participant was guided to lean slightly left, then slightly right, moving back and forth to find the point where they feel most stable. The participant repeated the process moving slightly forward and slightly back. Doing this focused attention on bodily sensations and helped connect to stability. At the end of Step 1, participants in the VR conditions were guided to open their eyes and notice what the (virtual) world around them feels like. We also created a 10-min control condition (called Relax and Move) in which interoception is not cued. IA is expected to be higher in the meditation condition than in the control condition. Relax and Move included the same movement cues occurring at the exact same time in the audio. However, any instructions to pay attention to interoception were omitted. Instead of being directed to notice how they feel, participants were encouraged to relax and let their mind go wherever it wants to go. Rather than synchronizing breath and movement, they did the same movements with no breath coordination. Rather than call to mind what it feels like to feel stable, they relax and daydream. Table 5 lines up the script for step 1 of Relax and Move alongside Step 1 for the meditation. Blank lines in the control script indicate silence where in the meditation script the guide is still speaking. Audio guiding the meditation was mixed with the live VR soundtrack and delivered using over-the-ear padded headphones. Other than two added sentences at the end of Step 1 instructing VR participants to open their eyes and ‘notice what the world around you feels like’, the audio for VR and eyes closed meditation conditions was identical. 2.6. Procedure Participants were randomly assigned to one out of six conditions (eyes closed audio only, Samsung Gear VR, HTC Vive) × (stability meditation, relax and move experience) prior to coming into the lab, for a between-subjects design experiment. Upon arrival, participants were given an IRB-approved consent form to sign and it was made clear that participation could be stopped at any time for any reason without consequence. Participants then completed a pre-survey using a desktop computer. Next, the researcher explained the process of the meditation and, if in the VR conditions, the researcher provided additional details about how VR works. The researcher assured them that no aspect of the study (voice or video) would be recorded and that the participant would have total privacy during the experience as the researcher would wait outside the room. As soon as the participant was equipped with the VR headset and/or headphones and seated in a chair located in the middle of the room, the researcher started the 10-min audio and left the room. Once the guided experience was over, the researcher returned and participants completed a final survey. 2.7. Measures To measure the self-location dimension of spatial presence, the four-item self-location dimension of the Spatial Presence Experience Scale (Hartmann et al., 2016) was used (α = .91), which includes questions such as ‘I felt like I was actually there in the environment of the presentation.’ Responses were given using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (‘I do not agree at all’) to 5 (‘I fully agree’). While there are myriad scales for measuring presence in virtual worlds, there are no scales for measuring IA in virtual worlds. As a first step for looking at IA while in virtual world, we modified the MAIA with permission from the creators of the scale, adding a specific time period (‘during the experience’) to the questions. Similar to the language in survey instruments that measure presence after a virtual world experience, instead of asking about IA in general, the adapted instrument asks specifically about IA during an experience someone has just completed. We adapted the MAIA questionnaire to measure self-reported IA during the meditation on the post-survey. The MAIA measures propensity for eight dimensions of IA: (i) Noticing, (ii) Not-Distracting, (iii) Not-Worrying, (iv) Attention Regulation, (v) Emotional Awareness, (vi) Self-Regulation, (vii) Body Listening and (viii) Trusting (median reliability across all scales α = .85). The MAIA consists of 32 items with questions such as ‘When I am tense I notice where the tension is located in my body’ and ‘I can refocus my attention from thinking to sensing my body.’ To measure IA during the meditation experience, MAIA questions were modified so responses reflected participants’ experience during the meditation: the question set began with the qualifier ‘during the stability meditation experience …’ (or ‘during the Relax and Move experience’), and questions were slightly altered to refer to the recent past, as opposed to generally—for example, ‘I noticed where the tension was located in my body’ replaced ‘I notice where tension is located in my body’. Like the original MAIA questions, our adapted IA questions used a six-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (Never) to 5 (Always). Not all of the 32 items made sense to ask in relation to a short meditation/VR experience. Our original plan was to omit the two MAIA subscales related to non-elaboration and non-judgment, because they measure aspects of mindfulness, not IA. To avoid bias and to inform future research, we decided to use factor analysis to examine the structure of the data. All 32 state IA questions were subjected to factor analysis with principal component analysis and quartimax rotation with Kaiser normalization to identify a subset of questions that might be summed to represent state. In running the factor analysis, we excluded study participants in eyes-closed conditions, since a primary goal of the research was to explore the idea of measuring IA in virtual worlds. Seventeen of the 32 items loaded .7 or higher onto a single factor (Table 6) that accounted for 42.8% of the variance. Four other factors had two items loading .7 or higher, and no other factor accounted for more than 7% of the variance. The 17 items from the main factor were summed and averaged, then used as a measure of state IA (α = .96). TABLE 6. Factor analysis for IAa. Items . Main factor loading . Communality . Q26—When I got caught up in thoughts, I calmed my mind by focusing on my body/breath. 0.88 0.78 Q25—I used my breath to reduce tension. 0.87 0.79 Q15—I could refocus my attention from thinking to sensing my body. 0.84 0.76 Q18—I noticed how my body changed during the activity. 0.84 0.73 Q14—I returned awareness to my body when I got distracted. 0.81 0.74 Q28—I took time to explore how my body felt. 0.81 0.75 Q17—I was able to consciously focus on my body as a whole. 