Video Call Glitches Can Seriously Influence Hiring, Healthcare, and Even Parole Decisions

Video calls are so woven into everyday life that most of us shrug off the occasional frozen screen, awkward delay, or distorted audio. It feels harmless, almost expected. But new research shows that these small technical glitches can quietly shape how people judge one another, with consequences that go far beyond mild frustration.

A major study published in Nature in 2025 reveals that even minor audiovisual glitches during face-to-face video calls can trigger a subtle psychological response known as uncanniness. This reaction, while hard to consciously pinpoint, can reduce trust, weaken social connection, and negatively affect critical decisions such as hiring outcomes, trust in telehealth providers, and parole rulings.

Why Video Calls Feel Real Until They Don’t

The biggest strength of video calls is that they create the feeling of being “together.” Seeing facial expressions, hearing natural speech rhythms, and observing real-time reactions help simulate in-person interaction. Our brains quickly adapt to this illusion.

The problem arises when the experience becomes almost perfect, but not quite. A brief audio delay, slightly out-of-sync lips, pixelated video, or momentary freezing can disrupt that illusion. According to the researchers, this places video calls in the psychological zone known as the uncanny valley, where something feels human-like but subtly off. When this happens, people often experience discomfort or unease, even if they cannot explain why.

This sense of uncanniness does not remain isolated. It spills over into how we evaluate the person on the screen.

Who Conducted the Research

The study, titled “Video Call Glitches Trigger Uncanniness and Harm Consequential Life Outcomes,” was led by Jacqueline Rifkin of Cornell University’s SC Johnson College of Business and Melanie Brucks of Columbia Business School. Jeff Johnson from the University of Missouri–Kansas City also contributed. The research combined real-world data analysis with controlled experiments to understand how glitches affect human judgment.

How the Researchers Studied Glitches

The research team used multiple methods to reach their conclusions, ensuring the results were consistent and robust.

One major data source was the CANDOR Corpus, an archive of more than 1,600 real “get-to-know-you” video calls conducted between January and November 2020. After each call, participants completed surveys rating how connected they felt to their conversation partner and whether they experienced technical issues.

The researchers then manually reviewed the calls where glitches were reported. They categorized the problems as audio glitches, video glitches, or both, and noted whether one or both participants experienced them. The findings were clear: social connection was measurably weaker whenever glitches occurred, regardless of their type or who experienced them.

To go further, the team ran a series of controlled experiments where participants watched or took part in video interactions with and without glitches. Across all experiments, glitches consistently led to more negative impressions, even when the information being shared was unaffected.

Impact on Hiring Decisions

One of the most striking findings involved hiring scenarios. When participants evaluated candidates in video interviews, minor glitches reduced hiring interest, even though the candidates’ qualifications, answers, and behavior were identical.

The discomfort triggered by glitches subtly shaped perceptions of competence, likability, and professionalism. Importantly, participants were often unaware that the glitch was influencing their judgment. They simply felt less positive about the person on the screen.

Effects on Telehealth Trust

The study also explored telehealth interactions, which have become increasingly common. In simulated medical consultations, patients reported lower trust in healthcare providers when glitches occurred during the call.

Even though the medical advice itself remained unchanged, the presence of glitches reduced confidence in the provider’s ability and reliability. This finding raises concerns about how technology quality can influence healthcare outcomes, especially when patients must rely on virtual appointments.

The Most Consequential Finding: Parole Hearings

Perhaps the most serious implications emerged from the analysis of virtual parole hearings in Kentucky. The researchers examined hearing transcripts from January to April 2021 and created a glitch dictionary to detect moments of audio or video disruption.

Glitches appeared in 32.6% of parole hearings. The outcomes were stark. Individuals whose hearings contained glitches were granted parole 48% of the time, compared to 60% for those whose hearings were glitch-free. That difference represents a 12-percentage-point drop in parole approval.

Even after controlling for factors such as the nature of the crime, offender history, and other case characteristics, the effect remained. The glitches themselves played an outsized role in determining outcomes.

Why Uncanniness Is Hard to Shake

Once uncanniness sets in, it is remarkably persistent. The researchers tested various interventions, including drawing attention to the glitch or attempting to reframe it as a technical issue. None of these approaches fully eliminated the negative effects.

The brain appears to automatically associate the discomfort with the person on screen, not the technology. As a result, judgments shift in subtle but meaningful ways.

Technology as Both Equalizer and Divider

Video calling is often described as a great equalizer. It allows people to attend interviews, medical appointments, and legal proceedings without geographic barriers. In many ways, this is true.

However, the research highlights a troubling flip side. People with unstable internet connections are more likely to experience glitches, and those glitches can quietly reduce their chances in high-stakes situations. This introduces an implicit bias that disadvantages individuals based on access to reliable technology rather than merit or need.

The researchers emphasize that these biases are usually unintentional. Decision-makers rarely realize that a glitch is influencing them at all.

The Researchers Lived the Problem Too

Interestingly, the researchers themselves experienced years of glitchy video calls while collaborating on the project, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. For much of the five-year research period, they worked remotely and only met in person for the first time near the end of the study.

Their personal experiences reinforced what the data showed: glitches feel minor, but their effects linger.

Understanding Uncanniness Beyond Video Calls

The concept of uncanniness has been studied before in fields like robotics, animation, and artificial intelligence. It describes the discomfort people feel when something appears human-like but behaves in slightly unnatural ways. Video calls, the researchers argue, have unintentionally entered this same psychological space.

As video communication becomes more advanced, even small imperfections stand out more sharply, making the experience feel stranger rather than smoother.

What This Means Going Forward

The findings suggest that improving video call reliability is not just a technical issue but a fairness and equity concern. Employers, healthcare systems, and legal institutions may need to consider how much weight they place on video-based interactions and how they account for technical disruptions.

While video calls are here to stay, this research reminds us that quality matters just as much as access.

Research paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09823-0