监控,潜行,还是监视?网络社会信息搜寻概念的综合

IF 6.3 Q1 COMMUNICATION Review of Communication Research Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.12840/issn.2255-4165.025
Jessica R. Frampton, Jesse Fox
{"title":"监控,潜行,还是监视?网络社会信息搜寻概念的综合","authors":"Jessica R. Frampton, Jesse Fox","doi":"10.12840/issn.2255-4165.025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Affordances of Internet sites and Internet-based applications make personal information about romantic partners, friends, family members, and strangers easy to obtain. People use various techniques to find information about others, capitalizing on online affordances by using search engines to find relevant websites and databases; scouring the target’s social media or social networking site presence; accessing information about the target via their links or network association with others on social media; or asking questions or crowdsourcing information through online channels. Researchers have coined an assortment of terms to describe online social information seeking behaviors, such as interpersonal electronic surveillance, social surveillance, monitoring, patient-targeted Googling, cybervetting, websleuthing, human flesh search, lateral surveillance, Facebook surveillance, and Facebook stalking. Although considerable research has examined these behaviors, there has been little effort to clarify the concepts themselves. As a result, the literature is currently full of inconsistent and overlapping conceptualizations. To synthesize these concepts for future research, this review examines 73 online social information seeking concepts extracted from 186 articles. Specifically, the concepts are reviewed in light of their scope; the information seeker or target of information seeking (e.g., romantic partners, parents, children, employees, criminals); motives for information seeking (e.g., uncertainty, threat, curiosity); and the intensity of the behavior. Recommendations are provided for future research, such as employing clear conceptualizations and incorporating affordances. Finally, we offer a decision tree that researchers can use to help select appropriate terms to use in their work moving forward.","PeriodicalId":43364,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Monitoring, Creeping, or Surveillance? A Synthesis of Online Social Information Seeking Concepts\",\"authors\":\"Jessica R. Frampton, Jesse Fox\",\"doi\":\"10.12840/issn.2255-4165.025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Affordances of Internet sites and Internet-based applications make personal information about romantic partners, friends, family members, and strangers easy to obtain. People use various techniques to find information about others, capitalizing on online affordances by using search engines to find relevant websites and databases; scouring the target’s social media or social networking site presence; accessing information about the target via their links or network association with others on social media; or asking questions or crowdsourcing information through online channels. Researchers have coined an assortment of terms to describe online social information seeking behaviors, such as interpersonal electronic surveillance, social surveillance, monitoring, patient-targeted Googling, cybervetting, websleuthing, human flesh search, lateral surveillance, Facebook surveillance, and Facebook stalking. Although considerable research has examined these behaviors, there has been little effort to clarify the concepts themselves. As a result, the literature is currently full of inconsistent and overlapping conceptualizations. To synthesize these concepts for future research, this review examines 73 online social information seeking concepts extracted from 186 articles. Specifically, the concepts are reviewed in light of their scope; the information seeker or target of information seeking (e.g., romantic partners, parents, children, employees, criminals); motives for information seeking (e.g., uncertainty, threat, curiosity); and the intensity of the behavior. Recommendations are provided for future research, such as employing clear conceptualizations and incorporating affordances. Finally, we offer a decision tree that researchers can use to help select appropriate terms to use in their work moving forward.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43364,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Communication Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Communication Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12840/issn.2255-4165.025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Communication Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12840/issn.2255-4165.025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

互联网站点和基于互联网的应用程序的功能使得关于恋人、朋友、家庭成员和陌生人的个人信息很容易获得。人们使用各种技术来查找有关他人的信息,通过使用搜索引擎查找相关网站和数据库来利用在线功能;搜索目标的社交媒体或社交网站;通过目标在社交媒体上的链接或与其他人的网络关联获取目标的信息;或者通过在线渠道提问或众包信息。研究人员创造了一系列术语来描述在线社会信息搜索行为,如人际电子监视、社会监视、监控、针对患者的谷歌搜索、网络审查、网络侦探、人肉搜索、横向监视、Facebook监视和Facebook跟踪。尽管已经有相当多的研究考察了这些行为,但很少有人努力澄清这些概念本身。因此,目前的文献中充满了不一致和重叠的概念。为了对这些概念进行综合研究,本研究从186篇文章中提取了73个在线社会信息搜索概念。具体地说,这些概念将根据其范围加以审查;信息追求者或信息追求者的目标(如恋人、父母、子女、雇员、罪犯);寻求信息的动机(如不确定、威胁、好奇);以及行为的强度。为未来的研究提供了建议,例如采用明确的概念和纳入启示。最后,我们提供了一个决策树,研究人员可以使用它来帮助选择合适的术语,以便在他们的工作中使用。
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
Monitoring, Creeping, or Surveillance? A Synthesis of Online Social Information Seeking Concepts
Affordances of Internet sites and Internet-based applications make personal information about romantic partners, friends, family members, and strangers easy to obtain. People use various techniques to find information about others, capitalizing on online affordances by using search engines to find relevant websites and databases; scouring the target’s social media or social networking site presence; accessing information about the target via their links or network association with others on social media; or asking questions or crowdsourcing information through online channels. Researchers have coined an assortment of terms to describe online social information seeking behaviors, such as interpersonal electronic surveillance, social surveillance, monitoring, patient-targeted Googling, cybervetting, websleuthing, human flesh search, lateral surveillance, Facebook surveillance, and Facebook stalking. Although considerable research has examined these behaviors, there has been little effort to clarify the concepts themselves. As a result, the literature is currently full of inconsistent and overlapping conceptualizations. To synthesize these concepts for future research, this review examines 73 online social information seeking concepts extracted from 186 articles. Specifically, the concepts are reviewed in light of their scope; the information seeker or target of information seeking (e.g., romantic partners, parents, children, employees, criminals); motives for information seeking (e.g., uncertainty, threat, curiosity); and the intensity of the behavior. Recommendations are provided for future research, such as employing clear conceptualizations and incorporating affordances. Finally, we offer a decision tree that researchers can use to help select appropriate terms to use in their work moving forward.
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
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Review of Communication Research will publish an annual volume with comprehensive and authoritative reviews of the current state of the main topics and the most significant developments in the field of Communication. These comprehensive critical reviews will summarize the latest advances in the field, but also will root out errors and will provoke intellectual discussions among scholars. The journal seeks both evaluative (theorical) and quantitative (meta-analysis) papers that make a state of the art of issues in scientific communication. Integrative review articles that connect different areas of research are of special interest.
期刊最新文献
Socio-cultural and individual factors in verbal irony use and understanding: What we know, what we don’t know, what we want to know The role of social support in obesity online health communities. A literature review Navigating a Diverse Paradigm: A Conceptual Framework for Experimental Framing Effects Research Are Emotion-Expressing Messages More Shared on Social Media? A Meta-Analytic Review A Review of the Participant Observation Method in Journalism: Designing and Reporting
×
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