Capturing a crisis: Exploring individuals’ Instagram use during the beginning stages of the COVID-19 pandemic

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Bibliographische Infos

Cover der Ausgabe: SCM Studies in Communication and Media Jahrgang 12 (2023), Heft 1
Open Access Vollzugriff

SCM Studies in Communication and Media

Jahrgang 12 (2023), Heft 1

Autor:innen:
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyrightjahr
2023
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
ISSN-Print
2192-4007

Kapitelinformationen

Open Access Vollzugriff

Jahrgang 12 (2023), Heft 1

Capturing a crisis: Exploring individuals’ Instagram use during the beginning stages of the COVID-19 pandemic

Autor:innen:
ISSN-Print
2192-4007
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
Kapitelvorschau:

Während der ersten Hälfte des Jahres 2020 haben Bilder der COVID-19 Pandemie die Titelseiten und Primetimes der Nachrichten dominiert: Leere Strassen, überfüllte Spitäler und Panikkäufe haben das Chaos und die grosse Unsicherheit dieser globalen Gesundheitskrise widergespiegelt. Jedoch produzieren seit Beginn des partizipativen Netzes nicht mehr ausschliesslich traditionelle Medienhäuser die Bilder solcher historischen Ereignisse, sondern ebenso private Bürger*innen, welche Bilder auf ihren Profilen in sozialen Medien teilen und somit einen Einblick in ihr persönliches Erleben dieser Zeit gewähren. Um die vorherrschenden COVID-19 Themen auf Instagram zu untersuchen, analysiert diese Instagram-Ethnographie das Instagram-Verhalten von 47 Nutzer*innen in der Schweiz und den USA während den ersten Wochen der Pandemie. In einer Instagram Ethnographie kombinieren wir Erkenntnisse einer qualitativen Inhaltsanalyse von 2.698 Instagram Posts mit 19 Interviews mit den Nutzer*innen um die folgenden Forschungsfragen zu adressieren: (1) Welche Inhalte zur Pandemie teilen die Nutzer*innen mit ihrem Publikum? Und, (2) weshalb haben sich die Teilnehmenden während der COVID-19 Pandemie auf Instagram eingeloggt? Wir haben sechs COVID-19 Themen gefunden, welche in den Feed- und Story-Posts der Nutzer*innen erschienen und welche hauptsächlich Veränderungen in den Privatleben der Teilnehmenden reflektierten, oft auch visuelle Veränderungen von alltäglichen Situationen. Diese Themen wurden überwiegend positiv dargestellt und haben den Instagram Nutzer*innen dabei geholfen, sich – während dieser Zeit der sozialen Isolation – als Teil von «etwas Grösserem» zu fühlen. Wir diskutieren diese Erkenntnisse im Kontext der Plattformlogiken und leisten somit einen Beitrag zur bisher limitierten Literatur über „Uses and Gratifications“ der Instagramnutzung und im Speziellen dem Nutzen von Bild-basierten sozialen Netzwerken während traumatischer Ereignisse.

