The present study adopts a mixed-methods research design with the aim of investigating the impact of virtual natural scenarios (between-subjects factor: experimental condition with or without virtual natural scenarios) on the state of mindfulness and emotions’ elicitation (within-subjects factor: pre- and post-measurements of the experimental session).

The study recruited Italian young adults aged 18–40, aiming for a balanced gender distribution. A sample size calculation, performed via a priori power analysis using GPower (version 3.1.9.6.), indicated that a minimum of 34 participants were required to achieve 80% power, a medium effect size (f = 0.25), and a significance level of α ≤ 0.05 for the main analyses of interest. Based on this, the study targeted a total of 50 participants (25 per experimental group). The recruitment process involved an online questionnaire distributed via snowball sampling techniques. A total of 90 responses were collected, comprising 61 women and 29 men (M age = 25.12, SD = 3.46, range: 20–43 years). For the screening phase, participants with prior mindfulness experience were excluded from the sample. This was important to control for any pre-existing effects of mindfulness on their emotional state or mindfulness levels, ensuring that the study accurately assessed the impact of the intervention on naive participants. Specifically, 11 individuals were excluded due to prior engagement in mindfulness practices. The final sample consisted of 49 participants who voluntarily chose to take part in the study, including 31 women (63.3%) and 18 men (36.7%). The average age of participants was 24.86 years (SD = 3.01), predominantly student-based sample (79.6%), holding a bachelor degree (65.3%).

Participants first completed a recruitment questionnaire, which gathered socio-demographic information (gender, age, education, place of birth, occupation), questions about their prior experience with VR and mindfulness, and their connection to nature. Those who met the inclusion criteria were contacted via email to schedule the experimental session, providing them with basic procedural information and instructions.

The study was conducted in the IDEaCT Social Lab at the Department of Social and Developmental Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome.

Upon arrival, participants read and signed an informed consent form explaining the study’s objectives, procedures, data treatment, and potential short-term effects of VR use. They were then fitted with the Polar H10 heart rate sensor, linked to the Elite HRV application, to measure baseline heart rate and inter-beat interval data for 2 min.

The Oculus Quest 2, a standalone VR system with an HMD and two manual controllers, was provided. Participants also wore over-ear headphones to hear environmental sounds (e.g., wind, birds, waves). A video recording of the session began, which included the lab space and mirrored VR footage to monitor participants’ behaviors.

Participants were instructed to select and explore three virtual natural environments— a tropical island, a meadow, and a forest. The order of these scenarios was randomized. After each 2-min exploration, they removed the headset to complete a questionnaire on a computer, assessing their subjective emotional experience and the explored environment.

Once all three environments were explored, participants completed a questionnaire on their current emotional state (PANAS) and indicated their preferred scenario for the subsequent mindfulness session, which would use VR in the experimental condition.

The mindfulness session involved a 23-min audio track, combining a guiding voice and music at 432 Hz to stimulate brain alpha waves and beta-endorphins. The guided mindfulness practice used in this study was taken from the Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) program developed by Woods and Rockman (2021), in its Italian adaptation (Woods and Rockman, 2022). The audio track features a professional instructor guiding participants through a structured mindfulness meditation consistent with MBSR principles. The guidance follows a gentle, non-directive style, with a calm and steady tone that encourages present-moment awareness and acceptance. The practice includes key themes typical of MBSR, such as focused attention on the breath, non-judgmental awareness of bodily sensations, and the invitation to gently return attention when the mind wanders. A single audio track was created for both experimental conditions, with the only difference being that in the conventional mindfulness track, participants were instructed to close their eyes, whereas this detail was omitted in the track for VR-based mindfulness. Participants listened to the track while seated in a chair at the center of the room. In the VR-based mindfulness condition, participants wore the headset again to view their preferred scenario.

Following the mindfulness experience, participants completed a final questionnaire assessing their emotional state (PANAS) and mindfulness state. They were also asked about their subjective experience with the virtual scenarios, the usability of the VR system, any symptoms related to headset use, and their sense of immersion and presence in the virtual environment.