0.80 0.72 Q24—When I brought awareness to my body I felt a sense of calm. 0.78 0.75 Q23—If I felt overwhelmed, I could find a calm place inside. 0.77 0.73 Q22—I noticed how my body changed when I felt positive emotions. 0.77 0.76 Q27—I listened for information from my body about my emotional state. 0.75 0.71 Q20—I noticed that my body felt different after the activity. 0.73 0.67 Q13—I paid attention to my posture. 0.73 0.61 Q12—I maintained awareness of my inner bodily sensations. 0.73 0.76 Q16—I could maintain awareness of my whole body even when a part of me was in pain. 0.72 0.69 Q4—I noticed changes in my breathing, such as whether it slowed down or sped up. 0.71 0.64 Q21—I noticed that my breathing became free and easy. 0.71 0.71 Items . Main factor loading . Communality . Q26—When I got caught up in thoughts, I calmed my mind by focusing on my body/breath. 0.88 0.78 Q25—I used my breath to reduce tension. 0.87 0.79 Q15—I could refocus my attention from thinking to sensing my body. 0.84 0.76 Q18—I noticed how my body changed during the activity. 0.84 0.73 Q14—I returned awareness to my body when I got distracted. 0.81 0.74 Q28—I took time to explore how my body felt. 0.81 0.75 Q17—I was able to consciously focus on my body as a whole. 0.80 0.72 Q24—When I brought awareness to my body I felt a sense of calm. 0.78 0.75 Q23—If I felt overwhelmed, I could find a calm place inside. 0.77 0.73 Q22—I noticed how my body changed when I felt positive emotions. 0.77 0.76 Q27—I listened for information from my body about my emotional state. 0.75 0.71 Q20—I noticed that my body felt different after the activity. 0.73 0.67 Q13—I paid attention to my posture. 0.73 0.61 Q12—I maintained awareness of my inner bodily sensations. 0.73 0.76 Q16—I could maintain awareness of my whole body even when a part of me was in pain. 0.72 0.69 Q4—I noticed changes in my breathing, such as whether it slowed down or sped up. 0.71 0.64 Q21—I noticed that my breathing became free and easy. 0.71 0.71 Factor loadings < .7 are suppressed. Open in new tab TABLE 6. Factor analysis for IAa. Items . Main factor loading . Communality . Q26—When I got caught up in thoughts, I calmed my mind by focusing on my body/breath. 0.88 0.78 Q25—I used my breath to reduce tension. 0.87 0.79 Q15—I could refocus my attention from thinking to sensing my body. 0.84 0.76 Q18—I noticed how my body changed during the activity. 0.84 0.73 Q14—I returned awareness to my body when I got distracted. 0.81 0.74 Q28—I took time to explore how my body felt. 0.81 0.75 Q17—I was able to consciously focus on my body as a whole. 0.80 0.72 Q24—When I brought awareness to my body I felt a sense of calm. 0.78 0.75 Q23—If I felt overwhelmed, I could find a calm place inside. 0.77 0.73 Q22—I noticed how my body changed when I felt positive emotions. 0.77 0.76 Q27—I listened for information from my body about my emotional state. 0.75 0.71 Q20—I noticed that my body felt different after the activity. 0.73 0.67 Q13—I paid attention to my posture. 0.73 0.61 Q12—I maintained awareness of my inner bodily sensations. 0.73 0.76 Q16—I could maintain awareness of my whole body even when a part of me was in pain. 0.72 0.69 Q4—I noticed changes in my breathing, such as whether it slowed down or sped up. 0.71 0.64 Q21—I noticed that my breathing became free and easy. 0.71 0.71 Items . Main factor loading . Communality . Q26—When I got caught up in thoughts, I calmed my mind by focusing on my body/breath. 0.88 0.78 Q25—I used my breath to reduce tension. 0.87 0.79 Q15—I could refocus my attention from thinking to sensing my body. 0.84 0.76 Q18—I noticed how my body changed during the activity. 0.84 0.73 Q14—I returned awareness to my body when I got distracted. 0.81 0.74 Q28—I took time to explore how my body felt. 0.81 0.75 Q17—I was able to consciously focus on my body as a whole. 0.80 0.72 Q24—When I brought awareness to my body I felt a sense of calm. 0.78 0.75 Q23—If I felt overwhelmed, I could find a calm place inside. 0.77 0.73 Q22—I noticed how my body changed when I felt positive emotions. 0.77 0.76 Q27—I listened for information from my body about my emotional state. 0.75 0.71 Q20—I noticed that my body felt different after the activity. 0.73 0.67 Q13—I paid attention to my posture. 0.73 0.61 Q12—I maintained awareness of my inner bodily sensations. 0.73 0.76 Q16—I could maintain awareness of my whole body even when a part of me was in pain. 0.72 0.69 Q4—I noticed changes in my breathing, such as whether it slowed down or sped up. 0.71 0.64 Q21—I noticed that my breathing became free and easy. 0.71 0.71 Factor loadings < .7 are suppressed. Open in new tab To convey readers with a concrete understanding of what the main IA factor is measuring, Table 7 shows means and standard deviation for all 32 IA items among the 80 participants in the VR conditions. ‘R’ after a question number indicates that the question is reversed when calculating the subscale. Items in the table are ordered from highest to lowest mean. Those 17 items that comprised the IA scale are noted with an asterisk. The corresponding MAIA subscale for each item is shown in Column 2. Item subscales with a grey background did not load on the main factor. This information is redundant with the asterisks, but helps draw attention to the subscale, whereas the asterisks draw attention to the individual item. TABLE 7. Individual IAa item details Descriptive statistics (n = 80) . Subscale . Mean . Std. deviation . Q31—I felt my body was a safe place. Trusting 4.14 1.003 Q32—I trusted my body sensations. Trusting 4.14 0.978 Q30—I was at home in my body. Trusting 3.95 1.09 *Q21—I noticed that my breathing became free and easy. Emotional awareness 3.94 1.151 *Q20—I noticed that my body felt different after the activity. Emotional awareness 3.9 1.063 *Q22—I noticed how my body changed when I felt positive emotions. Emotional awareness 3.89 1.006 *Q18—I noticed how my body changed during the activity. Emotional awareness 3.83 1.003 *Q25—I used my breath to reduce tension. Self-regulation 3.81 1.068 Q3—I noticed where in my body I was comfortable. Noticing 3.8 0.986 *Q4—I noticed changes in my breathing, such as whether it slowed down or sped up. Noticing 3.79 1.064 *Q17—I was able to consciously focus on my body as a whole. Attention regulation 3.78 0.993 *Q24—When I brought awareness to my body I felt a sense of calm. Self-regulation 3.76 1.034 *Q15—I could refocus my attention from thinking to sensing my body. Attention regulation 3.74 1.088 *Q26—When I got caught up in thoughts, I calmed my mind by focusing on my body/b... Self-regulation 3.73 1.1n69 *Q13—I paid attention to my posture. Attention regulation 3.71 1.234 *Q23—If I felt