On the Media Effects of Immigration and Refugee Board Hearings via Videoconference

Abstract

Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board conducts some of its refugee hearings via videoconferencing. As part of a review of the fairness of this practice, a theoretical approach and review of the empirical literature was commissioned. Particularly under ‘high stakes’ conditions, it was found that videoconferencing reduces mutual trust and understanding, exacerbates cultural differences in non-verbal communication, and increases the propensity to lie while decreasing the ability to detect falsehoods. Further, the inherent power imbalance between the tribunal and the claimant is widened as the tribunal members become acclimatized to the technology. In general, the difference in sensory perception of a mediating technology creates cognitive differences between mediated and non-mediated environments. Further, sensory perception that feeds narrative construction varies by culture. The process of conveying and understanding meaning across cultures is sufficiently difficult; adding the complexity of videoconference mediation introduces the possibility of inconsistency, inaccuracy, and altered judgement.