Video calls better than text-based communication, but nothing beats face-to-face for fulfilling interactions, researchers say. Photo Credit: AdobeStock/Antonio Rodriguez
A review of more than 1,000 studies has found that people are less engaged and experience fewer positive emotional responses when communicating via technology such as video calls, messaging apps or social media, compared with face-to-face interactions.
The study, published online on 6 January 2026 in Perspectives on Psychological Science, reviewed 1,158 studies comparing face-to-face and computer-mediated communication.
Lead author Roy Baumeister, professor of psychology at the University of Queensland, said: “Electronic communication is here to stay, so we need to learn how to integrate it into our lives,” Baumeister said. “But if it replaces live interactions, people miss important benefits and are likely to feel less fulfilled.”
The review found that “socialising alone”, or communicating with others while physically by oneself, often resulted in reduced impact and engagement.
‘Lol’ brings no health benefits?
Positive emotional responses were also lower when interactions took place via smartphones, computers or tablets.
One example of the difference is laughter. “There’s strong evidence that laughing out loud has real health benefits, but we couldn’t find any health benefits to typing ‘LOL’ in a text or social media post,” said Brad Bushman, co-author of the study and professor of communication at The Ohio State University.
Educational outcomes were also found to be stronger in face-to-face settings than in online environments, including studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic when remote learning was widespread.
Video calls performed better than text-based communication, particularly in generating positive emotions, although being removed in both time and space further weakens social benefits.
There are upsides
Findings on negative emotions were more mixed. Online communication can reduce certain forms of anxiety, allowing some individuals to feel and communicate better, according to Baumeister.
Although, some individuals were more likely to express negative or harmful comments online than they would face-to-face, with social inhibitions reduced in digital environments.
Should we be worried?
Computer-mediated communication was most effective when participants were highly motivated, such as in online psychotherapy, among committed work teams or between romantic partners.
“I was struck by studies showing that patients often felt video therapy worked as well as, or almost as well as, in-person sessions when engagement was high,” Baumeister said. “There may even be benefits, as people can feel less inhibited discussing personal issues.”
The authors noted that concerns about the impact of technology on human communication go way back. Almost a century ago, sociologists were concerned that the telephone would reduce people visiting in person with neighbors.
“There is a long history of unconfirmed predictions that various innovations will bring disaster, so one must be skeptical of alarmist projections,” the authors wrote in the paper. “Then again, the early returns are not encouraging.”
Co-authors on the study include Michaela Bibby of Harvard University and Dianne Tice of Brigham Young University.