Nobody’s Listening: Evaluating the Impact of Immersive VR for Engaging with Difficult Heritage and Human Rights

Abstract

Immersive virtual reality (VR) offers promising approaches for engaging with difficult heritage and human rights issues, potentially fostering deeper emotional connections than traditional media. This paper presents a mixed-methods evaluation of Nobody’s Listening, a VR experience documenting the Yazidi genocide in Iraq (2014–2017). Employing a historical empathy framework, the study analyses pre- and post-experience surveys, interviews, and observational data from 127 non-Yazidi participants across five Iraqi cities. It contributes a replicable framework for evaluating immersive heritage experiences, assessing how VR can foster emotional engagement, raise human rights awareness, and inspire positive action. Findings reveal substantial impact across cognitive, emotional, and behavioral domains: 85% reported increased awareness of the genocide, 71% gained new knowledge of Yazidi culture, and over 80% experienced intense emotional reactions, including empathy, grief, and shock. When describing what impressed them most, 57% demonstrated historical empathy (including contextualization, perspective taking, and affective connection). Notably, 92% believed justice had not been served, with many expressing intentions to support advocacy. Our findings suggest that VR’s impact in post-conflict contexts stems not solely from immersion, but from resonance with participants’ own trauma histories—activating empathy through analogical recognition and collective memory. The study offers key design and ethical principles, including cultural specificity, survivor testimony, community consultation, and trauma-informed evaluation. These insights contribute to inclusive heritage interpretation, reconciliation, and human rights education.

1. Introduction

Education and awareness are crucial for preventing genocide and fostering peace and reconciliation [1,2,3,4]. These educational goals can be more effectively achieved through emotional engagement and experiential learning, which help increase attention and memory retention [5,6]. Neurobiology research correlates strong emotional reactions with the formation of long-term memories [7], and museum and visitor studies demonstrate that “emotions serve as a ‘fixative’ for memories” [8].

The emotional dimension of learning is particularly important when engaging with difficult heritage and human rights issues. In these contexts, intellectual understanding alone often fails to foster meaningful engagement. Immersive VR offers unique potential by promoting a strong sense of presence and embodiment. This allows users to ‘step into the shoes of others’ “who are culturally, temporally and/or geospatially distant” [9]. By embodying—or in the case of NL, affectively witnessing [10]—culturally situated perspectives, users can experience others’ realities via multiple senses. This activates embodied cognition processes, which are essential for inducing empathy [11]—especially in human rights contexts.

Research on perspective-taking suggests that such emotionally and sensorily engaged experiences help reduce psychological distance. They also enhance compassionate responses [12], particularly when supported by narrative elements [13]. Empathy has been recognized as an imperative component of successful social interactions [14] and a motivator of helping behaviors [15] toward disadvantaged groups [16]. In post-conflict societies where communities remain divided by trauma and competing narratives, such empathy-building technologies may offer valuable pathways for fostering cross-community understanding and reconciliation.

The immersive nature of VR technology and its facilitation of a sense of presence in simulated environments makes it particularly effective for storytelling and advocacy [17]. A 2020 study indicated that VR storytelling can bring about a positive shift in users’ human rights attitudes more effectively than 2D or traditional formats [9]. Despite the slow increase in VR-based experiences engaging with dark or difficult heritage and human rights discourses in recent years, systematic evaluations measuring the impact of these resource-intensive virtual experiences remain critically limited. Specifically, there is a lack of large-scale studies examining VR’s effectiveness in post-conflict societies where difficult heritage remains contested. Despite growing interest in VR for difficult heritage interpretation, three critical gaps remain in current research: (1) a lack of large-scale empirical studies with diverse participant groups; (2) limited investigation of VR’s effectiveness in post-conflict societies where difficult heritage remains contested; and (3) insufficient understanding of how specific VR design elements contribute to empathy and action. This study addresses these gaps through systematic evaluation of the Nobody’s Listening (NL) VR experience with 127 participants from diverse backgrounds across Iraq.

NL is an immersive VR experience that formed the centerpiece of a mobile exhibition organized by human rights advocates and partner organizations across multiple Iraqi cities and other parts of the world. The exhibition aimed to raise awareness of the Yazidi genocide perpetrated by ISIS in Iraq (2014–2017)—a campaign of mass violence, forced displacement, and cultural erasure. In August 2014, ISIS launched systematic attacks on Yazidi communities in north of Iraq, killing an estimated 3100 Yazidis and abducting approximately 6800 others, primarily women and children who were subjected to sexual slavery [18,19]. These crimes have been recognized as genocide by United Nations bodies and states, with scholars and legal experts documenting their systematic nature and implications for justice and accountability [20,21]. The genocide also involved the systematic destruction of Yazidi cultural heritage [22] and has left long-term psychological, social, and economic consequences for survivors and displaced communities [23].

We conducted a systematic evaluation of the NL VR experience [24] with 127 users from diverse ethnic backgrounds across five cities in Iraq and its Kurdistan Region. In this paper we focus primarily on the effectiveness of immersive VR storytelling for: (1) emotionally engaging with difficult heritage, (2) raising awareness for sensitive human rights issues, and (3) inspiring positive action. Drawing on theories of historical empathy [25], embodied cognition [26], affective witnessing [10] and perspective-taking [12], our study addresses the following research questions:

1. How effective is immersive VR storytelling in creating emotional engagement with difficult heritage among non-Yazidi Iraqi participants?

2. To what extent does the NL VR experience increase awareness and understanding of the Yazidi genocide?

3. How does the VR experience influence positive action?

4. Which elements of the VR experience most effectively facilitate engagement with difficult heritage?

This systematic evaluation addresses a critical gap in empirical research on VR for difficult heritage, providing evidence-based insights for museums, memorial sites, and human rights organizations seeking to leverage immersive technologies for education and advocacy.

Our findings indicate that the NL VR experience had a high cognitive and emotional impact on the large majority of participants and inspired positive changes in attitudes and behavioral intentions regarding the Yazidi genocide. These outcomes confirm the strong potential of immersive VR, when coupled with an affective storytelling design, to promote human rights through difficult heritage experiences.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section 1 positions our work within the landscape of VR applications for difficult heritage. Section 2 presents an overview of the NL VR experience design and content. Section 3 presents our mixed-methods evaluation methodology, while Section 4 reports findings across four dimensions: learning, engagement, emotional connection, and attitude change. Section 5 discusses theoretical and practical implications, acknowledging limitations, and Section 6 presents conclusions and future directions.

