Virtually Connected: Do Shared Novel Activities in Virtual Reality Enhance Self-Expansion and Relationship Quality?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to self-expansion theory, sharing novel experiences with a romantic partner can help prevent boredom and maintain relationship quality. However, in today’s globalized modern world, partners spend less time together and are more likely to live apart than in previous generations, limiting opportunities for shared novel experiences. In two in-lab experiments, we tested whether shared novel activities in virtual reality (VR) could facilitate self-expansion, reduce boredom, and enhance relationship quality. In Study 1, couples (N = 183) engaged in a shared novel and exciting activity in either VR or over video. Participants in the VR condition reported greater presence (i.e., felt like they were in the same space as their partner) and were less bored during the interaction compared to the video condition, though no main effects emerged for reports of self-expansion or relationship quality (relationship satisfaction and closeness). Consistent with predictions, people who reported more presence, in turn, reported greater self-expansion, less boredom, and greater relationship quality. In Study 2, couples (N = 141) engaged in a novel and exciting or a mundane experience in VR. Results were mixed such that participants in the novel VR condition reported less boredom and greater closeness post-interaction, though no effects emerged for self-expansion or relationship satisfaction. In exploratory analyses accounting for immersion, couples who engaged in the novel virtual experience reported more self-expansion, less boredom, and greater closeness. The findings suggest that virtual interactions may have less potential than in-person interaction to promote self-expansion but offer interesting future directions given VR’s ability to enhance presence beyond video interactions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".