Zoom Yorgunluğu: Bir Gözden Geçirme

Öz

Yeni bir koronavirüs hastalığı (COVID-19) pandemisi sadece fiziksel sağlığı değil; bireysel, toplum-sal tutum ve davranışları değiştirerek küresel boyutta günlük hayatı kesintiye uğratmaktadır. Bu koşul-larda iş, sosyal hayat ve eğitimin devamı için video konferans uygulamaları dünya genelinde ana akım haline gelmektedir. Video konferanslar ve sohbetler bize çalışma odalarını, sınıfları uzaktan bağlamak, uzun mesafeleri ilişkileri sürdürmek ve COVİD-19 günlerinde birliktelik duygusunu teşvik etmek için yardımcı oldu ancak bir veya 2 sanal toplantıya katıldıktan, bir veya iki çevrimiçi web seminerini din-ledikten ve belki de konuşmacı olduktan sonra kişiler bitkin ve gergin hissettiklerini ifade etmeye baş-lamaktadırlar. Böylece video konferans platformlarının aşırı kullanımından kaynaklanan, popüler bir uygulamanın da adını taşıyan yeni bir terim ortaya çıktı: ’Zoom Yorgunluğu’. Zoom yorgunluğu vi-deo konferans aracı üzerinden yapılan bir toplantı sonrası yorgun hissetme olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Yorgunluğun normal iş yorgunluğundan farklı ve spesifik olduğu görülmektedir. Zoom yorgunluğuna neden olabilecek mevcut video konferans uygulamalarına özgü, mekanizmalar öne sürülmektedir. İlk mekanizmada, video konferanslarda kendi kendine bakış tarafından tetiklenebilen ayna kaygısından bahsedilmektedir. İkinci mekanizma, kamera görüş alanı içinde kalma ihtiyacı nedeniyle kapana kı-sılmış olma duygusudur. Diğer mekanizma, bu yeni iletişim ortamında sözel olmayan davranışları yönetmenin artan bilişsel yükü ile ilgilidir. Video konferanslarda sözlü olmayan iletişim dilini hem üretmek hem de yorumlamak için bilinçli çaba ve dikkat gerekmektedir. COVID-19 uzun zamandır olması tahmin edilen uzaktan çalışma eğilimini arttırmaktadır. Halen sosyal mesafeli tavsiyeler hafifle-tilse, yüz yüze toplantılar tekrar güvenli hale gelse bile video konferans uygulamaları üretkenliği art-tırmaya ve enerji tasarrufu sağlamaya devam etme potansiyeline sahip gibi görünmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Zoom
• yorgunluk
• sözsüz iletişim
• hiperbakış

Zoom Fatigue: A Review

Abstract

A novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is not just about physical health; It disrupts daily life on a global scale by changing individual and social attitudes and behaviors. In these conditions, video conferencing applications are becoming mainstream worldwide for the continuation of work, social life and education. Video conferences have helped us to remotely connect study rooms, class-rooms, but after attending one or 2 virtual meetings, listening to an online webinar or two, and per-haps speaking, people begin to express feeling exhausted and nervous. Thus, a new term emerged, also named after a popular application, resulting from the excessive use of video conferencing plat-forms: 'Zoom Fatigue'. Zoom fatigue is defined as feeling tired after a meeting over a video confer-encing tool. Fatigue appears to be different and specific from normal work fatigue. Mechanisms spe-cific to existing video conferencing applications that can cause Zoom Fatigue are suggested. The first mechanism mentions mirror anxiety, which can be triggered by self-gaze in video conferences. The second mechanism is the feeling of being trapped by the need to stay within the camera's field of view. The other mechanism has to do with the increased cognitive load of managing nonverbal be-haviors in this new communication environment. COVID-19 is increasing the long-anticipated trend of remote work. Even as social distancing recommendations are eased and face-to-face meetings be-come safe again, video conferencing apps seem to have the potential to continue to increase produc-tivity and save energy.

