Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Attitudes Toward and Familiarity With Virtual Reality Therapy Among Practicing Cognitive Behavior Therapists: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study in the Era of Consumer VR Platforms
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, Clinical psychology. Karolinska Institutet, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3061-501X
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, Clinical psychology.
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, Clinical psychology.
Show others and affiliations
Number of Authors: 62019 (English)In: Frontiers in Psychology, ISSN 1664-1078, E-ISSN 1664-1078, Vol. 10, article id 176Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) is an efficacious treatment for fear and anxiety and has the potential to solve both logistic issues for therapists and be used for scalable self-help interventions. However, VRET has yet to see large-scale implementation in clinical settings or as a consumer product, and past research suggests that while therapists may acknowledge the many advantages of VRET, they view the technology as technically inaccessible and expensive. We reasoned that after the 2016 release of several consumer virtual reality (VR) platforms and associated public acquaintance with VR, therapists' concerns about VRET may have evolved. The present study surveyed attitudes toward and familiarity with VR and VRET among practicing cognitive behavior therapists (n = 185) attending a conference. Results showed that therapists had an overall positive attitude toward VRET (pros rated higher than cons) and viewed VR as applicable to conditions other than anxiety. Unlike in earlier research, high financial costs and technical difficulties were no longer top-rated negative aspects. Average negative attitude was a larger negative predictor of self-rated likelihood of future use than positive attitude was a positive predictor and partially mediated the positive association between VRET knowledge and likelihood of future use, suggesting that promotional efforts should focus on addressing concerns. We conclude that therapist's attitudes toward VRET appear to have evolved in recent years, and no longer appear to constitute a major barrier to implementing the next generation of VR technology in regular clinical practice.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Frontiers Media S.A., 2019. Vol. 10, article id 176
Keywords [en]
virtual reality, therapist, cognitive behavior therapy, dissemination and implementation, eHealth
National Category
Psychology
Research subject
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-166587DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00176ISI: 000458204300002PubMedID: 30800086OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-166587DiVA, id: diva2:1293391
Available from: 2019-03-04 Created: 2019-03-04 Last updated: 2019-12-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindner, PhilipMiloff, AlexanderReuterskiöld, LenaCarlbring, Per
By organisation
Clinical psychologyDepartment of Psychology
In the same journal
Frontiers in Psychology
Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 162 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf