The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The fatiguing effects of camera use in virtual meetings: A within-person field experiment.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic propelled many employees into remote work arrangements, and face-to-face meetings were quickly replaced with virtual meetings. This rapid uptick in the use of virtual meetings led to much popular press discussion of virtual meeting fatigue (i.e., "Zoom fatigue"), described as a feeling of being drained and lacking energy following a day of virtual meetings. In this study, we aimed to better understand how one salient feature of virtual meetings-the camera-impacts fatigue, which may affect outcomes during meetings (e.g., participant voice and engagement). We did so through the use of a 4-week within-person experience sampling field experiment where camera use was manipulated. Drawing from theory related to self-presentation, we propose and test a model where study condition (camera on versus off) was linked to daily feelings of fatigue; daily fatigue, in turn, was presumed to relate negatively to voice and engagement during virtual meetings. We further predict that gender and organizational tenure will moderate this relationship such that using a camera during virtual meetings will be more fatiguing for women and newer members of the organization. Results of 1,408 daily observations from 103 employees supported our proposed model, with supplemental analyses suggesting that fatigue affects same-day and next-day meeting performance. Given the anticipated prevalence of remote work even after the pandemic subsides, our study offers key insights for ongoing organizational best practices surrounding virtual meetings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
Naegele, K. D., & Goffman, E. (1956) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089106 · Cited by 25,991
Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554 · Cited by 9,868
(2010) · Cited by 7,034
Enders, C., & Bandalos, D. (2001) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0803_5 · Cited by 4,978
Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue.
Enders, C. K., & Tofighi, D. (2007) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.12.2.121 · Cited by 4,462
Job Engagement: Antecedents and Effects on Job Performance
Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2010.51468988 · Cited by 3,833
Better Bootstrap Confidence Intervals
Efron, B. (1987) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1987.10478410 · Cited by 3,364
HELPING AND VOICE EXTRA-ROLE BEHAVIORS: EVIDENCE OF CONSTRUCT AND PREDICTIVE VALIDITY.
Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. (1998) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256902 · Cited by 3,178
Beyond the Turk: Alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research
Peer, E., Brandimarte, L., Samat, S., & Acquisti, A. (2017) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.006 · Cited by 2,957
Message Equivocality, Media Selection, and Manager Performance: Implications for Information Systems
Daft, R. L., Lengel, R. H., & Trevino, L. K. (1987) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/248682 · Cited by 2,322
Cited by
Understanding and shaping the future of work with self-determination theory
Gagné, M., Parker, S. K., Griffin, M. A., Dunlop, P. D., Knight, C., Klonek, F. E., & Parent-Rocheleau, X. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-022-00056-w · Cited by 434
Facial Appearance Dissatisfaction Explains Differences in Zoom Fatigue
Ratan, R., Miller, D. B., & Bailenson, J. N. (2022) · Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking · doi:10.1089/cyber.2021.0112 · Cited by 115
Li, Y. N., Cheng, B. H., Yu, B., & Zhu, J. N. Y. (2024) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/peps.12585 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Shockley, K. M., Gabriel, A. S., Robertson, D., Rosen, C. C., Chawla, N., Ganster, M. L., & Ezerins, M. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2021-08
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1137-1155
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W3193766750
- Cited by
- 293
- References
- 71
- FWCI
- 49.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The fatiguing effects of camera use in virtual meetings: A within-person field experiment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/apl0000948
- The paper
- Shockley, K. M., Gabriel, A. S., Robertson, D., Rosen, C. C., Chawla, N., Ganster, M. L., & Ezerins, M. E. (2021). The fatiguing effects of camera use in virtual meetings: A within-person field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000948
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.