2. Related Work

The expansion of XR technologies over the last decade has seen their increasing application for engaging users with heritage (including difficult heritage) and human rights issues. Critical scholarship on human rights museums examines the inherent tensions between memory, justice, and representation in communicating traumatic histories [27,28]—challenges that immersive technologies both address and complicate. However, the effectiveness and ethical considerations surrounding these technologies for engaging with traumatic and dark historical events remain debatable and largely theoretical.

The Last Goodbye VR experience from the University of South California Shoah Foundation virtually engages users with Holocaust survivors to educate them about Holocaust atrocities and human rights abuses. The experience immerses users into a 3D reconstruction of the Majdanek Nazi concentration camp in Poland, guided by the photorealistic avatar of an 87-year-old Holocaust survivor and eyewitness, Pinchas Gutter, who recounts his personal memories of the place where his family was murdered [29]. While online reporting and most user feedback suggests the application’s effectiveness in creating emotional connection and evoking empathy, scholars like Zalewska [30] question the epistemological and ethical implications of virtualizing Holocaust witness testimonies and site tours.

The United Nations’ (UN) Clouds Over Sidra application represents another significant use of VR for engaging with human rights and humanitarian crises. This experience follows the daily struggles of a Syrian teenage girl living in the Za’atari Refugee Camp in Jordan. Originally developed to support the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Advocacy Group’s effort to build resilience in vulnerable communities, it has since been used in various advocacy campaigns, including support for children’s education in crisis situations [31]. At its initial launch at a high-level donor meeting, the event raised US $3.8 billion—over 70 percent more than projected [32]. While media reports [33] and industry blogs [34] attribute the increased donation level to the empathy-eliciting power of the VR experience in a humanitarian context [12], no systematic evaluation or empirical evidence supports or refutes these claims.

The Global Nomads Group’s (GNG) Siroun experience employs VR to teach high-school students about the Armenian Genocide. This experience transports users to a rural Ottoman village in 1915, exposing them to the “choices and experiences of everyday people caught at the crossroads of civil war and genocide” [35]. The experience is accompanied by educational resources for high-school teachers to develop learning activities and discussions around human rights topics [36]. However, beyond online coverage and anecdotal evidence from student users, systematic evaluations of this project’s impact, lessons learned, and ethical considerations remain scarce in the scholarly literature. This highlights the need for more rigorous experimental and mixed-methods evaluation approaches.

A recent study [37] developed a hybrid digital application—combining a social VR platform with an interactive storytelling book—to engage sixth-grade learners in Greece with the 1922 Asia Minor Catastrophe. Although designed for students, the evaluation was conducted with 34 adult educators using qualitative interviews. The metaverse space served mainly as a repository and meeting place, lacking deeper interactivity or embodied learning features. While the study reported increased engagement and empathy, its findings are limited by the small sample and mismatch between design and evaluation audiences.

Recent systematic reviews have strengthened the evidence base for VR’s impact on empathy and prosocial behavior. Lee et al. [38] conducted a systematic review of how empathy is measured in head-mounted display VR experiences. They found consistent emotional responses across varied contexts, although they noted methodological inconsistencies in assessment approaches. Their review suggests that embodied first-person experiences elicit stronger empathic responses than observational formats, especially when measuring immediate emotional responses. These findings are supported by Canet and Sánchez-Castillo’s meta-analysis [39], which reported moderate to strong effects (d = 0.51–0.73) of immersive experiences on prosocial attitudes—notably higher than those associated with traditional media formats. However, both reviews note significant variation in effect durability, with limited longitudinal evidence beyond immediate post-experience assessments.

Our study employs a mixed-methods evaluation that captures both immediate responses and behavioral intentions and is situated in a post-conflict context where personal histories may mediate empathic engagement. Unlike previous research that has often relied on convenience samples of university students or Western audiences, our study engages participants from various ethnic backgrounds in Iraq, including communities with their own histories of persecution and conflict. This approach offers a novel contribution by examining how personal histories and cultural contexts shape the experience of difficult heritage through VR—an area underexplored in current empathy-focused research.

Experimental research comparing immersive experiences (VR-based and 2D-screen) and written journalism on human rights attitudes found that VR can elicit positive shifts in users’ human rights attitudes more effectively than other formats [9]. It concluded that VR was statistically more efficient at this than 2D, and in contrast, comparable written content elicited no attitudinal change in participants [9]. As research increasingly suggests VR’s power to elicit empathy [40], debates about ethical implications continue to unfold. This highlights the need for more empirical data and systematic evaluations when using VR in sensitive contexts of difficult heritage and human rights abuses [16]—precisely the gap our study of the Nobody’s Listening experience aims to address.

3. The Nobody’s Listening VR Experience

The Nobody’s Listening (NL) VR experience combines art, technology, and advocacy to memorialize and educate about the Yazidi genocide by ISIS, with the ultimate aim of raising awareness and encouraging recognition, justice, and action for the Yazidi community and other minorities in Iraq. Over a decade after the ISIS genocide began in 2014, many members of the Yazidi ethnoreligious minority in Iraq remain displaced and living in dire circumstances in camps [41].

The NL experience aims to (re)connect non-Yazidis with the past and ongoing continuing struggles of the Yazidis. Using Oculus Quest VR headsets, the experience immerses users in the sights, sounds, and stories of the 2014 attacks against the Yazidi community through a combination of technical elements: 6DoF (Degree of Freedom) scenes from photogrammetry of actual sites shot in Iraq, 360° footage of destruction caused by ISIS, 3D animations, soundscapes, sound effects, and first-person storytelling.

Several techniques enhance the sense of realism and immersion in the virtual environment: Static 360° videos and photos of real scenes are enlivened with virtual elements: trees swaying in the wind, ceiling fans swaying, clouds drifting, and time-lapse animations of nightfall with flying fireflies. The soundscapes create acoustics similar to those of physical environments, while animated silhouettes of Yazidis and ISIS fighters sensitively recreate scenes of atrocities complementing the audio narration by the main characters [42] (Figure 1).

