Remote collaboration in virtual reality induces physiological synchrony comparable to face-to-face interaction

TL;DR

This study shows that virtual reality supports physiological synchrony similar to face-to-face interactions, unlike video conferencing.

Contribution

The study introduces VR as a medium that preserves physiological synchrony during remote collaboration.

Findings

VR and face-to-face interactions showed strong heart rate variability synchrony.

Video conferencing resulted in significantly weaker physiological synchrony.

Creative performance and social presence were highest in face-to-face interactions.

Abstract

Physiological synchrony refers to the temporal alignment of bodily signals, such as heart rate variability, between two or more individuals during social interaction. It reflects implicit, often unconscious processes that arise when people share attention, emotions, or behavioral rhythms in close physical proximity. Because these coordinated physiological patterns are linked to social cohesion, rapport, and effective communication, physiological synchrony provides a valuable window into the quality and dynamics of social interaction. Here, we study physiological synchrony during virtual interaction where interaction partners are not physically co-located but remotely connected via technology. This allows us to capture aspects of social connectedness that are not accessible through self-report or behavior alone, making it a powerful tool for understanding how people engage and collaborate across different media. In our study, triads of participants performed a collective creativity task in one of three conditions: face-to-face (F2F) collaboration, remote collaboration using video conferencing (Video), or remote collaboration using immersive Virtual Reality (VR). To quantify social interaction quality, we measured creative group performance, social presence, and heart rate variability synchrony (HRVS) as a marker of social cohesion. As expected, creative group performance and social presence were highest in the F2F condition and significantly reduced in the VR and Video conditions. However, we observed strong HRV synchrony in the VR and F2F conditions and significantly weaker HRV synchrony in the Video condition. Our study supports the idea that VR (unlike video conferencing) supports physiological synchronization processes important for social interactions. Future studies need to identify the underlying physiological and psychological processes.

Figures