This study demonstrates how localization and homogenization can co-occur in different aspects of smartphone usage. Smartphones afford individualization of media behavior: users can begin, end, or switch between countless tasks anytime, but this individualization is shaped by shared environments such that smartphone usage may be similar among those who share such environments but contain differences, or localization, across environments or regions. Yet for all users, smartphone screen interactions are bounded and guided by nearly identical smartphone interfaces, suggesting that smartphone usage may be similar or homogenized across all individuals regardless of environment. We study homogenization and localization by comparing the temporal, visual, and experiential composition of screen activity among individuals in three dissimilar media environments—the United States, China, and Myanmar—using one week of screenshot data captured passively every 5 s by the novel Screenomics framework. We find that overall usage levels are consistently dissimilar across media environments, while metrics that depend more on moment-level decisions and user-interface design do not vary significantly across media environments. These results suggest that quantitative research on homogenization and localization should analyze behavior driven by user interfaces and by contextually determined parameters, respectively.
BagozziR. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 3. 10.17705/1jais.00122
2.
BagozziR. P.DavisF. D.WarshawP. R. (1992). Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations, 45(7), 659–686. 10.1177/001872679204500702
3.
BaronN. S.SegerstadY. H. (2010). Cross-cultural patterns in mobile-phone use: Public space and reachability in Sweden, the USA and Japan. New Media & Society, 12(1), 13–34. 10.1177/1461444809355111
4.
BoaseJ.LingR. (2013). Measuring mobile phone use: Self-report versus log data. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(4), 508–519. 10.1111/jcc4.12021
5.
BrinbergM.RamN.YangX.ChoM. J.SundarS. S.RobinsonT. N.ReevesB. (2020). The idiosyncrasies of everyday digital lives: Using the human screenome project to study user behavior on smartphones. Computers in Human Behavior, 114(106570), 106570. 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106570
6.
CampbellS. W. (2007). A cross-cultural comparison of perceptions and uses of mobile telephony. New Media & Society, 9(2), 343–363. 10.1177/1461444807075016
7.
ChoM. J. (2020). Media Production Behavior on Smartphones: Time, Content, Structure, and Context.
8.
GogginG. (2010). Global mobile media. Routledge.
9.
GuérinJ.GibaruO.ThieryS.NyiriE. (2017). CNN Features are also great at unsupervised classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.01700
10.
HarariG. M.LaneN. D.WangR.CrosierB. S.CampbellA. T.GoslingS. D. (2016). Using smartphones to collect behavioral data in psychological science: Opportunities, practical considerations, and challenges. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(6), 838–854. 10.1177/1745691616650285
11.
HoskinsC.MirusR. (1988). Reasons for the US dominance of the international trade in television programmes. Media, Culture and Society, 10(4), 499–515.
12.
HumphreysL.KarnowskiV.von PapeT. (2018). Smartphones as metamedia: A framework for identifying the niches structuring smartphone use. International Journal of Communication, 12, 17. 1932–8036/20180005
JenkinsH. (2004). The cultural logic of media convergence. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 7(1), 33–43. 10.1177/1367877904040603
15.
JensenK. B. (2011). Meta-media and meta-communication—revisiting the concept of genre in the digital media environment. MedieKultur: Journal of Media and Communication Research, 27(51), 14. 10.7146/mediekultur.v27i51.4032
16.
JooJ.Steinert-ThrelkeldZ. C.LuoJ. (2018-10). Social and political event analysis based on rich media. Proceedings of the 26th ACM international conference on multimedia, 2093–2095.
17.
KangH.SundarS. S. (2016). When self is the source: Effects of media customization on message processing. Media Psychology, 19(4), 561–588. 10.1080/15213269.2015.1121829
18.
KapposA.RivardS. (2008). A three-perspective model of culture, information systems, and their development and use. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 601–634. 10.2307/25148858
19.
KaunA.FornäsJ.EricsonS. (2016). Media times: mediating time—temporalizing media: Introduction. International Journal of Communication, 10(7). 1932–8036/20160005
20.
KayA.GoldbergA. (1977). Personal dynamic media. Computer, 10(3), 31–41. 10.1109/C-M.1977.217672
21.
KellerW. (2002). Geographic localization of international technology diffusion. American Economic Review, 92(1), 120–142. 10.1257/000282802760015630
22.
KingG.PanJ.RobertsM. E. (2013). How censorship in China allows government criticism but silences collective expression. American Political Science Review, 107(2), 326–343. :10.1017/S0003055413000014
23.