The experience begins with a Yazidi woman’s voice introducing users to the history, culture, and religion of the Yazidi community and their geographic and historic ties to Sinjar Mountain, their sanctuary throughout their difficult history. The female narrator then guides users through the ruins of Kocho village, one of the hardest-hit Yazidi communities during the genocide. Users navigate between virtual scenes by physical movement, which is paralleled in the virtual world as moving through images of Yazidi survivors.

After the introduction, users can choose to witness the story of one of three characters, each created based on a composite of real experiences:

1. Shereen, a Yazidi woman who was abducted and sexually enslaved (see Supplementary Video);

2. Shamo, the brother of the Yazidi woman, who survived an ISIS massacre, or;

3. A local ISIS fighter who attacked the village.

Each character recounts events, emotions, and crimes they experienced, witnessed, or (in the case of the ISIS fighter) committed. The 3D reconstructions enable users to explore each location as if experiencing it firsthand. The experience concludes by immersing users in the dire living conditions that many Yazidis face today, ending with the female narrator’s call for justice and action to help the Yazidi community. While designed to last approximately 12 min, users can choose to remain longer and further explore the virtual scenes [24]. A video excerpt from the NL immersive VR experience, showing the introduction, character selection menu, and interaction with the character Shereen, is provided as supplementary material to offer a visual overview of the immersive environment.

The experience storyline blends factual information about Yazidi culture and tradition with real stories from publicly accessible testimonies of Yazidi survivors and interviews with imprisoned ISIS fighters. Given VR’s potential to induce strong emotional reactions and the violent nature of the genocide events, the development team carefully planned the content selection and presentation.

Ethical considerations were central to the development process. The project team consulted a clinical psychologist and a Yazidi community-informed legal analyst and had the storyline script also reviewed by several prominent human rights organizations based in the Middle East, the USA, and the UK. To avoid emotional distress and comply with the ‘Do No Harm principle,’ the VR experience excludes overly graphic content (such as blood or dead bodies), and the narration avoids direct mention of sexual violence, instead implying it through the characters’ stories.

This carefully designed experience formed the basis of our systematic evaluation study, which examined its effectiveness for engaging users with difficult heritage and inspiring action, as described in the following section.

4. Evaluation Methodology

To systematically assess the impact of the Nobody’s Listening (NL) VR experience, we conducted a study with users from different socio-economic and ethnosectarian backgrounds across Iraq. The goal was to evaluate whether and how the experience achieved the exhibition’s aim of raising awareness about the Yazidi genocide.

We used a mixed-methods approach, combining both quantitative and qualitative data. Data collection involved three stages:

(a) pre-experience survey;

(b) observation of the NL VR experience use;

(c) post-experience quantitative and qualitative assessment, which included both an interview and a questionnaire.

Details of the instruments are provided in Supplementary Material.

This methodology was adapted from the EMOTIVE research project [43,44]. It allowed us to triangulate findings across multiple sources and helped reduce bias, which is especially important when researching sensitive topics.

4.1. Participant Recruitment and Sample

The study was conducted across five Iraqi cities: Sulaimani, Baghdad, Erbil, Duhok, and Kirkuk. Three research teams carried out data collection using standardized protocols in Kurdish, Arabic, and English.

The final sample consisted of 127 participants, distributed as follows:

• Sulaimani: 48% (n = 61);
• Baghdad: 16.5% (n = 21)—data from six additional participants were excluded due to incomplete responses;
• Erbil: 11.8% (n = 15);
• Duhok: 11.8% (n = 15);
• Kirkuk 11.8% (n = 15).

Each data collection session lasted an average of 45 min per participant, including VR setup, the experience itself, and the assessment.

4.2. Participants’ Profile

4.2.1. Demographic Characteristics

The sample had a fairly balanced gender distribution: 54.3% male, 45.7% female. Most participants were young adults—42.5% aged 25–34 and 29.9% aged 18–24—broadly aligning with Iraq’s predominantly young population [45]. Only 4.8% of participants were aged 55 years or older.

Participants were generally well-educated with 68.5% holding a bachelor’s degree or higher. Most lived in urban areas (91.1%).

The sample reflected Iraq’s ethnic, linguistic, and religious diversity with some limitations in representation:

• Ethnicity: 67% Kurdish, 22% Arab, and smaller percentages of other ethnic groups (e.g., one Kakai participant);
• Language: 70.8% reported Kurdish as their native language, 26.2% Arabic, and 1.5% each for Turkmen and English;
• Religion: 30% identified as Muslim without sectarian specification, 34% as Sunni Muslim, 4% as Shia Muslim, and over 30% did not select a religious association.

4.2.2. Prior Knowledge and Attitudes

While 92% of participants had some awareness of the ISIS-led genocide against Yazidis, only 22% expressed confidence in their understanding of the 2014 events. This knowledge gap was reflected in several areas:

• 54.3% reported knowing or having met Yazidis;
• 39.4% indicated familiarity with Yazidi culture;
• 22.8% had visited Yazidi towns or villages (e.g., Lalish, Sharya, Sinjar);
• 65% expressed empathy toward Yazidis, but only 25% could provide specific details.

Interestingly, participants generally rated their own knowledge of the genocide as higher than what they believed was typical among the general Iraqi population, suggesting a perceived gap in public awareness.

4.2.3. Personal Experiences with Conflict

Most participants (89%) had not experienced displacement in the previous seven years. However, 22% identified as victims of ISIS, reporting impacts such as:

• Death of immediate family members (13.4%);
• Death of family members from security forces retaking areas from ISIS;
• Displacement due to ISIS campaigns (3.9%);
• Property destruction (3.9%);
• Serious harm from ISIS, including kidnapping or imprisonment (3.1%).

4.2.4. Technology Familiarity

Over 60% of participants had heard of VR technology, but only 26.8% had used it before. Among those who expressed their views about VR (n = 45), over 90% reported positive attitudes toward the technology. Approximately one-third (33.9%) considered themselves tech-savvy to some degree.

4.3. Data Collection Instruments

4.3.1. Pre-Experience Survey

The pre-experience self-completion survey (Supplementary Material) collected baseline data on:

• Demographic profile: Age, gender, education, occupation, religious/ethnic affiliation, and residence;
• Knowledge and attitudes: Awareness of Yazidi culture and genocide, relationships with Yazidi people, and visits to Yazidi communities;
• Conflict experiences: Personal or family experience with displacement (in general) and/or ISIS-related events;
• Technology familiarity: Exposure to and comfort with VR.

