Kelley Cotter, Amy Ritchart, Ankolika De, Kali Foyle, Shaheen Kanthawala, Haley McAtee, TX Watson
{"title":"如果你正在阅读这篇文章,它就是为你准备的:算法精神的反思矛盾性","authors":"Kelley Cotter, Amy Ritchart, Ankolika De, Kali Foyle, Shaheen Kanthawala, Haley McAtee, TX Watson","doi":"10.1177/13548565241258949","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Growing awareness of the ubiquity of algorithms online has established a new discursive space for making sense of their role in individuals’ lives and society writ large. Within this space, social media users have come to think of algorithms as uniquely powerful forces shaping everyday experiences. This article explores how people make sense of algorithms, as seen through (dis)belief in algorithmic conspirituality, where users ascribe divine significance to algorithmic curation on TikTok. We ask: how do users understand algorithmic conspirituality, and under what circumstances do they believe (or not) in the mystical power of algorithms? Drawing on focus groups and interviews with TikTok users ( n = 25), we observed what we call reflexive ambivalence. This refers to a reflexive process in which participants examined their cognitive and affective responses to algorithmic conspirituality videos to untangle seemingly contradictory logical and mystical mentalities. With this insight, we complicate past work by demonstrating the co-occurrence and interdependency of rational, technical vs. affective, socially situated ways of knowing algorithms. We additionally highlight conditions under which belief in algorithmic conspirituality gained plausibility for our participants and how they rationalized the phenomenon as grounded in the worldly realm.","PeriodicalId":505001,"journal":{"name":"Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies","volume":"49 33","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"If you’re reading this, it’s meant for you: The reflexive ambivalence of algorithmic conspirituality\",\"authors\":\"Kelley Cotter, Amy Ritchart, Ankolika De, Kali Foyle, Shaheen Kanthawala, Haley McAtee, TX Watson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13548565241258949\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Growing awareness of the ubiquity of algorithms online has established a new discursive space for making sense of their role in individuals’ lives and society writ large. Within this space, social media users have come to think of algorithms as uniquely powerful forces shaping everyday experiences. This article explores how people make sense of algorithms, as seen through (dis)belief in algorithmic conspirituality, where users ascribe divine significance to algorithmic curation on TikTok. We ask: how do users understand algorithmic conspirituality, and under what circumstances do they believe (or not) in the mystical power of algorithms? Drawing on focus groups and interviews with TikTok users ( n = 25), we observed what we call reflexive ambivalence. This refers to a reflexive process in which participants examined their cognitive and affective responses to algorithmic conspirituality videos to untangle seemingly contradictory logical and mystical mentalities. With this insight, we complicate past work by demonstrating the co-occurrence and interdependency of rational, technical vs. affective, socially situated ways of knowing algorithms. We additionally highlight conditions under which belief in algorithmic conspirituality gained plausibility for our participants and how they rationalized the phenomenon as grounded in the worldly realm.\",\"PeriodicalId\":505001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies\",\"volume\":\"49 33\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565241258949\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565241258949","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
If you’re reading this, it’s meant for you: The reflexive ambivalence of algorithmic conspirituality
Growing awareness of the ubiquity of algorithms online has established a new discursive space for making sense of their role in individuals’ lives and society writ large. Within this space, social media users have come to think of algorithms as uniquely powerful forces shaping everyday experiences. This article explores how people make sense of algorithms, as seen through (dis)belief in algorithmic conspirituality, where users ascribe divine significance to algorithmic curation on TikTok. We ask: how do users understand algorithmic conspirituality, and under what circumstances do they believe (or not) in the mystical power of algorithms? Drawing on focus groups and interviews with TikTok users ( n = 25), we observed what we call reflexive ambivalence. This refers to a reflexive process in which participants examined their cognitive and affective responses to algorithmic conspirituality videos to untangle seemingly contradictory logical and mystical mentalities. With this insight, we complicate past work by demonstrating the co-occurrence and interdependency of rational, technical vs. affective, socially situated ways of knowing algorithms. We additionally highlight conditions under which belief in algorithmic conspirituality gained plausibility for our participants and how they rationalized the phenomenon as grounded in the worldly realm.