Speaking AnxietySocial Communication

Preliminary controlled study comparing VR therapy versus group-CBT for social phobia (n=36): both treatments produced statistically and clinically significant improvement, with trivial differences between the two

Klinger E et al. · 2005 · CyberPsychology & Behavior · Experimental · n = 36 · Adults with diagnosed social phobia · DOI
Evidence certainty: Low certainty
How this was rated

Preliminary controlled study with n=36 total across two conditions - small relative to current SAD RCT standards but reasonable for the era. Peer-reviewed in CyberPsychology & Behavior (Mary Ann Liebert, established peer-reviewed venue). Both arms followed a manualised 12-week protocol. The active comparator (group-CBT) is an evidence-based reference standard, which strengthens the non-inferiority framing. Limitations: small sample, early-era research-grade VR equipment, no formal randomisation procedure reported in detail in the abstract, and the 'trivial effect-size differences' framing may mask underpowered between-arm comparisons. Useful as foundational citation; less useful as definitive contemporary evidence.

Ratings use a simplified four-tier scheme (High, Moderate, Low, Very Low) informed by the GRADE working group. Learn more about how studies are rated.

Thirty-six participants diagnosed with social phobia were allocated to either virtual reality therapy (VRT) using four virtual environments (performance, intimacy, scrutiny, assertiveness situations) OR a control condition of group cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Both treatments lasted 12 weeks and were delivered according to a treatment manual. Both produced statistically and clinically significant improvement. Effect-size comparisons revealed that the differences between VRT and the active group-CBT comparator were trivial - establishing VRT as a non-inferior alternative to evidence-based group-CBT for social phobia.

Clinical bottom line

An early-era preliminary controlled study comparing 12-week VRT to 12-week group-CBT for clinically diagnosed social phobia. Both treatments produced statistically and clinically significant improvement with trivial between-treatment differences. This is foundational non-inferiority evidence for VR therapy vs evidence-based group-CBT for social phobia, frequently cited in later VRET reviews. Stronger and larger RCTs now exist (Anderson 2013, Bouchard 2017, Kampmann 2016) - for current clinical guidance, lean on those; for foundational and methodological citation, Klinger 2005 remains useful.

Key findings

  • 36 participants diagnosed with social phobia were allocated to either virtual reality therapy (VRT) or group cognitive-behavioral therapy (group-CBT) as the control condition
  • VRT used four virtual environments mapped to the four canonical social-phobia situation types: PERFORMANCE, INTIMACY, SCRUTINY, and ASSERTIVENESS situations
  • Both treatments lasted 12 WEEKS and were delivered according to a manualised protocol
  • Both treatments produced STATISTICALLY AND CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT improvement from pre to post
  • Effect-size comparisons of VRT vs group-CBT revealed TRIVIAL between-treatment differences - VRT is a workable non-inferior alternative to evidence-based group-CBT
  • Treatment was therapist-led - patients learned adapted cognitions and behaviors with therapist support, aiming to reduce anxiety in corresponding real situations
  • Hardware era: early-to-mid 2000s research VR equipment (specific hardware not extracted in detail)
  • Co-authored by Bouchard (later first author of the Bouchard 2017 BJPsych three-arm RCT, currently in this Hub) - the same research lineage that produced the more recent and definitive Bouchard 2017 superiority finding

Background

In the early 2000s, exposure-based cognitive-behavioral therapies were the gold-standard psychotherapy for social phobia, but in-vivo exposure was difficult to deliver in a controlled, dosable, replicable way. Virtual reality offered a new exposure-delivery mode, but few controlled comparisons against the established standard treatment (group-CBT) existed.

What the researchers did

Thirty-six participants diagnosed with social phobia (DSM-IV / CIM-10) were allocated to either virtual reality therapy (VRT) or group cognitive-behavioral therapy (group-CBT) as the active control. VRT used four virtual environments mapped to the four canonical social-phobia situation types: performance, intimacy, scrutiny, and assertiveness. Both treatments lasted 12 weeks and were delivered according to a manualised protocol. With the help of the therapist, patients learned adapted cognitions and behaviors to reduce anxiety in the corresponding real-world situations.