The virtual natural scenarios (Figure 1) were developed following the eight components of the Biophilic Effect (Salingaros, 2015), which include sunlight, color, gravity, fractal elements, curves, details, water, and life. These elements are known to promote relaxation and stress recovery, offering a healing effect on the human body. Specifically, the three natural scenarios analyzed in this study represent a tropical island, a meadow, and a forest.

In the recruitment survey, participants completed a series of questions assessing socio-demographic indicators, including gender, age, highest level of educational achievement, country of birth, and employment status. They were also asked about prior experience with mindfulness and VR, dispositional mindfulness, and their connection with nature.

Dispositional mindfulness, serving as the pre-test measurement, was measured using the Italian version of the Toronto Mindfulness Trait Scale (TMTS; Davis et al., 2009), which includes 13 items divided into two dimensions. The first one is curiosity which reflects an individual’s disposition to explore and understand their experience. In particular, it refers to the interest in every aspect of inner experience, including thoughts, emotions and bodily sensations, observed with an attitude of openness and exploration (Lau et al., 2006) even when they are unpleasant. Examples of items are: “I am curious about what I might learn about myself by taking notice of how I react to certain thoughts, feelings or sensations” and “I remain curious about the nature of each experience as it arises.”

The second one is decentering, indicating the tendency to observe thoughts and emotions without becoming absorbed by them. Specifically, it is defined as the ability to observe thoughts and emotions as temporary mental events rather than as accurate reflections of the self or reality (Lau et al., 2006), a capacity that plays a particularly important role in emotional regulation. Examples of items are: “I am more invested in just watching my experiences as they arise, than in figuring out what they could mean” and “I am aware of my thoughts and feelings without overidentifying with them.”

The Toronto Mindfulness State Scale (TMS; Lau et al., 2006) was adopted to assess - as the post-test measurement - the dimensions of curiosity and decentering through 13 items, with participants rating their experiences during the meditation on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (“not at all”) to 4 (“very much”).

The Italian short version of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson et al., 1988; Terracciano et al., 2003) was used to assess participants’ emotional states pre- and post- intervention. The Positive Affect scale assesses the degree of pleasurable engagement with the environment, characterized by emotions such as enthusiasm, excitement, energy, and determination. Conversely, the Negative Affect scale captures a general dimension of subjective distress and unpleasurable engagement, encompassing a broad spectrum of aversive emotional states, including fear, nervousness, guilt, and shame (Terracciano et al., 2003). This scale evaluates positive and negative emotions through self-reported agreement with items on a 5-point Likert scale.

Table 1 shows descriptive statistics of the variables of interest across groups.

Concerning decentering (Figure 2), a significant main effect of time was observed, F (1, 47) = 77.102, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.621, indicating overall higher scores at the state level post-intervention (M = 13.88, SD = 3.07) than at the trait level pre-intervention (M = 18.69, SD = 3.45). However, no significant main effect of the experimental group was found, F (1, 47) = 0.178, p = 0.675, η²_p = 0.004. Additionally, the interaction between time and experimental group was not significant, F (1, 47) = 0.823, p = 0.369, η²_p = 0.017.

Post-hoc comparisons showed that the increase of decentering level in the post-intervention was significant for both the VR-based mindfulness group, t (47) = −5.746, p_tukey < 0.001, and the conventional group, t (47) = −6.650, p_tukey < 0.001. For a comprehensive overview of the analysis, please see the Supplementary material S3.

This result indicates that the increase in decentering after the intervention was observed across all participants, regardless of whether they engaged in mindfulness alone or mindfulness combined with nature VR, suggesting the intervention type did not differentially impact decentering.

Regarding curiosity (Supplementary Figure S1), no significant main effects of time, F (1, 47) = 0.004, p = 0.951, η²_p = 0.000, nor of the experimental group factor were observed, F (1, 47) = 0.023, p = 0.881, η²_p = 0.000. Also, results did not show a significant interaction between time and experimental group, F (1, 47) = 0.019, p = 0.892, η²_p = 0.000. As reported, the curiosity scores tend to vary very slightly after the intervention (M = 19.33, SD = 3.68) compared to the pre-test (M = 19.37, SD = 3.32): it seems that the curiosity dimension is not affected by the Mindfulness intervention both when combined or not with VR. Complete analysis details are provided in the Supplementary material S4.