Keywords

• Zoom
• fatigue
• nonverbal communication
• hypergaze

Kaynakça

1. Akduman G (2021) Zoom yorgunluğu ölçeğinin türkçe uyarlaması: geçerlik ve güvenilirlik çalışması. İş'te Davranış Dergisi, 6:16-28.
2. Andrist S, Mutlu B, Gleicher M (2013) Conversational gaze aversion for virtual agents. In Intelligent virtual agents. (Eds R Aylett, B Krenn, C Pelachaud, H Shimodaira):249–262. Springer.
3. Argyle M, Dean J (1965) Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry, 28:289–304.
4. Bailenson JN, Beall AC, Loomis J, Blascovich J, Turk M (2005) Transformed social interaction, augmented gaze, and social influence in immersive virtual environments. Human Communication Research, 31:511–537.
5. Bailenson JN (2021) Nonverbal overload: A theoretical argument for the causes of Zoom Fatigue. Technology, Mind, and Behavior, 2:1-6.
6. Bennett AA, Gabriel AS, Calderwood C (2020) Examining the interplay of micro-break durations and activities for employee recovery: A mixed-methods investigation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 25:126–142. 
7. Bennett AA, Campion ED, Keeler KR, Keeler SK (2021) Videoconference fatigue? Exploring changes in fatigue after videoconference meetings during COVID-19. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106:330-344.
8. Birkett MA (2011) The Trier Social Stress Test protocol for inducing psychological stress. JoVE, 56:32-38.

