The desired sample size was determined using a G*Power analysis. With parameters set to f = 0.25, α = 0.05, and Power = 0.9, G*Power recommended a sample size of 64 participants. To account for potential dropouts owing to cybersickness and other reasons, we recruited 70 participants. All participants met the eligibility criteria of being at least 18 years old and not currently receiving psychiatric care. A total of 36 participants were randomly allocated to the VR-based guided meditation condition (VR condition) and 34 participants to the imagery-based guided meditation condition (imagery condition). Given the study objective of comparing novice and experienced meditators, we used a between-subjects design. We were concerned that, in a repeated-measures design, the experience of participating in the first condition (e.g., VR meditation) may influence participants’ responses in the second condition (e.g., non-VR meditation) due to learning effects or increased familiarity with meditation techniques. This could bias the results by introducing unintended carryover effects, thereby compromising the comparisons’ validity. Therefore, to minimize the risk of these confounding effects, a between-subjects design was deemed more appropriate. The baseline characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table 1.

After receiving approval from the institutional review board (#202403-HB-003), we recruited participants by posting recruitment flyers on college campuses. Eligibility was determined via email or telephone screening. Upon arrival, the participants were individually escorted to the testing room and informed about the study’s purpose, procedure, the voluntary nature of participation, and confidentiality. The participants assigned to the VR condition were also informed about the potential side effects of VR. After signing the consent form, a pretest was conducted to measure their HR, GSR, negative affect, and previous meditation experience. The experiment session was initiated and lasted for 18 min. During the experiment, efforts were made to minimize distraction in both conditions, such as having the researchers sit out of sight of the participants.

Participants in the VR condition were instructed to sit comfortably and wear the MetaQuest Pro VR all-in-one device with two VR programs: Guided Meditation¹ and TRIPP.² These platforms provide immersive meditation experiences designed to reduce external distractions and facilitate mental relaxation while exploring breathtaking landscapes and virtual worlds (Casu et al., 2024). The English audio guidance provided by these programs was muted, and the participants received verbal guidance in Korean from the researchers. The participants in the imagery condition were asked to sit comfortably with their eyes closed, adopt a relaxed posture, and visualize scenes in response to the researchers’ verbal guidance. Verbal guidance in both conditions consisted of two parts (breathing meditation and waterfall concentration meditation) and was delivered using prerecorded audio instructions (see Table 2).

In the VR condition, participants first engaged with Guided Meditation, followed by TRIPP. This order was predetermined to ease participants into the VR experience, beginning with general guided meditation before transitioning to the more interactive features of TRIPP. Specifically, participants completed breathing meditation using Guided Meditation and then moved on to waterfall concentration meditation in TRIPP. Those in the imagery condition followed the same sequence. Following the experimental session, all participants completed posttest measures of HR, GSR, negative affect, and concentration during meditation.

Breathing and nature-based meditation (here, the waterfall was used as the natural environment) are widely recognized techniques for enhancing mindfulness and reducing stress. Breathing meditation involves focusing on one’s breath to remain grounded in the present moment (Komariah et al., 2022; Paul et al., 2007). Meanwhile, nature-based meditation immerses individuals in natural environments, fostering a deeper connection to nature and promoting inner peace (Owens and Bunce, 2022; Ray et al., 2021).

Baseline characteristics between the VR and imagery conditions, including age and outcome measures (i.e., HR, GSR, negative affect), were compared using t-tests. No significant differences were observed between the conditions (Table 3). In addition, chi-square tests revealed no significant differences in gender distribution or previous meditation experience between the conditions.

To test the first and second hypotheses, we conducted repeated-measures multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) on HR, GSR, and negative affect. The means, standard deviations, and MANOVA statistics based on condition (i.e., VR, imagery) and time (i.e., pretest, posttest) are presented in Table 4. While the main effects of the conditions on HR, GSR, and negative affect were not significant, the main effects of time were significant. No significant interactions were observed between the condition and time. Furthermore, paired-sample t-tests were conducted to examine pretest/posttest differences (see Table 5) and differences between the VR and imagery conditions at the posttest (see Table 6). The results indicated significant decreases in HR, GSR, and negative affect from pretest to posttest for both the VR and imagery conditions. The effect sizes at posttest were also calculated using Cohen’s d. An effect size greater than 1.2 is considered very large, while 0.56 ~ 1.2 is considered large, 0.33 ~ 0.55 moderate, and less than 0.33 small (Lipsey and Wilson, 1993). The results indicated moderate to large effects (HR: VR d = 0.46, imagery d = 0.27; GSR: VR d = 0.60, imagery d = 0.71; negative affect: VR d = 1.29, imagery d = 1.46).

An independent samples t-test was conducted to compare the levels of concentration during meditation between the VR and imagery conditions. The results reveal a significant difference (Table 7), with the VR condition demonstrating higher concentrations than the imagery condition.

