Speaking AnxietyImplementation

First RCT (n=25+25) showing that consumer VR hardware and software can deliver effective one-session VRET for public speaking anxiety - both therapist-led (d=1.67) and self-led at home (d=1.35), with gains maintained at 6 and 12 months

Lindner P et al. · 2019 · Journal of Anxiety Disorders · RCT · n = 50 · Adults with elevated public speaking anxiety · DOI
Evidence certainty: Moderate certainty
How this was rated

Pre-specified RCT design with formal randomisation, n=25 per arm initially (later n=25 self-led at home), large within-group effects (d=1.67 and d=1.35) supported by linear mixed effects modeling, durable at 6 and 12 months. Peer-reviewed in Journal of Anxiety Disorders (Elsevier, established peer-reviewed venue). Limitations: the design is one-session therapist-led VRET followed by a 4-week internet-administered transition program - so the d=1.67 figure reflects the combined therapist-led + transition package, not VR alone. The waitlist-as-self-led-treatment crossover is a creative design but limits between-group comparison. The sample is community-recruited PSA, not strictly DSM-diagnosed SAD. The consumer-hardware result is the key contribution and is robust.

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.

Twenty-five participants were randomised to one-session therapist-led VR exposure therapy for public speaking anxiety using consumer VR hardware and software, followed by a 4-week internet-administered VR-to-in-vivo transition program; another 25 served as a waiting-list. Therapist-led VRET produced a very large effect on self-reported PSA (within Cohen's d = 1.67). The waiting-list then received internet-administered, SELF-LED VRET at home, followed by the same transition program - producing a large effect (d = 1.35). Results were maintained or improved at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups. This is the first published RCT demonstrating that off-the-shelf consumer VR hardware and software can deliver effective PSA exposure therapy in both clinician-supervised and home-based formats.

Clinical bottom line

The first RCT to show that consumer-grade off-the-shelf VR hardware and software can deliver effective public-speaking-anxiety exposure therapy in both therapist-led and self-led-at-home formats, with large within-group effects (d=1.67 and d=1.35) maintained or improved at 6 and 12 months. This is the consumer-hardware deployment study that makes contemporary clinical and home VRET practical - relevant to any clinician choosing between research-grade VR systems and Meta Quest-class consumer hardware. For PWS with PSA comorbidity, this RCT supports the case that consumer-hardware VRET delivered by SLPs (or even self-administered between sessions) is a viable treatment-augmentation strategy.

Key findings

  • n=25 + n=25 RCT design: therapist-led one-session VRET arm (n=25) vs waiting-list (n=25). After waitlist completion, the waitlist participants received the internet-administered SELF-LED home version of the same VRET protocol
  • Hardware: FIRST GENERATION of consumer VR hardware and software - establishing that off-the-shelf consumer kit is sufficient for clinically effective VRET, not just research-grade systems
  • Therapist-led VRET protocol: ONE session of in-person VR exposure followed by a 4-week internet-administered VR-to-in-vivo transition program
  • Therapist-led arm produced a LARGE within-group effect on self-reported PSA: Cohen's d = 1.67 (linear mixed effects modeling)
  • Self-led home VRET arm (delivered to the former waitlist participants) produced a LARGE within-group effect: Cohen's d = 1.35
  • Results were MAINTAINED OR IMPROVED at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups - durable long-term gains, not transient
  • Crossover design (waitlist becomes self-led treatment) is creative and ethically generous (no one stays untreated long) but limits clean between-arm comparison at follow-up
  • First demonstration that low-cost, off-the-shelf VR can be used to conduct PSA exposure therapy in both clinic and home settings - foundational for contemporary consumer-hardware VRET deployment

Background

Earlier RCTs of VRET for public speaking anxiety (PSA) and social anxiety disorder (SAD) used research-grade VR hardware (eMagin z800, VFX-3D, Virtual-I/0) - costly systems unsuited to routine clinical deployment. By 2018, consumer VR hardware (Oculus Rift, HTC Vive) and consumer VR software platforms had matured. The clinical question: could this off-the-shelf technology deliver effective VRET without research-grade hardware? And could a self-led home-administered VRET work in addition to therapist-led clinic VRET?

What the researchers did

Twenty-five participants with elevated PSA were randomised to one-session therapist-led VR exposure therapy delivered with consumer VR hardware and software, followed by a 4-week internet-administered VR-to-in-vivo transition program. Another 25 served as a waiting-list. After the waiting period, the waitlist participants received an internet-administered, SELF-LED version of the same VRET protocol to conduct at home, again followed by the same 4-week transition program. All outcomes were self-reported PSA, with linear mixed effects modeling for the analyzes.

What they found

Why this matters

This was the first RCT to show that off-the-shelf consumer VR hardware and software can deliver clinically effective public-speaking-anxiety exposure therapy in both therapist-led and self-led-at-home formats, with large durable effects. For clinicians considering consumer-hardware VRET (Meta Quest-class systems, including Therapy withVR), this RCT is the foundational clinical-effectiveness justification.

