# Compassionate Embodied Virtual Experience Increases the Adherence to Meditation Practice
## 3 Results
### Efficacy of the In-Person Session Practices  
Descriptive statistics, independent-sample \(t\)-test for baseline scores, and ANCOVA results are shown in Tables 2 and 3. VR and audio participants had no significantly different baseline scores in SMS and VAS-SC. Regarding the body swap induction, scores in the embodiment experience questionnaire were significantly greater than 1 [(location (\(M=5.29\); \(SD=1.11\); \(t\) (20) = 17.66, \(p<0.001\)), ownership (\(M=4.69\); \(SD=1.40\); \(t\) (20) = 12.11, \(p<0.001\)), and agency (\(M=5.81\); \(SD=0.90\); \(t\) (20) = 24.46, \(p<0.001\))]. That is, the induction was effective in generating the body swap and creating a feeling of being located in, having agency over, and owning the performer's body. In both conditions, there was a statistically significant increase in SMS scores from the previous moment to the in-person session and after it. Moreover, audio participants had significant low levels of energy after the session. However, after adjusting for pretest scores, differences in these outcomes between the two groups were not found. Finally, independent-samples \(t\)-tests were conducted to compare the Dictator's Game scores for TMTBA and audio conditions. There was a significant difference in the Dictator's Game between money that VR participants decided to retain (\(M=2134.52\); \(SD=122.60\)and money they decided to give to the embodied patient (\(M\) = 3053.57; \(SD\) = 390.38; \(t\) (20) = 10.29, \(p\) > 0.001, two-tailed, _eta squared_ = 0.84), with audio participants gaining an inferior quantity of money (\(M\) = 2121.25; \(SD\) = 117.90) than the patient (\(M\) = 2932.50.52; \(SD\) = 406.62; \(t\) (19) = 8.57, \(p\) < 0.001, two-tailed, _eta squared_ = 0.79). Nevertheless, there was no significant effect for condition on the amount that the patient received, \(t\) (39) = \(-\)0.97, \(p\) = 0.337, two tailed, _eta squared_ = 0.02), nor on the money that participants retained, \(t\) (39) = \(-\)0.35, \(p\) = 0.726, two tailed, _eta squared_ = 0.00), despite VR participants giving more money to the patient than audio participants. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Baseline Characteristic** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**VR**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Audio**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Full Sample**} \\ \hline  & \(n\) & \% & \(n\) & \% & \(n\) & \% \\ \hline Gender & & & & & \\ Female & 17 & 81 & 16 & 80 & 33 & 80.5 \\ Male & 4 & 19 & 4 & 20 & 8 & 19.5 \\ Highest educational level & & & & & \\ Middle school & 2 & 9.5 & 4 & 20 & 6 & 14.6 \\ High school/some college & 13 & 61.9 & 13 & 65 & 26 & 63.4 \\ University or postgraduate degree & 6 & 28.6 & 3 & 15 & 9 & 22 \\ Previous experience \({}^{\text{a}}\) & & & & & \\ Meditation practice & 5 & 23.8 & 5 & 25 & 10 & 24.4 \\ Compassion practice & 4 & 19.05 & 2 & 10 & 6 & 14.63 \\ Meditation practice frequency & & & & & \\ Never & 18 & 85.71 & 20 & 100 & 38 & 92.68 \\
1 time per week & 1 & 4.76 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 2.44 \\
4 times per week & 2 & 9.53 & 0 & 0 & 2 & 4.88 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note. N = 41 (\(n\) = 21 for participants of VR condition and \(n\) = 20 for participants of audio condition). Participants were on average 22.85 years old (SD = 4.76). \({}^{\text{a}}\) Reflects the number and percentage of participants answering “yes” to this question.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: Sociodemographic characteristics of participants at baseline.