Regarding positive emotions (Supplementary Figure S2), the main effect of time was not significant, F (1, 47) = 0.144, p = 0.706, η²_p = 0.003, so there were no relevant differences between positive emotions detected during the pre (M = 3.31, SD = 0.70) and the post test (M = 3.28, SD = 0.79). As the graph shows, the main effect of the experimental group, F (1, 47) = 0.001, p = 0.982, η²_p = 0.000 and the interaction effect of time and experimental group, were not significant too, F (1, 47) = 0.486, p = 0.489, η²_p = 0.010. Further details of the analysis can be found in the Supplementary material S5.

Overall, it seems that the proposed interventions have no significant effect in enhancing positive emotions, contrasting our initial hypothesis.

Concerning negative emotions (Figure 3), according to the analysis, there is a significant main effect of time, F (1, 47) = 15.732, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.251: the negative emotions perception decrease from the pre-test (M = 1.40, SD = 0.57) to the post-test (M = 1.10, SD = 0.27), as expected. In contrast, both the main effect of the experimental group, F (1, 47) = 0.030, p = 0.864, η²_p = 0.001, and the interaction effect of time and experimental group were not significant, F (1, 47) = 0.336, p = 0.565, η²_p = 0.007.

However, post-hoc comparisons revealed that the reduction in negative emotions from pre- to post-test was significant only for participants in the experimental group who underwent VR-based mindfulness, t (47) = 3.318, p_tukey = 0.009. In contrast, the difference between pre- and post-test scores was not significant in the group that received conventional mindfulness, t (47) = 2.325, p_tukey = 0.107.

Refer to the Supplementary material S6 for a full description of the analysis.

Thus, it appears that VR-based mindfulness significantly reduced negative emotions, whereas conventional mindfulness did not show a comparable effect, suggesting that experiencing virtual nature may enhance the effectiveness of mindfulness practices in reducing negative emotions.

The present study showed some promising results; however, some limitations should be considered. A possible explanation for the discrepancy between some observed results and our expectations, particularly regarding the expected added value of nature in VR, could be linked to some issues due to the design of the intervention, specifically the duration of the VR-based meditation session and the modality of experiencing virtual natural scenarios. Observing a virtual scene for 23 consecutive minutes without the option for interaction or exploration—since the meditation was conducted in a seated position—could have been a limiting factor. Mindfulness practice in natural environments - whether real or simulated - relies on attentional anchors and sensory stimuli to help practitioners stay present and engaged (Brown and Ryan, 2003). While the virtual environments in this study were visually and auditorily rich, it is possible that after a certain period, they ceased to be stimulating, failing to maintain participants’ attention. Additionally, several participants in the VR-based group expressed that they would have preferred to close their eyes during the mindfulness practice. This may have led them to perceive the VR experience as a barrier, preventing complete immersion in the practice. Future studies could further explore these aspects to determine the most effective way to structure the experience of mindfulness sessions in natural virtual environments. Additionally, research should investigate whether—and to what extent—specific characteristics of the natural environment influence the effectiveness of mindfulness practice.

Moreover, while participants with prior mindfulness experience were excluded to control for pre-existing differences in familiarity with the practice, this decision limits the generalizability of the findings to novice practitioners. Evidence suggests that experienced meditators may engage differently with mindfulness-based interventions, both physiologically and neurologically. For example, experienced practitioners exhibit reduced heart rate variability, reflecting enhanced autonomic self-regulation (Peressutti et al., 2012), and show altered resting-state connectivity in brain regions associated with self-referential processing and cognitive control, such as the posterior cingulate cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (Kral et al., 2018). Supporting this, Falcone and Jerram’s (2018) meta-analysis found distinct patterns of brain activation between novice and experienced meditators, indicating that mindfulness is a learned skill characterized by progressive neuroplastic changes—such as shifts from insula activation in novices to basal ganglia involvement in experts—reflecting increasing habitual engagement with the practice. To deepen understanding and optimize intervention efficacy, future research should systematically investigate how varying levels of prior mindfulness experience influence behavioral outcomes as well as underlying neural and physiological mechanisms. This will facilitate the development of more tailored and effective mindfulness-based interventions, including combined VR nature-based mindfulness interventions across diverse populations.