Literaturverzeichnis

  1. Aalbers, G., McNally, R. J., Heeren, A., de Wit, S., & Fried, E. I. (2019). Social media and depression symptoms: A network perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(8), 1454–1462. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000528 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  2. Abidin, C., & Zeng, J. (2020). Feeling Asian together: Coping with #COVIDRacism on subtle Asian traits: Social Media + Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120948223 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  3. Alhabash, S., & Ma, M. (2017). A tale of four platforms: Motivations and uses of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat among college students? Social Media + Society, 3(1), 2056305117691544. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117691544 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  4. Auxier, B., & Erson, M. (2021). Social media use in 2021. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/04/07/social-media-use-in-2021/ Bayer, J. B., Ellison, N. B., Schoenebeck, S. Y., & Falk, E. B. (2016). Sharing the small moments: Ephemeral social interaction on Snapchat. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 956–977. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1084349 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  5. Baym, N. K. (2011). Social networks 2.0. In C. Ess (Ed.), The Handbook of Internet Studies (pp. 384–405). Blackwell Publishing. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  6. Bilefsky, D., & Yeginsu, C. (2020, March 27). Of ‘covidivorces’ and ‘coronababies’: Life during a lockdown. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/world/coro- navirus-lockdown-relationships.html Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  7. Blackwood, R. (2019). Language, images, and Paris Orly airport on Instagram: Multilingual approaches to identity and self-representation on social media. International Journal of Multilingualism, 16(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2018.1500257 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  8. Bock, A., Isermann, H., & Knieper, T. (2011). Quantitative content analysis of the visual. In E. Margolis & L. Pauwels (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Visual Research Methods (pp. 265–282). Sage. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  9. Börner, Stefanie. (2021). Practices of solidarity in the COVID-19 pandemic. Culture, Practice & Europeanization, 6(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5771/2566-7742-2021-1-1 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  10. Caldeira, S. P., Van Bauwel, S., & Ridder, S. D. (2018). A different point of view: Women’s selfrepresentation in Instagram’s participatory artistic movements @girlgazeproject and @arthoecollective. Critical Arts, 32(3), 26–43. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02560046.2018.1447592 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  11. Carver, C. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocolʼs too long: Consider the brief COPE. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 92–100. https://doi. org/10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  12. Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.2.267 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  13. Chatzopoulou, E., Filieri, R., & Dogruyol, S. A. (2020). Instagram and body image: Motivation to conform to the “Instabod” and consequences on young male wellbeing. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 54(4), 1270–1297. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/ joca.12329 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  14. Chung, N., Han, H., & Koo, C. (2015). Adoption of travel information in user-generated content on social media: The moderating effect of social presence. Behaviour & Information Technology, 34(9), 902–919. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X. 2015.1039060 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  15. Clement, J. (2020). Distribution of instagram users worldwide as of July 2020, by age and gender. Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/248769/age-distribution-of-world- wide-instagram-users/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  16. Clifford, J. (1986). Introduction: Partial truths. In J. Clifford & G. E. Marcus (Eds.), Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography (pp. 2–26). University of California Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  17. Couldry, N. (2004). Theorising media as practice. Social Semiotics, 14(2), 115–132. https:// doi.org./10.1080/1035033042000238295 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  18. Cooper, G. (2021). #AidToo: Social media spaces and the transformation of the reporting of aid scandals in 2018. Journalism Practice, 15(6), 747–766. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  19. 786.2020.1851611 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  20. Couture Bue, A. C. (2020). The looking glass selfie: Instagram use frequency predicts visual attention to high-anxiety body regions in young women. Computers in Human Behavior, 108, 106329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106329 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  21. Cover, R. (2012). Performing and undoing identity online: Social networking, identity theories and the incompatibility of online profiles and friendship regimes. Convergence, 18(2), 177–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856511433684 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  22. Culley, M. (1989). “I look at me”: Self as subject in the diaries of American women. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 17(3/4), 15–22. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  23. Dahlin, E. (2021). Email interviews: A guide to research design and implementation. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/16094069211025453 Dickson, A. (2020, December 9). How will we tell the story of the Coronavirus? The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-communications/how-will-we-tell-the-story-of-the-coronavirus Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  24. Dolan, R., Conduit, J., Fahy, J., & Goodman, S. (2016). Social media engagement behaviour: A uses and gratifications perspective. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(3–4), 261–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2015.1095222 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  25. Enberg, J. (2020). Global Instagram Users 2020. https://www.emarketer.com/ content /globalinstagram-users-2020 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  26. Eriksson, M. (2016). Managing collective trauma on social media: The role of Twitter after the 2011 Norway attacks. Media, Culture & Society, 38(3), 365–380. https://doi. org/10.1177/0163443715608259 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  27. Farinosi, M., & Micalizzi, A. (2016). Geolocating the past: Online memories after the L’Aquila earthquake. In A. Hajek, C. Lohmeier, & C. Pentzold (Eds.), Memory in a Mediated World: Remembrance and Reconstruction (pp. 90–110). Palgrave Macmillan. https:// www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9781137470119 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  28. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: Study of emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(1), 150–179. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.1.150 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  29. Garcia, D., & Rimé, B. (2019). Collective emotions and social resilience in the digital traces after a terrorist attack. Psychological Science, 30(4), 617–628. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0956797619831964 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  30. Gibbs, M., Meese, J., Arnold, M., Nansen, B., & Carter, M. (2015). #Funeral and Instagram: Death, social media, and platform vernacular. Information, Communication & Society, 18(3), 255–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.987152 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  31. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Books. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  32. Gomes, C. (2015). Negotiating everyday life in Australia: Unpacking the parallel society inhabited by Asian international students through their social networks and entertainment media use. Journal of Youth Studies, 18(4), 515–536. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2 014.992316 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  33. Groves, D. L., & Timothy, D. J. (2001). Photographic techniques and the measurement of impact and importance attributes on trip design: A case study. Loisir et Société / Society and Leisure, 24(1), 311–317. https://doi.org/10.7202/000172ar Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  34. Hall, S. (1982). The rediscovery of ‘ideology’: Return of the repressed in media studies. In T. Bennett, J. Curran, M. Gurevitch, & J. Wollacott (Eds.), Culture, society and the media (1st ed., p. 328). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203978092-9 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  35. Han, E. L. (2016). Micro-blogging memories: Weibo and collective remembering in contemporary China. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  36. Han, E. L. (2017). Journalism and mnemonic practices in Chinese social media: Remembering catastrophic events on Weibo. Memory Studies, 13(2), 162–175. https://doi. org/10.1177/1750698017714833 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  37. Harsin, J. (2020). Toxic White masculinity, post-truth politics and the COVID-19 infodemic. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 23(6), 1060–1068. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1367549420944934 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  38. Helsper, E. J., & Whitty, M. T. (2010). Netiquette within married couples: Agreement about acceptable online behavior and surveillance between partners. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 916–926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.006 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  39. Hillyer, R. S. (2021). Staying connected: Effects of online platforms on transnational family relations and social capital. Contemporary Japan, 33(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/18 692729.2020.1847389 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  40. Hogan, B. (2010). The presentation of self in the age of social media: Distinguishing performances and exhibitions online. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(6), 377– Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  41. 386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610385893 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  42. Hu, Y., Manikonda, L., & Kambhampati, S. (2014, June 1–4). What we Instagram: A first analysis of Instagram photo content and user types [Paper Presentation]. Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  43. Hugentobler, Larissa (2022). The Instagram interview: Talking to people about travel experiences across online and offline spaces. Media and Communication, 10(3), 247–60. https:// doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i3.5340. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  44. Humphreys, L. (2018). The qualified self: Social media and the accounting of everyday life. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  45. MIT Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  46. Humphreys, L., Gill, P., Krishnamurthy, B., & Newbury, E. (2013). Historicizing new media: A content analysis of Twitter. Journal of Communication, 63(3), 413–431. https://doi. org/10.1111/jcom.12030 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  47. Ibrahim, Y. (2015). Self-representation and the disaster event: Self-imaging, morality and immortality. Journal of Media Practice, 16(3), 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/14682753.2 015.1116755 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  48. Jacobsen, B. N., & Beer, D. (2021). Quantified nostalgia: Social media, metrics, and memory. Social Media + Society, 7(2), 20563051211008824. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 20563051211008822 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  49. Jurgenson, N. (2019). The Social Photo: On Photography and Social Media. Verso. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  50. Kang, A. (2020, June 11). Could Dalgona coffee become more than just a TikTok trend? Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/annakang/2020/06/11/could-dalgona-coffee-become- more-than-just-a-tiktok-trend/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  51. Katz, E. (1959). Mass communications research and the study of popular culture: An editorial note on a possible future for this journal. Studies in Public Communication, 2, 1–6. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  52. Keles, B., McCrae, N., & Grealish, A. (2020). A systematic review: The influence of social media on depression, anxiety and psychological distress in adolescents. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 25(1), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.20 19.1590851 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  53. Latzer, M., Büchi, M., & Festic, N. (2020). Internet Use in Switzerland 2011–2019: Trends, Attitudes and Effects. Summary Report from the World Internet Project – Switzerland. University of Zurich. https://www.mediachange.ch/media//pdf/publications/SummaryRe- port_WIP-CH_2019.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  54. Leaver, T., Highfield, T., & Abidin, C. (2020). Instagram. Polity Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  55. Lee, E., Lee, J.-A., Moon, J. H., & Sung, Y. (2015). Pictures speak louder than words: Motivations for using Instagram. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(9), 552–556. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0157 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  56. Lewis, H. (2020, March 19). The Coronavirus is a disaster for feminism. The Atlantic. https:// www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/feminism-womens-rights-coronavi- rus-covid19/608302/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  57. Lewis, M., Brown, K. A., & Billings, A. C. (2017). Social media becomes traditional: Sport media consumption and the blending of modern information pathways. Journal of Global Sport Management, 2(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/24704067.2017.1314764 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  58. Lin, L. yi, Sidani, J. E., Shensa, A., Radovic, A., Miller, E., Colditz, J. B., Hoffman, B. L., Giles, Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  59. L. M., & Primack, B. A. (2016). Association between social media use and depression among U.S. young adults. Depression and Anxiety, 33(4), 323–331. https://doi. org/10.1002/da.22466 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  60. Lo, I. S., & McKercher, B. (2015). Ideal image in process: Online tourist photography and impression management. Annals of Tourism Research, 52, 104–116. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.annals.2015.02.019 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  61. Lucibello, K. M., Vani, M. F., Koulanova, A., de Jonge, M. L., Ashdown-Franks, G., & Sabiston, C. M. (2021). #quarantine15: A content analysis of Instagram posts during COVID-19. Body Image, 38, 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2021.04.002 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  62. Madianou, M., & Miller, D. (2012). Polymedia: Towards a new theory of digital media in interpersonal communication. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 16(2), 169–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877912452486 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  63. Makalintal, B. (2020, April 15). A dive into the disputed history of “Dalgona coffee.” Vice. https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkenb8/a-dive-into-the-disputed-history-of-dalgona-coffee Mastley, C. P. (2017). Social media and information behavior: A citation analysis of current research from 2008–2015. The Serials Librarian, 73(3–4), 339–351. https://doi.org/10.10 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  64. 80/0361526X.2017.1356420 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  65. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Social Research, 1(2), 105–114. Medford, R. J., Saleh, S. N., Sumarsono, A., Perl, T. M., & Lehmann, C. U. (2020). An “infodemic”: Leveraging high-volume Twitter data to understand public sentiment for the COVID-19 outbreak. MedRxiv, 2020.04.03.20052936. https://doi.org/10.1101/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  66. 2020.04.03.20052936 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  67. Moore, C. L. (2016). A study of social media and its influence on teen information seeking behaviors. The Serials Librarian, 71(2), 138–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 0361526X. 2016.1209452 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  68. Museum of the City of New York. (2020). #CovidStoriesNYC. https://www.mcny.org/covid- storiesnyc Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  69. Mylonas, Y. (2017). Witnessing absences: Social media as archives and public spheres. Social Identities, 23(3), 271–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630 .2016.1225495 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  70. Nguyen, M. H., Gruber, J., Fuchs, J., Marler, W., Hunsaker, A., & Hargittai, E. (2020). Changes in digital communication during the COVID-19 global pandemic: Implications for digital inequality and future research. Social Media + Society, 6(3), 2056305120948255. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120948255 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  71. Noguti, V., & Waller, D. S. (2020). Motivations to use social media: Effects on the perceived informativeness, entertainment, and intrusiveness of paid mobile advertising. Journal of Marketing Management, 36(15–16), 1527–1555. https://doi.org/10.1080/02 67257X.2020.1799062 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  72. Norman, D. (1999). Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions, 6(3), 38–43. https:// doi.org/10.1145/301153.301168 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  73. Norman, D. (2017). The psychology of everyday things. Basic Books. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  74. O’Reilly, K. (2005). Ethnographic methods. Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  75. Owens, Z. D. (2017). Is it Facebook official? Coming out and passing strategies of young adult gay men on social media. Journal of Homosexuality, 64(4), 431–449. https://doi.org Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  76. /10.1080/00918369.2016.1194112 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  77. Papacharissi, Z., & Rubin, A. M. (2000). Predictors of internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(2), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878 jobem4402_2 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  78. Pearce, J., & Moscardo, G. (2015). Social representations of tourist selfies: New challenges for sustainable tourism. BEST EN Think Tank XV. The Environment-People Nexus in Sustainable Tourism: Finding the Balance. https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/40604/ 6/40604%20Pearce%20and%20Moscardo%202015.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  79. Picheta, R. (2021, November 2). Why the world is still arguing over face masks, 20 months into the pandemic. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/02/health/face-mask-debate-cov- id-19-pandemic-cmd-intl/index.html Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  80. Pink, S. (2021). Doing visual ethnography (4th ed.). SAGE. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  81. Pittman, M., & Reich, B. (2016). Social media and loneliness: Why an Instagram picture may be worth more than a thousand Twitter words. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 155– Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  82. 167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.084 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  83. Quinn, K. (2016). Why we share: A uses and gratifications approach to privacy regulation in social media use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 60(1), 61–86. https://doi.or g/10.1080/08838151.2015.1127245 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  84. Richterich, A. (2020). Tracing controversies in hacker communities: Ethical considerations for internet research. Information, Communication & Society, 23(1), 76–93. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/1369118X.2018.1486867 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  85. Risam, R. (2018). Now you see them: Self-representation and the refugee selfie. Popular Communication, 16(1), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2017.1413191 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  86. Roberts, R. (2021, June 30). We hate the office. We love the office. Do we want to go back? Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021 /06/30/office-return-work-from-home/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  87. Rodgers, S., & Moore, S. (2020). Platform phenomenologies: Social media as experiential infrastructures of urban public life. In J. Stehlin, M. Hodson, J. Kasmire, J, & K. Ward (Eds.), Urban Platforms and the Future City (pp. 209–222). Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  88. Rollason-Cass, S., & Reed, S. (2015). Living movements, living archives: Selecting and archiving web content during times of social unrest. New Review of Information Networking, 20(1–2), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614576.2015.1114839 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  89. Rubin, A. M. (2009). Media uses and effects: A uses-and-gratifications perspective on media effects. In M. B. Oliver & J. Bryant (Eds.), Media effects advances in theory and research (pp. 165–184). Routledge. http://ezproxy.uniandes.edu.co:8080/ login?url=http://www. tandfebooks.com/isbn/9780203877111 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  90. Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st Century. Mass Communication and Society, 3(1), 3–37. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_02 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  91. Schmalz, D. L., Colistra, C. M., & Evans, K. E. (2015). Social media sites as a means of coping with a threatened social identity. Leisure Sciences, 37(1), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/0 1490400.2014.935835 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  92. Schneider, A., & Prost, A. (2020, April 26). Coronavirus: Letzte Ausgabe: Das Corona-Fototagebuch [Corona virus: las issue: The corona photo diary]. Die Zeit. https://www.zeit. de/gesellschaft/2020-03/coronavirus-deutschland-pandemie-alltag-fotos-projekt Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  93. Schreurs, L., & Vandenbosch, L. (2021). Introducing the social media literacy (SMILE) model with the case of the positivity bias on social media. Journal of Children and Media, 15(3), 320–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2020.1809481 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  94. Schroeder, A., Pennington-Gray, L., Donohoe, H., & Kiousis, S. (2013). Using social media in times of crisis. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(1–2), 126–143. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/10548408.2013.751271 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  95. Serafinelli, E. (2017). Analysis of photo sharing and visual social relationships: Instagram as a case study. Photographies, 10(1), 91–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/17540763.2016.1258657 Serafinelli, E., & Villi, M. (2017). Mobile mediated visualities: An empirical study of visual practices on Instagram. Digital Culture & Society, 3(2), 165–182. https://doi. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  96. org/10.14361/dcs-2017-0210 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  97. Sheldon, P., & Bryant, K. (2016). Instagram: Motives for its use and relationship to narcissism and contextual age. Computers in Human Behavior, 58(Supplement C), 89–97. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.059 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  98. Sontag, S. (2008). On photography. Penguin Books. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  99. Stafford, T. F., Stafford, M. R., & Schkade, L. L. (2004). Determining uses and gratifications for the internet. Decision Sciences, 35(2), 259–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 00117315.2004.02524.x Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  100. Thompson, N., Wang, X., & Daya, P. (2020). Determinants of news sharing behavior on social media. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 60(6), 593–601. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/08874417.2019.1566803 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  101. Timmermans, E., & Courtois, C. (2018). From swiping to casual sex and/or committed relationships: Exploring the experiences of Tinder users. The Information Society, 34(2), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2017.1414093 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  102. van Dijck, J. (2007). Mediated memories in the digital age. Stanford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  103. van Dijck, J. (2008). Digital photography: Communication, identity, memory. Visual Communication, 7(1), 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357207084865 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  104. Velasquez, A., & LaRose, R. (2015). Social media for social change: Social media political efficacy and activism in student activist groups. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59(3), 456–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2015.1054998 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  105. Verrastro, V., Fontanesi, L., Liga, F., Cuzzocrea, F., & Gugliandolo, M. C. (2020). Fear the Instagram: Beauty stereotypes, body image and Instagram use in a sample of male and female adolescents. Qwerty – Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 15(1), 31–49. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  106. Walsh, K. (2020, May 20). Zoom fatigue: How to politely decline a call during quarantine. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/20/smarter-living/coronavirus- zoom-facetime-fatigue.html Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  107. Wiederhold, B. K. (2018). The tenuous relationship between Instagram and teen self-identity. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  108. CyberPsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 21(4), 215–216. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  109. Yeo, S. L., Pang, A., Cheong, M., & Yeo, J. Q. (2020). Emotions in social media: An analysis of Tweet responses to MH370 search suspension announcement. International Journal of Business Communication, 57(2), 194–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488419882755 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  110. Zürcher, C., & Loser, P. (2021, November 13). Soziale Veränderungen in der Pandemie – Wie wir alle zu Kontrolleuren geworden sind [Social changes during the panedimc: How we all turned into controllers]. Tages-Anzeiger. https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/wie-wir-alle-zu- kontrolleuren-geworden-sind-794130534232 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  111. Andersen, K., Shehata, A., & Andersson, D. (2021). Alternative news orientation and trust in mainstream media: A longitudinal audience perspective. Digital Journalism. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2021.1986412 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  112. Bartels, L. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior, 24(2), 117–150. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021226224601 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  113. Beierlein, C., Kemper, C. J., Kovaleva, A., & Rammstedt, B. (2014). Political Efficacy Kurzskala (PEKS) [Political efficacy short scale]. In Leibniz-Zentrum für Psychologische Information und Dokumentation (ZPID) (Hrsg.), Elektronisches Testarchiv (PSYNDEX Tests-Nr. 9006492). ZPID. https://doi.org/10.6102/zis34 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  114. Callan, M. J., Shead, N. W., & Olson, J. M. (2011). Personal relative deprivation, delay discounting, and gambling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(5), 955– 973. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024778 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  115. Cremer, H. (2020). Verbreitung rassistischen Gedankenguts – Meinungsfreiheit hat Grenzen [Dissemination of racist ideas – freedom of speech has limits]. Jena: Institut für Demokratie und Zivilgesellschaft. https://www.idz-jena.de/fileadmin/user_upload/ PDFS_WsD2/WsD2_Verbreitung_rassistischen_Gedankenguts_-_Meinungsfreiheit_ hat_Grenzen.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  116. Deutscher Bundestag (2019). Plenarprotokoll 19/130. Deutscher Bundestag. Stenografischer Bericht. 130. Sitzung. Berlin, Mittwoch, den 27. November 2019 [Plenary protocol 19/130. German Bundestag. Stenographic report. 