Holding a headset in your hands may look like you are in a war zone but you’re equipped with tools that will help you better the way you do your job.

Metaverse arrived to stay and every year more people join this new world full of possibilities. The same is happening to remote in-depth interviews: after the pandemic, they came to stay.

Can virtual reality deliver a more engaging experience for in-depth interview participants?

But what if we mix these two topics for the benefit of user experience research? Have anyone already tested if dialogues or interviews in the metaverse are more effective, in a psychological and perception way, than remote calls? The answer is: yes, kind of!

A study presented some findings…

A recent study from June 2022, by Christoffer Ramsten, Rishit Rakesh Bhalja called Comparison of VR-interviews to Online Video Conferencing Software and its Impact on User Experience Studying the experience of VR-interviews compared to generic online video conferencing software like Zoom and MS Teams and its impact on the Interviewer and the Candidate analyzed the effectiveness of recruiting candidates in VR over remote calls for the candidate perspective and for the HR team point of view and this are the summarized results:

MeetingVR trailer — The software used in the study.

1. VR is not the best platform for E-Recruitment. It needs credibility, but it also proves VR has the potential to be used as a platform in the screening process of recruitment. Overall, the derived results that were measured, provided enough proof that the VR interviews indeed can be seen as a preferable option for neither the first stage nor the last stage in E-Recruitment but for the screening process in the middle and provides a better User Experience.
2. The interview experience in virtual reality is more immersive and enjoyable than in traditional video conferencing systems.
3. Furthermore, the features provided by VR cannot be mimicked in real life or on video conferencing systems. Interviews conducted in VR seem to be possible as a daily means since there’s no harm to visual health. Both candidates and recruiters would often be interested in using VR interviews over traditional VCS interviews due to them being more immersive.
4. Both candidates and recruiters feel that VR lacks non-verbal forms of communication like body language, expressions, and hand gestures which is a disadvantage of using VR for interviews.
5. People who have an interview in VR tend to be less self-conscious, according to the gathered data from candidates. The immersive platform helps them focus on showcasing their projects and abilities instead of other distractions.

MeetingVR — The software used in the study. Image from: https://www.meetinvr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/xMeetinVR-2_26_2021-11_08_37-AM.png.pagespeed.ic.5AQzR3e5wj.webp

6. Recruiters also believe that the lack of reality in avatars removes physical biases in the process of recruitment, making it easy for them to focus just on the competence of a candidate. Overall, VR is quite promising but still far away from perfect.

7. As shown in the study, MeetinVR is the software used in the study to conduct recruitment interviews. The community of users and developers on the platform of VR can focus on improving issues such as audio quality and software glitches that ruin the experience, making it more accessible. It’s important for VR to be accessible because it was quite prominent from the quantitative gathered data that the use of VR is low.

8. When it comes to recruitment, VR proves to be a great tool for displaying projects. The present study deals with projects by candidates looking for jobs in the field of Architecture, Interior Design, Product Design, Construction Engineering, or similar. However, the same platform can be used for companies pitching their products to their stakeholders without the need to travel at all and have a realistic experience of the product remotely which is not at all possible in general VCS.

9. It is important to understand that at present, the virtual world and real life are not fully integrated. However, if the two were combined and used in conjunction with each other, a person could have both their human face and non-verbal communication in the virtual world. If this were possible and VR interviews became more common, I believe that it could give rise to a greater sense of unity between people from different geographic locations who are not physically together.

Comparing to User In-Depth Interviews

The important findings in Ramsten’s study when it comes to transferring this reality to In-Depth User Interviews would be mainly, points 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6.

Point 1. Screening — This one was kind of obvious from the start. It’s hard to rely on avatars and nicknames to screen participants when you need credible information. But also it’s also a matter easily resolved: you do the screening before you go into VR.

Point 2. The interview experience in VR is more immersive and enjoyable both for recruiters and interviewed which is an extra point when you talk about making the interviewed person feel comfortable, building rapport, and sharing.

Point 3. The features provided by VR cannot be mimicked in real life or on video conferencing systems — No extra comments here. Real humans will always provide better experiences from the research point of view.

Point 4. VR lacks non-verbal forms of communication — This is the most important point here and that makes VR In-Depth interviews still not a good option over Remote Video Calls. Maybe in the future with the release of advanced technology that emulates this precious information.

Point 6 The lack of reality in avatars removes physical biases — This is a wonderful one to keep in mind!

Another Study

In another study, Integrating virtual reality in qualitative research methods: Making a case for the VR-assisted interview, by Dennis Mathysen from July 2021, the conclusion is very similar.

The author has taken a very modest approach to the use of virtual reality technology in social science research, staying well within the bounds of what it currently has to offer.

He has not tried to reinvent the wheel by applying VR technology in new ways that are outside its established discipline.

Instead, he has “resituated” an existing method — the semi-structured interview — in a new context but within its original discipline.

By the end of the day, the author states to believe that VR-assisted interviews could be useful for more complex applications of VR technology in social science research.

VR-assisted interviews are a convenient way for respondents to answer questions, but this method also limits opportunities for interactivity.

That being said, we are also convinced that ‘gamelike’ VR research designs will open up a world of possibilities and we expect its toolbox to expand in significant ways as VR-technology advances: perhaps soon it will be possible to measure biometric data such as a respondent’s pulse or pupil dilation upon experiencing a specific event in an integrated way for example.

There are several challenges to conducting VR surveys and interviewing today.

First, very few people have access to a VR-ready computer, making it hard to reach many people.

Second, research conducted in VR tends to be more expensive because you’ll need to purchase a headset for each respondent. While you could argue that this is not a limitation because of the presumed benefits, it’s important to also inform stakeholders about this added cost.

Accounting for the cost of a minimal, VR-ready PC over time is difficult, though. Oculus said that a low-end “Oculus Ready” PC would cost about $900 at launch in 2016, but that cost was down to about $500 by early 2017. In 2019, Oculus was listing entry-level “Oculus Ready” PCs at $829. Font: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/07/despite-100-price-increase-meta-quest-2-still-offers-historically-cheap-vr/

Similar to online written questionnaires 20 years ago, you can’t expect to launch a VR-research online now and expect a diverse and representative sample of society to participate.

While virtual reality is just starting to be employed in social science research, its potential is enormous.

The early adoption and development of this technology may provide us with increased accessibility to regions and people that would previously have been difficult, dangerous, or even impossible to reach.

We, therefore, welcome any and all approaches to using this technology, so long as they are correctly recognized for their potential limitations, and a respectful effort is made towards ensuring the safety of all involved.

So, what do you think? Does it worth mixing methods and trying or do you think we still have to wait for the technology to improve and apply VR in the research toolbox? Leave a comment!

And if you liked this content and wish to become a Medium Member referred by me Click Here to join!

Also, follow me on Instagram! And subscribe to my Tealfeed content!