<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec> <jats:title>Background</jats:title> <jats:p>Regular body-powered (BP) prosthesis training facilitates the acquisition of skills through repeated practice but requires adequate time and motivation. Therefore, auxiliary tools such as indirect training may improve the training experience and speed of skill acquisition. In this study, we examined the effects of action observation (AO) using virtual reality (VR) as an auxiliary tool. We used two modalities during AO: three-dimensional (3D) VR and two-dimensional (2D) computer tablet devices (Tablet). Each modality was tested from first- and third-person perspectives.</jats:p> </jats:sec><jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods</jats:title> <jats:p>We studied 40 healthy right-handed participants wearing a BP prosthesis simulator on their non-dominant hands. The participants were divided into five groups based on combinations of the different modalities and perspectives: first-person perspective on VR (VR1), third-person perspective on VR (VR3), first-person perspective on a tablet (Tablet1), third-person perspective on a tablet (Tablet3), and a control group (Control). The intervention groups observed and imitated the video image of prosthesis operation for 10 min in each of two sessions. We evaluated the level of immersion during AO using the visual analogue scale. Prosthetic control skills were evaluated using the Box and Block Test (BBT) and a bowknot task (BKT).</jats:p> </jats:sec><jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>In the BBT, there were no significant differences in the amount of change in the skills between the five groups. In contrast, the relative changes in the BKT prosthetic control skills in VR1 (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> < 0.001, d = 3.09) and VR3 (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> < 0.001, d = 2.16) were significantly higher than those in the control group. Additionally, the immersion scores of VR1 (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> < 0.05, d = 1.45) and VR3 (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> < 0.05, d = 1.18) were higher than those of Tablet3. There was a significant negative correlation between the immersion scores and the relative change in the BKT scores (Spearman’s r<jats:sub>s</jats:sub> = − 0.47, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> < 0.01).</jats:p> </jats:sec><jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>Using the BKT of bilateral manual dexterity, VR-based AO significantly improved short-term prosthetic control acquisition. Additionally, it appeared that the higher the immersion score was, the shorter the execution time of the BKT task. Our findings suggest that VR-based AO training may be effective in acquiring bilateral BP prosthetic control, which requires more 3D-based operation.</jats:p> </jats:sec>