Using the concepts of data reflectivity and user reflexivity, this paper explores the intricate interplay between human users and algorithms through the lens of domestication. Through the metaphor of yanghao on the Chinese digital platform Xiaohongshu (RED), this paper posits that three failure types relating to data reflectivity result in dissatisfaction with RED’s algorithmic outputs and a perceived loss of control over algorithmic identity. In response, users reflexively feed six specific types of data into the algorithm to shape its understanding of themselves. Ultimately, by strategically curating data and interacting with an algorithm, yanghao demonstrates a successful domestication process, highlighting how data reflectivity and user reflexivity empower users to gain agency within the human–algorithm power dynamic.
BeerD (2017) The social power of algorithms. Information, Communication & Society20(1): 1–13.
2.
BhandariABimoS (2022) Why’s everyone on TikTok now? The algorithmized self and the future of self-making on social media. Social media+ society8(1). DOI: 10.1177/20563051221086241
3.
BiernackiPWaldorfD (1981) Snowball sampling: problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociological Methods & Research10(2): 141–163.
4.
Cheney-LippoldJ (2011) A new algorithmic identity: soft biopolitics and the modulation of control. Theory, Culture & Society28(6): 164–181.
5.
Cheney-LippoldJ (2017) We are data: algorithms and the making of our digital selves. In: We Are Data. New York: New York University Press.
6.
De ReuverMNikouSBouwmanH (2016) Domestication of smartphones and mobile applications: a quantitative mixed-method study. Mobile Media & Communication4(3): 347–370.
7.
DeVitoMAGergleDBirnholtzJ (2017) Algorithms ruin everything # RIPTwitter, folk theories, and resistance to algorithmic change in social media. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Denver, Colorado,USA, 6-11 May 2017, pp. 3163–3174.
8.
D’cruzHGillinghamPMelendezS (2007) Reflexivity, its meanings and relevance for social work: a critical review of the literature. British Journal of Social Work37(1): 73–90.
9.
EslamiMKrishna KumaranSRSandvigC, et al. (2018) Communicating algorithmic process in online behavioral advertising. In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Montreal, QC, Canada, 21-23 April 2018, pp.1–13.
10.
FinlayLGoughB (2008) Reflexivity: A Practical Guide for Researchers in Health and Social Science. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
11.
FrenchMR (2018) Algorithmic Mirrors: An Examination of How Personalized Recommendations Can Shape Self-Perceptions and Reinforce Gender Stereotypes. Ph.D. dissertation .
12.
GuoY (2019) How does Xiaohongshu achieve efficient recommendations? Decrypt the architecture behind the big data computing platform. Availble at: https://juejin_cn/post/6844903945849012232 (accessed 19 September 2019).
13.
HuangYMiaoW (2021) Re-domesticating social media when it becomes disruptive: evidence from Chinas “super app” WeChat. Mobile Media & Communication9(2): 177–194.
14.
HynesD (2009) Users as designers: the Internet in everyday life in Irish households. Anthropology in Action16(1): 18–29.
15.
JatonF (2021) The Constitution of Algorithms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
KantT (2020) Making it Personal: Algorithmic Personalization, Identity, and Everyday Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17.
KarizatNDelmonacoDEslamiM, et al. (2021) Algorithmic folk theories and identity: how TikTok users co-produce Knowledge of identity and engage in algorithmic resistance. In, Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction, 5 (CSCW2), New York, USA, 18 October 2021, pp: 1–44.
18.
KennedyHPoellTvan DijckJ (2015) Data and agency. Big Data & Society2(2): 1–7.
19.
KlawitterEHargittaiE (2018) Its like learning a whole other language: the role of algorithmic skills in the curation of creative goods. International Journal of Communication12(2018): 3490–3510.
20.
LiIDeyAKForlizziJ (2011) Understanding my data, myself: supporting self-reflection with ubicomp technologies. Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Ubiquitous computing. New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 405–414.
21.