KingG.PanJ.RobertsM. E. (2014). Reverse-engineering censorship in China: Randomized experimentation and participant observation. Science (6199), 891–891. 10.1126/science.1251722
24.
KobayashiT.BoaseJ. (2012). No such effect? The implications of measurement error in self-report measures of mobile communication use. Communication Methods and Measures, 6(2), 126–143. 10.1080/19312458.2012.679243
25.
LangleyP.LeyshonA. (2017). Platform capitalism: The intermediation and capitalisation of digital economic circulation. Finance and Society, 3(1), 11–31. 10.2218/finsoc.v3i1.1936
26.
LeongL. (2017). Mobile Myanmar: The development of a mobile app culture in Yangon. Mobile Media & Communication, 5(2), 139–160. 10.1177/2050157917689950
27.
LinY. H.LinY. C.LeeY. H.LinP. H.LinS. H.ChangL. R.TsengH. W.YenL. Y.YangC. H.KuoB. J. (2015). Time distortion associated with smartphone addiction: Identifying smartphone addiction via a mobile application (App). Journal of psychiatric research, 65, 139–145. 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.04.003
28.
LingR.PanchapakesanC.AricatR.OregliaE.LwinM. O. (2017). Mobile communication in Myanmar. In GogginG.McLellandM. (Eds.), The Routledge companion to global internet histories (pp. 296–310). Routledge.
29.
MansellR. (2012). Imagining the internet: Communication, innovation, and governance. Oxford University Press.
30.
MansellR. (2017). Imaginaries, values and trajectories: A critical reflection on the internet. In GogginG.McLellandM. (Eds.), The Routledge companion to global internet histories (pp. 23–33). Routledge.
31.
ManteE. (2002). The Netherlands and the USA compared. In Katz andJ.AakhusM. (Eds.), Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance (pp. 110–125). Cambridge University Press.
32.
MehrotraA.MüllerS. R.HarariG. M.GoslingS. D.MascoloC.MusolesiM.RentfrowP. J. (2017). Understanding the role of places and activities on mobile phone interaction and usage patterns. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 1(3), 84. 10.1145/3131901
33.
MontagC.BeckerB.GanC. (2018). The multipurpose application WeChat: A review on recent research. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02247
34.
OulasvirtaA.RattenburyT.MaL.RaitaE. (2012). Habits make smartphone use more pervasive. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 16(1), 105–114. 10.1007/s00779-011-0412-2
35.
OulasvirtaA.TamminenS.RotoV.KuorelahtiJ. (2005, April). Interaction in 4-s bursts: The fragmented nature of attentional resources in mobile HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 919–928). ACM.
36.
PalumboL.OgdenR.MakinA. D.BertaminiM. (2014). Examining visual complexity and its influence on perceived duration. Journal of Vision, 14, 3–3. 10.1167/14.14.3
37.
PengT. Q.ZhouY.ZhuJ. J. (2020). From filled to empty time intervals: Quantifying online behaviors with digital traces. Communication Methods and Measures, 14(4), 1–20. 10.1080/19312458.2020.1812556
38.
PengY. (2021). What makes politicians’ Instagram posts popular? Analyzing social media strategies of candidates and office holders with computer vision. International Journal of Press/Politics, 26(1), 143–166. 10.1177/1940161220964769
39.
PostillJ. (2008). Localizing the internet beyond communities and networks. New Media & Society, 10(3), 413–431. 10.1177/1461444808089416
40.
PriceM. E. (2002). Media and sovereignty: The global information revolution and its challenge to state power. MIT press.
41.
PunathambekarA.MohanS. (2019). Digital platforms, globalization and culture. In CurranJames & HesmondhalghDavid (Eds.), Media and Society (6th, pp. 207–226).
42.
QinX.TanC. W.LawE. L. C.BødkerM.ClemmensenT.QuH.ChenD. (2018, April). Deciphering the role of context in shaping mobile phone usage: Design recommendations for context-aware mobile services from a cross-cultural perspective. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium of Chinese CHI (pp. 39-48). ACM.
43.
ReevesB.RamN.RobinsonT. N.CummingsJ. J.GilesC. L.PanJ.ChiattiA.ChoM. J.RoehrickK.YangX.GagnejaA.BrinbergM.MuiseD.LuY.LuoM.FitzgeraldA.YeykelisL. (2021). Screenomics: A framework to capture and analyze personal life experiences and the ways that technology shapes them. Human–Computer Interaction, 36(2), 150–201. 10.1080/07370024.2019.1578652
44.