130th session. Berlin, Wednesday, November 27, 2019]. http://dipbt.bundestag.de/doc/btp/19/19130.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  117. Eberle, F., Schumann, S., Oepke, M., Müller, C., Barske, N., Pflüger, M., & Hesske, S. (2009). Instrumenten- und Skalendokumentation zum Forschungsprojekt „Anwendungs- und problemorientierter Unterricht in gymnasialen Lehr-/Lernumgebungen (APU)“ [Instrument and scale documentation for the research project “Application and problem-oriented teaching in secondary school teaching/learning environments (APU)”]. https://digitalcollection.zhaw.ch/bitstream/11475/13137/1/Skalendokumentation-APU_2009_SC3.4.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  118. Fawzi, N. (2019). Untrustworthy news and the media as “enemy of the people?” How a populist worldview shapes recipients’ attitudes toward the media. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 24(2), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161218811981 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  119. Fawzi, N., Steindl, N., Obermaier, M., Prochazka, F., Arlt, D., Blöbaum, B., Dohle, M., Engelke, K. M., Hanitzsch, T., Jackob, N., Jakobs, I., Klawier, T., Post, S., Reinemann, C., Schweiger, W., & Ziegele, M. (2021). Concepts, causes and consequences of trust in news media – A literature review and framework. Annals of the International Communication Association, 45, 154–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2021.1960181 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  120. Flynn, D. J., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2017). The nature and origins of misperceptions: Understanding false and unsupported beliefs about politics. Political Psychology, 38, 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12394 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  121. Freedom House (2021). Freedom in the world 2021. Germany. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/country/germany/freedom-world/2021 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  122. Füllenbach, B. (2009). Wege aus dem Konflikt. Konfliktvermittlung in Organisationen. Fach- und Führungskräfte als betriebliche Konfliktberater [Ways to overcome conflict. Conflict mediation in organizations. Specialists and managers as conflict advisors in companies]. https://www.yumpu.com/de/document/read/6129571/ein-fragebogen-fur- die-bewerberauswahl-alumni-der-psychologie- Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  123. Gadinger, F. (2019). Lügenpresse, gesunder Volkskörper, tatkräftiger Macher: Erzählformen des Populismus [Lying press, healthy people‘s body, energetic doer: Narrative forms of populism]. In M. Müller & J. Precht (Hrsg.), Narrative des Populismus (S. 115–146). Springer Fachmedien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-22374-8_7 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  124. Garton Ash, T. (2016). Free speech: Ten principles for a connected world. Yale University Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  125. Gensheimer, T., & Frankenberger, R. (2019). Themen, Thesen, Argumente. Die Bedeutung von politischem System, Politikfeldern und Beteiligungsangeboten für AfD- und Nicht-AfD-Wähler im Vergleich [Issues, hypotheses, arguments. The relevance of the political system, policy fields, and participatory opportunities compared for AfD- and non-AfD-voters]. In Baden-Württemberg Stiftung (Hrsg.), Demokratie-Monitoring Baden-Württemberg 2016/2017 (S. 103–128). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-23331-0_6 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  126. Habermas, J. (1982). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Band 2. Zur Kritik der funktionalistischen Vernunft [Theory of communicative action. Volume 2: On the critique of functionalist reason]. Suhrkamp. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  127. Habermas, J. (1990). Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft [Structural change of the public sphere. Studies on a category of bourgeois society]. Suhrkamp. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  128. Heft, A., Mayerhöffer, E., Reinhardt, S., & Knüpfer, C. (2020). Beyond Breitbart: Comparing right‐wing digital news infrastructures in six western democracies. Policy & Internet, 12(1), 20-45. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.219 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  129. Hmielowski, J. D., Feldman, L., Myers, T. A., Leiserowitz, A., & Maibach, E. (2014). An attack on science? Media use, trust in scientists, and perceptions of global warming. Public Understanding of Science, 23(7), 866–883. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513480091 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  130. Imbusch, P., & Heitmeyer, W. (2012). Dynamiken gesellschaftlicher Integration und Desintegration [Dynamics of social integration and disintegration]. In W. Heitmeyer & Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  131. P. Imbusch (Hrsg.), Desintegrationsdynamiken (S. 9–25). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  132. Imhof, K. (2008). Theorie der Öffentlichkeit als Theorie der Moderne [Theory of the public sphere as a theory of modernity]. In C. Winter, A. Hepp, & F. Krotz (Hrsg.), Theorien der Kommunikations- und Medienwissenschaft: Grundlegende Diskussionen, Forschungsfelder und Theorieentwicklungen (S. 65–89). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  133. Kellner, P. (2016). Analyse: Welches Menschenrecht ist am wichtigsten? [Analysis: Which human right is most important?]. YouGov. https://yougov.de/news/2016/03/31/analyse- welches-menschenrecht-ist-am-wichtigsten/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  134. Kern, A. (2017). Identifikation mit politischen Parteien und Demokratiezufriedenheit: Eine Längsschnittanalyse zum Einfluss von Parteiidentifikation in Deutschland [Identification with political parties and satisfaction with democracy: A longitudinal analysis of the influence of party identification in Germany]. PVS Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 58(1), 51–76. https://doi.org/10.5771/0032-3470-2017-1-51 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  135. Klausmann, V. (2019). Meinungsfreiheit und Rechtsextremismus. Das antinationalsozialistische Grundprinzip des Grundgesetzes [Freedom of expression and right-wing extremism: The basic anti-national-socialist principle of the German constitution]. Nomos. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  136. Köcher, R. (2019). Grenzen der Freiheit. Eine Dokumentation des Beitrags von Prof. Dr. Renate Köcher in der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung Nr. 119 vom 23. Mai 2019 [Limits of freedom. A documentation of the article by Prof. Dr. Renate Köcher in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung no. 119 of May 23, 2019]. Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach. https://www.ifd-allensbach.de/fileadmin/user_upload/FAZ_Mai2019_Meinungsfreiheit.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  137. Koreng, A. (2015). Hate Speech im Internet – eine rechtliche Einordnung [Hate speech on the Internet – a legal classification]. In Amadeu Antonio Stiftung (Hrsg.), „Geh sterben!“. Umgang mit Hate Speech und Kommentaren im Internet (S. 33–34). Berlin: Amadeu Antonio Stiftung. https://www.amadeu-antonio-stiftung.de/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Geh_sterben_web.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  138. Kösters, R., & Jandura, O. (2018). Politische Kommunikation in heterogenen Lebenswelten. Kommunikationspraxis in politischen Milieus und Bedingungen ihrer Integration [Political communication in heterogeneous environments: Communication practice in political milieus and conditions of their integration]. Studies in Communication and Media (SCM), 7(2), 129–185. https://doi.org/10.5771/2192-4007-2018-2-1 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  139. Kreißel, P., Ebner, J., Urban, A., & Guhl, J. (2018). Hass auf Knopfdruck. Rechtsextreme Trollfabriken und das Ökosystem koordinierter Hasskampagnen im Netz [Hate at the push of a button: Right-wing troll factories and the ecosystem of coordinated hate campaigns on the net]. Institute for Strategic Dialogue. https://www.isdglobal.org/wp- content/uploads/2018/07/ISD_Ich_Bin_Hier_2.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  140. Lanius, D. (2020). Meinungsfreiheit und die kommunikative Strategie der Rechtspopulisten [Freedom of speech and the communicative strategy of right-wing populists]. In T. Schultz (Hrsg.), Was darf man sagen? Meinungsfreiheit im Zeitalter des Populismus (S. 75–112). Kohlhammer. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  141. Leonhard, L., Rueß, C., Obermaier, M., & Reinemann, C. (2018). Perceiving threat and feeling responsible: How severity of hate speech, number of bystanders, and prior reactions of others affect bystanders’ intention to counterargue against hate speech on Facebook. Studies in Communication and Media (SCM), 7(4), 555–579. https://doi. org/10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-555 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  142. Lindolf, T. R. (1988). Media audiences as interpretive communities. Annals of the International Communication Association, 11(1), 81–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  143. 1988.11678680 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  144. Meltzer, C. E. (2017). Medienwirkung trotz Erfahrung. Der Einfluss von direkter und medial vermittelter Erfahrung eines Ereignisses [Media impact inspite of experience: The influence of direct and media-mediated experience of an event]. Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  145. Moffitt, B. (2017). Liberal illiberalism? The reshaping of the contemporary populist radical right in Northern Europe. Politics and Governance, 5(4), 112. https://doi. org/10.17645/pag.v5i4.996 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  146. Müller, P., & Schulz, A. (2021). Alternative media for a populist audience? Exploring political and media use predictors of exposure to Breitbart, Sputnik, and Co. Information, Communication & Society, 24(2), 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1646778 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  147. Naab, T. K., & Scherer, H. (2009). Möglichkeiten und Gefahren der Meinungsfreiheit [Possibilities and dangers of freedom of speech]. Publizistik, 54(3), 373–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-009-0056-7 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  148. Neubaum, G., & Krämer, N. C. (2018). What do we fear? Expected sanctions for expressing minority opinions in offline and online communication. Communication Research, 45(2), 139–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215623837 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  149. Neuberger, C., Bartsch, A., Reinemann, C., Fröhlich, R., Hanitzsch, T., & Schindler, J. (2019). Der digitale Wandel der Wissensordnung: Theorienrahmen für die Analyse von Wahrheit, Wissen und Rationalität in der öffentlichen Kommunikation [The digital transformation of knowledge order: Theoretical frameworks for the analysis of truth, knowledge, and rationality in public communication]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 67(2), 167–186. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2019-2-167 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  150. Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  151. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The spiral of silence. A theory of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 24, 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1974.tb00367.x Noelle-Neumann, E. (1983). Persönlichkeitsstärke: Ein neues Kriterium zur Zielgruppen- Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  152. bestimmung [Personality strength: a new criterion for target group identification]. In Spiegel Dokumentation (Hrsg.), Persönlichkeitsstärke: Ein neuer Maßstab zur Bestimmung von Zielgruppenpotentialen (S. 7–21). Spiegel-Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  153. Obermaier, M., Haim, M., & Reinemann, C. (2014). Emotionen bewegen? Ein Experiment zur Wirkung von Medienbeiträgen mit Emotionalisierungspotential auf Emotionen, politische Partizipationsabsichten und weiterführende Informationssuche [Do emotions move? An experiment on the effect of media contributions with emotionalization potential on emotions, political participation intentions, and further information Search]. Medien- & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 62(2), 216–235. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615- 634x-2014-2-216 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  154. Obermaier, M. (2020). Vertrauen in journalistische Medien aus Sicht der Rezipienten. Zum Einfluss soziopolitischer und performanzbezogener Erklärgrößen [Trust in journalistic media from the perspective of the recipients: On the role of sociopolitical and performance-related explanatory variables]. Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  155. Petersen, T. (2013). Tatsächliche und gefühlte Intoleranz: Eine Dokumentation des Beitrags von Dr. Thomas Petersen in der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung Nr. 67 vom 20. März 2013 [Factual and perceived intolerance: A documentation of the article by Dr. Thomas Petersen in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung no. 67 of March 20, 2013]. Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach. https://www.ifd-allensbach.de/fileadmin/kurzbe- richte_dokumentationen/Maerz13_Intoleranz.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  156. Petersen, T. (2020). Forschungsfreiheit an deutschen Universitäten. Ergebnisse einer Umfrage unter Hochschullehrern [Freedom of research at German universities. Results of a survey among lecturers in higher education]. Akademie der Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung. https://www.kas.de/documents/252038/7995358/Studie+des+Instituts+f%C3%BCr+Demoskopie+Allensbach+zur+Forschungsfreiheit+an+deutschen+Universit%C3%A4ten. pdf/01252a6a-38eb-a647-fb74-7d39b1890382?version=1.0&t=1581610619899 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  157. Petersen, T. (2021). Die Mehrheit fühlt sich gegängelt. Eine Dokumentation des Beitrags von Dr. Thomas Petersen in der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung Nr. 136 vom 16. Juni 2021 [The majority feels it’s being restrained. A documentation of the article by Dr. Thomas Petersen in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung no. 136 of June 16, 2021.]. Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach. https://www.ifd-allensbach.de/fileadmin/kurzbe- richte_dokumentationen/FAZ_Juni2021_Meinungsfreiheit.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  158. Polenz, R., & Wolter, D. (2021). „Das Geschäftsmodell von Facebook und Twitter verhindert im Grunde eine vernünftige Debattenkultur“ [“Facebook and Twitter’s business model basically prevents a reasonable culture of debate”]. Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. https://www.kas.de/documents/252038/11055681/Interview+mit+Ruprecht+Polenz+% C3%BCber+die+Debattenkultur+in+den+Sozialen+Medien.pdf/33541793-a5c9-eddc- bd12-5afab20d21d2 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  159. Quiring, O., Jackob, N., Schemer, C., Jakobs, I., & Ziegele, M. (2020). „Das wird man doch noch sagen dürfen…“ – Wahrgenommene Sprechverbote und ihre Korrelate [“One should still be allowed to say that...” – Perceived speech prohibitions and their correlates]. In N. Jackob, O. Quiring, & M. Maurer (Hrsg.), Traditionen und Transformationen des Öffentlichen (S. 49–72). Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  160. Reinemann, C., Haas, A., & Rieger, D. (2022). “I don’t care, ’cause I don’t trust them!” – The impact of information sources, institutional trust and populist attitudes on the perception of the COVID-19 pandemic during the first lockdown in Germany. Studies in Communication & Media (SCM), 11(1), 132–168. https://doi.org/10.5771/2192- 4007-2022-1-132 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  161. Reinemann, C., Maurer, M., Zerback, T., & Jandura, O. (2013). Die Spätentscheider. Medieneinflüsse auf kurzfristige Wahlentscheidungen [Late deciders: Media influences on short-term electoral decisions]. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  162. Reuter, M. (2021, 12. Januar). Deplatforming: Warum Trumps Accountsperrungen richtig und hochproblematisch sind [Deplatforming: Why Trump‘s account suspensions are right and highly problematic]. netzpolitik.org. https://netzpolitik.org/2021/deplatfor- ming-warum-trumps-accountsperrungen-richtig-und-hochproblematisch-sind/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  163. Revers, M., & Traunmüller, R. (2020). Is free speech in danger on university campus? Some preliminary evidence from a most likely case. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 72(3), 471–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-020- 00713-z Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  164. Rippl, S., & Baier, D. (2005). Das Deprivationskonzept in der Rechtsextremismusforschung [The concept of deprivation in right-wing extremism research]. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 57, 644–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11577-005-0219-0 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  165. Rogers, R. (2020). Deplatforming: Following extreme internet celebrities to Telegram and alternative social media. European Journal of Communication, 35(3), 213–229. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0267323120922066 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  166. Rössler, P. (2011). Skalenhandbuch Kommunikationswissenschaft [Scale Handbook for Communication Studies]. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  167. Rossmann, C. (2013). Kultivierungsforschung: Idee, Entwicklung und Integration [Cultivation research: Idea, development and integration]. In W. Schweiger & A. Fahr (Hrsg.), Handbuch Medienwirkungsforschung (S. 385–400). VS Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  168. Schenk, M., & Rössler, P. (1997). The rediscovery of opinion leaders. An application of the personality strength scale. Communications, 22(1), 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1515/ comm.1997.22.1.5 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  169. Schindler, J., Fortkord, C., Posthumus, L., Obermaier, M., & Reinemann, C. (2018). Woher kommt und wozu führt Medienfeindlichkeit? Zum Zusammenhang von populistischen Einstellungen, Medienfeindlichkeit, negativen Emotionen und Partizipation [Where does media hostility come from and what does it lead to? On the connection between populist attitudes, media hostility, negative emotions and participation]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 66(3), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615- 634X-2018-3-283 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  170. Schneider-Haase, T. (2009) „Was messen wir da eigentlich?“ – Anmerkungen zur Sonntagsfrage [“What Do We Actually Measure Here?“ – Notes on the sunday survey]. In Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  171. H. Kaspar, H. Schoen, S. Schumann, & J. R. Winkler (Hrsg.), Politik – Wissenschaft – Medien (S. 269–273). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-531-91219-6_15 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  172. Skaaning, S.-E., & Krishnarajan, S. (2021). Who cares about free speech? Findings from a global survey of support for free speech. Justitia. https://futurefreespeech.com/wp-con- tent/uploads/2021/06/Report_Who-cares-about-free-speech_21052021.