Cited by 33Virtual Reality Applications and ImpactsDigital Mental Health InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Virtually Real, But Not Quite There: Social and Economic Barriers to Meeting Virtual Reality’s True Potential for Mental Health

Open access
Pimentel, Daniel, Foxman, Maxwell, Davis, Donna Z., Markowitz, David M.·2021·Frontiers in Virtual Reality

Abstract

Strategies to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, namely quarantine and social distancing protocols, have exposed a troubling paradox: mandated isolation meant to preserve well-being has inadvertently contributed to its decline. Prolonged isolation has been associated with widespread loneliness and diminished mental health, with effects compounded by limited face-to-face access to clinical and social support systems. While remote communication technologies (e.g., video chat) can connect individuals with healthcare providers and social networks, remote technologies might have limited effectiveness in clinical and social contexts. In this review, we articulate the promise of Virtual Reality as a conduit to clinical resources and social connection. Furthermore, we outline various social and economic factors limiting the virtual reality industry’s ability to maximize its potential to address mental health issues brought upon by the pandemic. These barriers are delineated across five dimensions: sociocultural, content, affordability, supply chain, and equitable design. After examining potential short- and long-term solutions to these hurdles, we outline potential avenues for applied and theoretical research seeking to validate these solutions. Through this evaluation we seek to (a) emphasize virtual reality’s capacity to improve mental health by connecting communities to clinical and social support systems, (b) identify socioeconomic barriers preventing users from accessing these systems through virtual reality, and (c) discuss solutions that ensure these systems can be equitably accessed via changes to existing and future virtual reality infrastructures.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/frvir.2021.627059

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Although consumer iVR technology is widely available and affordable, the pressing absence of freely available VRET platforms persists.

    “Although consumer iVR technology is widely available and affordable, the pressing absence of freely available VRET platforms persists [54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64].”

    From SAFEvR MentalVeRse.app: Development of a Free Immersive Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy for Acrophobia and Claustrophobia (2024) · cites this paper as [63]

    The Affordability section says VR hardware costs US$300–US$1,500 and remains out of financial reach for most consumers, contrary to the claim that consumer iVR is affordable. The Discussion recommends free core features for VR apps, but neither that passage nor the passages retrieved on exposure therapy establish a persistent absence of freely available VRET platforms. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Cook, D. M., Dissanayake, D., and Kaur, K. (2019). "Virtual reality and older hands: dexterity and accessibility in hand-held VR control," in Proceedings of the 5th international ACM in cooperation HCI and UX conference on CHIuXiD'19, April 1-9, 2020, Jakarta Surabaya, Bali, Indonesia.
  2. mm6932a1 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Oliver, M. B. (2003). "Mood management and selective exposure," in Communication and emotion: essays in honor of dolf zillmann. Editors J. Bryant, R. Roskos-Ewoldsen, and J. Cantor (New York: Routledge), 85-106.
  4. gri · DOI
  5. bkw · DOI
  6. bkw · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pimentel, D., Foxman, M., Davis, D. Z., & Markowitz, D. M.
Affiliations
University of Oregon (US)
Corresponding author
Pimentel, Daniel
Venue
Frontiers in Virtual Reality
Published
2021-02-17
Volume
2
ISSN
2673-4192 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3132951422
Cited by
33
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 1
FWCI
2.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Virtual Reality (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Scholars' Bank (University of Oregon) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
virtual reality, mental health, COVID-19 pandemic, social isolation, loneliness, remote healthcare access, socioeconomic barriers, accessibility, equitable design, socio-cultural barriers, affordability, supply chain, virtual reality content, social connectedness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review