ReevesB.RobinsonT. N.RamN. (2020). Time for the human screenome project. Nature, 577, 314–317. 10.1038/d41586-020-00032-5
45.
ReevesB.ThorsonE.SchleuderJ. (1985). Attention to television: psychological theories and chronometric measures. Perspectives on Media Effects, 27(3-4), 251–279. 10.3109/00207458509149770
46.
RothschildM. L.ThorsonE.ReevesB.HirschJ. E.GoldsteinR. (1986). EEG Activity and the processing of television commercials. Communication Research, 13(2), 182–220. 10.1177/009365086013002003
47.
SchillerH. (1976). Communication and cultural domination. ME Sharpe.
48.
ScholzF. W.StephensM. A. (1987). K-sample Anderson–Darling tests. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(399), 918–924. 10.1.1.1087.8833
49.
ShannonC. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379–423. 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x
50.
ShepardC.RahmatiA.TossellC.ZhongL.KortumP. (2011). LiveLab: measuring wireless networks and smartphone users in the field. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 38(3), 15–20.
51.
SimonyanK.ZissermanA. (2014). Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556 arXiv:1409.1556
52.
SmithC. L.KantorP. B. (2008, July). User adaptation: Good results from poor systems. In Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 147–154). Association for Computing Machinery .
53.
SparksC. (2012). Media and cultural imperialism reconsidered. Chinese Journal of Communication, 5(3), 281–299. 10.1080/17544750.2012.701417
StephensM. A. (1974). EDF statistics for goodness of fit and some comparisons. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 69(347), 730–737. 2286009
57.
SundarS. S.OhJ. (2019). Psychological effects of interactive media technologies: A human–computer interaction (HCI) perspective. In M. B. Oliver, A. A. Raney, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research (4th ed., pp. 357–372). Routledge.
58.
TanejaH.WuA. X. (2014). Does the great firewall really isolate the Chinese? Integrating access blockage with cultural factors to explain web user behavior. Information Society, 30(5), 297–309. 10.1080/01972243.2014.944728
59.
TuchA. N.Bargas-AvilaJ. A.OpwisK.WilhelmF. H. (2009). Visual complexity of websites: effects on users’ experience, physiology, performance, and memory. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 67(9), 703–715. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.04.002
60.
TurowJ. (2011). Media today: An introduction to mass communication. Taylor & Francis.
61.
Van AlstyneM.BrynjolfssonE. (2005). Global village or cyber-Balkans? Modeling and measuring the integration of electronic communities. Management Science, 51(6), 851–868. 10.1287/mnsc.1050.0363
62.
van BerkelN.LuoC.AnagnostopoulosT.FerreiraD.GoncalvesJ.HosioS.KostakosV. (2016). A systematic assessment of smartphone usage gaps. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 4711-4721). ACM.
63.
WestS. (2019). Data capitalism: Redefining the logics of surveillance and privacy. Business and society, 58(1), 20–41. 10.1177/0007650317718185
64.
WuA. X.TanejaH. (2016). Reimagining internet geographies: A user-centric ethnological mapping of the world wide Web. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(3), 230–246. 10.1111/jcc4.12157
65.
YangX.RamN.RobinsonT.ReevesB. (2019). Using screenshots to predict task switching on smartphones. Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–6.
66.
YeykelisL.CummingsJ. J.ReevesB. (2014). Multitasking on a single device: Arousal and the frequency, anticipation, and prediction of switching between media content on a computer. Journal of Communication, 64(1), 167–192. 10.1111/jcom.12070
67.
YuH. (2017). Social imaginaries of the internet in China. In GogginG.McLellandM. (Eds.), The Routledge companion to global internet histories (pp. 296–309). Routledge.
68.
ZhangH.PanJ. (2019). CASM: A Deep-Learning Approach for Identifying Collective Action Events with Text and Image Data from Social Media. Sociological Methodology, 49(1), 1–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0081175019860244
69.
ZhengX. S.ChakrabortyI.LinJ. J. W.RauschenbergerR. (2009, April). Correlating low-level image statistics with users-rapid aesthetic and affective judgments of web pages. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-10). Association for Computing Machinery.
70.
ZhuJ. J.ChenH.PengT. Q.LiuX. F.DaiH. (2018). How to measure sessions of mobile phone use? Quantification, evaluation, and applications. Mobile Media & Communication, 6(2), 215–232. 10.1177/2050157917748351
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