The survey utilized multiple-choice questions, Likert scales, and open-ended questions to capture a comprehensive baseline.

4.3.2. VR Experience Setup and Technical Considerations

Participants experienced the Nobody’s Listening VR exhibition using Oculus Quest headsets in controlled settings. Each session lasted approximately 45 min and included the following steps:

• Completion of the pre-experience survey;
• Sanitization of the VR equipment for safety;
• Setup of VR boundaries;
• Brief orientation on VR equipment use and navigation;
• VR experience, with data collectors present to assist with any technical issues and observe reactions;
• Post-experience interview (Supplementary Material);
• Completion of a self-administered questionnaire (Supplementary Material).

We monitored technical issues throughout the sessions to understand their impact on user experience:

• 20% of participants reported issues with the VR headset;
• Another 20% had difficulty navigating the virtual world, mainly when walking through virtual ‘paintings’ to progress between scenes or managing physical movement while immersed;
• Approximately 25% experienced one or more symptoms of VR discomfort, with the most common being blurred vision, general discomfort, and dizziness with eyes open, followed by sensations of head fullness, nausea, difficulty focusing, and vertigo.

Despite these challenges, no participants withdrew due to VR sickness. Notably, even those who experienced physical discomfort generally expressed interest and enthusiasm about both the technology and the overall VR experience.

4.3.3. Post-Experience Quantitative Assessment

The post-experience questionnaire (Supplementary Material) included 18 statements rated on a 5-point Likert-scale (from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”) and one multiple-choice question. These instruments were adapted from the EMOTIVE project [43,44] and other validated tools [46,47,48].

The questionnaire, assessed:

• Awareness and cognitive learning: Understanding of the Yazidi genocide and cultural context;
• Affective learning: Overall engagement and emotional connection with the narrative and characters;
• Perception and attitudes: Shifts in views towards the Yazidi community and their experiences.

We also included a multi-select question to identify any symptoms of VR motion sickness during the experience.

4.3.4. Post-Experience Qualitative Assessment

Semi-structured interviews (Supplementary Material) and open-ended questions in the post-experience questionnaire (Supplementary Material) provided deeper insights into participants’ reactions, including emotional engagement and empathy. Interview questions were primarily based on Endacott and Brooks’ historical empathy model [25] which promotes affective engagement with historical events and figures [49].

The interviews explored three key dimensions of historical empathy:

• Historical contextualization: critical reflection on historical facts;
• Perspective taking: deeper understanding of different viewpoints from the past;
• Affective connection: emotional connection with historical individuals, encouraging users to see them as people with emotions, values and worldviews [49].

Additional questions addressed participants’ navigation and interaction experience and any technical issues encountered during the VR session.

4.4. Data Analysis Methods

4.4.1. Quantitative Analysis

Quantitative data from the pre- and post-experience surveys were entered into Microsoft Excel 2021 and IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0. We used descriptive statistics to summarize the findings.

4.4.2. Qualitative Analysis

Qualitative data from the interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and translated when necessary. We applied thematic analysis to identify recurring themes. Coding was performed manually, with an initial framework based on the historical empathy model, expanded iteratively as new themes emerged from the data.

4.5. Quality Assurance and Ethical Considerations

4.5.1. Data Quality Measures

To address potential response bias, particularly social desirability in research on sensitive topics like genocide and other research-recognized biases [50], we implemented several quality control measures:

1. Triangulation: Used multiple data sources (quantitative and qualitative) to verify responses and detect inconsistencies;

2. Observational data: Documented participants’ non-verbal reactions and behaviors during the VR experience and speaking tone during the interviews (with consent);

3. Quality control: Maintained rigorous quality checking throughout data collection, transcription, and coding;

4. Standardization: Trained data collectors through online and in-person workshops and provided detailed written protocols.

4.5.2. Ethical Protocols

The study followed international ethical guidelines for research involving human participants, particularly in sensitive areas like genocide and human rights:

• Voluntary participation: All participants joined voluntarily;
• Informed consent: Participants received full briefings in their preferred language about the study objectives, VR content, potential risks including motion sickness and emotional distress, before signing consent forms in Kurdish, Arabic, or English;
• Right to withdraw: Participants were reminded of their right to withdraw at any time from the VR experience or data collection without penalty;
• Consent for recording: No audio recordings, photographs, or observations were made without written consent;
• Data protection: All data were anonymized.

Clinical psychology experts advised on the design and support protocols due to the sensitive nature of the content. These protocols were essential to ensuring participant safety and ethical integrity, particularly given the post-conflict context—and they laid the foundation for the broader ethical reflections discussed in Section 6.4.

4.6. Limitations

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting the results:

• Geographical scope: Data were collected in only five cities, with nearly half (48%) from Sulaimani, limiting generalizability across Iraq’s diverse regions;
• Sample representativeness: The sample was predominantly Kurdish (67%) and well-educated (68.5% holding a bachelor’s degree or higher), which may not reflect Iraq’s broader population, particularly those in remote or conflict-affected areas;
• Technical barriers: Varying levels of familiarity with VR (only 26.8% had prior experience) may have affected engagement, alongside occasional headset discomfort and software glitches that disrupted immersion for some users;
• Translation challenges: Working across multiple languages required translation of instruments and responses (from Kurdish—Sorani and Kurmanji dialects—and Arabic into English) which may have introduced subtle shifts in meaning, particularly in emotionally nuanced or culturally specific expressions. Due to resource constraints, systematic back-translation was limited. Future multilingual research would benefit from multilingual coding and back-translation protocols to improve fidelity;
• Social desirability bias: Despite mitigation efforts, participants may have provided socially acceptable responses;
• Short-term assessment: The study captured immediate reactions to the VR experience but did not measure long-term attitudinal or behavioral changes.

These limitations should be considered when interpreting the study’s theoretical contributions, particularly the integration of historical empathy into immersive design frameworks and its potential role in reconciliation-oriented heritage practices.

5. Results

Building on the methodology described above, this section presents our findings from both quantitative and qualitative data analysis. Our analysis revealed substantial impact of the NL experience across four key dimensions: (1) learning and understanding about the Yazidi genocide, (2) engagement with the VR experience and content, (3) emotional connection, and (4) attitudinal and behavioral intentions. Below, we present quantitative findings complemented by qualitative insights that illuminate how participants experienced and processed the VR content.

