MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Self-Compassionate Engagement and Cultural Background Explain Gains in Emerging Adults’ Temporal Well-Being After a Virtual Reality Experience

2025· article· W4416404261 on OpenAlexaff
Jacob Sauer, Denise Quesnel, Noah Miller, Bernhard E. Riecke

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperience sampling methodVirtual realityMeditationAction (physics)Empirical researchAnxietyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An established empirical connection links adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) with the development of self-critical behaviours, including habitual self-scrutiny and harsh self-evaluation. These tendencies inhibit self-compassion and reduce well-being, particularly among emerging adults (ages 16–30) for whom such adversity may be recent or ongoing. We conducted a pilot study examining (a) the relationship between baseline compassionate abilities and multidimensional temporal well-being, and (b) the potential impact of a self-transcendent virtual reality (VR) meditation experience, Awedyssey, on well-being. Participants (N = 8) completed pre-study, pre-VR, and post-VR assessments of compassionate abilities, well-being, flow state, and anxiety, as well as semi-structured interviews. Results indicated that self-compassionate action and engagement could predict improvements across several domains and temporal dimensions of well-being. However, contrary to expectations, immersive flow and self-transcendent emotions elicited by Awedyssey did not produce measurable changes in anxiety or well-being. These findings support a robust connection between self-compassion and well-being, while highlighting limitations in the use of unguided compassion-focused VR to elicit durable positive affect. Additionally, regional cultural background and prior lab affiliation emerged as moderating factors, emphasizing the need for stratified sampling and ecologically valid methods in future research.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions→French-language works237,207→