Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
• Both live and virtual animal interactions can produce measurable effects on psychological and physiological outcomes. • Digital formats can elicit psychological and physiological changes broadly comparable to those observed in real-life animal-assisted interventions. • Future research should determine which design features of virtual animals (e.g. animation quality, interactivity, presence and immersion) most strongly contribute to their effectiveness. • VR-based animal-assisted intervention formats could represent an innovative therapeutic extension, especially in contexts where resources, accessibility or mobility are limited. Animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) have been shown to exert beneficial effects on various mental disorders. However, organizational, hygienic, and ethical challenges often limit their implementation. As a result, virtual alternatives are gaining increasing relevance. Initial findings suggest that digital interactions with animals may also elicit affective and physiological responses, although systematic, controlled studies are lacking. This study aimed to systematically compare the effects of real and virtual AAIs on depressive symptoms and peripheral oxytocin concentrations in patients with depression and healthy controls. In a mixed factorial design ( N = 66), patients with depression and healthy controls each underwent three conditions in randomized order: interaction with a live therapy dog, a virtual therapy dog, and a virtual reality (VR)-based fantastical creature. Depressive symptoms (per the DASS) and salivary oxytocin concentrations were assessed. All interventions significantly reduced depressive symptoms in patients, with the strongest effects observed for the live therapy dog and the VR-based fantastical creature. Oxytocin levels increased significantly across all conditions, regardless of participant group. Virtual animal interactions can evoke psychophysiological effects comparable to real-life AAIs. They appear promising as accessible, technology-supported interventions for psychiatric populations, particularly when access to live animals is limited.
Willms et al. (Fri,) studied this question.