Empathy toward virtual humans depicting a known or unknown person expressing pain

Johana Monthuy-Blanc1,3

Stéphane Bouchard2,3, François Bernier4, Éric Boivin3, Stéphanie Dumoulin2,3, Tanya Guitard2,3, Mylène Laforest2,3, Geneviève

Robillard2,3, Patrice Renaud2,3

1University of Quebec in Trois-Rivières2University of Quebec in Outaouais (UQO)

3Laboratory of Cyberpsychology4Defense Research and Development Canada

16th Annual CyberTherapy 2011 - 19-22th, June 2011

Rational: Can pain in an avatar elicit empathy?

Facial expression Emotion recognitionReactions

(Dyck et al. 2008; Rossen et al., 2008; Pan et al., 2008)

Facial expression of pain Reaction

(Alqudah et al., 2010; Hirsh, et al., 2009; Stutts et al., 2010)

Empathy ??

Rational: Can pain in an avatar elicit empathy?

Facial expression of pain

(Botvinick et al., 2005; Williams, 2002)

Reaction Empathy ??

Rational: Can pain in an avatar elicit empathy?

Rational: Pain can elicit empathy in avatar?

Interpretation and perception of pain

(Goubert et al., 2005; Bailenson et al., 2005)

Known or unknown avatar

Social presenceReaction Empathy ??

Two aims of study

To test the role of social presence in users’ empathy

toward avatar’s pain.

To test whether people feel more empathy and presence toward

the avatar of known or unknown person experiencing pain

Method42 adults (18 to 60 years old, 26 females and 16 males)

were monitored:

Galvanic Skin Response InterSense IS-900 VET

Method

42 adults (18 to 60 years old, 26 females and 16 males) completed:

Empathy toward the pain of the avatar:“I was empathic to the pain of the virtual person” “the pain of the virtual character was credible”(Based on Bailenson et al. 2005)

Social presence:A global measure of the concept used for the regressions.(Gerhard et al., 2001)

Social presence (two dimensions):Co-presence – acknowledging the presence of the other person as if it was a real person.Social dimensions – behavioral response to the avatar : likability and embarrassment of performing silly actions. (Bailenson et al., 2005)

Questionnaire

Method

Condition 1 (n = 22)Known Avatar First (KAF)

42 adults (18 to 60 years old, 26 females and 16 males)who were familiar with a known avatar (Stéphane Bouchard):

Condition 2 (n = 22)Unknown Avatar First (UAF)

Method42 adults (18 to 60 years old, 26 females and 16 males)

Experimental conditionsKnown / Unknown avatar

Control / learningCat

Psyché – CAVE-like system

Method

Control / learning

Idle Greetings Pain

42 adults (18 to 60 years old, 26 females and 16 males)

Idle Greetings Pain

Method

Video excerpt of the first 10 seconds of the 40 seconds pain animation

42 adults (18 to 60 years old, 26 females and 16 males)

Results

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

Imm 1 - Pre Imm 1 - Pain Imm 2 Pre Imm 2 Pain

KAFUAF

Galvanic Skin Response to the « acute » pain reaction(10 sec. pre vs 10 sec during)

Time effect during imm1F(1,40) = 7.26, p < .01

Time effect during imm2F(1,40) = 5.58, p < .05

ResultsMovements relative to the avatar:

(recording 12 second segments before and during the acute pain an)

F(1,40) = 8.87, p < .01] InterSense IS-900 VET

Immersion 1 Immersion 2Pre pain During

painPre pain During

painKAF .04 .10** .07 .08UAF .05 .09 .05 .07

ResultsImmersion 1

M (SD)Immersion 2

M (SD)EmpathyKAF 9.09 (3.66) 7.36 (4.03) UAF 9.6 (2.7) 10.7 (3.02) Co-presenceKAF 7.86 (5.31) 7.41 (5.51)UAF 11.10 (4.97) 13.65 (5.27)LikabilityKAF 20.36 (7.72) 11.64 (6.84)UAF 18.25 (6.32) 20.20 (7.50)Embarrassement

KAF 21.09 (11.03) 17.64 (10.86)UAF 19.35 (10.78) 17.35 (12.31)

Results

Repeated measures contrats

Control vs immersion 1

Immersion 1 vs immersion 2

Time Inter. Time Inter.Empathy N/A N/A N/A N/ASocial presence .02 .15 .51 15.11***Co-presence 8.15** 1.35 3.32 6.82**Likability 11.55** 1.33 6.53* 16.2***Embarrassement .01 .00 7.17* .57

Main effect

Time condition Inter.Empathy .92 3.66 18.59***Social presence .29 6.17* 3.32**Co-presence 11.07** 8.16** 5.43**Likability 7.93** .03 15.16***Embarrassement 1.98 .16 .13

Results

Empathytoward

know avatar

Social presence

F(3, 41) = 20.57, p < .001

Regression

Facial expression of pain Reaction => GSR=> Movements

(Alqudah et al., 2010; Hirsh, et al., 2009; Stutts et al., 2010)

Discussion

Discussion

Empathy +++

Realism of avatar

Known avatar

Social presence => co-presence=> likability

Any questions ?

Johana Monthuy-BlancEmail: johana.monthuy-blanc@uqtr.ca

Cyberpsychology Lab of UQOWebsite: http://w3.uqo.ca/cyberpsy/

Cybertherapy 19-22th, June 2011