Our brains are hardwired for face-to-face interaction. Since the Stone Age, humans have used facial expressions and sound as primary means of communication. Over time, evolution has resulted in biological adaptations that enhance the effectiveness of F2F interactions. For example, the location of the larynx, the development of the vocal tract, and accompanying changes in the brain now allow human beings to create the many sounds needed to speak modern languages. Similarly, adaptations of muscles in the human face enable a diverse range of facial expressions used to communicate.12

The naturalness of a communication medium is determined by the extent to which it matches the features of face-to-face interaction.13 Key factors that contribute to feelings of naturalness include sharing the same space, sending and receiving messages quickly, and being able to send and receive both verbal and nonverbal expressions.14

445

The human brain enables us to send and receive messages in our natural face-to-face mode with a minimum of effort. However, when we use a less natural medium, we face greater barriers to effective communication. In this way, videoconferencing can be seen as more natural than text-based media because it has the ability to convey vocal and visual cues (such as tone and body posture) synchronously, not unlike face-to-face communication. By contrast, emails provide mostly text-based cues and typically are asynchronous. Emoticons can be added to email messages, but they lack the richness and variety of cues found in F2F communicating.15

In the following section, we explore some of the specific challenges caused by mediated presentations in terms of the naturalness we often take for granted in F2F communication. Unless otherwise noted, these challenges apply to both prerecorded and real-time communication.