Maybe it’s because they are so dull. Maybe it’s another reason, but we probably all experienced how exhausting online meetings and/or classes can be. New neuroscientific research confirms what we’ve already felt: Using EEG and ECG data, researchers demonstrated that video conferences and online education formats lead to more significant fatigue than face-to-face alternatives. The scientists conclude that videoconferencing should be considered a possible complement to face-to-face interaction but not a substitute.
From the press release:
Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the increase in virtual interactions has created a new challenge: fatigue caused by video calls, also known as Zoom fatigue or videoconference fatigue. This exhaustion, characterized by a feeling of tiredness and alienation due to too long or inappropriate video-based communication, had previously only been investigated through surveys and self-assessments by users. An interdisciplinary research team led by René Riedl from the University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria/Campus Steyr and Gernot Müller-Putz from Graz University of Technology has now managed to provide neurophysiological evidence of videoconference fatigue.
In the “Technostress in Organizations” project funded by the Austrian Science Fund FWF, the researchers conducted a neuroscientific study with students to investigate videoconference fatigue in the context of online university lectures. The test subjects took part in lectures that were held both in-person in a traditional lecture hall and online via video conferencing. These two experimental conditions were then compared with each other. The research team measured fatigue parameters both neurophysiologically based on electroencephalography (EEG) and electrocardiography (ECG) and by questionnaires. This allowed them to record objective physiological parameters and subjective perceptions. The objective findings based on EEG and specific parameters of heart rate variability as well as the subjective perceptions of the respondents showed that a 50-minute video conference-based lecture exhausted the test subjects significantly more than a lecture of the same length in the traditional lecture hall format, where lecturers and students meet face to face.
The study has been published in the high-profile journal Scientific Reports. “A better understanding of videoconference fatigue is important, as this phenomenon has a far-reaching impact on the well-being of individuals, interpersonal relationships and organizational communication,” emphasizes René Riedl. Gernot Müller-Putz further explains that “a holistic view of the underlying psychological and physiological mechanisms is required to develop effective strategies for coping with the harmful effects of videoconference fatigue.”
Together with two North American colleagues, the two scientists constitute the board of the Society for Neuro-Information Systems, a non-profit international scientific association based in Vienna that promotes and supports research and innovation at the intersection of neuroscience, information systems research and digitization. A key aim of this society is to make people more satisfied and productive when using digital technologies. “A better understanding of the neurophysiological processes in the body and brain of users is essential to achieve these goals,” the two scientists conclude.
Abstract of the study:
In the recent past, many organizations and people have substituted face-to-face meetings with videoconferences. Among others, tools like Zoom, Teams, and Webex have become the “new normal” of human social interaction in many domains (e.g., business, education). However, this radical adoption and extensive use of videoconferencing tools also has a dark side, referred to as videoconference fatigue (VCF). To date only self-report evidence has shown that VCF is a serious issue. However, based on self-reports alone it is hardly possible to provide a comprehensive understanding of a cognitive phenomenon like VCF. Against this background, we examined VCF also from a neurophysiological perspective. Specifically, we collected and analyzed electroencephalography (continuous and event-related) and electrocardiography (heart rate and heart rate variability) data to investigate whether VCF can also be proven on a neurophysiological level. We conducted a laboratory experiment based on a within-subjects design (N = 35). The study context was a university lecture, which was given in a face-to-face and videoconferencing format. In essence, the neurophysiological data—together with questionnaire data that we also collected—show that 50 min videoconferencing, if compared to a face-to-face condition, results in changes in the human nervous system which, based on existing literature, can undoubtedly be interpreted as fatigue. Thus, individuals and organizations must not ignore the fatigue potential of videoconferencing. A major implication of our study is that videoconferencing should be considered as a possible complement to face-to-face interaction, but not as a substitute.