MarkhamA (2013) Algorithmic self: layered accounts of life and identity in the 21st century. In: AoIR 14.0 Resistance+ Appropriation: Association of Internet Researchers, Denver, USA, 23-26 October 2013.
22.
MarwickAEBoydD (2011) I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society13(1): 114–133.
23.
MathieuDVengerfeldtPP (2020) The data loop of media and audience: how audiences and media actors make datafication work. MedieKultur. Journal of Media & Communication Research36(69): 116–138.
24.
Mayer-SchönbergerVCukierK (2013) Big Data: A Revolution that Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
25.
MiaoWChanLS (2021) Domesticating gay apps: an intersectional analysis of the use of blued among Chinese gay men. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication26(1): 38–53.
26.
NobleSU (2018) Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York: New York university press.
27.
Olmos-VegaFMStalmeijerREVarpioL, et al. (2022) A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149. Medical Teacher45(3): 241. DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057287
28.
OysermanDElmoreKSmithG (2012) Self, self-concept, and identity. In: LearyMRTangneyJP (eds). Handbook of Self and Identity. 2nd ed.. NewYork: The Guilford Press, 69–104.
29.
PlodererBReitbergerWOinas-KukkonenH, et al. (2014) Social interaction and reflection for behaviour change. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing18(7): 1667–1676.
SchrageM (2020) Recommendation Engines. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32.
SeaverN (2019) Knowing algorithms. In: VertesiJRibesD (eds). DigitalSTS: A Field Guide for Science & Technology Studies. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 412–422.
33.
SerensenK (2005) Domestication: the enactment of technology. In: BerkerTHartmannMPunieY (eds). The Domestication of Media and Technology. London: McGraw-Hill Education, 40–58.
34.
SilesIEspinoza-RojasJNaranjoA, et al. (2019) The mutual domestication of users and algorithmic recommendations on Netflix. Communication, Culture & Critique12(4): 499–518.
35.
SilverstoneR (1994) Television and Everyday Life. London: Routledge.
36.
SilverstoneRMorleyDDahlbergA, et al. (1989) Families, Technologies and Consumption: The Household and Information and Communication Technologies. CRICT Discussion Paper. Uxbridge, UK: Centre for Research into Innovation, Culture & Technology.
37.
SilverstoneRHirschEMorleyD (1992) Information and communication technologies and the moral economy of the household. In: SilverstoneRHirschE (eds). Consuming Technologies. London: Routledge, 15–31.
38.
SimpsonESemaanB (2021) For you, or for “you”? Everyday LGBTQ+ encounters with TikTok. In: Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW3). New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 1–34.
39.
SimpsonEHamannASemaanB (2022) How to tame “your” algorithm: LGBTQ+ users' domestication of TikTok. In: Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(GROUP). New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 1–27.
40.
Şotİ (2022) Fostering intimacy on TikTok: a platform that ‘listens’ and ‘creates a safe space. Media, Culture & Society44(8): 1490–1507.
41.
StraussACorbinJ (1990) Basics of Qqualitative Rresearch. Newbury Park, California: Sage publications.
42.
StuartF (2018) Reflexivity: introspection, positionality, and the self as research instrument—toward a model of abductive reflexivity. In: JerolmackCKhanS (eds). Approaches to Ethnography: Analysis and Representation in Participant Observation. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 211–237.
43.
SubramaniS (2019) Practising reflexivity: ethics, methodology and theory construction. Methodological Innovations12(2): 1–17.
44.
SujonZVineyLToker-TurnalarE (2018) Domesticating Facebook: the shift from compulsive connection to personal service platform. Social Media+ Society4(4): 2056305118803895.
VelkovaJKaunA (2021) Algorithmic resistance: media practices and the politics of repair. Information, Communication & Society24(4): 523–540.
47.
WangJQuJGLeo-LiuJ (2023) An algorithmically woven community: disclosing mental illness and connecting with similar others on an algorithm-mediated platform in China. Social Media + Society9(4). DOI: 10.1177/20563051231205596.
