Our Work / Research & Evidence
Mayo Clinic researchers published two peer-reviewed papers about the same VR diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) training programme, built for Mayo Clinic nurse and social worker leaders:
Both papers describe the VR module as built in partnership with Equal Reality. JONA states: "The VR developers were contracted external to the organization through the company Equal Reality, which specializes in DEI VR training." Social Science & Medicine states: "a virtual reality module was created in partnership with Equal Reality (equalreality.com)." Neither paper lists a PTR or Equal Reality author; both describe it as the external VR development partner.
Scenarios were co-designed with nursing staff who had lived experience of workplace racism and microaggressions, many of whom identify as Black, Indigenous or people of colour, working with Equal Reality's developers.
Four VR situations were built around two settings, a staff breakroom and a patient room, each pairing an embodiment component (the participant experiences bias as a Black nurse avatar) with a rehearsal component (the participant practises responding as themselves). Delivery was synchronous and virtual: 100 VR headsets were distributed, and 28 two-hour class sessions ran over 4 months, combining VR immersion with small-group debriefing led by trained facilitators.
Of 1,131 leaders who attended, 593 (52.4%) completed the post-class education survey.
of the 593 survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed they achieved the learning objectives.
of the same 593 respondents agreed the debrief was effective.
rated the overall activity "very good" or "excellent" on a 5-point scale, the more mixed result; authors suggest technical issues, discomfort with the content, or the class's mandatory nature as possible reasons.
A separate, randomised program evaluation found that most respondents (86.2%) felt the VR simulation was valuable to their professional growth and 89.2% would repeat it, but fewer felt the simulation represented real people (66.3%) or that the avatar felt like them (55.8%).
This paper analyses a quasi-experimental trial of the same programme: 841 of the 1,149 eligible leaders completed a baseline survey and were assigned to intervention or a waitlist control group (665 randomly, 176 assigned to the intervention automatically because of scheduling). A third empathy measure, empathic awareness, did not change significantly at any point in the study.
the intervention group's increase in empathic feeling and expression, immediately after the VR session, relative to a waitlist control group.
the intervention group's increase in upstander-behaviour predictors (Theory of Planned Behavior), relative to controls, immediately after the session.
later, the same measures (except empathic awareness) remained significantly higher than each participant's own baseline; there was no longer a control group at this point for comparison.
The intervention group also showed significant gains, relative to controls, in empathic perspective-taking (p = .01) and in willingness to respond, rather than do nothing, to a hypothetical scenario of a coworker facing racial bias (p = .008). The authors describe the 6 to 8 month durability as one of the study's most notable findings, since attitude-change effects from similar interventions often fade over time.
Both papers flag real constraints. The Social Science & Medicine authors note that 176 of 841 baseline participants were not randomised, that there was no control group at the 6 to 8 month mark, and that the sample was drawn from a single health system and was mostly white (about 94-95%) and female (about 89-90%), reflecting who held these leadership roles at Mayo Clinic at the time. Measures were self-reported scales and a hypothetical written vignette, not observed workplace behaviour. The JONA authors add that delivery varied by site (some used a flatscreen instead of a headset), that the fully virtual, COVID-era format limited in-person technical support, and that scope was limited to racial DEI because that was what its funding targeted.
Both papers study the same 1,149-leader cohort and the same four-scenario VR module: JONA focuses on the programme's rollout and participant-reported evaluation, while Social Science & Medicine reports the controlled-trial analysis of its effect on empathy and upstander-behaviour intentions.
Promoting Nursing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Through Virtual Reality Learning
Nelson et al. (ten Mayo Clinic authors)
The Journal of Nursing Administration (JONA), Vol. 54, No. 11, pp 638-644, November 2024
Funded internally by Mayo Clinic. DOI: 10.1097/NNA.0000000000001503
Download the paper (PDF)A virtual reality intervention to increase interracial empathy and upstander behaviors in nursing leaders
Phelan et al. (thirteen Mayo Clinic authors)
Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 366, 117648, 2025 (received June 2024, published online December 2024)
Quasi-experimental controlled trial. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117648
Download the paper (PDF)nurse and social worker leaders trained, across 3 major campuses and 4 regions of Mayo Clinic's network (Southwest, Midwest, Southeast United States).