Virtual Space as An Incubator of Empathy to Foster Effective Communication Under an Unsynchronized Spatial Environment

11/29/2023

“Communication: the transmission of information, ideas, emotions, skills, etc., by the use of symbols -- words, pictures, figures, graphs, etc.” -- Bernard Berelson and Gary A. Steiner. Human Behavior. 1964

The efficacy of communication

As humans, our definition of communication refers to senders stimulating meaning in the receivers while in a broader ethological context (Grammer, 1996). It refers to the inter-organism exchange of information, using evolved purpose-specific signals that influence organisms’ behavior (Janovi, 2003). As signals are exchanged between the sender and the receiver, the reception and decoding processes depend on the amount of noise -- stimuli interfering with the reception of a signal present in the communication channel (Devito, 1998). The efficacy of communication can be gauged by the speed of knowledge transfer, the stability of agreements reached, and the depth of perception generated amongst different cohorts.

Power of empathy in communication

In understanding how to foster effective communication, previous research has suggested personal identity, skills, traits, psychological biases, or cognitive capacity limitations as the basis for communication success or failure (Greenaway, 2015; Dwyer, 2003; Keysar & Henly, 2002; Krauss & Fussell, 1996; Michelon, 2008; Spitzberg, 2003). Empathy is broadly a process contributing to sharing and understanding the effective state of another person (Håkansson Eklund and Summer Meranius, 2021), and has been studied in promoting the efficacy of communication in personal relationships (Jones, 2016), healthcare (Chen, 2021), education (Thompson & Gullone, 2003), crisis management (Scoofs, 2019).

However, we do not have immediate first-person access to the other’s subjective states and intentions (Husserl, 1989). There is thus a necessary asymmetry between the experiencing subject and the subject who is experienced by them (Throop and Zahavi 2020).

Shared spatial experience cultivates empathy

Empathy can be facilitated “given in bodily presence” as phenomenology claims in the theory of empathy (Stein, 2008). There are a three-step process in which the experience of the other person (the empathee) (1) emerges to the empathizer as an experience had by the empathee, the empathizer then (2) follows the experience of the empathee through, in order to (3) return to a more comprehensive understanding of the meaning of the experience had by the empathee (Stein, 2008).

In short, shared experiences are the pivot of empathy. But, we do not need to share all of others’ values, perspectives, memories, aspirations, fantasies, goals, skills, or emotional responses – to empathize with them (Throop, 2023).

How Architecture Fits In

Hence, space as the container of experience, shapes our physical movements and psychological status. The way space shapes our experiences is through a variety of spatial contexts, including geometry forms, spatial dimensions, lighting, and material (Austin, 2020).

Architectural phenomenology believes that body-subject or pre-reflective corporeal engagement is expressed via action and typically in sync with the spatial and physical environment in which the action unfolds (Merleau-Ponty, 1962). Similarly, the theory of narrative environments states that spatial environments actively shape our feelings, aspirations, and actions. Our imagination and our sense of self are in part formed through our spatial attachments (Austin, 2020). For example, noise and a lack of vegetation can generate stress (Glass, Singer, 1972; Ulrich, 1979). Moreover, an emerging field -- Neuro-architecture explores the interplay between spatial environment and psychology through a scientific lens (Azzazy et al. 2021).

Noise of communication in the unsynchronized spatial environment

In a diversity of situations, failure of communication happens. For instance, People sometimes struggle to communicate with others from different cultures (e.g., Gudykunst, 1995, 2005), different gender or sexual orientations (e.g., Hajek, Abrams, & Murachver, 2005), different age groups (e.g., Wegge & Schmidt, 2009; Williams & Garrett, 2005), and different work groups (e.g., Paulsen, Graham, Jones, Callan, & Gallois, 2005).

Noise in communication is anything that distorts a message (Devito, 1998). There are four types of noise:

• Physical noise: examples are car horns, illegible handwriting, and poor grammar.

• Physiological noise: examples are visual impairments, hearing loss, and memory loss.

• Psychological noise: examples are biases, closed-mindedness, and preconceived ideas.

• Semantic noise: examples are language or dialectical differences, and the use of jargon.

