抵抗和不抵抗之间的振荡?抖音用户民间理论与对算法策展的抵制

IF 5.5 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Social Media + Society Pub Date : 2025-01-18 DOI:10.1177/20563051251313610
Hui Lin
{"title":"抵抗和不抵抗之间的振荡?抖音用户民间理论与对算法策展的抵制","authors":"Hui Lin","doi":"10.1177/20563051251313610","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An increasing number of users are aware of algorithmically driven content curation. Yet, while numerous studies have examined how people understand algorithmic power, there are insufficient numbers of studies about how people respond to and resist algorithmic curation in different sociocultural contexts. This article adopts a walk-through method and a diary-interview approach with 31 participants to investigate user resistance to algorithmic curation in different sociocultural circumstances. Drawing on the theoretical framework of folk theories and user resistance to algorithms, this study reveals a paradox in users’ algorithmic awareness and resistance behaviors: although respondents said they expressed annoyance with algorithmic simplification, commercial exploitation, and political agenda-setting, they often behaved in ways that contradict those claims with oscillated resistance to algorithmic curation. This study found that this paradox of resistance not only reflects users’ efforts to reconcile sociocultural needs with digital irritations caused by algorithmic mismatches but also arises from a sense of digital resignation in response to the platform’s strict regulations and censorship. Thus, this article argues that although people espouse folk theories as resources to resist algorithmic curation in different sociocultural contexts, most of their resistance behaviors remain constrained within the dominant use of technological affordances, which largely functions as a process of continuous negotiation rather than a subversive force capable of disrupting the ideological power relations embedded in algorithm-driven platforms.","PeriodicalId":47920,"journal":{"name":"Social Media + Society","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Oscillation Between Resist and to Not? Users’ Folk Theories and Resistance to Algorithmic Curation on Douyin\",\"authors\":\"Hui Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20563051251313610\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"An increasing number of users are aware of algorithmically driven content curation. Yet, while numerous studies have examined how people understand algorithmic power, there are insufficient numbers of studies about how people respond to and resist algorithmic curation in different sociocultural contexts. This article adopts a walk-through method and a diary-interview approach with 31 participants to investigate user resistance to algorithmic curation in different sociocultural circumstances. Drawing on the theoretical framework of folk theories and user resistance to algorithms, this study reveals a paradox in users’ algorithmic awareness and resistance behaviors: although respondents said they expressed annoyance with algorithmic simplification, commercial exploitation, and political agenda-setting, they often behaved in ways that contradict those claims with oscillated resistance to algorithmic curation. This study found that this paradox of resistance not only reflects users’ efforts to reconcile sociocultural needs with digital irritations caused by algorithmic mismatches but also arises from a sense of digital resignation in response to the platform’s strict regulations and censorship. Thus, this article argues that although people espouse folk theories as resources to resist algorithmic curation in different sociocultural contexts, most of their resistance behaviors remain constrained within the dominant use of technological affordances, which largely functions as a process of continuous negotiation rather than a subversive force capable of disrupting the ideological power relations embedded in algorithm-driven platforms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47920,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Media + Society\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Media + Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051251313610\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Media + Society","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051251313610","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的用户意识到算法驱动的内容管理。然而,尽管有许多研究调查了人们如何理解算法的力量,但关于人们如何在不同的社会文化背景下应对和抵制算法管理的研究数量不足。本文采用走访法和日记访谈法对31名参与者进行调查,以调查不同社会文化环境下用户对算法策展的抵制。利用民间理论和用户抵制算法的理论框架,本研究揭示了用户算法意识和抵制行为中的一个悖论:尽管受访者表示他们对算法简化、商业利用和政治议程设置表示不满,但他们的行为方式往往与这些主张相矛盾,对算法管理的抵制摇摆不定。本研究发现,这种抵制悖论不仅反映了用户努力调和社会文化需求与算法不匹配引起的数字愤怒,而且源于对平台严格监管和审查的数字辞职感。因此,本文认为,尽管人们在不同的社会文化背景下支持民间理论作为抵制算法策管的资源,但他们的大多数抵制行为仍然受到技术支持的主导使用的限制,这在很大程度上是一种持续谈判的过程,而不是一种能够破坏算法驱动平台中嵌入的意识形态权力关系的颠覆性力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Oscillation Between Resist and to Not? Users’ Folk Theories and Resistance to Algorithmic Curation on Douyin
An increasing number of users are aware of algorithmically driven content curation. Yet, while numerous studies have examined how people understand algorithmic power, there are insufficient numbers of studies about how people respond to and resist algorithmic curation in different sociocultural contexts. This article adopts a walk-through method and a diary-interview approach with 31 participants to investigate user resistance to algorithmic curation in different sociocultural circumstances. Drawing on the theoretical framework of folk theories and user resistance to algorithms, this study reveals a paradox in users’ algorithmic awareness and resistance behaviors: although respondents said they expressed annoyance with algorithmic simplification, commercial exploitation, and political agenda-setting, they often behaved in ways that contradict those claims with oscillated resistance to algorithmic curation. This study found that this paradox of resistance not only reflects users’ efforts to reconcile sociocultural needs with digital irritations caused by algorithmic mismatches but also arises from a sense of digital resignation in response to the platform’s strict regulations and censorship. Thus, this article argues that although people espouse folk theories as resources to resist algorithmic curation in different sociocultural contexts, most of their resistance behaviors remain constrained within the dominant use of technological affordances, which largely functions as a process of continuous negotiation rather than a subversive force capable of disrupting the ideological power relations embedded in algorithm-driven platforms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Media + Society
Social Media + Society COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
3.80%
发文量
111
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Media + Society is an open access, peer-reviewed scholarly journal that focuses on the socio-cultural, political, psychological, historical, economic, legal and policy dimensions of social media in societies past, contemporary and future. We publish interdisciplinary work that draws from the social sciences, humanities and computational social sciences, reaches out to the arts and natural sciences, and we endorse mixed methods and methodologies. The journal is open to a diversity of theoretic paradigms and methodologies. The editorial vision of Social Media + Society draws inspiration from research on social media to outline a field of study poised to reflexively grow as social technologies evolve. We foster the open access of sharing of research on the social properties of media, as they manifest themselves through the uses people make of networked platforms past and present, digital and non. The journal presents a collaborative, open, and shared space, dedicated exclusively to the study of social media and their implications for societies. It facilitates state-of-the-art research on cutting-edge trends and allows scholars to focus and track trends specific to this field of study.
期刊最新文献
Truth Default or Generalized Skepticism? The Role of Overconfidence in the Relationship Between Social Media News Use and Traditional Media Use “Cash Masters” Coming Out as “Straight”: Social Media and the Changing Dynamics of Gender and Sexuality Banana Populism: Exploring the Emotionally Engaging, Authentic, and Memeable Rhetoric of Populist Visual Communication Twitter (X) and the Commercial Determinants of Health: Characterizing the Most Amplified, Influential, and Connected Voices Driving Twitter Discourse About Tobacco Regulatory Policy From September 2019 to July 2021 Internet Memes as Stabilizers of Conspiracy Culture: A Cognitive Anthropological Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1