What they found

Why this matters

For the early VRET-for-SAD literature, this study was an important non-inferiority demonstration: VRT could match the established group-CBT standard at the 12-week mark. The four-situation taxonomy (performance / intimacy / scrutiny / assertiveness) influenced subsequent VRET scenario design, most notably the Bouchard et al. 2017 three-arm BJPsych RCT (which used a closely related four-situation framework). For current clinical guidance, the larger and more recent RCTs in this Hub (Anderson 2013, Bouchard 2017, Kampmann 2016) supersede this preliminary study.

Limitations

Implications for practice

For current clinical decision-making, lean on the larger and more recent RCTs (Anderson 2013, Bouchard 2017, Kampmann 2016) rather than this preliminary study. Klinger 2005's main contributions today are (a) foundational non-inferiority framing - VRT can match group-CBT for social phobia - and (b) the influential four-situation taxonomy (performance / intimacy / scrutiny / assertiveness) which subsequently informed VRET scenario design across multiple studies including Bouchard 2017. For PWS with social anxiety comorbidity, the relevance is indirect: the study supports the broader case that VRT is a credible alternative to evidence-based talk therapy, but does not address stuttering-specific outcomes.

Related Studies

Social CommunicationSpeaking AnxietyGeneralization

VR exposure is as effective as in vivo exposure group therapy for public-speaking-focused social anxiety, with lasting results

In a randomized controlled trial of 97 adults with social anxiety disorder whose primary fear was public speaking, eight sessions of virtual reality exposure were as effective as eight sessions of manualized in vivo exposure delivered in groups. Both active treatments outperformed waitlist on self-report and on a behavioral speech task, and improvements were maintained at 12-month follow-up.

Anderson PL et al. · 2013 Read Summary
Speaking AnxietySocial CommunicationGeneralization

First long-term (4-6 year) follow-up of VR exposure therapy and exposure group therapy for social anxiety disorder: durable gains, with 54% no longer meeting diagnostic criteria

Twenty-eight participants from the Anderson et al. 2013 RCT of VR exposure therapy (VRET) vs exposure group therapy for DSM-diagnosed social anxiety disorder were re-assessed a mean of 6 years (range 4-6) after treatment completion. Self-report measures, behavioral speech tasks, and diagnostic interviews all showed statistically significant improvement from pre-treatment to long-term follow-up. The majority (54%) no longer met diagnostic criteria for SAD; 68% rated themselves 'very much' or 'much' improved. With one exception, there were no differences between VRET and exposure group therapy at follow-up - both produce durable long-term benefits, consistent with the broader CBT-for-SAD evidence base.

Anderson PL et al. · 2017 Read Summary
Speaking AnxietySocial CommunicationGeneralization

Pre-registered three-arm RCT: CBT with VR exposure was superior to in-vivo exposure on the primary social-anxiety outcome - and more practical for therapists

A pre-registered three-arm RCT randomized 59 adults with DSM-5 social anxiety disorder to 14 weekly sessions of CBT with VR exposure (n=17), CBT with in-vivo exposure (n=22), or waitlist (n=20). The pre-specified superiority hypothesis was confirmed: VR exposure was significantly more effective than in-vivo exposure on the LSAS-SR primary outcome at post-treatment and at 6-month follow-up, and significantly less cumbersome for therapists (SWEAT: 15.24 vs 24.46). Reliable change: 76.5% VR, 68.3% in vivo, 30.0% waitlist.

Bouchard S et al. · 2017 Read Summary
Speaking AnxietySocial Communication

Pilot pre-post + waitlist study of four brief VR therapy sessions for public speaking anxiety in university students: reductions in self-report and heart-rate measures

Eight university students with public speaking anxiety completed four brief VR therapy sessions (~15 minutes each, weekly), with six waitlist-control students completing post-testing only. Self-report inventories, Subjective Units of Discomfort during exposure, and heart-rate measurements during speaking tasks were used. Results showed reductions on self-report measures and physiological indices for the VR group, supporting brief VRT as a workable PSA intervention. Small samples and pre-post-with-waitlist (not full RCT) design limit certainty - this is foundational pilot evidence rather than definitive efficacy data.