An unsynchronized spatial environment refers to the discrepancies in the spatial context of communicators (Pamela & Diane. 2003). Any message sender and receiver situated in different spaces will experience a variety of noise in communication. Such unsynchronization can be attributed to factors like physical distance, separation by different spaces, or barriers to visual contact.

Simulation of spatial environments to foster effective communication

Bridging neuro-psychology and architecture, I propose simulating spatial experiments as a catalyst for empathy to foster effective communication between individuals.

The rise of VR/AR technology lends more control of the virtual representation of real-world spatial environments. Acoustic and haptic stimuli can also be integrated with the visual representation to simulate spatial environments. The advantage of simulation of a virtual environment over other representations of spatial context such as video recordings, mock-up settings, and text description is that the former provides more immersive and first-person synchronization of the spatial experiences by stimulating all five sensing systems in human bodies whereas the latter focuses on one or two.

The efficacy of simulated virtual environments in promoting communication can be gauged through Mobile Brain/Body Imaging (MoBI), an approach used in neuro-architectural studies to model and understand natural cognition during unrestricted exploratory action in the immediate environments (Parada and Rossi, 2021). It requires adequate hardware and software integration to simultaneously record data streams from neuron dynamics, motor behavior, and environmental events (King & Parada, 2021). It requires data-driven methods for multi-modal data to dissociate the brain from non-brain processes (Makeig et al., 2009; Gramann et al., 2011).

Use case of communicating through the spatial environment

The noise in communication is induced by unsynchronized spatial environments. Any communication can be promoted through the synchronization of spatial experience between sender and receiver in communication. However, there are several essential scenarios the author vision where virtual spatial environments can be introduced to offset the noise in communication and assist effective communication. Below are some examples:

• Teenage education: Differences in students' intelligence, skills, and backgrounds can hinder effective learning. By simulating and sharing aspects of students' learning environments, educators can gain a deeper understanding of individual challenges and provide more tailored guidance.

• Design communication: Divergent goals and perspectives between designers and clients can impede progress. A shared virtual experience of the environments that shape these differing perspectives can refine stakeholder discussions, leading to more cohesive end products.

• Psychological therapy: The communication of psychological needs is often limited. Virtual experiences can provide therapists with a more comprehensive understanding of their clients' traumas.

• Long-distance separation in any social relationships: In managing long-distance social relationships, the absence of shared daily experiences can widen communication gaps. Synchronizing spatial experiences virtually can help individuals stay connected, maintaining a consistent pace in their relationships.

This concept highlights the impact of the physical environment on the quality and efficacy of communication, underscoring the need for strategies to mitigate these spatial discrepancies.

Reference:

Azzazy, S., Ghaffarianhoseini, A., GhaffarianHoseini, A., Naismith, N., and Doborjeh, Z. (2021). A critical review on the impact of the built environment on users’ measured brain activity. Archit. Sci. Rev. 64, 319–335. doi: 10.1080/00038628.2020.1749980

Carol M Davis, What Is Empathy, and Can Empathy Be Taught?, Physical Therapy, Volume 70, Issue 11, 1 November 1990, Pages 707–711

Chen, H., Liu, C., Cao, X., Hong, B., Huang, D. H., Liu, C. Y., & Chiou, W. K. (2021). Effects of loving-kindness meditation on doctors’ mindfulness, empathy, and communication skills. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(8), 4033.

Devito, J. A., The interpersonal communication book, 8th ed. (Longman,New York, 1998)

Diamond, A.S. (1959). The History and Origin of Language (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003462514

Dwyer J. (2003). The business communication handbook (6th ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education.

Glass, D.C.; Singer, J.E. Urban Stress: Experiments on Noise and Social stressors; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1972.

Gramann, K., Gwin, J. T., Ferris, D. P., Oie, K., Jung, T.-P., Lin, C.-T., et al. (2011). Cognition in action: imaging brain/body dynamics in mobile humans. Rev. Neurosci. 22, 593–608. doi: 10.1515/RNS.2011.047

Grammer, K., V. Filova, M. Fieder, The communication paradox and possible solutions. New aspects in human ethology. (Plenum Press, New York, 1996) 96.

