skip to main content
10.1145/3565472.3592951acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesumapConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Personalizing Time Loss Aversion to Reduce Social Media Use

Published:19 June 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

This study examines the effectiveness of a novel personalization approach for persuasive and behavior change systems: time loss aversion. Focusing on time instead of money, it influences behavior. Two interventions were developed and tested to reduce daily social media use and boost non-digital activities. Participants received information about their average daily social media use in terms of a week, month, and year, with one intervention offering substitute activities. Among 231 participants, both interventions successfully reduced intentions for future social media use, revealing generational effects, with Gen Zs using social media more than Millennials. These results have practical implications for personalizing interventions that reduce excessive digital engagement.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Elia Abi-Jaoude, Karline Treurnicht Naylor, and Antonio Pignatiello. 2020. Smartphones, social media use and youth mental health. Cmaj 192, 6 (2020), E136–E141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Charu C Aggarwal 2016. Recommender systems. Vol. 1. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Kelly A Allen, Tracii Ryan, DeLeon L Gray, Dennis M McInerney, and Lea Waters. 2014. Social media use and social connectedness in adolescents: The positives and the potential pitfalls. The Educational and Developmental Psychologist 31, 1 (2014), 18–31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Stephanie Alley, Pauline Wellens, Stephanie Schoeppe, Hein de Vries, Amanda L Rebar, Camille E Short, Mitch J Duncan, and Corneel Vandelanotte. 2016. Impact of increasing social media use on sitting time and body mass index. Health Promotion Journal of Australia 28, 2 (2016), 91–95.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Aarif Alutaybi, Dena Al-Thani, John McAlaney, and Raian Ali. 2020. Combating fear of missing out (FoMO) on social media: The fomo-r method. International journal of environmental research and public health 17, 17 (2020), 6128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Cecilie Schou Andreassen, Ståle Pallesen, and Mark D Griffiths. 2017. The relationship between addictive use of social media, narcissism, and self-esteem: Findings from a large national survey. Addictive behaviors 64 (2017), 287–293.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Dan Ariely and Michael I Norton. 2008. How actions create–not just reveal–preferences. Trends in cognitive sciences 12, 1 (2008), 13–16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Hal Ashton and Matija Franklin. 2022. The problem of behaviour and preference manipulation in AI systems. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 3087. CEUR Workshop Proceedings.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Hal Ashton and Matija Franklin. 2022. Solutions to preference manipulation in recommender systems require knowledge of meta-preferences. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.11801 (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Stoney Brooks, Phil Longstreet, and Christopher Califf. 2017. Social media induced technostress and its impact on internet addiction: A distraction-conflict theory perspective. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction 9, 2 (2017), 99–122.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Xiongfei Cao, Xitong Guo, Douglas Vogel, and Xi Zhang. 2016. Exploring the influence of social media on employee work performance. Internet Research (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Seong-Soo Cha and Bo-Kyung Seo. 2018. Smartphone use and smartphone addiction in middle school students in Korea: Prevalence, social networking service, and game use. Health psychology open 5, 1 (2018), 2055102918755046.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Sophia Choukas-Bradley, Savannah R Roberts, Anne J Maheux, and Jacqueline Nesi. 2022. The perfect storm: A developmental–sociocultural framework for the role of social media in adolescent girls’ body image concerns and mental health. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review 25, 4 (2022), 681–701.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Jacob Cohen. 2013. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. David Collins. 2017. Loss aversion bias or fear of missing out: A behavioural economics analysis of compensation in investor–state dispute settlement. Journal of International Dispute Settlement 8, 3 (2017), 460–482.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Katie Davis. 2013. Young people’s digital lives: The impact of interpersonal relationships and digital media use on adolescents’ sense of identity. Computers in Human Behavior 29, 6 (2013), 2281–2293.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Huseyin Dogan, Helmi Norman, Amen Alrobai, Nan Jiang, Norazah Nordin, Anita Adnan, 2019. A web-based intervention for social media addiction disorder management in higher education: Quantitative survey study. Journal of medical Internet research 21, 10 (2019), e14834.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Alexander J Dontre. 2021. The influence of technology on academic distraction: A review. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies 3, 3 (2021), 379–390.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Matija Franklin. 2022. Virtual Spillover of preferences and behavior from extended reality. (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Matija Franklin, Hal Ashton, Rebecca Gorman, and Stuart Armstrong. 2022. Missing Mechanisms of Manipulation in the EU AI Act. In The International FLAIRS Conference Proceedings, Vol. 35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Matija Franklin, Hal Ashton, Rebecca Gorman, and Stuart Armstrong. 2022. Recognising the importance of preference change: A call for a coordinated multidisciplinary research effort in the age of AI. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.10525 (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Ziwei Gao. 2023. Time-Based Addiction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06630 (2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Ziwei Gao. 2023. Time Loss Aversion. In HCI International 2023 Posters: 25th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, HCII 2023. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Renee Garett, Lynwood R Lord, and Sean D Young. 2016. Associations between social media and cyberbullying: a review of the literature. mhealth 2 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Shilpi Gupta and Monica Shrivastava. 