MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365151890 · doi:10.5210/spir.v2022i0.12983

DIGITAL TRACES, SOCIAL RESIDUES: USAGE AS SELF-REPRESENTATION ON LIFESTYLE APPS

2023· article· en· W4365151890 on OpenAlexaff
Chelsea Butkowski, Sara Bimo, Aparajita Bhandari

Bibliographic record

VenueAoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaInternet privacyComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)World Wide WebRepurposingDigital mediaMultimediaEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-representation is ubiquitous in digital spaces, but much of the existing literature discussing it is focused on social media contexts. Self-representation involves the creation of media traces that record users’ presence and existence through media, but these traces and the platforms that circulate them do not have to be explicitly or directly social. We study self-representation in alternative digital contexts: lifestyle apps focused on ambient usage behaviors that are generally private, personal, or invisible in online spaces. These apps incorporate social features based on displays of user data—streams repurposing users’ engagement with the platform as social displays to networked friends. The three apps of interest include the payment app Venmo, music streaming app Spotify, and fitness tracking app Strava. We study these apps through a combination of “walkthroughs” of each of the platforms and interviews with users. Our findings suggest that these platforms repurpose individual user behaviors as digital residues in social streams, transforming them into networked self-representations. Within this process, we expect that some users intentionally mobilize their engagement with the apps as social performances. Ultimately, this study raises questions about digital self-making, commodification, and platform sanctioned sociality beyond social media.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAoIR Selected Papers of Internet ResearchSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207