Greenaway, K. H., Wright, R. G., Willingham, J., Reynolds, K. J., & Haslam, S. A. (2015). Shared Identity Is Key to Effective Communication. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(2), 171-182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214559709

Hajek C., Abrams J. R., Murachver T. (2005). Female, straight, male, gay, and worlds betwixt and between: An intergroup approach to sexual and gender identities. In Harwood J., Giles H. (Eds.), Intergroup communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 43-64). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Håkansson Eklund, J. and Summer Meranius, M. 2021. Toward a consensus on the nature of empathy: a review of reviews. Patient Education and Counseling, 104(2): 300–307

Husserl, E. 1989. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and a Phenomenological Philosophy: Second Book. Trans. R. Rojcewics and A. Schuwer. Dordecht: Kluwer Academic Press.

Janovi, T et al.: Empathy, Communication, Deception, Coll. Antropol. 27 (2003) 2: 809–822

Jones, S. M., Bodie, G. D., & Hughes, S. D. (2019). The Impact of Mindfulness on Empathy, Active Listening, and Perceived Provisions of Emotional Support. Communication Research, 46(6), 838-865. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215626983

Keysar B., Henly A. S. (2002). Speakers’ overestimation of their effectiveness. Psychological Science, 13, 207-212.

King, J. L., & Parada, F. J. (2021). Using mobile brain/body imaging to advance research in arts, health, and related therapeutics. European Journal of Neuroscience, 54(12), 8364-8380.

Krauss R. M., Fussell S. R. (1996). Social psychological models of interpersonal communication. In Higgins E. T., Kruglanski A. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 655-701). New York, NY: Guilford.

Makeig, S., Gramann, K., Jung, T.-P., Sejnowski, T. J., and Poizner, H. (2009). Linking brain, mind and behavior. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 73, 95–100. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-228x.2010.01088.x

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (1962) Phenomenology of Perception, New York: Academic Press.

Michelon A. (2008). Human dynamics: The basis of communication. Norwood South, SA: Quamec.

Narrative Environments and Experience Design: Space as a Medium of Communication, Tricia Austin

Pamela J. H., and Diane E. B. (2003). Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams. Organization Science 2003 14:6, 615-632. 10.1287/orsc.14.6.615.24872

Parada, F. J., and Rossi, A. (2021). Perfect timing: mobile brain/body imaging scaffolds the 4E-cognition research program. Eur. J. Neurosci. 54, 8081–8091. doi: 10.1111/ejn.14783

Paulsen N., Graham P., Jones E., Callan V. J., Gallois C. (2005). Organizations as intergroup contexts: Communication, discourse, and identification. In Harwood J., Giles H. (Eds.), Intergroup communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 165-188). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Schoofs, L., Claeys, A. S., De Waele, A., & Cauberghe, V. (2019). The role of empathy in crisis communication: Providing a deeper understanding of how organizational crises and crisis communication affect reputation. Public Relations Review, 45(5), 101851.\

Spitzberg B. H. (2003). Methods of interpersonal skill assessment. In Greene J. O., Burleson B. R. (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social skills (pp. 93-134). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Stein, E. (2008) [1917]. Zum Problem der Einfühlung. Gesamtausgabe Bd. 5, Freiburg: Verlag Herder.

Thompson, K. L., & Gullone, E. (2003). Promotion of empathy and prosocial behaviour in children through humane education. Australian Psychologist, 38(3), 175-182.

Throop, C. J. (2023). Empathy and its limits: a manifesto. In Conversations on Empathy (pp. 27-33). Routledge.

Throop, J. 2017. Pain and otherness, the otherness of pain. In B. Leistle (ed.), Anthropology and Alterity: Responding to the Other, pp. 185–206. London: Routledge.

Throop, J. and Zahavi, D. 2020. From bright to dark empathy and back again: some phenomenological reflections. Current Anthropology, 61(3): 283–299.

Ulrich, R.S. Visual landscapes and psychological well-being. Landsc. Res. 1979, 4, 17–23.

Waldenfels, B. 2011. Phenomenology of the Alien: Basic Concepts. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

Wegge J., Schmidt K. H. (2009). The impact of age diversity in teams on group performance, innovation and health. In Antoniou A. S. G., Cooper C. L., Chrousos G. P., Spielberger C. D., Eysenck M. W. (Eds.), Handbook of managerial behavior and occupational health (pp. 79-94). Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.