overwhelmed, I could find a calm place inside. Self-regulation 3.7 1.13 *Q28—I took time to explore how my body felt. Body listening 3.7 1.184 *Q16—I could maintain awareness of my whole body even when a part of me was in pain. Attention regulation 3.66 1.055 Q2—I noticed when I was uncomfortable in my body. Noticing 3.64 1.105 Q1—I noticed where the tension was located in my body. Noticing 3.6 1.063 Q12—I maintained awareness of my inner bodily sensations. Attention regulation 3.6 1.051 Q29—I listened to my body inform me about what to do. Body listening 3.6 1.143 *Q14—I returned awareness to my body when I got distracted. Attention regulation 3.56 1.146 *Q27—I listened for information from my body about my emotional state. Body listening 3.53 1.18 Q11—I paid attention to my breath without being distracted by things happening around me. Attention regulation 3.45 1.2 *Q19—I could feel in my body whether something was wrong. Emotional awareness 3.43 1.188 Q6R—I distracted myself from sensations of discomfort. Not distracting 3.09 1.093 Q7R—When I felt pain or discomfort, I tried to power through it. Not distracting 3.08 1.24 Q5R—I ignored physical tension or discomfort. Not distracting 3.01 1.073 Q10—I noticed an unpleasant body sensation without worrying about it. Not worrying 2.99 1.196 Q8R—When I felt physical pain, I became upset. Not worrying 2.25 1.175 Q9R—I started to worry that something was wrong if I felt any discomfort. Not worrying 2.11 1.114 Descriptive statistics (n = 80) . Subscale . Mean . Std. deviation . Q31—I felt my body was a safe place. Trusting 4.14 1.003 Q32—I trusted my body sensations. Trusting 4.14 0.978 Q30—I was at home in my body. Trusting 3.95 1.09 *Q21—I noticed that my breathing became free and easy. Emotional awareness 3.94 1.151 *Q20—I noticed that my body felt different after the activity. Emotional awareness 3.9 1.063 *Q22—I noticed how my body changed when I felt positive emotions. Emotional awareness 3.89 1.006 *Q18—I noticed how my body changed during the activity. Emotional awareness 3.83 1.003 *Q25—I used my breath to reduce tension. Self-regulation 3.81 1.068 Q3—I noticed where in my body I was comfortable. Noticing 3.8 0.986 *Q4—I noticed changes in my breathing, such as whether it slowed down or sped up. Noticing 3.79 1.064 *Q17—I was able to consciously focus on my body as a whole. Attention regulation 3.78 0.993 *Q24—When I brought awareness to my body I felt a sense of calm. Self-regulation 3.76 1.034 *Q15—I could refocus my attention from thinking to sensing my body. Attention regulation 3.74 1.088 *Q26—When I got caught up in thoughts, I calmed my mind by focusing on my body/b... Self-regulation 3.73 1.1n69 *Q13—I paid attention to my posture. Attention regulation 3.71 1.234 *Q23—If I felt overwhelmed, I could find a calm place inside. Self-regulation 3.7 1.13 *Q28—I took time to explore how my body felt. Body listening 3.7 1.184 *Q16—I could maintain awareness of my whole body even when a part of me was in pain. Attention regulation 3.66 1.055 Q2—I noticed when I was uncomfortable in my body. Noticing 3.64 1.105 Q1—I noticed where the tension was located in my body. Noticing 3.6 1.063 Q12—I maintained awareness of my inner bodily sensations. Attention regulation 3.6 1.051 Q29—I listened to my body inform me about what to do. Body listening 3.6 1.143 *Q14—I returned awareness to my body when I got distracted. Attention regulation 3.56 1.146 *Q27—I listened for information from my body about my emotional state. Body listening 3.53 1.18 Q11—I paid attention to my breath without being distracted by things happening around me. Attention regulation 3.45 1.2 *Q19—I could feel in my body whether something was wrong. Emotional awareness 3.43 1.188 Q6R—I distracted myself from sensations of discomfort. Not distracting 3.09 1.093 Q7R—When I felt pain or discomfort, I tried to power through it. Not distracting 3.08 1.24 Q5R—I ignored physical tension or discomfort. Not distracting 3.01 1.073 Q10—I noticed an unpleasant body sensation without worrying about it. Not worrying 2.99 1.196 Q8R—When I felt physical pain, I became upset. Not worrying 2.25 1.175 Q9R—I started to worry that something was wrong if I felt any discomfort. Not worrying 2.11 1.114 Open in new tab TABLE 7. Individual IAa item details Descriptive statistics (n = 80) . Subscale . Mean . Std. deviation . Q31—I felt my body was a safe place. Trusting 4.14 1.003 Q32—I trusted my body sensations. Trusting 4.14 0.978 Q30—I was at home in my body. Trusting 3.95 1.09 *Q21—I noticed that my breathing became free and easy. Emotional awareness 3.94 1.151 *Q20—I noticed that my body felt different after the activity. Emotional awareness 3.9 1.063 *Q22—I noticed how my body changed when I felt positive emotions. Emotional awareness 3.89 1.006 *Q18—I noticed how my body changed during the activity. Emotional awareness 3.83 1.003 *Q25—I used my breath to reduce tension. Self-regulation 3.81 1.068 Q3—I noticed where in my body I was comfortable. Noticing 3.8 0.986 *Q4—I noticed changes in my breathing, such as whether it slowed down or sped up. Noticing 3.79 1.064 *Q17—I was able to consciously focus on my body as a whole. Attention regulation 3.78 0.993 *Q24—When I brought awareness to my body I felt a sense of calm. Self-regulation 3.76 1.034 *Q15—I could refocus my attention from thinking to sensing my body. Attention regulation 3.74 1.088 *Q26—When I got caught up in thoughts, I calmed my mind by focusing on my body/b... Self-regulation 3.73 1.1n69 *Q13—I paid attention to my posture. Attention regulation 3.71 1.234 *Q23—If I felt overwhelmed, I could find a calm place inside. Self-regulation 3.7 1.13 *Q28—I took time to explore how my body felt. Body listening 3.7 1.184 *Q16—I could maintain awareness of my whole body even when a part of me was in pain. Attention regulation 3.66 1.055 Q2—I noticed when I was uncomfortable in my body. Noticing 3.64 1.105 Q1—I noticed where the tension was located in my body. Noticing 3.6 1.063 Q12—I maintained awareness of my inner bodily sensations. Attention regulation 3.6 1.051 Q29—I listened to my body inform me about what to do. Body listening 3.6 1.143 *Q14—I returned awareness to my body when I got distracted. Attention regulation 3.56 1.146 *Q27—I listened for information from my body about my emotional state. Body listening 3.53 1.18 Q11—I paid attention to my breath without being distracted by things happening around me. Attention regulation 3.45 1.2 *Q19—I could feel in my body whether something was wrong. Emotional awareness 3.43 1.188 Q6R—I distracted myself from sensations of discomfort. Not distracting 3.09 1.093 Q7R—When I felt pain or discomfort, I tried