We performed a one-way ANOVA to examine the differences in HR, GSR, negative affect, and concentration during meditation in terms of condition and previous meditation experience. Significant differences were found among the four groups in concentration scores (see Table 8). The post-hoc Scheffé test indicated that participants with no previous meditation experience in the VR condition (Group 2) reported significantly higher levels of concentration during meditation than those in the imagery condition (Group 4).

The participants’ qualitative responses regarding their meditation experiences in both conditions were analyzed using interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA). IPA was chosen because of its focus on the lived experience of individuals and its emphasis on empathic interpretation of participant narratives (Smith et al., 2009). The results for the VR and imagery conditions are summarized in Tables 9, 10, respectively. Participants in both conditions reported positive outcomes of meditation, such as relaxation and enhanced focus on breathing. Those in the VR condition highlighted the benefits of an immersive environment with appropriate visual and auditory stimuli. However, they also noted technical issues including poor image quality and discomfort caused by wearing the VR headset.

The results indicated that both VR and imagery meditation effectively decreased HR, GSR, and negative affect from baseline scores. Thus, our first hypothesis, which predicted a significant reduction in these measures under both conditions, was confirmed. Although the effectiveness of VR-based meditation has not been extensively documented, previous studies have reported encouraging results (Flores et al., 2018; Gomez et al., 2017). Our findings align with these studies, suggesting the benefits of VR-based guided meditation (Failla et al., 2022; Navarro-Haro et al., 2017) for stress reduction and mood improvement among South Korean adults in a controlled experiment.

However, our second hypothesis, which predicted that VR-based guided meditation would outperform imagery-based guided meditation in reducing HR, GSR, and negative affect, was not supported. Our findings contrast with those of prior research, indicating the potential superiority of VR in reducing stress and negative affect (Navarro-Haro et al., 2019; Ma et al., 2023). Nevertheless, some previous findings have also suggested that the effectiveness of VR-based-and non-VR-based meditation is not significantly different (King et al., 2024). One possible explanation for this inconsistency is the initial arousal induced by the VR experience, which can diminish the immediate stress-reducing effects. For example, the participants in this study who are less exposed to VR may experience heightened anticipatory anxiety when using VR equipment. In support of this explanation, prior research has suggested that VR is inherently arousing (Lombard and Ditton, 1997), which may create a slight increase in arousal at the beginning of the VR meditation.

Despite the similar effects of VR and imagery meditation on HR, GSR, and negative affect, qualitative feedback from participants suggested that VR-based guided meditation (not imagery-based guided meditation) was effective in inducing positive emotions. Although we did not measure changes in positive emotion following either meditation method, participants from the VR condition qualitatively described feeling “calm and comfortable” and reported that they “enjoyed” the experience. While the primary goal of meditation is not to foster a positive mood, the ability of VR-based meditation to facilitate positive emotions could be beneficial in mitigating experiential challenges related to negative emotions (Garland et al., 2015). Several studies show that VR-based meditation interventions can effectively induce positive affect, such as wonder, joy, peace, inspiration, and interest (Miller et al., 2021; Seabrook et al., 2020). However, it is critical to consider that positive affect might result from the use of VR itself; thus, the content presented in the VR environment to participants is likely to play a crucial role (Seabrook et al., 2020). In this study, positive affect may have stemmed from the simulated waterfall environment, which participants found calming, comfortable, and enjoyable.

Third, our third hypothesis was supported, indicating that participants in the VR condition demonstrated higher concentration during meditation than those in the imagery condition. The participants reported that the increased concentration observed in the VR condition was due to the immersive nature of the VR environment. Specifically, participants noted that these environments blocked the user’s view of the real world and helped them focus their attention on meditation, which is congruent with observations from previous studies (Navarro-Haro et al., 2019). In addition, the availability of visual and auditory stimuli within a VR environment helps minimize mind wandering (Costa et al., 2019; Navarro-Haro et al., 2017). Therefore, for individuals who have difficulty maintaining focus during meditation, VR-based meditation offers a promising alternative tool for reducing stress levels and negative affect.

Furthermore, our fourth hypothesis was supported. Novice meditators in the VR condition reported significantly higher concentration levels than those in the imagery condition. Thus, VR-guided meditation may be especially beneficial for individuals who are new to meditation, as the immersive nature of VR helps maintain focus. Studies show that maintaining continuous attention on a specific object is a challenging skill for novices (Anderson et al., 2019; Lutz et al., 2008). In contrast, experienced meditators may already possess the concentration skills necessary to engage in various meditation methods. These findings align with prior research on VR’s potential to enhance attention. However, they also contradict research that emphasizes the benefits of mindfulness training primarily for experienced meditators in stressful immersive virtual environments (Crescentini et al., 2016). Future research can explore how VR-guided meditation may be tailored specifically to novice meditators to maximize its potential for supporting the development of concentration and mindfulness skills. Scholars can also investigate its long-term effects compared to traditional mindfulness training programs.

