Investigating autistic traits, social phobia, fear of COVID-19, and internet use disorder variables in the context of videoconference fatigue

Videoconference fatigue from a neurophysiological perspective: experimental evidence based on electroencephalography (EEG) and electrocardiography (ECG)

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.