to power through it. Not distracting 3.08 1.24 Q5R—I ignored physical tension or discomfort. Not distracting 3.01 1.073 Q10—I noticed an unpleasant body sensation without worrying about it. Not worrying 2.99 1.196 Q8R—When I felt physical pain, I became upset. Not worrying 2.25 1.175 Q9R—I started to worry that something was wrong if I felt any discomfort. Not worrying 2.11 1.114 Descriptive statistics (n = 80) . Subscale . Mean . Std. deviation . Q31—I felt my body was a safe place. Trusting 4.14 1.003 Q32—I trusted my body sensations. Trusting 4.14 0.978 Q30—I was at home in my body. Trusting 3.95 1.09 *Q21—I noticed that my breathing became free and easy. Emotional awareness 3.94 1.151 *Q20—I noticed that my body felt different after the activity. Emotional awareness 3.9 1.063 *Q22—I noticed how my body changed when I felt positive emotions. Emotional awareness 3.89 1.006 *Q18—I noticed how my body changed during the activity. Emotional awareness 3.83 1.003 *Q25—I used my breath to reduce tension. Self-regulation 3.81 1.068 Q3—I noticed where in my body I was comfortable. Noticing 3.8 0.986 *Q4—I noticed changes in my breathing, such as whether it slowed down or sped up. Noticing 3.79 1.064 *Q17—I was able to consciously focus on my body as a whole. Attention regulation 3.78 0.993 *Q24—When I brought awareness to my body I felt a sense of calm. Self-regulation 3.76 1.034 *Q15—I could refocus my attention from thinking to sensing my body. Attention regulation 3.74 1.088 *Q26—When I got caught up in thoughts, I calmed my mind by focusing on my body/b... Self-regulation 3.73 1.1n69 *Q13—I paid attention to my posture. Attention regulation 3.71 1.234 *Q23—If I felt overwhelmed, I could find a calm place inside. Self-regulation 3.7 1.13 *Q28—I took time to explore how my body felt. Body listening 3.7 1.184 *Q16—I could maintain awareness of my whole body even when a part of me was in pain. Attention regulation 3.66 1.055 Q2—I noticed when I was uncomfortable in my body. Noticing 3.64 1.105 Q1—I noticed where the tension was located in my body. Noticing 3.6 1.063 Q12—I maintained awareness of my inner bodily sensations. Attention regulation 3.6 1.051 Q29—I listened to my body inform me about what to do. Body listening 3.6 1.143 *Q14—I returned awareness to my body when I got distracted. Attention regulation 3.56 1.146 *Q27—I listened for information from my body about my emotional state. Body listening 3.53 1.18 Q11—I paid attention to my breath without being distracted by things happening around me. Attention regulation 3.45 1.2 *Q19—I could feel in my body whether something was wrong. Emotional awareness 3.43 1.188 Q6R—I distracted myself from sensations of discomfort. Not distracting 3.09 1.093 Q7R—When I felt pain or discomfort, I tried to power through it. Not distracting 3.08 1.24 Q5R—I ignored physical tension or discomfort. Not distracting 3.01 1.073 Q10—I noticed an unpleasant body sensation without worrying about it. Not worrying 2.99 1.196 Q8R—When I felt physical pain, I became upset. Not worrying 2.25 1.175 Q9R—I started to worry that something was wrong if I felt any discomfort. Not worrying 2.11 1.114 Open in new tab We examined the relationship between the original MAIA subscales and which items loaded onto the main IA in virtual worlds scale. All five items in the Emotional awareness subscale (awareness of the connection between body sensations and emotional states) and all four items in the Self-regulation subscale (ability to regulate distress by attention to body sensations) loaded onto the main IA factor. So did five of the seven Attention regulation items (ability to sustain and control attention to body sensations), two of the three Body listening items (active listening to the body for insight) and one of the four Noticing items (awareness of uncomfortable, comfortable and neutral body sensations). Specifically, the one Noticing item that appeared in the main factor was Q4, ‘I noticed changes in my breathing, such as whether it slowed down or sped up.’ Three of the MAIA subscales were wholly absent from the IA in virtual worlds factor. Trusting, whose three items had the highest means, was absent from the IA factor. Participants generally experienced their body as a safe and trustworthy place during the VR experience. The Not-distracting and Not-worrying MAIA subscale items related to sensations of pain, discomfort or tension. These also did not load onto the main IA factor. They also had the lowest means of the 32 items. This makes sense in a 10-min VR experience where attention would not be as likely to be drawn to pain and discomfort as would happen in everyday life. 3. DATA ANALYSIS We performed a manipulation check by comparing values for our IA scale between the groups exposed to the stability meditation condition and the groups exposed to the control condition (relax and move experience). ANOVA analysis showed that IA for participants in the stability meditation condition (M = 3.98, SD = .70) was significantly higher compared to participants in the control condition (M = 3.63, SD = .87); F (1, 119) = 5.973, P = .016). This confirms that the experimental manipulation was successful. Subjects exposed to the stability meditation condition reported higher IA than subjects exposed to the control condition. Because the primary concern of this exploratory study is with IA in virtual worlds, we examined the population pyramid (Fig. 3) among VR conditions comparing IA frequencies between the meditation and control conditions. There appears to be a ceiling effect in the stability meditation condition, with the highest frequency being the highest possible value of IA. No meditation participant fell below an IA score of 2. Looking at the control condition, a more normal curve is evident, but with a long tail skewing on the low-IA side. Four of the participants in the control condition reported IA scores below 2. FIGURE 3 Open in new tabDownload slide Population Pyramid: Frequency of IA by condition. FIGURE 3 Open in new tabDownload slide Population Pyramid: Frequency of IA by condition. As was discussed in the literature review, visual clarity and motion sickness in VR have interesting implications for IA and presence. Participants were asked ‘on a scale from 1 (very blurry) to 10 (very clear), how would you rate the visual clarity of the experience?’ and ‘on a scale from 1 (no motion sickness at all) to 10 (extreme motion sickness), how would you rate your feelings of motion sickness during the experience?’ The average visual clarity was 6.02 out of 10 (SD = 2.20); 31% reported visual clarity below 5. The average motion sickness was 2.05 out of 10 (SD = 1.83); 60% experienced no motion sickness. In total, 88% reported motion sickness below 5. RQ1: What is the relationship between VR motion sickness and IA? We observed an interesting relationship between self-reported motion sickness and directing attention to checking in with how you feel. Forty-nine percent of participants who were directed to check in with how they were feeling reported zero motion sickness whereas 71% of those in the mind wandering condition reported no motion sickness. The mind-wandering group probably did not notice. Bivariate correlation analysis found a significant negative correlation between IA and motion sickness (r = −.292, P = .009). Experiencing motion sickness was associated with lower IA. An independent samples t-test was calculated among participants in the VR conditions comparing reports of motion sickness among the group where attention was directed to checking in with how you feel (the stability meditation group) and the mind-wandering group. Average motion sickness between the two groups was not significantly different (t(78) = .736, P = .464). H1: During a VR session, individuals who experience higher IA will also experience higher self-location spatial presence. A simple linear regression was calculated to determine whether participants’ IA would predict their sense of self-location. A significant positive relationship was found (F(1, 79) = 10.358, P = .002, R2 = .117) between IA (M = 3.74, SD = .85) and self-location (M = 3.38, SD = 1.02). The more IA a participant reported, the higher their feelings of self-location’s spatial presence (β = .342, P = .002). H1 is supported. RQ2: Do differences in consumer VR headsets (HTC Vive and Samsung Gear VR) impact the experience of (i) IA, (ii) perceived visual clarity and (iii) VR motion sickness in a virtual world? Independent samples t-tests were calculated among participants in the VR conditions comparing Gear VR or Vive headset groups along IA, visual clarity, motion sickness and self-location spatial presence. Neither IA (t(78) = .909, P = .366) nor perceived visual clarity (t(78) = .200, P = .842) nor motion sickness (t(78) = .491, P = .624) nor spatial presence (t(78) = 1.375, P = .173) was significantly different based on type of VR headset. Giving insight to RQ2, the type of VR headset used had no impact on IA, visual clarity, motion sickness or spatial presence. H2: IA, VR display technology, perceived visual clarity and absence of VR motion sickness will contribute to self-location spatial presence in a virtual environment. A simple linear regression was calculated to determine the relative contributions of directing attention to bodily sensations (the stability meditation condition), IA measured by the adapted MAIA scale, VR display technology, perceived visual clarity and absence of motion sickness to predict sense of self-location. The overall regression was significant (F(5, 74) = 6.722, P = .000, R2 = .312). IA (β = .326, P = .003), perceived visual clarity (β = .296, P = .003) and directing attention to bodily sensations (β = .225, P = .029) had significant positive beta scores, while the beta for VR motion sickness (β = −.124, P = .245) was not significant. H2 is partially supported. Manipulating IA, IA overall and visual clarity each contributed to predicting spatial presence. VR display technology and VR motion sickness did not predict spatial presence. RQ3: Considering both the stability meditation condition and the control condition, is self-reported IA higher for participants with their eyes closed (no VR headset, audio only) than for participants with their eyes open wearing a VR headset? A 2 × 2 between-subjects factorial ANOVA was calculated comparing IA for the stability meditation condition or control condition and for VR headset (eyes open) or eyes closed (audio only) conditions. The main effect of control condition was significant (F (1,117) = 5.952, P = .016), with participants in the IA condition (M = 3.98) showing higher IA when compared to participants in the control condition (M = 3.63). The main effect eyes closed or eyes open in VR headsets was not significant (F (1,117) = 1.179, P = .280). Finally, the interaction was not significant (F (1,117) = .403, P = .527). Giving insight to RQ1, eyes closed versus VR had no impact on IA, regardless of whether participants experienced the stability meditation or the control conditions. 4. DISCUSSION This is the first study to explore relationships between IA and spatial presence in virtual worlds research. We introduced the construct of IA during a virtual experience and used an exploratory scale to measure IA by adapting the 32-item MAIA trait interoceptive awareness scale. Participants in the VR conditions experienced a commercial quality, professionally designed virtual world (sitting beside the Colorado River) for 10 min, either engaging with a 10-min meditation designed to activate IA or a parallel 10-min experience designed to encourage mind wandering. The most important finding of this study is the significance of IA predicting feelings of self-location spatial presence. Regardless of experimental condition, participants who were more interoceptively aware during the VR experience reported stronger feelings of spatial presence. Our results show that an individual’s attention to bodily sensations and feelings had a direct impact on their sense of spatial presence in a virtual environment. Surprisingly, being in the stability meditation condition also emerged as a significant predictor of spatial presence. Something about the meditation had an impact above and beyond IA as measured by the adapted MAIA scale. A meditation can be designed to specifically enhance an individual’s experience with the virtual world around them (Heeter & Allbritton, 2015a, 2015b). Most presence research begins with the assumption that better technology is the causal agent of presence in virtual worlds. In this manuscript, we show that the experience of presence is influenced by an individual’s attentional orientation. Individual differences in sense of presence vary as much outside of virtual worlds as they vary within virtual worlds. After all, stimulus-independent thought (mind wandering) can occur even when someone is immersed in the most technologically advanced VR landscape. When attention strays from present moment sensations, participants feel less present. Does increased IA improve VR experiences? Our results suggest the answer is yes. Confirming that attention to our bodily sensations (including bodily sensations associated with emotions, feelings and thoughts) impacts feelings of spatial presence is exciting. Designers of virtual experiences should consider strategies