ד"ר שיר אתגר
ד"ר אתגר היא חברת סגל בחוג לתקשורת ע"ש דן באוניברסיטת תל אביב משנת 2023. תחום המחקר העיקרי שלה הוא הפסיכולוגיה של תקשורת מתווכת-מחשב, והמחקרים שלה מבוססים על שיטות כמותניות לניתוח נתונים.
בין אם היינו רוצים בכך או שלא, טכנולוגיות חדשות משנות את האופן שבו אנחנו מתקשרים עם אחרים, מבינים אותם, ואפילו חושבים עליהם(!). במחקריה, היא בוחנת את ההשפעות הללו על יחידים ועל מערכות יחסים, בסביבות מקוונות ולא מקוונות.
ספציפית, שאלות המחקר שבהן היא ומעבדת המחקר שלה מתעסקים כיום הן:
איך לייקים ותגובות ברשת משפיעים על השיפוטים החברתיים שלנו? (לדוגמא, האם נתפוס אדם כיותר מתאים לעבודה אם קיבל הרבה תגובות מפרגנות בלינקדאין? ולמה?)
האם שימוש במכשירים טכנולוגיים שונים (לדוגמא, סמארטפונים מול לפטופים) משפיעים שונה על יכולותינו הקוגניטיביות?
מדוע מערכות היחסים שלנו עם אנשים בסביבתנו נפגעות כשאנחנו משתמשים בטכנולוגיות בקרבתם? ומה ניתן לעשות כדי לצמצם את הפגיעה?
בכדי לחקור את השאלות האלו, ד"ר אתגר משתמשת משתמשת בשיטות כמותניות שונות, כולל מולטילבל מודלינג, מודלים ביסיאניים, ניתוחים דיאדיים, מטא-אנליזות, ופקטור אנלסיס.
Dr. Shir Etgar
Dr. Etgar is a faculty member at the DAN Department of Communication, Tel Aviv University. Her research focuses on how computer-mediated communication (CMC) impacts individuals' social-cognitive processes and social relationships. Whether we like it or not, our day-to-day behaviors and social interactions have massively changed in the last two decades, with the widespread adoption of computers, smartphones, and social network sites. Her research captures the impact of these rapid changes on the different ways in which individuals construct and interpret their online and offline environments, with the goal of improving individuals' social information processing in the current technological era.
She explores those interrelated influences between computer-mediated communication and the individual using varied quantitative research methods, including Bayesian models, multilevel models, dyadic studies, machine learning approaches, experiments, and correlational studies.
Specifically, she is currently interested in the following questions:
How does online engagement (e.g., likes, comments) affect our social judgments? (For instance, would we perceive a person as more qualified if s/he received many supportive comments on LinkedIn? And why?)
Can using different technological devices (for example, smartphones vs. laptops) affect our cognitive abilities differently?
Why is face-to-face relationship harmed when people use devices in the presence of each other? And what should we do to reduce the damage?
מחקר
ניתוח השפעתם של מודלים עסקיים של מדיה חברתית על התפשטות תוכן מקטב והקצנה (באנגלית)
קבוצת מחקר:
דמוגרפיה וחוסן
The significant role played by social media platforms in amplifying the reach of disinformation and radicalizing content is by now a well-known fact (Belfer Center and Shorenstein Center, 2023). It is also clear that alongside ideological motivations, the creation and spreading of such information is a lucrative business (Bruce et al., 2023). However, how the business models of social media platforms, and specifically their monetization schemes, impact the dissemination of radicalizing content is less understood. This lacuna poses a challenge to the development of effective governance mechanisms aimed at mitigating societal polarization and radicalization (Ruiz, 2023). To address this gap and develop possible remedies for this problem, we plan to unpack the nexus of platform monetization policies, content creators' monetization strategies and the strategies of users when it comes to the creation and dissemination of the radicalizing content. Our theoretical foundation rests on the principle-agent framework, which “models the interactions between an agent, who can influence the probability of an outcome by incurring costly effort, and a principal, who has preferences over the outcome” (Khan & Wright, 2021). In the present case, two specific types of interactions are pertinent. First, the platform might be viewed as an agent possessing the capability but lacking the motivation to implement costly preventive measures against the dissemination of the radicalizing content (DeCook et al., 2022; Santini et al., 2023); a regulator assumes the role of the principal, striving to strike a balance between the monetary (e.g., costs) and non-monetary (e.g., impact on democracy) effects associated with these precautions and the damage inflicted by such content (Khan & Wright, 2021). The problem is expressed in Frances Haugen, a former Facebook manager, testimony before the US Senate Commerce Committee: “Facebook repeatedly chose to maximize online engagement instead of minimizing harm to users.” Secondly, platforms themselves also act as principals, regulating the actions of the content creators (agents) operating on their platforms. Different business strategies can be thought of as offering various trade-offs between financial gains and the harm caused by the spread of radicalizing content.
Research
Analyzing the Influence of Social Media Business Models on the Proliferation of Polarizing and Radicalizing Content
Research Group:
Demography and Resilience
The significant role played by social media platforms in amplifying the reach of disinformation and radicalizing content is by now a well-known fact (Belfer Center and Shorenstein Center, 2023). It is also clear that alongside ideological motivations, the creation and spreading of such information is a lucrative business (Bruce et al., 2023). However, how the business models of social media platforms, and specifically their monetization schemes, impact the dissemination of radicalizing content is less understood. This lacuna poses a challenge to the development of effective governance mechanisms aimed at mitigating societal polarization and radicalization (Ruiz, 2023). To address this gap and develop possible remedies for this problem, we plan to unpack the nexus of platform monetization policies, content creators' monetization strategies and the strategies of users when it comes to the creation and dissemination of the radicalizing content. Our theoretical foundation rests on the principle-agent framework, which “models the interactions between an agent, who can influence the probability of an outcome by incurring costly effort, and a principal, who has preferences over the outcome” (Khan & Wright, 2021). In the present case, two specific types of interactions are pertinent. First, the platform might be viewed as an agent possessing the capability but lacking the motivation to implement costly preventive measures against the dissemination of the radicalizing content (DeCook et al., 2022; Santini et al., 2023); a regulator assumes the role of the principal, striving to strike a balance between the monetary (e.g., costs) and non-monetary (e.g., impact on democracy) effects associated with these precautions and the damage inflicted by such content (Khan & Wright, 2021). The problem is expressed in Frances Haugen, a former Facebook manager, testimony before the US Senate Commerce Committee: “Facebook repeatedly chose to maximize online engagement instead of minimizing harm to users.” Secondly, platforms themselves also act as principals, regulating the actions of the content creators (agents) operating on their platforms. Different business strategies can be thought of as offering various trade-offs between financial gains and the harm caused by the spread of radicalizing content.