by Sydney Kennedy, PharmD, PGY1 Pharmacy Practice Resident, University of Mississippi Medical Center
The Covid-19 pandemic forced employees of many industries into remote work, most often from home. Likewise, students were forced to rapidly transition to remote learning. The rapid transition from in-person to remote instruction posed challenges to both learners and educators. From an educator’s standpoint, requiring the use of cameras during remote instruction most closely approximates the face-to-face interaction that occurs in an in-person classroom. The assumption is that interacting “face-to-face” will increase student participation, but is this true? There is controversy about whether requiring cameras to be “on” during meetings and classes improves the quality of the meeting or the instruction. The lay press reports how students and workers are feeling drained after attending face-to-face virtual meetings. Some call this phenomenon “Zoom fatigue.” The impact on students who have been, by necessity, forced to learn in a virtual environment has not been studied. There may be consequences of the virtual environment caused by prolonged video conferencing. Just because you ‘can’ use video cameras does not necessarily mean that using video leads to better outcomes.
A recent study entitled “The Fatiguing Effects of Camera Use in Virtual Meetings: A Within-Person Field Experiment” reveals the negative impact that a “camera’s on” policy might have. This was a four-week field experiment. The authors hypothesized that virtual meetings would be more fatiguing for women and those who were newer members of the organization. The study was performed to gather insights about best practices for virtual meetings. The study involved 103 employees that were largely female (56.3%) who had been with the organization, on average, for about three years. The participants were randomly assigned to the camera study condition, “on” or “off.” The camera “on” or “off” condition was the independent variable, and all participants were given a survey instrument that included questions about how they felt during the meeting. Fatigue was significantly greater in the camera “on” group (p < 0.001). Camera use also negatively effected engagement (p < 0.001). This was assessed by participant ratings on the survey after each meeting to the question, “in meetings today, when I had something to say, I felt like I had a voice.” The association between camera use and fatigue was stronger for women than men (p < 0.001). Additionally, there was a positive relationship between camera use and fatigue among those employees with the shortest tenure with the organization (p < 0.001). Overall, these results suggest that camera use is particularly fatiguing for women and newer employees.
The results of this study align with the theory that virtual meeting participants feel that they need to actively manage impressions when their cameras are on. When the participants’ are on camera, they experience a “self-presentation” effect that causes fatigue. Thus, encouraging (or requiring) employees or students to turn cameras on may be harmful and actually hinder engagement.
To date, there are no studies that have evaluated whether different camera angles would be less fatiguing by being able to give the learner the ability to minimize the self-presentation effects. Self-presentation may be fatiguing due to pressure to “look” competent while maintaining societal appearance standards. There are limitations to these findings, however, such as not being able to evaluate the long-term effects of virtual meetings over time and whether the size of the virtual meetings contributes to these effects.
While this study evaluated people in an employment context, I believe the results can be extrapolated to the virtual classroom. Similar to students, employees are being evaluated on performance and engagement in discussions. There may be additional reasons contributing to fatigue in the virtual classroom. The amount of close-up eye contact with the instructor and other students is not a natural distance when compared to in-person classrooms. Furthermore, students may be spending a lot of time acknowledging self (e.g., looking at themselves) rather than the educator — a phenomenon that does not occur during in-person classes. Additionally, the frame of the camera is small and limits normal mobility. This can be physically straining. Lastly, the cognitive load is higher in a video environment because it’s more challenging to pick up on nonverbal cues and therefore work much harder to send and receive signals.
There have been several proposed solutions to these problems. It may be beneficial to reduce the size of the window on the monitor to reduce the student’s face size. For those who use laptop computers, external keyboards can increase the distance between the learner and the video monitor. It has also could be suggested to build in camera “off” time spaced throughout the day to give the students nonverbal rest.
Admittedly, this topic is controversial. But the results of this study provide some evidence that requiring “cameras on” during video conferencing may not always be beneficial and may contribute to a negative learning environment. Clearly, we need to learn more about the effects of cameras on student learning and performance! However, educators should be cognizant of some of the negative consequences of “cameras on” in their virtual classrooms.
References
- Shockley KM, Gabriel AS, Robertson D, et al. The fatiguing effects of camera use in virtual meetings: A within-person field experiment. J Appl Psychol. 2021 Aug;106(8):1137-1155.
- Ramachandran V. Stanford researchers identify four causes for ‘Zoom fatigue’ and their simple fixes.. Stanford News 2021. Accessed November 2021.