to direct the user’s attention toward present moment’s bodily sensations. Future research could examine levels of IA during virtual world experiences other than meditation, assessing whether the relationship between IA and spatial presence remains significant. A surprising twist is that IA for participants who sat with eyes closed to do the meditation was almost identical to IA for those who experienced the meditation in a VR headset, seated beside the virtual Colorado River. Virtual reality neither enhanced nor detracted from the IA elicited by the meditation experience. And yet, IA predicted self-location in the virtual world. This finding suggests that attentional orientation toward present moment bodily sensations has a causal contribution to self-location in virtual worlds that is unrelated to the virtual world itself. After all, neural network research shows that closing the eyes activates the interoceptive network. Accessing interoceptive feelings should have been easier and more prominent with eyes closed. However, IA encompasses more than basic perception of interoceptive signals. IA is a way of relating to the world through the lens of present moment bodily sensations and feelings. In the VR conditions, being immersed in a peaceful, idyllic nature scene likely engendered additional pleasant bodily sensations and feelings associated with being in nature. Thus, perhaps the level of self-reported IA was essentially the same in both conditions but for different reasons. Increasing IA during therapeutic uses of VR has potential to increase therapeutic effectiveness. VR-delivered eco-therapy is used to harness some of the benefits of being in nature for therapeutic purposes. Boosting IA prior to or during these sessions could be beneficial. The Beach VR Meditation is an example of coupling meditation with a specific VR nature environment (Heeter and Allbritton, 2015b). VR nature meditation experiences can be used to reach hospitalized, homebound and elderly patients. Another therapeutic use of VR is to help recalibrate perceptions of time in patients with conditions such as ADHD, autism and schizophrenia (Bansall, Weech, Barnett-Cowan, 2019). Priming IA prior to time perception recalibration experiences might increase effectiveness of those treatments. Meditation has salutatory health and well-being effects, and one of the mechanisms of effect is that regular meditation increases emotional awareness (IA). However, resistance to taking time out to engage in meditation presents barriers to adoption. Meditating in VR could be more engaging and easier to engage with than eyes closed meditation. More immersion, whether through high IA and high spatial presence, is not synonymous with a better VR experience. What constitutes a good VR experience depends upon the experience goals of the designers and of the users. For example, a VR game may be intended to be engaging, challenging and fun. Might priming IA increase VR game engagement, challenge or fun? VR surgery may be designed to expand the surgeon’s seeing and accuracy. Could priming IA reduce VR surgical errors? Future research could move beyond the general idea of more immersive experiences into more effective experiences in entertainment, work and therapy. Finally, a primary experimental design was to compare the same meditation done in VR sitting beside a virtual Colorado River scene, when participants were using either HTC Vive or Samsung Gear VR headsets. VR display technology did not impact perceived visual clarity or VR motion sickness. We examined the relationship between IA and self-location spatial presence across VR conditions and found that the more immersive VR headset (HTC Vive) was not significantly better than the less immersive VR headset (Samsung Gear VR) in promoting feelings of self-location spatial presence. This lack of difference was not because the meditation experience in a virtual world failed to elicit a sense of self-location—the overall average spatial presence scale value was 3.22 out of a maximum possible score of 5. Likewise, VR headset did not impact IA. One possible explanation could be that the qualities of the headset matter less when the attention is focused inward, toward breath, movement and bodily sensations. Another factor limiting appreciation of the Vive headset is that participants sat in one place and turned their heads; they did not make use of Vive’s capability of moving vertically (even though they could have). Another explanation is that effect sizes on self-location’s spatial presence may have been reduced because the user sits in one location beside a river—there was no movement or agency. Perhaps elaborate immersion technology matters more when participants move around in and interact with the environment. Our exploratory study used experimental conditions where participants sat in one location in a virtual world. An audio guide directed the mind and body either in a meditation or in a relaxing mental experience with a small amount of gentle arm, neck and shoulder movement that exactly paralleled the meditation. There was no agency in the virtual world. No actions other than looking around were available. We did this to maximize IA. Future research should consider experiences where users have more agency, such as moving around in and interacting with the environment. How do agency and IA co-exist? It will be fascinating to explore how we can amplify presence during VR experiences and continue to explore the connection between propensity for IA and IA and virtual worlds presence. Another future research topic would be to investigate IA-related constructs in VR Research. Flow is a theory of optimal experiences that has been applied to media research. Three of six dimensions of flow potentially overlap with IA: (i) merging of action and awareness, (ii) concentration on an immediate task and (iii) loss of self-reflection (Nakamura and Csikszentmihalyi, 2002). 