5.1. Learning and Understanding

The first dimension of our analysis focused on changes in participants’ knowledge and understanding of the Yazidi genocide following their VR experience. We collected data through both Likert-scale questions (n = 106) and follow-up structured interviews (n = 127).

Responses to the Likert-scale statements were measured on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). As shown in Figure 2, participants reported substantial cognitive benefits from the NL VR experience. Four out of five statements related to learning and understanding received high average scores (over 4.0), with over 70% of respondents either agreeing or strongly agreeing that the VR experience enhanced their knowledge about the Yazidi genocide.

5.1.1. Qualitative Insights on Knowledge Change

Qualitative data strongly corroborated the quantitative findings, with 70.8% of interview respondents (n = 120) confirming positive knowledge change regarding Yazidi culture. The highest rated statement (mean = 4.37, SD = 0.708) addressed enhanced awareness of the Yazidi genocide with over 85% of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing that the VR experience effectively communicated the historical context and significance of these events.

Comparatively, cultural understanding showed greater response variability (mean = 4.08, SD = 1.039), suggesting that the experience was more effective at conveying factual information about the genocide than deeper cultural insights.

Participants attributed this change primarily to gaining new previously unheard information or details and to becoming more aware of the Yazidi genocide events by ISIS, their ongoing struggles, culture, and way of living. Elements of historical empathy (historical contextualization (58.3%), perspective taking (11.8%), and affective connection (8.7%) with the stories and characters) were evident in the large majority of the answers. Additionally, 40.5% of 116 interview respondents (n = 47) said that the experience changed their previous knowledge and impressions about ISIS. Previously unheard details, media coverage limitations, and the intensity of the ISIS crimes and cruelty they learned through the VR experience were the main items reported in what changed in participants’ previous knowledge and impressions about ISIS. As a participant said:

“They [ISIS] further intensified their crimes. I am not saying that through media I did not know what ISIS did, but I had seen things in fragmentation. But now, I can say that ISIS destroyed a region and the life of a group of people.”

Less than 15% of these responses demonstrated historical empathy elements (specifically, perspective taking and affective connection), significantly lower than the responses about Yazidi knowledge change. With an average scoring of 3.64, participants were less positive and more divided (std. deviation of 1.236) in their scorings for feeling challenged and provoked during the VR experience. It is likely that the meaning of this statement was not clear to many since answers to other questions in the questionnaire and structured interview suggest strong cognitive and emotional reactions to the VR experience that we discuss later.

5.1.2. Role of Surprise in Learning

Of the 100 participants who addressed this question during interviews, more than 85% indicated being surprised by some aspects of the VR experience or its stories. Surprise has an important role in explicit and incidental learning as well as the process of knowledge updating [51]. When asked to specify the source of their surprise, four themes emerged from participants’ open responses:

• Only 13.5% of respondents directly identified the VR technology itself as the source of the surprise. Of those, most referred to the immersive nature of the experience and its contribution to making the experience realistic: “I felt I was right there inside the events because of the VR”;
• Half of the respondents attributed their surprise to newly discovered historical, cultural, and genocide-related information presented in the stories, as well as how these narratives were communicated both verbally and visually;
• Another 20.2% of participants specifically attributed their surprise to the characters’ testimonies, actions, or experiences portrayed in the VR environment. Examples include: “It was that particular information, that nobody has been prosecuted, and those who have been prosecuted are for other crimes” and “How the women covered their face with dirt and wounded themselves to be less attractive”;
• Generic responses constituted 16.3% of answers, with participants referring to overall impressions rather than specific sources of surprise, such as: “How despite all their bitter experience, they are still continuing and wanting to pass their message to others. Their resilience is a really nice thing”.

Among participants who did not report being surprised, many appeared to misinterpret the question, associating surprise only with positive feelings rather than general unexpectedness, as illustrated by: “I would not call it a surprise because it is such a sad experience that does not make me surprised but very sad.”

5.1.3. Character Selection and Perspective-Taking

Among the 119 participants who responded to this question, the majority (60.5%) chose to follow Shereen, the Yazidi woman’s character. Shamo, the Yazidi man (Shereen’s brother) was selected by 26.1% participants, while only 13.4% chose to follow the ISIS fighter’s storyline. When asked why they made their selection, participants cited various motivations:

• Gender identification of curiosity (“wanting to see the experience from the same (or different) gender perspective”)
• Information-seeking (“learning new information that I did not know about from the news”)
• Emotional engagement with a particular character. One notable response came from a male participant who selected the ISIS fighter character, explaining: “We share similar religious exposure that sometimes blinds us towards the truths.”
• Accidental selection

We also investigated how participants cognitively processed their selected character’s experiences and motivations. The responses revealed distinct patterns based on character selection:

Participants who selected Yazidi characters (women or men) identified a range of emotions that were either explicitly stated or implicitly in the narrative:

• Lost dreams and opportunities;
• Feelings of betrayal;
• Helplessness;
• Fear of history repeating itself;
• Defiance and resilience.

Participants who selected the ISIS fighter approached the character predominantly from an outsider’s perspective, attributing his actions and feelings to:

• Emotional detachment;
• Indoctrination;
• Misguided sense of righteousness;
• Unresolved hatred;
• Financial motivation (love for money).

5.2. Engagement

The experience elicited a high level of engagement across intellectual, spatial, and temporal dimensions, with an average score exceeding 4 (out of 5) for related statements (Figure 3). Specifically, over 80% of participants either “agreed” or “completely agreed” that The VR experience stimulated their thinking (intellectual engagement), transported them to another world (spatial engagement), and caused them to lose track of time (temporal engagement).

5.2.1. Bodily and Emotional Responses

To assess embodied engagement, participants were asked immediately after finishing the VR experience to identify where in their bodies they primarily felt this. Among the 118 respondents, the most common responses were mind/brain (29.7%) and heart (28.0%), followed by eyes (17.8%), feet (8.5%), legs (7.6%), chest (5.1%), stomach (1.7%), arms (0.8%), and toes (0.8%). One participant reported feeling “out of body”, suggesting complete immersion in the virtual environment. Among those who identified mind/brain, the majority demonstrated a high level of reflection and empathy towards what the Yazidi community had endured.

