Teenage Uploaders on YouTube: Networked Public Expectancies, Online Feedback Preference, and Received On-Platform Feedback

This article focuses on teenage YouTube uploaders' networked public expectancies when posting a video. These expectancies allow uploaders to cope temporarily with the uncertainty of who exactly will view their video. The results indicate that teenage uploaders strongly expect viewers that are situated close to them in both geographic and socio-demographic terms. Furthermore, we discuss the uncertainty-reducing properties of online feedback. We propose that different types of online feedback are preferred to verify the prior networked public expectancies. An effect of the identified online public expectancy (viewers with a similar interest/activity) is found for the importance of feedback both on the platform (e.g., views, comments) and off the platform (e.g., interaction on a social-network site). The identified offline public expectancy (friends/family) affects the importance attributed to off-platform feedback. Surprisingly, no effect of the unidentified online public expectancy (the general public) was found on on-platform feedback. This finding, in conjunction with the low expectancy of this group, raises the question of whether teenagers either cannot conceive this ambiguous mass public, or, if their expectancies are accurate, whether they are aware of the fact that only a small fraction of the videos on YouTube reach notable popularity. Therefore, in a second study, we test the accuracy of the online networked public expectancies by testing their effects on the longitudinal growth of actual feedback (views, comments, and rates). The results provide modest evidence that teenage uploaders have accurate online public expectancies.

[1]  Hugo Liu,et al.  Social Network Profiles as Taste Performances , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[2]  Angela Thomas.  Youth Online: Identity and Literacy in the Digital Age. New Literacies and Digital Epistemologies. Vol. 19. , 2007 .

[3]  Danah Boyd,et al.  I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience , 2011, New Media Soc..

[4]  D. Boyd.  Taken Out of Context: American Teen Sociality in Networked Publics , 2010 .

[5]  C. Berger,et al.  SOME EXPLORATIONS IN INITIAL INTERACTION AND BEYOND: TOWARD A DEVELOPMENTAL THEORY OF INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION , 1975 .

[6]  Patti M. Valkenburg,et al.  Getting acquainted through social network sites: Testing a model of online uncertainty reduction and social attraction , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[7]  P. Valkenburg,et al.  Consequences for Social Competence and Self-Concept Unity , 2008 .

[8]  R. Schiffer,et al.  INTRODUCTION , 1988, Neurology.

[9]  Eduardo Di Petta.  Henry Jenkins (2006), Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century, Chicago: The MacArthur Foundation , 2012 .

[10]  G. Gonzales,et al.  Information Technologies , 2019, Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies.

[11]  Elisheva F. Gross,et al.  Adolescent Internet use: What we expect, what teens report , 2004 .

[12]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Latent Growth Curve Modeling , 2008 .

[13]  D. Boyd.  Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life , 2007 .

[14]  Henry Jenkins.  Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century , 2006 .

[15]  Lieven De Marez,et al.  Gratifications and Seeding Behavior of Online Adolescents , 2009, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[16]  Patricia G. Lange.  Publicly Private and Privately Public: Social Networking on YouTube , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[17]  Sonia Livingstone,et al.  Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: teenagers' use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression , 2008, New Media Soc..

[18]  Uwe Matzat,et al.  A theory of relational signals in online groups , 2009, New Media Soc..

[19]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[20]  Veronika Kloučková.  Language of the Internet: One Language Variety? , 2010 .

[21]  Frank Nack,et al.  Broadcast yourself on YouTube: really? , 2008, HCC '08.

[22]  Stephanie M. Reich,et al.  Online and Offline Social Networks: Use of Social Networking Sites by Emerging Adults , 2008 .

[23]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[24]  K. L. Schmitt,et al.  Personal homepage construction as an expression of social development. , 2008, Developmental psychology.

[25]  L. Tidwell,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication Effects on Disclosure, Impressions, and Interpersonal Evaluations: Getting to Know One Another a Bit at a Time , 2002 .

[26]  Pablo Rodriguez,et al.  I tube, you tube, everybody tubes: analyzing the world's largest user generated content video system , 2007, IMC '07.

[27]  Bernard C. Y. Tan,et al.  Group Polarization and Computer-Mediated Communication: Effects of Communication Cues, Social Presence, and Anonymity , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[28]  P. Valkenburg,et al.  Adolescents’ identity experiments on the internet , 2005 .

[29]  E. Wenger.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[30]  Brandon Van Der Heide,et al.  How do people really seek information about others?: Information seeking across Internet and traditional communication channels , 2008, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[31]  P. Valkenburg,et al.  Preadolescents' and adolescents' online communication and their closeness to friends. , 2007, Developmental psychology.

[32]  J. Hagel,et al.  The Real Value of Online Communities , 2000 .

[33]  Patti M. Valkenburg,et al.  Characteristics and Motives of Adolescents Talking with Strangers on the Internet , 2006, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..