5. CONCLUSION The main contribution to virtual world’s presence research from the current study is the introduction of IA to virtual world’s presence research and the suggestion that IA can contribute to feelings of spatial presence. We examined the experience of IA during a meditation experience designed with the goal of activating IA by relaxing the body, calming the mind, and directing attention to interoceptive bodily sensations including breath, movement and the feeling of stability. We also explored potential differences in IA between participants when experiencing the meditation through a VR headset or with eyes closed, audio only. Surprisingly, IA for participants with eyes closed was nearly identical to IA for VR participants. Finally, we investigated the relationship between different types of immersive VR headsets to IA and self-location spatial presence and did not find any. Meditation experts on VR design teams could suggest subtle ways of directing the user’s attention towards IA during games and other VR experiences where meditation is not formally part of the experience. Priming IA through short pre-game meditations may enhance the gaming experience. Therapeutic applications of VR may be more effective if IA is added. In addition, relationships among IA, presence and flow should be examined. Overall, due to the significance and clarity of the findings, it seems that IA is a promising dimension for deepening understanding of neurobiological processes and spatial presence. Acknowledgements Clinical Yoga Therapist Dr Marcel Allbritton guided the design of the meditation. Cubicle Ninjas CEO Josh Farkas provided the Virtual Colorado River environment for Samsung Gear VR and HTC Vive for use in our research. Leticia Cherchiglia is a fellowship recipient of CNPq, Brazil (207633/2014-2). Footnotes 1 IA: Interoceptive Awareness 2 VR: Virtual Reality 3 VR: Virtual Reality 4 IA: Interoceptive Awareness 5 VR: Virtual Reality 6 IA: Interoceptive Awareness 7 VR: Virtual Reality 8 IA: Interoceptive Awareness 9 IA: Interoceptive Awareness REFERENCES Bansal , A. , Weech , S. and Barnett-Cowan , M. ( 2019 ) Movement-contingent time flow in virtual reality causes temporal recalibration . Sci. Rep. , 9 , 1 – 13 . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40870-6. Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Bishop , S. et al. ( 2004 ) Mindfulness: A proposed definition . Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. , 11 , 230 – 241 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Buckner , R. L. , Andrews-Hanna , J. R. and Schacter , D. L. ( 2008 ) The brain’s default network . Ann N. Y. Acad. Sci. , 1124 , 1 – 38 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Bornemann , B. , Herbert , B. M., Mehling , W. E. and Singer , T. ( 2015 ) Differential changes in self-reported aspects of interoceptive awareness through 3 months of contemplative training . Front. Psychol. , 5 , 1504 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Chandrasekaran , N. ( 2012 ) Principles and Practice of Yoga Therapy: A Complete Guide for Learning and Practice of Yoga Therapy. . VHP Publications , Chennai . Google Scholar Google Preview OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat COPAC Craig , A. D. and Craig , A. D. ( 2009 ) How do you feel--now? The anterior insula and human awareness . Nat. Rev. Neurosci. , 10 , 59 – 70 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Craig , A. D. ( 2014 ) How Do You Feel?: An Interoceptive Moment with Your Neurobiological self . Princeton University Press . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Google Scholar Google Preview WorldCat COPAC Cubicle Ninjas . ( 2015 ). Guided Meditation App. Available at http://guidedmeditationvr.com/ (accessed 18 august 2019). Cubicle Ninjas . ( 2016 ) Guided Meditation VR . Computer and phone software , Chicago . Google Scholar Google Preview OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat COPAC Cummings , J. J. and Bailenson , J. N. ( 2016 ) How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence . Media Psychol. , 19 , 272 – 309 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Damasio , A. R. ( 1999 ) The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness . Harcourt , Houghton Mifflin . Google Scholar Google Preview OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat COPAC Desikachar , K. , Bragdon , L. and Bossart , C. ( 2005 ) The yoga of healing: Exploring yoga’s holistic model for health and well-being . Int. J. Yoga Ther. , 15 , 17 – 39 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Farb , N. , Daubenmier , J., Price , C. J., Gard , T., Kerr , C., Dunn , B. D., Klein , A. C., Paulus , M. P. and Mehling , W. E. ( 2015 ) Interoception, contemplative practice, and health . Front. Psychol. , 6 , 763 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Farb , N. A. , Segal , Z. V. and Anderson , A. K. ( 2012 ) Attentional modulation of primary interoceptive and exteroceptive cortices . Cereb. Cortex , 23 , 114 – 126 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Ferentzi , E. , Horváth , Á. and Köteles , F. ( 2019 ) Do body-related sensations make feel us better? Subjective well-being is associated only with the subjective aspect of interoception . Psychophysiol. , 56 , e13319 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Genetics Home Reference . ( 2019 ). Motion Sickness Statistics. Available at https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/motion-sickness#statistics (accessed 18 august 2019). Hartmann , T. et al. ( 2016 ) The Spatial Presence Experience Scale (SPES): A short self-report measure for diverse media settings . J. Media Psychol. , 28 , 1 – 15 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Heeter , C. ( 1992 ) Being there: The subjective experience of presence . Presence-Teleop. Virt. Environ. , 1 , 262 – 271 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Heeter , C. ( 2016 ) A meditation on embodied presence and meditation . Presence-Teleop. Virt. Environ. , 25 , 175 – 183 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Heeter , C. ( 2018 ). IA in VR. Available at http://carrieheeter.com/publications/ia_in_vr/ (accessed 18 august, 2019). Heeter , C. and Allbritton , M. ( 2015a ) Being there: Implications of neuroscience and meditation for self-presence in virtual worlds . J Virtual Worlds Res. , 1–8 . OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat Heeter , C. and Allbritton , M. ( 2015b ) Playing with Presence: How meditation can increase the experience of embodied presence in a virtual world. In Foundations of Digital Games . Presented at the Asilomar, CA . Google Scholar Google Preview OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat COPAC Heeter , C. , Lehto , R. H., Allbritton , M., Day , T. and Wiseman , M. ( 2017 ) Effects of a technology-assisted meditation program on healthcare providers’ interoceptive awareness, compassion fatigue, and burnout . J. Hosp. Palliat. Nurs. , 19 , 314 – 322 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat International Society for Presence Research . ( 2000 ). The Concept of Presence: Explication Statement. Available at : www.ispr.info. Jao , T. , Vértes , P. E., Alexander-Bloch , A. F., Tang , I. N., Yu , Y. C., Chen , J. H. and Bullmore , E. T. ( 2013 ) Volitional eyes opening perturbs brain dynamics and functional connectivity regardless of light input . NeuroImage , 69 , 21 – 34 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Kabat-Zinn , J. ( 1994 ) Wherever You Go. In There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation In Everyday Life , Hachette Books, NY . Google Scholar Google Preview OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat COPAC Khalsa , S. S. , Rudrauf , D., Damasio , A. R., Davidson , R. J., Lutz , A. and Tranel , D. ( 2008 ) Interoceptive awareness in experienced meditators . Psychophysiol. , 45 , 671 – 677 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Killingsworth , M. A. and Gilbert , D. T. ( 2010 ) A wandering mind is an unhappy mind . Science , 330 , 932 – 932 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Kilteni , K. , Groten , R. and Slater , M. ( 2012 ) The sense of embodiment in virtual reality . Presence-Teleop. Virt. Environ. , 21 , 373 – 387 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Lee , K. M. ( 2004 ) Presence, explicated . Commun. Theor. , 14 , 27 – 50 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Lenggenhager , B. , Tadi , T., Metzinger , T. and Blanke , O. ( 2007 ) Video ergo sum: Manipulating bodily self-consciousness . Science , 317 , 1096 – 1099 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Lombard , M. , Biocca , F., Freeman , J., IJsselsteijn , W. and Schaevitz , R. J. ( 2015 ) Immersed in Media . Springer , London . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Google Scholar Google Preview WorldCat COPAC Lombard , M. and Ditton , T. ( 1997 ) At the heart if it all: The concept of presence . J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. , 3 . OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat Mahler , K. J. ( 2015 ) Interoception: The Eight Sensory System . Kansas, AAPC Publishing , Lenexa . Google Scholar Google Preview OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat COPAC Marx , E. , Deutschländer , A., Stephan , T., Dieterich , M., Wiesmann , M. and Brandt , T. ( 2004 ) Eyes open and eyes closed as rest conditions: Impact on brain activation patterns . NeuroImage , 21 , 1818 – 1824 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Mehling , W. ( 2014 ). Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA). Available at: www.osher.ucsf.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/maia1.pdf (accessed 11 June 2014) . Mehling , W. ( 2016 ) Differentiating attention styles and regulatory aspects of self-reported interoceptive sensibility . Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. , 371 . OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat Mehling , W. E. , Gopisetty , V., Daubenmier , J., Price , C. J., Hecht , F. M. and Stewart , A. ( 2009 ) Body awareness: Construct and self-report measures . PLoS ONE , 4 , e5614 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Mehling , W. E. , Price , C., Daubenmier , J. J., Acree , M., Bartmess , E. and Stewart , A. ( 2012 ) The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA) . PLoS ONE , 7 , e48230 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Mittner , M. , Boekel , W., Tucker , A. M., Turner , B. M., Heathcote , A. and Forstmann , B. U. ( 2014 ) When the brain takes a break: A model-based analysis of mind wandering . J. Neurosci. , 34 , 16286 – 16295 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Mohan , A. G. and Mohan , I. ( 2004 ) Yoga Therapy: A Guide to the Therapeutic Use of Yoga and Ayurveda for Health and Fitness . Shambhala Publications , Boston . Google Scholar Google Preview OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat COPAC Mrazek , M. D. , Phillips , D. T., Franklin , M. S., Broadway , J. M. and Schooler , J. W. ( 2013 ) Young and restless: Validation of the Mind-Wandering Questionnaire (MWQ) reveals disruptive impact of mind-wandering for youth . Front. Psychol. , 4 , 560 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Nakamura , J. and Csikszentmihalyi , M. ( 2002 ) The concept of flow . In: C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.) In: Handbook of positive psychology (p. 89–105) . Oxford University Press . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Google Scholar Google Preview WorldCat COPAC Rasmussen , N. ( 2019 ). Top 5 Best VR Meditation Apps of 2019 VR/TODAY. Available at https://vrtodaymagazine.com/vr-meditation/ (accessed 18 august 2019). Riva , G. ( 2009 ) Is presence a technology issue? Some insights from cognitive sciences . Virt. Real. , 13 , 159 – 169 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Riva , G. , Waterworth , J. A. and Waterworth , E. L. ( 2004 ) The layers of presence: A bio-cultural approach to understanding presence in natural and mediated environments . Cyberpsychol. Behav. , 7 , 402 – 416 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Schooler , J. W. , Smallwood , J., Christoff , K., Handy , T. C., Reichle , E. D. and Sayette , M. A. ( 2011 ) Meta-awareness, perceptual decoupling and the wandering mind . Trends Cogn. Sci. , 15 , 319 – 326 . Google Scholar PubMed OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat Slater , M. ( 2009 ) Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behaviour in immersive virtual environments . Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. , 364 , 3549 – 3557 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat Suarez , A. ( 2018 ). How and why our experiments with virtual reality motion made us ill. Available at https://venturebeat.com/2018/02/27/how-and-why-our-experiments-with-virtual-reality-motion-made-us-ill/ (accessed 18 august 2019). Weng , H. Y. , Lewis-Peacock , J. A., Hecht , F. M., Uncapher , M., Ziegler , D., Farb , N. A., Goldman , V., Skinner , S., Duncan , L. D., Chao , M., T., & Gazzaley , A. ( 2018 ). Focus on the breath: Brain decoding reveals internal states of attention during meditation . bioRxiv , preprint , DOI: 10.31231/osf.io/9jxqf. OpenURL Placeholder Text WorldCat Wiesmann , M. et al. ( 2006 ) Eye closure in darkness animates olfactory and gustatory cortical areas . NeuroImage , 32 , 293 – 300 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat Wirth , W. et al. ( 2007 ) A process model of the formation of spatial presence experiences . Media Psychol. , 9 , 493 – 525 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The British Computer Society. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)
TI - Interoceptive Awareness: The ‘Being’ Dimension of ‘Being There’ in Virtual Worlds
JF - Interacting with Computers
DO - 10.1093/iwc/iwaa001
DA - 2006-09-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/interoceptive-awareness-the-being-dimension-of-being-there-in-virtual-80AGE0SNHd
SP - 1
VL - Advance Article
IS - 
DP - DeepDyve
ER -