Monitor on Psychology - March 2012 - (Page 49)

Research suggests that using avatars in therapy, business consulting and training may be as effective as their real-life counterparts, and may have other benefits as well. B Y TORI D eA NG ELI S F or 30 years, New York psychologist Richard H. Wexler, PhD, has helped companies develop effective leaders and productive teams. But in the last three years, much of his work has taken place not in Manhattan office buildings, but in virtual meeting rooms. There, digital versions of employers and employees, or avatars, come together to work on projects, get training and receive help with professional or personal problems. “Until recently, the technology just wasn’t available for the average practitioner to be able to do this sort of thing,” says Wexler. “But it’s moving so rapidly that [now] you’re limited only by your imagination.” Wexler and his wife, psychologist and executive coach Suzanne Roff-Wexler, PhD, are part of an emerging cadre of psychological practitioners, researchers, trainers and product developers who are bringing avatars and other forms of virtual technology into the practice realm. “I wouldn’t want to make the case that these technologies are the be-all and end-all, or that they’re going to replace faceto-face psychotherapy,” says clinical researcher James Herbert, PhD, a Drexel University psychology professor, who has studied avatar therapy. “But they are tools that really do have some advantages.” These virtual environments are computer-simulated interactive spaces that appear and feel to users like they’re inhabiting a relatively real setting. They are often populated by avatars that interact, talk, gesture, walk and “teleport” — travel to any location they choose. Virtual environments create a feeling of person-to-person presence and immersion — the sense of actually sharing a space with others, Wexler says. Psychologists are using two types of virtual technology in therapy, teaching and training, and organizational consulting. One technology is immersive virtual reality, sometimes called “classic” immersive virtual reality. In classic immersive settings, people don goggles and headphones and are transported into a three-dimensional world that can include highly realistic sights and sounds, as well as smells generated by computer-controlled scent machines. The second is flat-screen technology, through which you can access computer-generated three-dimensional environments on your computer or television screen. A wellknown example is Linden Labs’s Second Life, a “metaverse” that allows anyone to log in for free, adopt an avatar and roam unencumbered through a cyberspace filled with restaurants, college campuses, business settings and a variety of fantasylands. Practitioners use these technologies in different ways and with greater or lesser ease, says neuroscientist Walter Greenleaf, PhD, chief strategy officer at Thrive Research, a research and development company that licenses a behavioral wellness platform. Immersive virtual reality is generally done in the same room as clients, and tends to be easier for both clients and clinicians than Second Life-type settings because it’s more controlled and has a smaller learning curve. (In Second Life, for example, you have to learn to dress yourself, navigate and communicate in new ways.) That said, the two technologies are useful for different purposes and conditions, he says. “In general, if a treatment involves social skills and other aspects of interpersonal interaction — how to deal with a mean boss, for example — clinicians feel comfortable conducting therapy over the Internet using avatars,” he says. That’s also the case with student training or business applications. But if it involves post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorders or other stressful situations, clinicians like to use classic immersive virtual reality tools and to stay in the room with the patient so they can help manage difficult symptoms as they arise, Greenleaf adds. virtual reality therapy Key features of classic immersive virtual reality are its ability to augment people’s senses and imaginations, says Ivana Steigman, MD, PhD, also of Thrive Research. In the area of substance abuse treatment and recovery, for instance, Steigman is working on an application that brings patients into scenes resembling those that fuel their addiction — bar settings, for example — or of emotional triggers, such as family conflicts. By bringing these scenes directly to the client and therapist, clients can bypass a big problem in traditional therapy: having to visualize and recall scenes accurately, Steigman says. In turn, this versimilitude provokes the same emotions that would be stirred up in real life. “After a while, when you put a [virtual] beer or line of cocaine in front of someone, the person is sweating,” she says. “So you can really mimic their emotional turmoil.” 49 M a rc h 2 0 1 2 • M o n i to r o n p s yc h o l o g y

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Monitor on Psychology - March 2012

Monitor on Psychology - March 2012
Letters
President’s column
Contents
From the CEO
Supreme Court rejects eyewitness protections
New member benefit: prevention screenings
A psychodynamic treatment for PTSD shows promise for soldiers
Was ‘Little Albert’ ill during the famed conditioning study?
New research identifies ways to improve eyewitness identifications
In Brief
‘Our health at risk’
Perspective on Practice
APA endorses higher education guidelines
TIME CAPSULE
QUESTIONNAIRE
Random Sample
Judicial Notebook
Help for struggling veterans
Driving out cancer disparities
In the Public Interest
SCIENCE WATCH
Practice, virtually
The legal and ethical issues of virtual therapy
Psychologist PROFILE
EARLY CAREER PSYCHOLOGY
Bringing life into focus
Pay attention to me
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL FOUNDATION
Division Spotlight
Personalities

Monitor on Psychology - March 2012