Virtual conference participant’s perceptions of its effectiveness and future projections

Abstract

Background The virtual conference format has become an essential tool for professional development of researchers around the world since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to identify empirical evidence of the benefits and challenges of virtual conferences by investigating participants’ experiences with them. Methods The study participants were delegates to the 40th annual meeting of the Korean Society of Nephrology, which was held virtually in September, 2020. A questionnaire was developed and implemented among the conference attendees. The 44-item questionnaire included five sub-scales related to participant perceptions of the virtual conference, which were (a) convenience and accessibility, (b) planning and organization, (c) technology use, (d) social exchanges, and (e) overall satisfaction, their preferences of conference formats, and their views of future projections for a virtual conference. Results A total of 279 delegates completed and returned the questionnaires (18.8% response rate). Participants varied in gender, age, profession, work location, and prior experience with conferences. On a four-point Likert scale (1 = “strongly disagree” and 4 = “strongly agree”), participants showed positive perceptions of the virtual conference in general, where the total mean (M) was 3.03 and less positive perceptions on social exchanges (M = 2.72). Participant perceptions of the virtual conference differed across age groups, professions, and prior experience with conferences (p < .05). Approximately half of the participants (n = 139) preferred the virtual format, and 33% (n = 92) preferred the conventional format. Participant preferences for the virtual format were somewhat evenly distributed between asynchronous (32.9%) and synchronous (29.1%) modes. Participants predicted a virtual conference would continue to be a popular delivery format after the end of the COVID-19. Conclusions Although participants had positive perceptions of the virtual conference, more support needs to be offered to those who may be less comfortable with using technology or with online interactions, and there is a need for improvement in supporting social exchange among attendees. Also, it is suggested that a blend of asynchronous and synchronous delivery methods should be considered to meet the varied needs of attendees.

Integration of virtual platforms for enhanced conference experience: Data-based evidence from the Society of Interdisciplinary Placebo Studies 2021 conference

“…The attendee satisfaction results supported that those over 75 years of age had the lowest level of confidence in virtual conferences and had the most difficulty navigating the virtual platform. While this correlation did not demonstrate statistical significance, it may indicate a technology gap between different age groups (Kim et al, 2022). Even though the SIPS Planning Committee reviewed multiple platforms for ease of use, additional studies need to be conducted on best platforms for multiple generational users.…”

“…The SIPS conference was not the only virtual conference to see a general high retention rates across multi-day conferences ( Fulcher et al, 2020 ; Stamelou et al, 2021 ; Weiniger and Matot, 2021 ; Kim et al, 2022 ) with some reporting an increase in attendance compared to in-person meetings from previous years ( Counsell et al, 2020 ; Fulcher et al, 2020 ; Stefanoudis et al, 2021 ; Weiniger and Matot, 2021 ). However, other conferences held during the COVID-19 pandemic that distributed post-conference surveys did not present an objective assessment of percentage of attendees that could and could not have attended an in-person conference if offered ( Ruiz-Barrera et al, 2021 ; Kim et al, 2022 ). Over a third of the attendees who completed the SIPS survey were only able to join because the conference was offered virtually.…”

“…Attendees had opportunities to engage in conversation and form connections with other participants within the virtual conference platform using designated networking events, 24/7 available networking rooms, private chat function, chat features during sessions, poster sessions with live video, and Q&A rooms after sessions. Virtual conferences during the COVID-19 pandemic devised different ways to incorporate networking in order to create some semblance of in-person conferences ( Veldhuizen et al, 2020 ; Bhargava et al, 2021 ; Zaver et al, 2021 ; Kim et al, 2022 ). There were conferences that described similar functions to the SIPS Conference virtual platform including private chat functions and chat feature during sessions ( Holman et al, 2021 ; Ruiz-Barrera et al, 2021 ).…”

“…However, having an identifiable record of an individual’s online activity may raise concerns about privacy. Many conferences have not explored privacy concerns that is inherently involved with a virtual conference ( Karabacak et al, 2021 ; Ruiz-Barrera et al, 2021 ; Kim et al, 2022 ). Privacy issue could be addressed by ensuring that future conference attendees be made aware of the data that platforms such as SOCIO collects.…”

“…However, this survey was completed by only 11% of the attendees and did not show the full extent of locations attendees were from. Other conferences that provided a post-conference survey had varying attendee response rates ranging from 16 to 89.7% ( Veldhuizen et al, 2020 ; Chan et al, 2021 ; Holman et al, 2021 ; Karabacak et al, 2021 ; Nelson et al, 2021 ; Stamelou et al, 2021 ; Wang et al, 2021 ; Kim et al, 2022 ; Vinchenzo et al, 2022 ). This difference could be due to the time lag between the end of the SIPS conference and time the survey was delivered (80 days after the conference).…”