Paper detail

Technological Factors Influencing Videoconferencing and Zoom Fatigue

The paper presents a conceptual, multidimensional approach to understand the technological factors that are assumed to or even have been proven to contribute to what has been coined as Zoom Fatigue (ZF) or more generally Videoconferencing Fatigue (VCF). With the advent of the Covid-19 pandemic, the usage of VC services has drastically increased, leading to more and more reports about the ZF or VCF phenomenon. The paper is motivated by the fact that some of the media outlets initially starting the debate on what Zoom fatigue is and how it can be avoided, as well as some of the scientific papers addressing the topic, contain assumptions that are rather hypothetical and insufficiently underpinned by scientific evidence. Most of these works are acknowledge the lacking evidence and partly suggest directions for future research. This paper intends to deepen the survey of VC-technology-related literature and to provide more existing evidence, where possible, while reviewing some of the already provided support or evidence for certain causal hypotheses. The technological factors dimension and its identified sub-dimensions presented in this paper are embedded within a more holistic four-dimensional conceptual factors model describing the causes for ZF or VCF. The paper describing this overall conceptual model is written by the same group of authors and currently under revision for an Open Access Journal publication. The present paper expands on the technological factors dimension descriptions provided in the overall model paper and provides more detailed analyzes and concepts associated with how VC technology may affect users' perception, cognitive load, interaction and communication, possibly leading to stress, exhaustion and fatigue. The paper currently is a living document which will be expanded further with regard to the evidence for or against the impact of certain technological factors.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.