The self-led-at-home arm is particularly important for accessibility - many people with PSA will not present to a clinic, but might use a self-administered home program. The d=1.35 self-led effect (smaller than but in the same large-effect range as the therapist-led d=1.67) supports a stepped-care or home-based model.

Limitations

Implications for practice

For clinicians choosing between research-grade VR systems and consumer-grade Meta Quest-class hardware, this RCT is the clinical-effectiveness justification for choosing consumer hardware: the gains are large, durable, and achievable both in-clinic and at home. The one-session-plus-internet-transition protocol is a particularly practical model for busy SLP and CBT caseloads. For PWS with PSA comorbidity, this RCT supports the case that consumer-hardware VRET delivered by SLPs - or self-administered between sessions - is a viable treatment-augmentation strategy. For Therapy withVR or similar consumer-hardware-based products, this study is foundational supporting evidence that the technology category (consumer VR + structured exposure protocol) works clinically.

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

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 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

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.

Klinger E et al. · 2005 Read Summary
Speaking AnxietyEcological Validity

Three-arm RCT (n=51) of stand-alone 360° video VR exposure therapy for public speaking anxiety: both audience-content and empty-room content produced significant pre-to-post reductions (partial η² up to .90) versus no-treatment control

Fifty-one participants with high public speaking anxiety were randomly allocated to one of three conditions: 360° video VRET incorporating audience stimuli (n=17), 360° video VRET incorporating empty-room stimuli (n=16), or no-treatment control (n=18). Outcomes measured at five timepoints. Mixed-ANOVA revealed a significant time × intervention-group interaction for PSA, social anxiety, and fear of negative evaluation (FNE). Both 360° VRET groups showed large pre-to-post reductions; for PSA, partial η² = .90 (audience) and .71 (empty room). Active intervention participants showed continued significant improvement out to 10-week follow-up. The study also addresses whether 360° video content (audience vs empty room) affects VRET outcomes - both worked.

Reeves R et al. · 2021 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
Speaking AnxietySocial CommunicationImplementation

Pilot RCT (n=44) of brief self-guided virtual reality exposure therapy for social anxiety disorder: moderate-to-large effects on SAD severity, job interview fear, and trait worry, maintained at 3 and 6 months

Forty-four community-dwelling or undergraduate adults diagnosed with social anxiety disorder (SAD) using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview were randomly assigned to a self-directed VR exposure intervention (designed to last four sessions or more; n=26) or a waitlist control (n=18). Outcomes measured at baseline, post-treatment, 3-month follow-up, and 6-month follow-up. VR exposure produced moderate-to-large reductions in SAD symptom severity, job interview fear, and trait worry (Hedges' g = 0.54 to 1.11). Although between-group differences in depression were not significant, the VR arm reduced depression while waitlist did not. Gains were maintained at 3- and 6-month follow-up. Self-reported presence increased during treatment (g = 0.36 to 0.45); cybersickness decreased (g = 0.43).

Zainal NH et al. · 2021 Read Summary

Cite this study

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

APA 7th
Lindner, P., Miloff, A., Fagernäs, S., Andersen, J., Sigeman, M., Andersson, G., Furmark, T., & Carlbring, P. (2019). Therapist-led and self-led one-session virtual reality exposure therapy for public speaking anxiety with consumer hardware and software: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Anxiety Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2018.07.003.
AMA 11th
Lindner P, Miloff A, Fagernäs S, Andersen J, Sigeman M, Andersson G, Furmark T, Carlbring P. Therapist-led and self-led one-session virtual reality exposure therapy for public speaking anxiety with consumer hardware and software: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Anxiety Disorders. 2019. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2018.07.003.
BibTeX
@article{lindner2019,
  author = {Lindner, P. and Miloff, A. and Fagernäs, S. and Andersen, J. and Sigeman, M. and Andersson, G. and Furmark, T. and Carlbring, P.},
  title = {Therapist-led and self-led one-session virtual reality exposure therapy for public speaking anxiety with consumer hardware and software: A randomized controlled trial},
  journal = {Journal of Anxiety Disorders},
  year = {2019},
  doi = {10.1016/j.janxdis.2018.07.003},
  url = {https://withvr.app/evidence/studies/lindner-2019}
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Lindner, P.
AU  - Miloff, A.
AU  - Fagernäs, S.
AU  - Andersen, J.
AU  - Sigeman, M.
AU  - Andersson, G.
AU  - Furmark, T.
AU  - Carlbring, P.
TI  - Therapist-led and self-led one-session virtual reality exposure therapy for public speaking anxiety with consumer hardware and software: A randomized controlled trial
JO  - Journal of Anxiety Disorders
PY  - 2019
DO  - 10.1016/j.janxdis.2018.07.003
UR  - https://withvr.app/evidence/studies/lindner-2019
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: Department of Psychology, Stockholm University; Center for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet; Department of Psychology, Uppsala University; Department of Behavioral Sciences and Learning, Linköping University; Department of Psychology, University of Southern Denmark. Funding sources not extracted in detail from the abstract excerpt. Peer-reviewed in Journal of Anxiety Disorders (Elsevier). 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 first-generation consumer hardware and software, NOT Therapy withVR or Research withVR.

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