We observed that participants’ verbal descriptions sometimes revealed emotional responses that transcended their selected body part. For instance, many who chose “mind/brain” described intense emotional reactions rather than purely cognitive engagement. These emotional responses manifested physically through crying, shivering legs, kneeling, rapid heartbeat, hand and head gestures, muttering, stomach pain, and breathing difficulties. Despite these intense reactions, only one participant chose to discontinue the VR experience, suggesting that while emotionally challenging, the experience remained within most participants’ tolerance thresholds.

Technical aspects of VR also affected physical engagement, with some participants reporting disorientation and difficulty moving. Several requested physical assistances from the data collectors while choosing to continue the experience.

5.2.2. Identification with Characters

Of the 127 participants, 31.5% (n = 40) reported relating to characters in the experience, with 26 identifying with the Yazidi woman and 11 with the Yazidi man. Notably, Kurdish participants frequently drew connections between the Yazidi experiences and events from Kurdish history, including the Anfal campaigns, Halabja genocide, the 1991 displacement, and persecution under Saddam’s regime. These connections demonstrate how personal or cultural history can mediate engagement with difficult heritage narratives.

5.2.3. Detail Recall and Reflection

Participants demonstrated high attentiveness through their recall of vivid details, visual information, and spoken words and narratives from the VR experience. This engagement extended beyond the immediate experience, with many participants becoming notably reflective and talkative afterwards. This observation during pilot testing informed our protocol design, leading us to conduct interviews immediately after the VR experience, before administering questionnaires, to capture these fresh reflections.

5.3. Emotional Connection

Participants demonstrated strong emotional connections to the VR experience, with over 70% indicating emotional engagement with the stories and characters (Figure 4). The highest average score (4.43 out of 5, SD = 0.743) was for the statement “I felt moved by the story of the Yazidis’ experience and their genocide” (statement 3.6) with 86.7% of participants strongly agreeing or agreeing, 12.3 neutral, and no participants disagreeing (Figure 4).

5.3.1. Types and Intensity of Emotional Responses

Interview data revealed intense emotional responses among over 80% of participants, with predominant emotions that included empathy, sadness, grief, despair, fear, anger, helplessness, pain, interest, and shock often reported in combination. One participant captured this visceral impact: “My hands were shivering, and my feet felt as if they were not standing on the ground. I felt I was a soul without a body”. Another noted: “Certainly it [the VR experience] will stay with me for a long time. The fear, stress, and worries that I went through were very strange. I don’t think I was as scared in my whole life.” The word frequency visualization in Figure 5 illustrates this emotional landscape.

5.3.2. Emotionally Resonant Scenes

When asked to identify the most emotionally engaging parts of the experience, participants highlighted various scenes, suggesting different elements resonated with different users. Among the 120 respondents to this question:

• 20.8% identified the scene depicting the forced separation of a Yazidi mother and daughter by an ISIS fighter;
• 13.3% mentioned the destroyed house of the Yazidi woman where she recalls her pre-ISIS family life and expresses her fear about ISIS approaching their village;
• 10.8% each cited the school (now a memorial for dead and missing Yazidis) and the tent (showing displaced Yazidis’ living conditions);
• Smaller percentages noted the valley, the bus transporting Yazidi women to abduction sites, and the ISIS house;
• 30.85% did not specify a single part, instead referring to the whole experience as emotionally impactful.

5.3.3. Factors Influencing Significant Impressions

Over 85% of participants reported that the VR experience, either in whole or part, made a significant impression on them. Analysis of their descriptions revealed that:

• 56.6% of responses included elements of historical empathy (historical contextualization, perspective taking, and affective connection);
• 44.1% highlighted the effect of different emotions as significant factors;
• Only 27.6% focused on the VR technology itself.

These findings suggest that participants connected primarily with the narrative content rather than the technological aspects of the experience, with historical empathy and emotional engagement serving as the primary drivers of impact.

5.4. Attitudes and Values

This section examines how the VR experience influenced participants’ attitudes and values regarding the Yazidis, ISIS, and the genocide.

5.4.1. Quantitative Measures of Attitudinal Change

Statements related to changing perceptions of Yazidis and ISIS (statements 4.2 and 4.3) received relatively lower average scores (neutral to slightly above) (Figure 6) compared to statements in previous sections. This may be attributed to two factors: participants’ confusion about what constituted a “change of perception”, pre-existing empathy towards Yazidis (reported by 65% of participants) alongside already negative impressions of ISIS.

Despite these moderate scores on perception change, over 70% of participants agreed or completely agreed that they would continue thinking about the experience (statement 4.1, mean = 3.98). Furthermore, over 75% reported increased awareness of the ISIS genocide of Yazidi culture (statement 4.4, mean = 4.05).

Notably, the statement “I would recommend the experience to my family/friends” received the highest average score (4.55) and second-lowest standard deviation (0.732) among all questionnaire statements. This strong endorsement suggests high satisfaction and potential for wider impact through social diffusion.

5.4.2. Qualitative Insights on Moral and Ethical Responses

Interview data provided deeper insights into participants’ attitudes towards the various actors in the genocide. When asked what they would say to an ISIS fighter, responses fell into three categories: condemnation of action, questioning motives, and advocating for respect across different backgrounds.

Regarding the families of missing Yazidis, the majority of responses demonstrated high level of sympathy and affective connection. Many participants expressed difficulty imagining the psychological trauma experienced by these families, with one noting: “I think they must be in psychological torture, stress, and worries every day.” Some participants connected from the Yazidi experience to their own past traumas, as exemplified by one Kurdish participant who stated:

“As I told you, in 1991 [referring to the Kurdish mass displacement], I got disconnected from my mother, sister, and brothers. I met them again after a few days on the border. What Mr. Shamo went through, I had gone through it 30 years ago and our politicians are doing it to us.”

Similarly, when asked what they would say to the Yazidi community, participants expressed strong emotional support, condemnation of ISIS, and encouragement for seeking justice. Representative responses included: “I wish they live in peace and security. They deserve compensation for all of this”; “I would tell them you are part of this society with all your traditions, and you deserve a dignified life with all your rights”; and “Don’t stop telling your stories to us and whatever you can just to punish ISIS.”