9. Bothra S (2020) How to Avoid Zoom Fatigue While Working From Home. https://thriveglobal.com/stories/how-to-avoid-zoom-fatigue-while-working-fromhome/?utm_source=Newsletter_General&utm_medium=Thrive (Accessed 04.05.2021).
10. Burgoon BJK, Bonito JA, Ramirez A, Dunbar NE, Kam K, Fischer J (2002) Testing the interactivity principle: Effects of mediation, propinquity, and verbal and nonverbal modalities in interpersonal interaction. J. Commun, 52:657–677.
11. Chatman JA, Flynn FJ (2001) The influence of demographic heterogeneity on the emergence and consequences of cooperative norms in work teams. Academy of Management Journal, 44:956–974.
12. Cook SW, Mitchell Z, Goldin-Meadow S (2008) Gesturing makes learning last. Cognition, 106:1047–1058.
13. Croes EAJ, Antheunis ML, Schouten AP, Krahmer EJ (2019) Social attraction in videomediated communication: The role of nonverbal affiliative behavior. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36:1210–1232.
14. Degges-White S (2020) Dealing with Zoom anxiety. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/lifetime-connections/202004/dealing-zoom-anxiety (Accessed 13 Mayıs 2020).
15. Duval S, Wicklund RA (1972) A theory of objective self awareness. Academic Press.
16. Dallon RD (2020) Zoom fatigue by the numbers: a new poll looks at video conferencing engagement. https://www. techrepublic.com/article/zoom-fatigue-by-the-numbers-a-new-poll-looks-at-videoconferencing-engagement/ (Accessed 03.08.2020).
17. Epstein HAB (2020) Virtual meeting fatigue. J. Hosp. Libr, 20:356–360.
18. Fauville G, Luo M, Queiroz ACM, Bailenson JN, Hancock J (2021) “Zoom Exhaustion & Fatigue Scale.” Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 4: 100119.
19. Fauville G, Luo M, Queiroz ACM, Bailenson JN, Hancock J (2021) Nonverbal mechanisms predict zoom fatigue and explain why women experience higher levels than men. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820035 (Accessed 13.05.2020).
20. Fejfar MC, Hoyle RH (2000) Effect of private self-awareness on negative affect and selfreferent attribution: A quantitative review. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev, 4:132–142.
21. Gonzales A, Hancock J (2011) Mirror, mirror on my facebook wall: Effects of exposure to facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw, 14:79–83.
22. Gruenewald TL, Kemeny ME, Aziz N, Fahey JL (2004) Acute threat to the social self: Shame, social self-esteem, and cortisol activity. Psychosomatic Medicine, 66:915–924.
23. Gully SM, Devine DJ, Whitney DJ (1995) A meta-analysis of cohesion and performance: Effects of levels of analysis and task interdependence. Small Group Research, 26:497–520.
24. Hackman JR (1992) Group influences on individuals in organizations. In Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Eds MD Dunnette, LM Hough):199–267. Consulting Psychologists Press.
25. Hall TG, Horgan NA (2019) Murphy, Nonverbal communication. Annu. Rev. Psychol, 70:271–294.
26. Hanna JE, Brennan SE (2007) Speakers’ eye gaze disambiguates referring expressions early during face-to-face conversation. Journal of Memory and Language, 57:596-615.
27. Hinds PJ (1999) The cognitive and interpersonal costs of video. Media Psychol, 1:283–311.
28. Ingram RE, Cruet D, Johnson BR, Wisnicki KS (1988) Self- focused attention, gender, gender role, and vulnerability to negative affect. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol, 55:967–978.
29. Kaplan S (1995) The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15:169–182.
30. Kendon A (1970) Movement coordination in social interaction: Some examples described. Acta Psychol, 32:101–125.
31. Kendon A (2004) Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
32. Kleinke CL (1986) Gaze and eye contact: A research review. Psychological Bulletin, 100: 78– 100.
33. Lavelle J (2020). Gartner CFO survey reveals 74% intend to shift some employees to remote work permanently. https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2020-04-03-gartner-cfo-surey-reveals-74-percent-of-organizations-to-shift-some-employees-to-remote-work-permanently2 (Accessed 03.04.2020).
34. Li Q et al. (2020) Early transmission dynamics in Wuhan, China, of novel coronavirus-infected pneumonia. N Engl J Med 2020; published online Jan 29. DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa2001316.
35. Morris B. (2020) Why does Zoom exhaust you? Science has an answer. https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-does-zoom-exhaustyou-science-has-an-answer-11590600269 (Accessed 03.08.2020).
36. Nardi C (2020). Nearly three out of every four Canadians say virtual conferencing tools an’excellent’ alternative to interacting in person. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/nearly-three-out-of-four-canadians-says-virtual-conferencing-tools-are-an-excellent-alternative-to-interacting-in-person (Accessed 03.08.2020).
37. O’Brien W, Yazdani Aliabadi F (2020) Does telecommuting save energy? A critical review of quantitative studies and their research methods. Energy and Building, 225(10):1–15.
38. Ong D, Moors T, Sivarama V (2014) Comparison of the energy, carbon and time costs of videoconferencing and in-person meetings. Computer Communications, 50,:86–94.
39. Oppezzo M, Schwartz DL (2014) Give your ideas some legs: The positive effect of walking on creative thinking. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn, 40:1142–1152.
40. Peper E, Lin IM, Harvey R, Perez J (2017) How posture affects memory recall and mood. Biofeedback, 45(2), 36–41.
41. Peper E, Wilson V, Martin M, Rosegard E, Harvey R (2021) Avoid Zoom fatigue, be present and learn. NeuroRegulation, 8(1):47.
42. Porges SW (2017) The pocket guide to the polyvagal theory: The transformative power of feeling safe. New York, W. W. Norton & Company.
43. Sklar J (2020) ‘Zoom Fatigue’ is taxing the brain. Here's why that happens. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/04/coronavirus-zoom-fatigue-is-taxing-the-brain-here-is-why-that-happens/ (Accessed 12.09.2020).
44. Spataro J (2020). The future of work—the good, the challenging & the unknown. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/blog/2020/07/08/future-work-good-challenging-unknown/ (Accessed 08.07.2020).
45. Takac M, Collett J, Blom KJ, Conduit R, Rehm I, Foe AD (2019) Public speaking anxiety decreases within repeated virtual reality training sessions. PLOS ONE, 14(5).
46. Tronick E, Adamson LB, Als H, Brazelton TB (1975) Infant emotions in normal and pertubated interactions. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Denver.
47. Wiederhold BK (2020) Connecting through technology during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: avoiding “Zoom Fatigue”. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Networking 2020; 23: 437–8.
48. World Health Organization (2020) Statement on the second meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Published January 30, 2020. (Accessed 02.02.2020).