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  173. Slothuus, R., & Bisgaard, M. (2021). How political parties shape public opinion in the real world. American Journal of Political Science, 65, 896–911. https://doi.org/10.1111/ ajps.12550 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  174. Smith, H. J., Pettigrew, T. F., Pippin, G. M., & Bialosiewicz, S. (2012). Relative deprivation: A theoretical and meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(3), 203–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311430825 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  175. Spiegel Online (2022, 23. April). Digital Services Act: EU einigt sich auf Gesetz gegen Hass und Hetze im Internet [Digital Services Act: EU agrees on law against hate and incitement on the Internet]. https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/europaeische-union-einigt- sich-auf-digital-services-act-gegen-hass-und-hetze-im-internet-a-81b4bc96-4c29-45b0- a1af-a8613265d692 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  176. Strömbäck, J., Tsfati, Y., Boomgaarden, H. G., Damstra, A., Lindgren, E., Vliegenthart, R., & Lindholm, T. (2020). News media trust and its impact on media use: Toward a framework for future research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 44, 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2020.1755338 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  177. Stroud, N. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30, 341–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-007-9050-9 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  178. Struth, A. K. (2019). Hassrede und Freiheit der Meinungsäußerung. Der Schutzbereich der Meinungsäußerungsfreiheit in Fällen demokratiefeindlicher Äußerungen nach der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention, Grundgesetz und der Charta der Grundrechte der Europäischen Union [Hate Speech and freedom of speech: The scope of protection of freedom of speech in cases of anti-democratic statements pursuant to the European Convention on Human Rights, the German constitution and the Charta of Fundamental Rights of the European Union]. Springer. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  179. Stucke, J. (2021, 22. Januar). Verschwörungserzähler Ken Jebsen – YouTube sperrt KenFM [Conspiracy narrator Ken Jebsen – YouTube blocks KenFM]. Deutschlandfunkkultur. de. https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/verschwoerungserzaehler-ken-jebsen-youtu- be-sperrt-kenfm-100.html Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  180. Süss, D., Lampert, C., & Trültzsch-Wijnen, C. (2018). Medienpädagogik. Ein Studienbuch zur Einführung (3. Aufl.) [Media Pedagogy. An introductory study book (3rd ed.)]. Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  181. Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755–769. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  182. Unzicker, K. (2018, 17. Juli). „Das wird man ja wohl noch sagen dürfen“ – Keine Meinungsfreiheit in Deutschland? [“It’s still okay to say that” – No freedom of speech in Germany?]. Blog Vielfalt leben, Bertelsmann Stiftung. https://blog.vielfaltleben.de/2018/07/17/ das-wird-man-ja-wohl-noch-sagen-duerfen-keine-meinungsfreiheit-in-deutschland/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  183. Van Aelst, P., Strömbäck, J., Aalberg, T., Esser, F., de Vreese, C. H., Matthes, J., Hopmann, D., Salgado, S., Hubé, N., Stepinska, A., Papathanassopoulos, S., Berganza, R., Legnante, G., Reinemann, C., Sheafer, T., & Stanyer, J. (2017). Political communication in a high choice media environment: A challenge for democracy? Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  184. 985.2017.1288551 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  185. V- Dem (2022). Autocratization changing nature. Democracy report 2022. V-Dem Institute. https://v-dem.net/media/publications/dr_2022.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  186. Zerback, T., Koch, T., & Krämer, B. (2015). Thinking of others: Effects of implicit and explicit media cues on climate of opinion perceptions. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92(2), 421–443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015574481 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  187. Zerback, T., Reinemann, C., & Nienierza, A. (2015). Who’s hot and who’s not? Factors influencing public perceptions of current party popularity and electoral expectations. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 20(4), 458–477. https://doi. org/10.1177/1940161215596986 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  188. Bandura, A. (2005). The primacy of self-regulation in health promotion. Applied Psychology, 54(2), 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00208.x Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  189. Böhnisch, L., & Lenz, K. (2015). Erwachsenensozialisation [Adult socialization]. In K. Hurrelmann, U. Bauer, M. Grundmann, & S. Walper (Eds.), Handbuch Sozialisationsforschung (8th ed.) (pp. 871–884). Beltz. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  190. Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Academic Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  191. Celeux, G., & Soromenho, G. (1996). An entropy criterion for assessing the number of clusters in a mixture model. Journal of Classification, 13(2), 195–212. https://doi. org/10.1007/BF01246098 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  192. EPatient Analytics. (2022). Self Tracking Report 2022: Wie will Deutschland mit seinen Gesundheitsdaten umgehen? [Self Tracking Report 2022: How Germany wants to handle its health data?]. EPatient Analystics GmbH. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  193. Fraley, C., & Raftery, A. E. (1998). How many clusters? Which clustering method? Answers via model-based cluster analysis. The Computer Journal, 41(8), 578–588. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  194. Geber, S., Baumann, E., & Klimmt, C. (2016). Tailoring in risk communication by linking risk profiles and communication preferences: The case of speeding of young car drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 97, 315–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. aap.2015.06.015 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  195. Hassan, L., Xi, N., Gurkan, B., Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2020). Gameful self-regulation: A study on how gamified self-tracking features evoke gameful experiences. Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1103–1112. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  196. Hermsen, S., Frost, J., Renes, R. J., & Kerkhof, P. (2016). Using feedback through digital technology to disrupt and change habitual behavior: A critical review of current literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015. 12.023 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  197. Herzberg, P. Y. (2002). Zur psychometrischen Optimierung einer Reaktanzskala mittels klassischer und IRT-basierter Analysemethoden [On the psychometric optimization of a reactance scale using classical and IRT-based analysis methods]. Diagnostica, 48(4), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1026//0012-1924.48.4.163 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  198. Heyen, N. B. (2020). From self-tracking to self-expertise: The production of self-related knowledge by doing personal science. Public Understanding of Science, 29(2), 124– Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  199. 138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662519888757 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  200. Humphreys, L., Karnowski, V., & von Pape, T. (2018). Smartphones as metamedia: A framework for identifying the niches structuring smartphone use. International Journal of Communication, 12, 2793–2809. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  201. Kantar. (2019). Android vs. IOS. https://www.kantarworldpanel.com/global/smartphone- os-market-share/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  202. Karnowski, V. (2017). Latent class analysis. In J. Matthes, C. S. Davis, & R. F. Potter (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods (pp. 967–976). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0130 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  203. Kim, J. Y., Lee, K. H., Kim, S. H., Kim, K. H., Kim, J. H., Han, J. S., Bang, S. S., Shin, J. H., Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  204. Kim, S. H., Hwang, E. J., & Bae, W. K. (2013). Needs analysis and development of a tailored mobile message program linked with electronic health records for weight reduction. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 82(11), 1123–1132. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2013.08.004 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  205. Knittle, K., Nurmi, J., Crutzen, R., Hankonen, N., Beattie, M., & Dombrowski, S. U. (2018). How can interventions increase motivation for physical activity? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Psychology Review, 12(3), 211–230. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/17437199.2018.1435299 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  206. Krug, S., Jordan, S., Mensink, G. B. M., Müters, S., Finger, J., & Lampert, T. (2013). Körperliche Aktivität: Ergebnisse der Studie zur Gesundheit Erwachsener in Deutschland (DEGS1) [Physical activity: Results of the study on adult health in Germany (DEGS1)]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, 56(5–6), 765–771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-012-1661-6 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  207. Lazar, A., Koehler, C., Tanenbaum, J., & Nguyen, D. H. (2015). Why we use and abandon smart devices. Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing – UbiComp 15, 635–646. https://doi. org/10.1145/2750858.2804288 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  208. Lee, I.