5,404
Views
6
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Making curation algorithms apparent: a case study of ‘Instawareness’ as a means to heighten awareness and understanding of Instagram's algorithm

ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 1769-1789 | Received 09 Jan 2020, Accepted 26 Jan 2021, Published online: 28 Feb 2021

References

  • Awad, N. F., & Krishnan, M. S. (2006). The personalization privacy paradox: An empirical evaluation of information transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for personalization. MIS Quarterly, 30(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148715
  • Baumer, E. P., Khovanskaya, V., Matthews, M., Reynolds, L., Schwanda Sosik, V., & Gay, G. (2014). Reviewing reflection: On the use of reflection in interactive system design. Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada, Association for Computing Machinery, June 2014 (pp. 93–102).
  • Beer, D. (2017). The social power of algorithms. Information Communication and Society, 20(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1216147
  • Bozdag, E. (2013). Bias in algorithmic filtering and personalization. Ethics and Information Technology, 15(3), 209–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-013-9321-6
  • Bucher, T. (2012). Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media & Society, 14(7), 1164–1180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812440159
  • Bucher, T. (2016). Neither black nor box: Ways of knowing algorithms. In S. Kubitschko, & A. Kaun (Eds.), Innovative methods in media and communication research (pp. 81–98). Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Bucher, T. (2017). The algorithmic imaginary: Exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information Communication and Society, 20(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1154086
  • Constine, J. (2018, June 1). How Instagram’s algorithm works. https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/01/how-instagram-feed-works
  • Cormen, T. H., Leiserson, C. E., Rivest, R. L., & Stein, C. (2009). Introduction to algorithms. The MIT Press.
  • Cotter, K. (2019). Playing the visibility game: How digital influencers and algorithms negotiate influence on Instagram. New Media & Society, 21(4), 895–913. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818815684
  • Delen, D., & Demirkan, H. (2013). Data, information and analytics as services. Decision Support Systems, 55(1), 359–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.044
  • Dimitrov, D., & Rumrill, P. D. (2003). Pretest-posttest designs and measurement of change. Work, 20(2), 159–165. PMID: 12671209.
  • Edwards, L., & Veale, M. (2017). Slave to the algorithm? Why a ‘right to an explanation’ is probably not the remedy you are looking for. Duke Law and Technology Review, 16(1), 18–84. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2972855
  • Eslami, M., Karahalios, K., Sandvig, C., Vaccaro, K., Rickman, A., Hamilton, K., & Kirlik, A. (2016). First I like it, then I hide it: Folk theories of social feeds. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference, May 2016, (pp. 2371–2382).
  • Eslami, M., Rickman, A., Vaccaro, K., Aleyasen, A., Vuong, A., Karahalios, K., Hamilton, K., & Sandvig, C. (2015). “I always assumed that I wasn’t really that close to [her]”: Reasoning about invisible algorithms in news feeds. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference (April 2015), (pp. 153–162).
  • Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin’s Press.
  • Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2018). Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2450–2468. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817724170
  • Goodman, B., & Flaxman, S. (2017). European union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a ‘right to explanation'. AI Magazine, 38(3), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v38i3.2741
  • Hannák, A., Sapieżyński, P., Khaki, A. M., Lazer, D., Mislove, A., & Wilson, C. (2017, May). Measuring personalization of web search. In Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on WWW.
  • Hargittai, E. (2005). Survey measures of web-oriented digital literacy. Social Science Computer Review, 23(3), 371–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439305275911
  • Hargittai, E., Gruber, J., Djukaric, T., Fuchs, J., & Brombach, L. (2020). Black box measures? How to study people’s algorithm skills. Information, Communication & Society, 23(5), 764–775. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1713846
  • Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.
  • Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2013). Distinct skill pathways to digital engagement. European Journal of Communication, 28(6), 696–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323113499113
  • Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, 64, 122–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002
  • Latzer, M., Hollnbuchner, K., Just, N., & Saurwein, F. (2016). The economics of algorithmic selection on the Internet. In J.M. Bauer & M. Latzar (Eds.), Handbook on the economics of the internet (pp. 395-425). Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Livingstone, S., Van Couvering, E., & Thumin, N. (2008). Converging traditions of research on media and information literacies. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D.J. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 103–132). Routledge.
  • Matzat, L., Zielinski, L., Cocco, M., Penner, K., Spielkamp, M., Gießler, S., & Thiel, V. (2019). Atlas of Automation - Automated decision-making and participation in Germany (No. 1). http://s100014241.ngcobalt360.manitu.net/atlas_algorithmwatch_org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Atlas_of_Automation_by_AlgorithmWatch.pdf
  • Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of Oppression. http://nyupress.org/books/9781479837243/
  • Norberg, P. A., Horne, D. R., & Horne, D. A. (2007). The privacy paradox: Personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(1), 100–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00070.x
  • Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin UK.
  • Rader, E., & Gray, R. (2015). Understanding user beliefs about algorithmic curation in the Facebook news feed. Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference (April 2015). ACM, (pp. 172–182.
  • R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
  • Sandvig, C., Hamilton, K., Karahalios, K., & Langbort, C. (2014, May). Auditing algorithms: Research methods for detecting discrimination on internet platforms. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association, Seattle, WA (pp. 1 - 23).
  • van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Courtois, C., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2014). Internet skills, sources of support, and benefiting from Internet use. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 30(4), 278–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2013.858458
  • van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2016). Development and validation of the Internet Skills Scale (ISS). Information Communication and Society, 19(6), 804–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1078834
  • van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2009). Using the Internet: Skill related problems in users’ online behavior. Interacting with Computers, 21(5-6), 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2009.06.005
  • van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2015). Internet skill levels increase, but gaps widen: A longitudinal cross-sectional analysis (2010–2013) among the Dutch population. Information, Communication & Society, 18(7), 782–797. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.994544
  • van Deursen, A. J. A. M., van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & Peters, O. (2012). Proposing a survey instrument for measuring operational, formal, information, and strategic Internet skills. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 28(12), 827–837. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2012.670086
  • van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & van Deursen, A. J. A. M. (2014). Digital skills: Unlocking the information society. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Vanwynsberghe, H., Boudry, E., & Verdegem, P. (2015). De impact van ouderschapsstijlen op de ontwikkeling van sociale mediageletterdheid bij adolescenten. Tijdschrift voor communicatiewetenschappen, 43(1), 84–100.
  • Vanwynsberghe, H., & Haspeslagh, L. (2014). Getting started measuring social media literacy. https://mediawijs.be/tools/emsoc-toolskit-meten-sociale-mediageletterdheid
  • Verdegem, P., Haspeslagh, L., & Vanwynsberghe, H. (2014). EMSOC survey report: social media use and experience of the Flemish population. https://www.ugent.be/mict/en/research/social_media_use_and_experience_in_flanders_results_form_the_emsoc_survey.pdf
  • Wright, D. B. (2006). Comparing groups in a before-after design: When t-test and ANCOVA produce different results. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(3), 663–675. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905X52210
  • Yang, H.-d., & Yoo, Y. (2004). It’s all about attitude: Revisiting the technology acceptance model. Decision Support Systems, 38(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(03)00062-9
  • Zuiderveen, B. F. J., Trilling, D., Möller, J., Bodó, B., De Vreese, C. H., & Helberger, N. (2016). Should we worry about filter bubbles? Internet Policy Review, 5(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.14763/2016.1.401

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.