1 / 12

Internet Affordances drive Uses & Gratifications A Cognitive Heuristics Approach

Internet Affordances drive Uses & Gratifications A Cognitive Heuristics Approach. S. Shyam Sundar Media Effects Research Lab The Pennsylvania State University. Where Have All the Audiences Gone?. They’ve become “users” Action, not simply reception

bryony
Télécharger la présentation

Internet Affordances drive Uses & Gratifications A Cognitive Heuristics Approach

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Internet Affordances drive Uses & GratificationsA Cognitive Heuristics Approach S. Shyam Sundar Media Effects Research Lab The Pennsylvania State University

  2. Where Have All the Audiences Gone? • They’ve become “users” • Action, not simply reception • Technology of the internet offers “affordances” • These affordances convey cues to promote heuristics about message attributes

  3. Technology & Cues • Affordances of a given technology can serve as cues • E.g., Interactivity = openness of information access and/or participatory nature of the forum • Cues embedded in affordances aid credibility judgments • Trigger heuristics about the typical nature of underlying content Cues also dictate uses and gratifications of internet-based media

  4. Cues transmitted by Affordances • Two ways • sheer presence of a given affordance • value-added functionality will be rife with judgment-related cues (e.g., contingency; dialogue; flow) • Technology assembles information for making quick quality and credibility judgments • (e.g., counters on Web pages # of contacts on social networking site Google News cues)

  5. M A I N Model • Ten years of research at our lab using a variety of digital media have identified four broad affordances that have shown significant psychological effects • Modality (M) • Agency (A) • Interactivity (I) • Navigability (N) Credibility Judgment Affordance Heuristics Quality Cues

  6. Heuristic M A I N Model Cues (Examples) Affordance Realism Old-media Being there Distraction Bells & Whistles Coolness Novelty Intrusiveness Perceptual Bandwidth Modality Quality Utility Importance Relevance Believability Popularity Pedigree Completeness Level of Detail Variety Clarity Understandability Appearance Affect Accessibility Conciseness Locatability Representative quality Consistency Compatibility Reliability Trustworthiness Uniqueness Timeliness Objectivity Expertise Benevolence Machine Bandwagon Authority Social Presence Helper Identity Collaborative Filtering Agency Credibility Judgment Interaction Activity Responsiveness Choice Control Telepresence Flow Contingency Similarity Customization Interactivity Browsing Elaboration Scaffolding Play Prominence Similarity Information Scent Navigability Sundar, S. Shyam. “The MAIN Model: A Heuristic Approach to Understanding Technology Effects on Credibility." Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility. Edited by Miriam J. Metzger and Andrew J. Flanagin. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008. 73–100.

  7. Modality • Different modalities command differential levels of information processing by users • Modalities evoke visceral responses, both physiological and psychological • They also trigger heuristics such as • Realism (A/V > Text) • Being-There (Authenticity/Intensity) • Coolness (stylish and hip) • Novelty (halo effect) • Intrusiveness (unsolicited telemarketer schema)

  8. Agency • Now, anybody and everybody can serve as a gatekeeper • Internet media users given unprecedented agency in creation and recommendation of content • Journalistic Agency = Expertise heuristic • Interface Agents trigger machine heuristic • Self-agency leads to ownness heuristic • Other-Users Agency = Bandwagon • Agency-enhancement and Community-Building have become new gratifications

  9. News Story Ratings as a function of Perceived Source (Editors vs. Computer vs. Others vs. Self)

  10. Agency • Now, anybody and everybody can serve as a gatekeeper • Internet media users given unprecedented agency in creation and recommendation of content • Journalistic Agency = Expertise heuristic • Interface Agents trigger machine heuristic • Self-agency leads to ownness heuristic • Other-Users Agency = Bandwagon • Agency-enhancement and Community-Building have become new gratifications

  11. Interactivity • Dialogue • Contingency • Speed • Customization Navigability • Information Scent = Similarity heuristic • Prominence heuristic (In Google We Trust) • Flow/Play

  12. To sum up… • Technological affordances relating to MAIN contribute to user construction of meaning of content • They facilitate richer engagement with—and experience of—content • They shape our consumption of content • They cultivate in us gratifications that we did not seek with traditional media

More Related