-M., Shiroma, E. J., Kamada, M., Bassett, D. R., Matthews, C. E., & Buring, J. E. (2019). Association of step volume and intensity with all-cause mortality in older women. JAMA Internal Medicine, 179(8), 1105. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.0899 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  209. Leiner, D. J. (2019). Too fast, too straight, too weird: Non-reactive indicators for meaningless data in internet surveys. Survey Research Methods, 13(3), 229–248. https://doi. org/10.18148/SRM/2018.V13I3.7403 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  210. Linzer, D. A., & Lewis, J. B. (2011). PoLCA: An R package for polytomous variable latent class analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 42(10), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.18637/ jss.v042.i10 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  211. Lomborg, S., & Frandsen, K. (2016). Self-tracking as communication. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 1015–1027. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1067710 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  212. Lomborg, S., Thylstrup, N. B., & Schwartz, J. (2018). The temporal flows of self-tracking: Checking in, moving on, staying hooked. New Media & Society, 20(12), 4590–4607. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818778542 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  213. Lupton, D. (2013). The digitally engaged patient: Self-monitoring and self-care in the digital health era. Social Theory & Health, 11(3), 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1057/sth.2013.10 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  214. Lupton, D. (2016a). The diverse domains of quantified selves: Self-tracking modes and dataveillance. Economy and Society, 45(1), 101–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/0308514 7.2016.1143726 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  215. Lupton, D. (2016b). The quantified self: A sociology of self-tracking. Polity. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  216. Matthews, J., Win, K. T., Oinas-Kukkonen, H., & Freeman, M. (2016). Persuasive technology in mobile applications promoting physical activity: A systematic review. Journal of Medical Systems, 40(3), 72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-015-0425-x Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  217. Meidert, U., Scheermesser, M., Prieur, Y., Hegyi, S., Stockinger, K., Eyyi, G., Evers-Wölk, M., Jacobs, M., Oertel, B., & Becker, H. (2018). Quantified Self – Schnittstelle zwischen Lifestyle und Medizin [Quantified self – interface between lifestyle and medicine]. vdf. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  218. Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here: The folly of technological solutionism. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  219. Public Affairs. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  220. Nelson, M. C., Story, M., Larson, N. I., Neumark-Sztainer, D., & Lytle, L. A. (2008). Emerging adulthood and college-aged youth: An overlooked age for weight-related behavior change. Obesity, 16(10), 2205–2211. https://doi.org/10.1038/oby.2008.365 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  221. Priebe, C. S., & Spink, K. S. (2012). Using messages promoting descriptive norms to increase physical activity. Health Communication, 27(3), 284–291. https://doi.org/10.10 80/10410236.2011.585448 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  222. Reifegerste, D., & Karnowski, V. (2020). Lifestyle, Präventionserfolg oder Optimierungszwang? Chancen und Risiken der Gesundheitssozialisation Jugendlicher durch Selftracking-Apps [Lifestyle, prevention success or optimization compulsion? Opportunities and risks of adolescent health socialization through self-tracking apps]. In A. Kalch & A. Wagner (Eds.), Gesundheitskommunikation und Digitalisierung (pp. 103– 116). Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748900658-103 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  223. Rimal, R. N. (2008). Modeling the relationship between descriptive norms and behaviors: A test and extension of the theory of normative social behavior (TNSB). Health Communication, 23(2), 103–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410230801967791 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  224. Rimal, R. N., & Real, K. (2005). How behaviors are influenced by perceived norms: A test of the theory of normative social behavior. Communication Research, 32(3), 389–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650205275385 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  225. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  226. Sawyer, S. M., Afifi, R. A., Bearinger, L. H., Blakemore, S.-J., Dick, B., Ezeh, A. C., & Patton, G. C. (2012). Adolescence: A foundation for future health. The Lancet, 379(9826), 1630–1640. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60072-5 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  227. Schmietow, B., & Marckmann, G. (2019). Mobile health ethics and the expanding role of autonomy. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 22(4), 623–630. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11019-019-09900-y Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  228. Schoeppe, S., Alley, S., Van Lippevelde, W., Bray, N. A., Williams, S. L., Duncan, M. J., & Vandelanotte, C. (2016). Efficacy of interventions that use apps to improve diet, physical activity and sedentary behaviour: A systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 13(1), 127. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-016-0454-y Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  229. Schomakers, E.-M., Lidynia, C., Vervier, L., & Ziefle, M. (2018). Of guardians, cynics, and pragmatists: A typology of privacy concerns and behavior. In V. Méndez Muñoz, G. Wills, R. Walters, F. Firouzi, & V. Chang (Eds.), IoTBDS 2018: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Internet of Things, Big Data and Security: Funchal, Madeira, Portugal, March 19-21, 2018 (pp. 153–163). SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  230. Selke, S. (2016). Lifelogging: Digital self-tracking and Lifelogging – between disruptive technology and cultural transformation. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3- 658-13137-1 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  231. Sharon, T., & Zandbergen, D. (2017). From data fetishism to quantifying selves: Self-tracking practices and the other values of data. New Media & Society, 19(11), 1695–1709. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816636090 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  232. Simpson, C. C., & Mazzeo, S. E. (2017). Calorie counting and fitness tracking technology: Associations with eating disorder symptomatology. Eating Behaviors, 26, 89–92. htt- ps://doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2017.02.002 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  233. Splendid Research. (2019). Optimized Self Monitor 2019. Splendid Research GmbH. Statista. (2017). Bildungsstand: Verteilung der Bevölkerung in Deutschland nach Alters- Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  234. gruppen und höchstem Schulabschluss [Educational attainment: Distribution of the population in Germany according to age groups and highest level of school attainment]. https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/197269/umfrage/allgemeiner-bil- dungsstand-der-bevoelkerung-in-deutschland-nach-dem-alter/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  235. Stiglbauer, B., Weber, S., & Batinic, B. (2019). Does your health really benefit from using a self-tracking device? Evidence from a longitudinal randomized control trial. Computers in Human Behavior, 94, 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.018 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  236. Sullivan, A. N., & Lachman, M. E. (2017). Behavior change with fitness technology in sedentary adults: A review of the evidence for increasing physical activity. Frontiers in Public Health, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00289 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  237. Van Dijck, J. (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance & Society, 12(2), 197–208. https://doi. org/10.24908/ss.v12i2.4776 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  238. von Entress-Fürsteneck, M., Gimpel, H., Nüske, N., Rückel, T., & Urbach, N. (2019, Febru- ary 23-27). Self-Tracking and gamification: Analyzing the interplay of motivations, usage and motivation fulfillment. 14th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, Sie- gen, Germany. https://www.fim-rc.de/Paperbibliothek/Veroeffentlicht/844/wi-844.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  239. Wang, J. B., Cadmus-Bertram, L. A., Natarajan, L., White, M. M., Madanat, H., Nichols, J. F., Ayala, G. X., & Pierce, J. P. (2015). Wearable sensor/device (Fitbit One) and SMS text-messaging prompts to increase physical activity in overweight and obese adults: A randomized controlled trial. Telemedicine and E-Health, 21(10), 782–792. https://doi. org/10.1089/tmj.2014.0176 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  240. Wang, J. B., Cataldo, J. K., Ayala, G. X., Natarajan, L., Cadmus-Bertram, L. A., White, M. M., Madanat, H., Nichols, J. F., & Pierce, J. P. (2016). Mobile and wearable device features that matter in promoting physical activity. Journal of Mobile Technology in Medicine, 5(2), 2–11. https://doi.org/10.7309/jmtm.5.2.2 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92

Zitation

Download RIS Download BibTex

Downloads

Download Kapitel (PDF)

Hinweis

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und darf nur nach den Vorgaben der Nutzungs- und Lizenzvereinbarung genutzt werden. Jede darüber hinaus gehende Nutzung des Werkes ist ausdrücklich untersagt und wird verfolgt.

Per E-Mail teilen

Medien