You finish a day of back-to-back video calls. Your eyes ache. Your brain feels scrambled. You have barely moved from your chair, yet you feel exhausted in a way that an ordinary conversation does not always produce.
This is not a personal failure. In 2021, Stanford researcher Jeremy Bailenson proposed four ways the video-call environment may contribute: close-up eye gaze, constant self-view, reduced mobility, and extra cognitive work to send and read nonverbal cues.
The paper was theoretical, not a study of 10,000 people and not a direct experiment on Zoom fatigue. The four explanations are research-informed hypotheses, not four proven causes.
What the paper did
Bailenson drew on research about nonverbal communication, mirrors, movement, and computer-mediated interaction. He then applied those findings to common video-conference interfaces.
The paper explicitly states that the four arguments had not been directly tested in the context of Zoom and called for future experiments.
The four proposed mechanisms
1. Close-up gaze
Video grids can place several large faces in front of you for long periods. Even when you are not speaking, other people's eyes can appear directed towards you. Bailenson argued that the size and apparent gaze may create an unusually intense social experience.
This is sometimes called “hyper-gaze,” but the paper did not measure a fight-or-flight response during ordinary calls.
2. Constant self-view
Many platforms show your own face throughout a meeting. Research outside video conferencing has linked mirror exposure and self-focused attention with increased self-evaluation. Bailenson proposed that an all-day digital mirror may add strain.
The paper did not establish that self-view affects everyone equally.
3. Reduced mobility
A fixed camera has a narrow field of view. Users may stay close to the screen to remain visible, limiting the ability to stand, pace, or move naturally.
Because movement can support cognition and comfort, this constraint may contribute to fatigue.
4. Extra work for nonverbal cues
In person, gaze, posture, and small gestures often operate with little conscious effort. On video, people may exaggerate a nod, monitor whether they are centred, or work harder to interpret delayed and cropped signals.
Bailenson proposed that this added monitoring increases cognitive load.
Low-cost changes to try
The paper's suggestions follow directly from the proposed mechanisms. They are sensible experiments for your own setup, not guaranteed treatments.
Hide self-view
After confirming your framing, hide your own tile if the platform allows it. Other participants can still see you.
Reduce the video window
Move the window farther away or make it smaller so faces do not dominate your field of view.
Create room to move
An external camera or keyboard can let you sit farther from the screen. Use audio-only breaks when the meeting permits it.
Question camera-on defaults
Decide whether video is useful for the task instead of treating it as mandatory for every conversation.
The bottom line
Close-up gaze, self-view, limited movement, and additional nonverbal work offer a plausible explanation for why a day of video calls can feel so draining. In the cited paper, they are theoretical arguments, not four experimentally confirmed causes.
You do not need to wait for a perfect causal model before changing the interface. Hide the mirror, make the faces smaller, create room to move, and question whether every meeting needs a camera. Keep the changes that give some of your attention back.
Put this into practice
Use AI speech coaching when you want to rehearse the verbal part of a presentation without also managing a video grid. Then test the final delivery in the medium where it will happen.