5.4.3. Perspectives on Justice and Forward Action

An overwhelming majority (92.2%) of 103 respondents believed justice had not been served in the Yazidi genocide. When asked what should be done, participants proposed multiple avenues:

• Legal justice for victims and prosecution of perpetrators;
• Financial, psychological, and emotional compensation;
• Improvement of quality of life and reconstruction of Sinjar;
• International recognition of the genocide and Yazidi culture;
• Raising local awareness about Yazidi culture;
• Facilitating reconciliation processes.

The following are some of the responses: “It is very important to gain international recognition for their cause. We think their cause has been internationalized, but very little has been done for them in comparison to all that they [Yazidis] have endured” and “Recognizing this as a genocide and prosecuting the perpetrators.”

5.4.4. Self-Reported Impact and Long-Term Intentions

Over 80% of respondents reported changes in how they felt about aspects of the Yazidi genocide, clustering into four main categories:

• Enhanced knowledge and awareness (“Whatever knowledge I had before was from news and reading. But from now on if you talk about them [Yazidis], I will remember this experience”;
• Nuanced perspectives, including ISIS members’ motivations (“Imagine being a kid and they teach you to carry a rifle to kill people and they say this is the religion and you have to be this way. I have thought about that a lot. Maybe it’s not their (I mean ISIS kids’) fault”);
• Appreciation for their own circumstances (“I became more grateful for the life I have”);
• Action motivation (“I just wish this experience does something real for these people and not just a one-day activity. I hope that one day I hear that what we did today had changed something”; “I will read more about their culture, how they lived”).

These categories align with Mezirow’s transformative learning theory [52], which describes how “disorienting dilemmas” can lead to profound shifts in meaning perspectives. The NL VR experience appears to function as such a disorienting dilemma in these cases, prompting participants to reconsider their understanding of the Yazidi genocide as well as culture and religion through emotional engagement with unfamiliar perspectives. While this study did not capture long-term behavioral changes, responses suggest potential for the VR experience to catalyze both attitudinal and behavioral shifts among participants.

6. Discussion

6.1. Emotional Engagement Through Historical Empathy and Collective Memory

Our findings strongly support previous research on VR’s ability to evoke emotion and foster empathy through presence [53,54] and embodied experience [26]. Presence, as defined by Slater [55], involves the illusion of being in a real place and the plausibility of events unfolding as real. These mechanisms were evident in our study—with 86.7% of participants reporting feeling “moved by the story of the Yazidis”. Moreover, 56.6% of responses about significant impressions demonstrated historical empathy elements (perspective taking, historic contextualization, and affective connection). However, our data suggest that these mechanisms alone do not fully explain the depth of engagement observed, particularly the historically empathetic responses and contextualization of the genocide within broader patterns of persecution.

We propose that historical empathy adds a critical dimension to the established presence-emotion-empathy model, introducing a fourth layer rooted in cultural and temporal specificity. While general empathy may involve both affective and cognitive engagement, historical empathy explicitly integrates these within situated engagement with past events and individuals [25]. In our study, anchoring the VR experience in time and culture deepened emotional resonance among participants. This engagement was often mediated through collective memory—the social frameworks through which communities interpret and transmit the past [56]. Through affective witnessing [10], participants formed historically empathetic connections to the events depicted, frequently expressing strong emotional responses that situated the Yazidi genocide within broader historical trauma.

Drawing on Landsberg’s [57] concept of prosthetic memory, we argue that VR-mediated engagement with past suffering—especially when grounded in collective memory and cultural specificity—can simulate memory-like experiences that enhance historical empathy and deepen emotional engagement.

The post-conflict Iraqi context fundamentally shaped participants’ responses. Kurdish participants frequently linked Yazidi experiences to their own histories of genocide, displacement, and systemic persecution. This aligns with intergroup empathy theory—which suggests that perceived similarity and shared suffering enhance empathic concern across group boundaries [58]—and with social identity theory, where collective suffering reinforces group solidarity and identification [59]. Our findings reveal that empathy in this post-conflict context operated through analogical recognition: users related others’ experiences to their own, mapping familiar patterns of suffering onto new contexts to foster understanding and emotional resonance [60].

6.2. Engaging with Difficult Heritage in Post-Conflict Contexts

Our findings demonstrate that immersive VR, when carefully designed and contextually grounded, can effectively engage users with difficult heritage. Even accounting for potential novelty effects, participants’ strong emotional and cognitive responses to Nobody’s Listening suggest that immersive experiences can support public engagement with traumatic histories such as the Yazidi genocide. This positions VR as a bridging technology capable of overcoming experiential gaps that traditional heritage interpretation often struggles to address.

In societies where unresolved trauma and competing narratives are often fragmented and politicized, immersive VR offers a promising tool for inclusive heritage interpretation. By foregrounding survivor testimony and emotional resonance, NL contributes to a digital curatorial model that aligns with contemporary calls in museum and memory studies for more affective, participatory approaches to human rights education [27,28].

The substantial attitudinal shifts observed (Section 4.4)—including increased genocide awareness, enhanced cultural knowledge about the Yazidis, and strong intentions to support advocacy—highlight VR’s potential to cultivate action-oriented engagement across community boundaries. However, these self-reported intentions immediately after the experience require longitudinal research is needed to assess long-term impact.

The high endorsement scores (mean 4.55) and participants’ requests to develop similar experiences for other local traumatic events (Halabja genocide, Anfal campaigns) suggest a perceived need for expanded digital commemoration infrastructure in post-conflict Iraq, particularly within the Kurdistan Region. This points to a broader opportunity for immersive technologies to complement traditional heritage institutions by offering emotionally resonant, accessible platforms for remembrance and education.

Moreover, immersive VR may help navigate the complexities of contested memory by creating shared spaces for reflection and dialog. In contexts where historical narratives are fragmented or marginalized, such technologies can amplify underrepresented voices and foster empathy across ethnic and generational divides. As such, immersive heritage experiences like NL not only engage users with the past but also contribute to collective memory and civic awareness in transitional societies.

6.3. Design Implications for Difficult Heritage VR

Our findings highlight several design considerations for immersive heritage experiences addressing traumatic histories. Emotional engagement and historical empathy were significantly enhanced by cultural specificity and survivor testimony, suggesting that such experiences should be grounded in lived experience and contextual nuance.

