MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414827832 · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2025.102329

Framing the climate: How TikTok’s algorithm shapes environmental discourse

2025· article· en· W4414827832 on OpenAlexafffund
Iliana Loupessis, Channarong Intahchomphoo

Bibliographic record

VenueTelematics and Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsSociotechnical systemFraming (construction)ScholarshipNarrativePersonalizationPerformative utteranceCitizen journalismLegibilityCorporate governanceAgency (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• TikTok’s design favors affective climate content over scientific depth or nuance. • Content rarely includes long-form or justice-based climate framings. • Youth-driven activism thrives but is shaped by platform design. • The “algorithmic spiral cycle” emerges through engagement loops and stylistic mimicry. • TikTok’s virality logic amplifies simplified climate narratives. This study investigates how TikTok’s platform design, algorithmic infrastructure, and engagement logic shape the public’s understanding of climate change. As the platform grows into a dominant space for media consumption, it has reshaped the contours of how environmental issues are communicated and emotionally processed. Drawing on a scoping review of 17 peer-reviewed articles and a platform walkthrough simulating a new user experience, this paper examines how emotional and performative content rises in visibility, while epistemically grounded, systemic, or justice-oriented narratives are often marginalized. We introduce and discuss the concept of the algorithmic spiral cycle ; a feedback loop in which platform logic and user interaction mutually reinforce affective urgency, selective exposure, and ideological closure. Three interlocking dynamics emerge from the analysis: (1) affective urgency, (2) narrative amplification, and (3) platform immersion. While TikTok offers novel opportunities for engagement and participatory science communication, its emphasis on virality and personalization often comes at the expense of deliberation, complexity, and informational diversity. This article contributes to emerging scholarship on climate communication, platform studies, and digital media governance by offering an empirical and conceptual framework for understanding how TikTok’s architecture mediates climate discourse. These findings underscore the need for critical platform literacy and regulatory approaches that address the sociotechnical shaping of environmental discourse in digital spaces.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.017
Scholarly communication0.0140.012
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTelematics and InformaticsSame topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207