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

Table of contents

Bibliographic information

Cover of Volume: SCM Studies in Communication and Media Volume 12 (2023), Issue 1
Open Access Full access

SCM Studies in Communication and Media

Volume 12 (2023), Issue 1

Authors:
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyright Year
2023
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
ISSN-Print
2192-4007

Chapter information

Open Access Full access

Volume 12 (2023), Issue 1

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

Authors:
ISSN-Print
2192-4007
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
Preview:

In the first half of the year 2020, images of the COVID-19 pandemic dominated frontpages and primetime news: empty streets, overcrowded hospitals and panic-buying reflected the chaos and great uncertainty of this global health crisis. Since the advent of the Web 2.0, however, it has been not only traditional news media that shape the imagery of such historical events, but also people’s social media accounts which show what individuals are experiencing at a specific time and deem shareworthy. To identify prevalent COVID-19 imagery on Instagram, this digital ethnography assesses the posting behavior of 47 internet users in Switzerland and the United States during the early stages of the pandemic. This study combines findings from a qualitative content analysis of 2,698 posts and interviews with 19 creators to address the following research questions: (1) What content related to the pandemic did Instagram users share with their followers? And, (2) why did these individuals log on to Instagram during the COVID-19 pandemic? Overall, we found six COVID-19-related themes in the Feed and Story posts, which predominantly reflected changes to participants’ personal lives, including visual changes to everyday scenery. Furthermore, the individuals in our sample captured the COVID-19-related themes from an overwhelmingly positive angle. Answering our second question, we found that logging onto Instagram helped our participants feel part of “something bigger” during a time of social isolation. We discuss these findings in the context of the platform’s affordances and conventions and contribute to the thus far limited literature on the uses and gratifications of Instagram and individuals’ use of an image-based social networking site during a traumatic event.

Bibliography

  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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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/ Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  19. 786.2020.1851611 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  25. Enberg, J. (2020). Global Instagram Users 2020. https://www.emarketer.com/ content /globalinstagram-users-2020 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  31. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Books. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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– Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  41. 386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610385893 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  44. Humphreys, L. (2018). The qualified self: Social media and the accounting of everyday life. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  45. MIT Press. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  49. Jurgenson, N. (2019). The Social Photo: On Photography and Social Media. Verso. Open Google Scholar 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/ Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  54. Leaver, T., Highfield, T., & Abidin, C. (2020). Instagram. Polity Press. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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/ Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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, Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  64. 80/0361526X.2017.1356420 Open Google Scholar 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/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  66. 2020.04.03.20052936 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  68. Museum of the City of New York. (2020). #CovidStoriesNYC. https://www.mcny.org/covid- storiesnyc Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  73. Norman, D. (2017). The psychology of everyday things. Basic Books. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  74. O’Reilly, K. (2005). Ethnographic methods. Routledge. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  76. /10.1080/00918369.2016.1194112 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  80. Pink, S. (2021). Doing visual ethnography (4th ed.). SAGE. Open Google Scholar 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– Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  82. 167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.084 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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/ Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  96. org/10.14361/dcs-2017-0210 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  98. Sontag, S. (2008). On photography. Penguin Books. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  102. van Dijck, J. (2007). Mediated memories in the digital age. Stanford University Press. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  107. Wiederhold, B. K. (2018). The tenuous relationship between Instagram and teen self-identity. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-7
  108. CyberPsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 21(4), 215–216. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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- Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  124. Garton Ash, T. (2016). Free speech: Ten principles for a connected world. Yale University Press. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 & Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  131. P. Imbusch (Hrsg.), Desintegrationsdynamiken (S. 9–25). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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/ Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  143. 1988.11678680 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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- Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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/ Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  166. Rössler, P. (2011). Skalenhandbuch Kommunikationswissenschaft [Scale Handbook for Communication Studies]. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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/ Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-48
  184. 985.2017.1288551 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  190. Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Academic Press. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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– Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  199. 138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662519888757 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  201. Kantar. (2019). Android vs. IOS. https://www.kantarworldpanel.com/global/smartphone- os-market-share/ Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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., Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  215. Lupton, D. (2016b). The quantified self: A sociology of self-tracking. Polity. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  218. Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here: The folly of technological solutionism. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  219. Public Affairs. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92
  225. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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- Open Google Scholar 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/ Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2023-1-92

Citation

Download RIS Download BibTex

Downloads

Download chapter (PDF)

Notice

This work is protected by copyright and may only be used in accordance with the provisions of the Terms of Use and License Agreement. Any use of the work beyond this is expressly prohibited and will be prosecuted.

Share via email

Media