An important aspect of the current study was the use of single-session VR interventions. While these interventions are shorter in duration, they offer several unique benefits. Single-session interventions can provide immediate stress relief and relaxation. Consequently, they can be particularly useful for individuals seeking quick and accessible ways to manage acute stress or emotional distress (Rubin et al., 2024). These interventions are also convenient for those who may have limited time or may not be ready to commit to longer programs, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR). MBSR is an evidence-based, eight-week program designed to teach mindfulness mediation (Kabat-Zinn, 1990). Although initially developed for stress management, MBSR has since been shown to effectively address anxiety, depression, pain, and somatic symptoms (Niazi and Niazi, 2011).

While single-session interventions are effective for short-term stress relief and may serve as an entry point for further mindfulness practices, they do not offer the sustained benefits associated with multi-session programs such as MBSR. Future research should investigate how VR-based mindfulness interventions can be structured into multi-session formats like MBSR and whether these adaptations can produce the same depth of long-term benefits.

The findings of this study hold several implications for clinical practice. First, we found that VR-based- and imagery-based guided meditation were equally effective in reducing physiological stress markers and negative affect. This equivalence is noteworthy for individuals who find imagery-based meditation difficult and seek alternatives to traditional practices. Clinicians are advised to explore their clients’ comfort levels in using meditation techniques, their proficiency in skills such as imagination or visualization, and their previous experience with VR before deciding on a method. Understanding these factors can help to tailor meditation interventions that suit individual preferences and needs. Specifically, clinicians are encouraged to consider that individual differences in mental imagery ability can influence participants’ engagement with traditional imagery-based mindfulness practices, as not everyone possesses strong visualization skills. Individuals with lower mental imagery capabilities may find it difficult to fully immerse themselves in guided meditations that rely heavily on visualizing calming scenes (Cui et al., 2007). This may explain some variations in participants’ responses to such interventions. Overall, these findings underscore the potential benefits of incorporating VR into mindfulness and relaxation interventions.

Second, our study highlighted the significant advantage of VR in enhancing concentration during meditation. This finding suggests potential benefits for clients experiencing attention problems, such as anxiety symptoms or ADHD. For these clients, efforts to generate and sustain specific images during imagery-based meditation can paradoxically increase rather than reduce stress. Third, our findings underscore the importance of adapting meditation interventions based on the client’s previous experience with meditation. The novice meditators in our study reported significantly higher levels of concentration during VR-based meditation than their counterparts who used imagery-based methods. This suggests that VR can be particularly beneficial for individuals who are new to meditation and may find traditional techniques challenging to initiate and maintain. Clinicians should consider using VR-based meditation with novice meditators to facilitate initial engagement and concentration.

First, we used a self-report, three-item scale that we developed to measure concentration levels during meditation at the posttest. Future research could use established scales such as the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) (Brown and Ryan, 2003) or the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) (Baer et al., 2006) to measure concentration and mindfulness during meditation. These scales provide a more comprehensive assessment of participants’ mindfulness experiences than our three-item scale. Scholars may also benefit from incorporating more objective measures, such as neuroimaging techniques (e.g., fMRI and EEG), to measure concentration during meditation.

Second, although this study examined the short-term effects of meditation, longitudinal research is necessary to evaluate the temporal sustainability of these benefits. Long-term follow-up and larger randomized controlled trials are essential to determine whether VR-based guided meditation leads to long-term improvements in mental health outcomes compared with traditional methods.

Third, we did not compare the various types of VR programs. Certain VR environments may be more effective than others in lowering HR, GSR, and negative affect. Future studies should investigate how different VR elements may influence these outcome measures (King et al., 2024).

Fourth, heart rate variability (HRV) data were not included in this study. HRV is a valuable physiological marker for assessing autonomic nervous system regulation and stress responses. Hence, it is an important measure for evaluating the effectiveness of psychological interventions such as meditation. Future studies should include HRV measurements to provide a more comprehensive understanding of both the psychological and physiological effects of meditation practices.

Fifth, we primarily focused on measuring negative affect (NA) and did not include positive affect (PA) as an outcome variable. While reducing NA is important, research has demonstrated that VR-based meditation may be particularly effective in enhancing PA, including emotions such as joy, peace, and inspiration (Miller et al., 2021; Seabrook et al., 2020). Future studies should consider incorporating both NA and PA to more comprehensively capture the emotional effects of VR meditation interventions. In addition, we utilized only visual and auditory cues. Integrating sensory stimulation, such as olfactory stimuli, into VR meditation interventions may further enhance the meditative experience (Pizzoli et al., 2022). For instance, incorporating pleasant or familiar scents into VR environments could foster deeper emotional engagement and relaxation during mindfulness practices. Future research should explore the potential of olfactory stimuli in creating multisensory VR meditation experiences.

Finally, qualitative feedback from the VR participants indicated that the discomfort caused by the VR headset was a source of distraction. This suggests that participant comfort should be prioritized when selecting a VR headset to enhance mindfulness exercises. Future studies could benefit from allowing participants additional time to habituate themselves to and adjust their VR headsets.