Efficacy of Virtual Reality-Based Sustainability Education in Fostering Environmental Empathy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.67169/publicarciencia.V7i1.38Keywords:
virtual reality, sustainability education, environmental empathy, pro-environmental behavior, educational technologyAbstract
Sustainability education seeks to foster pro-environmental attitudes, yet traditional methods often fail to generate deep emotional connections. This study evaluates the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) in fostering environmental empathy among university students, comparing it with an educational video and a control group. A total of 120 students participated, randomly assigned to three groups: one experienced an immersive VR simulation regarding deforestation, another watched a documentary, and the third received no intervention. Environmental empathy and the intention to adopt sustainable behaviors were measured before and after the intervention using validated scales. Results indicate that the VR group experienced a significant increase in environmental empathy (p < 0.01) and showed a greater willingness to engage in sustainable behaviors, with effects persisting at the four-week mark. The video group showed minor improvements, while the control group showed no changes. The high sense of presence in VR correlated with higher levels of empathy. These findings suggest that VR is a powerful tool for sustainability education, as it fosters emotional connections with the environment, thereby overcoming the limitations of traditional methods.
Downloads
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
Arbuthnott, K. D., & Scerbe, C. (2016). Changing environmental attitudes: Comparing the efficacy of video and text-based messages. Environmental Education Research, 22(5), 672–689.
Bailenson, J. (2018). Experience on demand: What virtual reality is, how it works, and what it can do. W.W. Norton & Company.
Berenguer, J. (2007). The effect of empathy in proenvironmental attitudes and behaviors. Environment and Behavior, 39(2), 269–283.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. Wiley.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage Publications.
Gobierno Autónomo Descentralizado Municipal de Daule. (2023). Informe ambiental cantonal 2022.
García, M., & Almeida, J. (2019). Educación ambiental en Ecuador: Retos y oportunidades. Revista Ecuatoriana de Educación, 12(1), 45–60.
Gravetter, F. J., & Forzano, L.-A. B. (2018). Research methods for the behavioral sciences. Cengage Learning.
Gravetter, F. J., & Wallnau, L. B. (2017). Statistics for the behavioral sciences. Cengage Learning.
Herrera, F., Bailenson, J., Weisz, E., Ogle, E., & Zaki, J. (2018). Building long-term empathy: A large-scale comparison of traditional and virtual reality perspective-taking. PLoS ONE, 13(10), e0204494.
Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8–21.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2022). Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press.
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE). (2023). Monitoramento do desmatamento da floresta amazônica brasileira por satélite.
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260.
Markowitz, D. M., Laha, R., Perone, B. P., Pea, R. D., & Bailenson, J. N. (2018). Immersive virtual reality field trips facilitate learning about climate change. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2364.
Ministerio del Ambiente del Ecuador (MAE). (2017). Estrategia nacional de educación ambiental 2017-2022.
Ministerio del Ambiente, Agua y Transición Ecológica del Ecuador (MAATE). (2022). Informe nacional de biodiversidad 2021.
Ponce, J., & Torres, L. (2021). Educación ambiental en el cantón Daule: Análisis de iniciativas comunitarias. Revista Guayas Sustentable, 5(2), 23–38.
Rickinson, M. (2001). Learners and learning in environmental education: A critical review of the evidence. Environmental Education Research, 7(3), 207–320.
Schultz, P. W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 391–406.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.
Slater, M., & Sanchez-Vives, M. V. (2016). Enhancing our lives with immersive virtual reality. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 3, 74.
Suresh, K. (2011). An overview of randomization techniques: An unbiased assessment of outcome in clinical research. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 4(1), 8–11.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap.
Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(3), 225–240.
World Medical Association. (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191–2194.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jorge Tarquino Erazo Rivera, Mildred Paola Sánchez Hidalgo, José Omar Villavicencio Santillán, Elsie de Lourdes Viteri Espinoza (Autor/a)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