Harris SR et al. · 2002 Read Summary
Speaking AnxietySocial Communication

Three-arm RCT (n=60) of stand-alone VR exposure therapy vs in-vivo exposure vs waiting-list for social anxiety disorder: in-vivo exposure was superior to VRET on multiple secondary outcomes - the opposite pattern to Bouchard 2017

Sixty participants diagnosed with social anxiety disorder were randomly assigned to individual virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET), individual in-vivo exposure therapy (iVET), or a waiting-list control. Both treatments improved social anxiety symptoms, speech duration, perceived stress, and avoidant-personality-disorder beliefs versus waitlist. However, iVET (but NOT VRET) also improved fear of negative evaluation, speech performance, general anxiety, depression, and quality of life. iVET was superior to VRET on social anxiety symptoms at post and follow-up and on avoidant-PD beliefs at follow-up. At follow-up, almost all improvements remained significant for iVET; for VRET only the perceived-stress effect held.

Kampmann IL et al. · 2016 Read Summary
Speaking AnxietyGeneralization

VR exposure equals traditional CBT for public-speaking anxiety, with lower dropout

In an 88-person RCT, VR-based cognitive-behavioral therapy for public-speaking anxiety produced anxiety reductions equivalent to traditional CBT and significantly larger than waitlist, with notably fewer participants dropping out of the VR arm.

Wallach HS et al. · 2009 Read Summary

Cite this study

If you reference this study in your work, the canonical citation formats are:

APA 7th
Klinger, E., Bouchard, S., Légeron, P., Roy, S., Lauer, F., Chemin, I., & Nugues, P. (2005). Virtual Reality Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Social Phobia: A Preliminary Controlled Study. CyberPsychology & Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2005.8.76.
AMA 11th
Klinger E, Bouchard S, Légeron P, Roy S, Lauer F, Chemin I, Nugues P. Virtual Reality Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Social Phobia: A Preliminary Controlled Study. CyberPsychology & Behavior. 2005. doi:10.1089/cpb.2005.8.76.
BibTeX
@article{klinger2005,
  author = {Klinger, E. and Bouchard, S. and Légeron, P. and Roy, S. and Lauer, F. and Chemin, I. and Nugues, P.},
  title = {Virtual Reality Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Social Phobia: A Preliminary Controlled Study},
  journal = {CyberPsychology & Behavior},
  year = {2005},
  doi = {10.1089/cpb.2005.8.76},
  url = {https://withvr.app/evidence/studies/klinger-2005}
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Klinger, E.
AU  - Bouchard, S.
AU  - Légeron, P.
AU  - Roy, S.
AU  - Lauer, F.
AU  - Chemin, I.
AU  - Nugues, P.
TI  - Virtual Reality Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Social Phobia: A Preliminary Controlled Study
JO  - CyberPsychology & Behavior
PY  - 2005
DO  - 10.1089/cpb.2005.8.76
UR  - https://withvr.app/evidence/studies/klinger-2005
ER  -

Know of research that should be in this hub? If a relevant peer-reviewed study is not listed here, send the reference to hello@withvr.app. The hub is kept up to date as the literature grows.

Funding & independence

Affiliations: Klinger (E.) affiliated with engineering research group; Bouchard with Université du Québec en Outaouais; Légeron, Roy, Lauer (clinical psychology / psychiatry); Chemin (research engineering); Nugues (computer science). Funding sources not extracted in detail. Peer-reviewed in CyberPsychology & Behavior (Mary Ann Liebert). No withVR BV involvement in funding, study design, or authorship. Summary prepared independently by withVR using the published peer-reviewed paper. The VR system used was an era-appropriate research configuration, NOT Therapy withVR or Research withVR.

Last reviewed: 2026-05-17 Next review due: 2027-05-17 Reviewed by: Gareth Walkom