A Virtual Laboratory

Second Life emerges as a new setting for psychology research

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Residents of Second Life—an online computer game in which players can do almost everything they can do in real life, such as buy and sell property, take classes and date—tout their world’s realistic settings and social opportunities. Now a growing number of scientists are beginning to take notice and are bringing their human behavior research into the virtual world.

Second Life allows researchers to study scenarios that they cannot in real life, such as placing a person in someone else’s body, changing the laws of physics or even performing experi­ments that are otherwise ethically taboo. Communications scientist Nick Yee of the Palo Alto Research Center, who uses Second Life as his primary laboratory, says that the setting could provide new ways to explore people’s feelings about age, sex or race. Another group of researchers at University Col­lege London recently repeated Stanley Milgram’s notorious 1963 ex­periment—in which participants were asked to ad­minister apparently lethal electric shocks to another volunteer—in a vir­tual-reality setting. The results were similar to those of the original experi­ment; although the participants became uncomfortable, many continued ad­ministering shocks at the request of the researchers. Computer scientist Mel Slater, who led the experiment, says that virtual reality is more realistic than Second Life but agrees that, like virtual reality, the game has the poten­tial to be a powerful research tool.

Dmitri Williams, a communications professor at the University of Southern California, says that online games such as Second Life also offer an unprecedented chance to gather large amounts of accurate behavioral data. “In these worlds,” Williams explains, “you have the equivalent of cameras recording people’s every move.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Some experts, however, caution that it is too early to say for sure whether experiments done in virtual worlds can be applied to real behavior. A recent study from Yee’s group demonstrated that many people respond to social cues such as personal space and eye contact much as they would in real life. But in other cases, such as risk-taking behavior, people behave very differently in games, because the cost of death is relatively insignificant. “We need to find out which situations do match up [with reality] and which don’t,” Williams says. “We’re not even close to that yet.”

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe