Interview scorecard template

Virtual Reality Therapist interview scorecard

Evaluate Virtual Reality Therapist candidates across 4 weighted areas: clinical competence, patient safety and protocol, patient communication, and working in a clinical team. Clinical competence leads at 35%, so check licensure (LPC, LCSW, psychologist) plus hands-on use of VR platforms such as Psious, XRHealth, Amelia or Bravemind for exposure hierarchies, anxiety, phobia. Use the rubric to compare role-specific evidence consistently.

See AI scoring
healthcare clinicalcbtclinical licensureimmersive simulationvr exposure therapy
TL;DR
For clinical competence, look for evidence the candidate names specific VR platforms and headsets used, maps sessions to manualised CBT or prolonged exposure protocols, and cites outcome measures like PCL-5 or SUDS. For patient safety and protocol, look for evidence the candidate describes pre-session screening, an agreed exit cue, cleaning protocol between clients, and a concrete instance of aborting immersion and grounding the patient. Apply the written 1–5 anchors to every answer, record the evidence behind each rating, and use the factor weights to reach a consistent overall assessment.
Complete evaluation framework

What to assess and how to score it

Review the evidence signals before interviewing. Then use the anchored descriptions—not instinct alone—to choose the score that best matches each answer.

01
Evaluation factor

Clinical competence

35% weight

Check licensure (LPC, LCSW, psychologist) plus hands-on use of VR platforms such as Psious, XRHealth, Amelia or Bravemind for exposure hierarchies, anxiety, phobia and PTSD protocols.

Evidence to listen for

  • Command of the procedures, anatomy, and equipment the role requires
  • Holds current registration or certification
  • Knows normal from abnormal and what to do about each
  • Recognises when a case is outside their scope

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Unsafe knowledge gaps; registration missing or lapsed.

2
Needs Improvement

Knowledge gaps that would affect patient care.

3
Satisfactory

Competent for standard cases; needs support on complex ones.

4
Very Good

Strong clinical knowledge; safe and reliable across the usual range.

5
Excellent

Names specific VR platforms and headsets used, maps sessions to manualised CBT or prolonged exposure protocols, and cites outcome measures like PCL-5 or SUDS.

02
Evaluation factor

Patient safety and protocol

30% weight

Probe handling of cybersickness, dissociation and abreaction mid-immersion: stop signals, headset hygiene, seizure and fall risk screening, informed consent for immersive content.

Evidence to listen for

  • Follows identification, infection control, and documentation protocol without prompting
  • Can describe an error or near miss and what they did
  • Escalates deterioration early
  • Treats protocol as protection rather than bureaucracy

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Casual about protocol; would not report an error.

2
Needs Improvement

Inconsistent protocol adherence; slow to escalate.

3
Satisfactory

Follows protocol reliably; documentation sometimes thin.

4
Very Good

Protocol is instinctive; escalates early and reports honestly.

5
Excellent

Describes pre-session screening, an agreed exit cue, cleaning protocol between clients, and a concrete instance of aborting immersion and grounding the patient.

03
Evaluation factor

Patient communication

20% weight

Assess how they orient anxious or sceptical clients to a headset, calibrate immersion intensity, and debrief what the virtual environment surfaced afterwards.

Evidence to listen for

  • Explains a procedure to an anxious or confused patient
  • Handles distress, pain, or refusal without losing control of the interaction
  • Respects privacy and dignity in practice, not just in principle
  • Works with families and carers

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Dismissive of patients; no bedside awareness.

2
Needs Improvement

Task-focused; struggles with distressed patients.

3
Satisfactory

Adequate rapport; less confident in difficult interactions.

4
Very Good

Calm, clear, and respectful with anxious or difficult patients.

5
Excellent

Explains graded introduction to the hardware, checks distress verbally during immersion, and debriefs cognitions and avoidance patterns in plain language.

04
Evaluation factor

Working in a clinical team

15% weight

Look for coordination with psychiatrists, occupational therapists and technical staff on scenario builds, EHR documentation, and referral or escalation when VR is contraindicated.

Evidence to listen for

  • Hands over cleanly and completely
  • Challenges a colleague when patient safety requires it
  • Takes direction from clinicians without deferring blindly
  • Handles shift work and pressure without becoming difficult to work with

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Poor handover; cannot work in a clinical team.

2
Needs Improvement

Handover gaps; avoids raising concerns about colleagues.

3
Satisfactory

Reliable team member; handover adequate.

4
Very Good

Clean handovers and willing to speak up on safety.

5
Excellent

Cites named collaborators, documents session data in the EHR, and shows judgement on when to refer out rather than continue immersive work.

Evidence-led prompts

Interview questions for a Virtual Reality Therapist

Use these prompts to surface evidence for the weighted factors above and compare candidates against the same role-specific criteria.

  1. 01

    Can you describe your experience using virtual reality in therapeutic settings?

  2. 02

    What training or certification do you have relevant to this work?

  3. 03

    How do you integrate this into an overall treatment plan?

  4. 04

    How do you assess whether a client is suitable for this approach?

  5. 05

    What safety protocols do you follow during sessions?

See the complete Virtual Reality Therapist question set
Put this rubric to work

Score every candidate against the same standard

Add these weighted factors to Hirevire and let AI evaluate recorded answers against your rubric.

Explore AI Scorecards