MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416183861 · doi:10.1109/ismar67309.2025.00132

The Awe-Some Spectrum: Self-Reported Awe Varies by Eliciting Scenery and Presence in Virtual Reality, and the User's Nationality

2025· article· en· W4416183861 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa Steininger, Alexander Marquardt, Monica Perusquía-Hernández, Marvin Lehnort, Hiromu Otsubo, Felix Dollack, Ernst Kruijff, Björn Krüger, Kiyoshi Kiyokawa, Bernhard E. Riecke

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionRelevance (law)Virtual realityNationalityPersonalityAffect (linguistics)Space (punctuation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Awe is a multifaceted emotion often associated with the perception of vastness, that challenges existing mental frameworks. Despite its growing relevance in affective computing and psychological research, awe remains difficult to elicit and measure. This raises the research questions of how awe can be effectively elicited, which factors are associated with the experience of awe, and whether it can reliably be measured using biosensors. For this study, we designed 10 immersive Virtual Reality (VR) scenes with dynamic transitions from narrow to vast environments. These scenes were used to explore how awe relates to environmental features (abstract, human-made, nature), personality traits, and country of origin. We collected skin conductance, respiration, self-reported awe and presence data from participants from Germany, Japan, and Jordan. Our results indicate that self-reported awe varies significantly across countries and scene types. In particular, a scene depicting outer space elicited the strongest awe. Scenes that elicited high selfreported awe also induced a stronger sense of presence. However, we found no evidence that awe ratings are correlated with physiological responses. These findings challenge the assumption that awe is reliably reflected in autonomic arousal and underscore the importance of cultural and perceptual context. Our study offers new insights into how immersive VR can be designed to elicit awe, and suggests that subjective reports - rather than physiological signals - remain the most consistent indicators of emotional impact.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedia Influence and HealthFrench-language works237,207