Ethical representation is critical. Designers must engage affected groups during content development and avoid reductive or stereotypical portrayals. In NL, despite stakeholder consultation, one participant noted that the experience oversimplified Yazidi suffering—underscoring the challenges external development teams face in authentically representing contested heritage [61,62].

Cross-ethnic engagement challenges further emphasize the need for locally developed content and community-driven design. Perspective taking varies across cognitive and emotional dimensions depending on context and user background [63]. Effective implementation requires deep consultation, not just technological transfer. Culturally responsive frameworks—prioritizing co-creation and adaptability—can extend the reach and impact of immersive heritage across diverse post-conflict settings, such as Colombia, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and South Sudan.

Character selection data (Section 5.1.3) suggests that offering multiple narrative perspectives enhances user agency and supports varied learning styles. The strong preference for victim perspectives (86.6% chose Yazidi characters) highlights the emotional salience of survivor narratives. While NL did not involve direct character embodiment, it supported affective witnessing [10]—a form of emotionally engaged observation that fosters ethical connection without requiring full immersion.

These findings align with theories of moral imagination, which suggest immersive media can foster ethical reflection through emotional and cognitive engagement with others’ experiences [64,65]. They also support inclusive heritage approaches, showing that performative, community-based storytelling in immersive narratives can deepen ethical and emotional engagement [66]. At the same time, these findings underscore critical ethical and pedagogical responsibilities: designers must handle perpetrator perspectives with care to avoid reinforcing stereotypes or normalizing violence.

Finally, the role of surprise as a learning catalyst (Section 5.1.2) has important design implications for heritage VR. Participants frequently cited the impact of previously unknown details—whether about the scale of atrocities, justice failures, or survival strategies—suggesting that strategic information delivery can deepen engagement. As demonstrated in Section 5.4.4, such unexpected revelations can trigger transformative learning [52]. For designers, this underscores the value of front-end evaluation to identify audience knowledge gaps, enabling targeted content development that challenges assumptions and maximizes emotional and educational impact—particularly critical in contexts where historical narratives remain contested or underrepresented.

6.4. Limitations and Ethical Considerations

While methodological limitations—such as sample size, recruitment bias, and novelty effects—have been addressed in Section 4.6, this section reflects on broader limitations and ethical considerations that shape the interpretation and application of our findings.

A key limitation lies in the cultural specificity of Nobody’s Listening, which was developed in close collaboration with Yazidi communities and rooted in the socio-historical context of post-conflict Iraq. This grounding enhanced emotional resonance and historical empathy, but limits generalizability to other cultural or geopolitical contexts. Participant responses may vary depending on prior knowledge, cultural proximity, and personal experiences of trauma or displacement.

Although participants reported strong emotional and cognitive engagement, their increases in awareness, empathy, and advocacy intentions were captured immediately post-experience. Longitudinal research using diverse metrics is needed to assess the durability of these shifts and explore whether they lead to sustained action, civic participation, or contribute to evolving collective memory.

Ethical considerations are central when evaluating immersive representations of trauma. While our team was not involved in the design of Nobody’s Listening, the evaluation underscored the importance of trauma-informed approaches, particularly in post-conflict contexts. Emotional responses varied: many found the experience meaningful, but others may be vulnerable to distress or re-traumatization. This highlights the need for careful framing, content warnings, and emotional support mechanisms in future deployments.

The use of survivor testimonies in immersive formats also raises questions of agency, consent, and representation. Evaluators must remain sensitive to how such material is framed and received, especially in contexts where memory politics and emotional responses are deeply intertwined. Community consultation and ethical stewardship are essential—even during evaluation—to ensure respectful engagement with difficult heritage.

In sum, while immersive VR holds promise for engaging with traumatic histories, its ethical evaluation requires ongoing reflection, cultural sensitivity, and a commitment to responsible research practices.

7. Conclusions

This study provides empirical evidence for the effectiveness of immersive VR in engaging diverse audiences with difficult heritage and human rights issues. Our systematic evaluation of the Nobody’s Listening VR experience, conducted with 127 participants across five Iraqi cities, demonstrates that carefully designed VR experiences can significantly enhance knowledge, foster emotional engagement, and potentially motivate action in response to human rights abuses.

Four key contributions emerge from our findings:

First, we offer robust quantitative and qualitative evidence of VR’s impact across cognitive, emotional, and behavioral dimensions in a post-conflict context, adding empirical weight to existing theoretical frameworks on immersive technologies and empathy. The high levels of historical empathy observed (in 57% of responses about what made a significant impression) suggest that immersive technologies can facilitate not only emotional connection but also historical contextualization and perspective taking. This extends existing models of presence–emotion–empathy by introducing historical empathy as a mediating factor. Our findings also highlight the role of collective memory and intergroup empathy, where analogical recognition and shared historical experiences—rooted in social identity—enhance emotional resonance and foster cross-community understanding.

Second, we present a replicable methodological framework for evaluating immersive experiences that address difficult heritage that balances quantitative measures with rich qualitative insights. By adapting historical empathy models to VR evaluation, we contribute a theoretically grounded and culturally responsive approach that future researchers and practitioners can apply across diverse heritage and conflict-affected contexts.

Third, our findings from an Iraqi context underscore how cultural and historical positioning mediates user engagement. The strong connections Kurdish participants drew between Yazidi experiences and their own histories of violence and displacement suggest that immersive experiences may serve as powerful tools for fostering intergroup empathy and activating collective memory. These mechanisms have potential applications in reconciliation, transitional justice, and heritage pedagogy.

Fourth, we provide practical design and ethical guidance for immersive heritage experiences. Our findings emphasize the importance of trauma-informed approaches, cultural specificity, and community consultation—particularly when representing marginalized communities and traumatic histories. These considerations are essential for ensuring respectful engagement and maximizing the emotional and educational impact of immersive technologies in post-conflict settings.

For heritage practitioners, human rights educators, and policymakers, our findings suggest that immersive technologies offer promising pathways for inclusive engagement with sensitive historical material. When designed with strong narrative elements, multiple perspective options, and ethical sensitivity, VR experiences can contribute meaningfully to reconciliation efforts—ensuring that the stories of marginalized communities are not reduced to abstract historical narratives, but are remembered, emotionally resonant, and deeply felt.