2021. Herding and loss aversion in stock markets: mediating role of fear of missing out (FOMO) in retail investors. International Journal of Emerging Markets (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. John Herrman. 2019. How TikTok is rewriting the world. The New York Times 10 (2019), 412586765–1586369711.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Yubo Hou, Dan Xiong, Tonglin Jiang, Lily Song, and Qi Wang. 2019. Social media addiction: Its impact, mediation, and intervention. Cyberpsychology: Journal of psychosocial research on cyberspace 13, 1 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Mathias Jesse and Dietmar Jannach. 2021. Digital nudging with recommender systems: Survey and future directions. Computers in Human Behavior Reports 3 (2021), 100052.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. 2013. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. In Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part I. World Scientific, 99–127.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Jonas Karlsson and Martin Larsson. 2016. Adapting infinite-scroll with the user experience in mind.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Yvonne Kelly, Afshin Zilanawala, Cara Booker, and Amanda Sacker. 2018. Social media use and adolescent mental health: Findings from the UK Millennium Cohort Study. EClinicalMedicine 6 (2018), 59–68.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Eike B Kroll and Bodo Vogt. 2008. Loss aversion for time: an experimental investigation of time preferences. Working Paper Series (2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Ethan Kross, Philippe Verduyn, Gal Sheppes, Cory K Costello, John Jonides, and Oscar Ybarra. 2021. Social media and well-being: Pitfalls, progress, and next steps. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 25, 1 (2021), 55–66.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Linyuan Lü, Matúš Medo, Chi Ho Yeung, Yi-Cheng Zhang, Zi-Ke Zhang, and Tao Zhou. 2012. Recommender systems. Physics reports 519, 1 (2012), 1–49.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Stuart Mills and Henrik Skaug Sætra. 2022. The autonomous choice architect. AI & SOCIETY (2022), 1–13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Minh Hao Nguyen, Moritz Büchi, and Sarah Geber. 2022. Everyday disconnection experiences: Exploring people’s understanding of digital well-being and management of digital media use. new media & society (2022), 14614448221105428.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Behdin Nowrouzi-Kia, Jill Stier, Luma Ayyoub, Lauren Hutchinson, Jamie Laframboise, and Alex Mihailidis. 2021. The Characteristics of Canadian University Students’ Mental Health, Engagement in Activities and Use of Smartphones: A descriptive pilot study. Health Psychology Open 8, 2 (2021), 20551029211062029.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Susanna Paasonen. 2016. Fickle focus: Distraction, affect and the production of value in social media. First Monday (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Theda Radtke, Theresa Apel, Konstantin Schenkel, Jan Keller, and Eike von Lindern. 2022. Digital detox: An effective solution in the smartphone era? A systematic literature review. Mobile Media & Communication 10, 2 (2022), 190–215.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Amit Sharma, Joonho Moon, and Lisa Bailey-Davis. 2018. Loss aversion of time: Serving school lunches faster without impacting meal experience. Ecology of food and nutrition 57, 6 (2018), 456–472.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Bernd Skiera, Oliver Hinz, and Martin Spann. 2015. Social media and academic performance: Does the intensity of Facebook activity relate to good grades?Schmalenbach Business Review 67 (2015), 54–72.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Statista. 2022. Global social networks ranked by number of users 2022. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/ (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Stefan Stieger and David Lewetz. 2018. A week without using social media: Results from an ecological momentary intervention study using smartphones. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 21, 10 (2018), 618–624.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Yalin Sun and Yan Zhang. 2021. A review of theories and models applied in studies of social media addiction and implications for future research. Addictive Behaviors 114 (2021), 106699.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Anushree Tandon, Amandeep Dhir, Intesar Almugren, Ghada Naif AlNemer, and Matti Mäntymäki. 2021. Fear of missing out (FoMO) among social media users: a systematic literature review, synthesis and framework for future research. Internet Research (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Anushree Tandon, Amandeep Dhir, Shalini Talwar, Puneet Kaur, and Matti Mäntymäki. 2022. Social media induced fear of missing out (FoMO) and phubbing: Behavioural, relational and psychological outcomes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 174 (2022), 121149.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Jean M Twenge, Zlatan Krizan, and Garrett Hisler. 2017. Decreases in self-reported sleep duration among US adolescents 2009–2015 and association with new media screen time. Sleep medicine 39 (2017), 47–53.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Emily Weinstein. 2017. Adolescents’ differential responses to social media browsing: Exploring causes and consequences for intervention. Computers in Human Behavior 76 (2017), 396–405.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Eldad Yechiam. 2019. Acceptable losses: The debatable origins of loss aversion. Psychological research 83, 7 (2019), 1327–1339.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Kirsty Young. 2011. Social ties, social networks and the Facebook experience. International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society 9, 1 (2011), 20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Xingchen Zhou, Pei-Luen Patrick Rau, Chi-Lan Yang, and Xiaofei Zhou. 2021. Cognitive behavioral therapy-based short-term abstinence intervention for problematic social media use: Improved well-being and underlying mechanisms. Psychiatric Quarterly 92, 2 (2021), 761–779.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Personalizing Time Loss Aversion to Reduce Social Media Use

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          UMAP '23: Proceedings of the 31st ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization
          June 2023
          333 pages
          ISBN:9781450399326
          DOI:10.1145/3565472

          Copyright © 2023 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 19 June 2023

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate162of633submissions,26%

          Upcoming Conference

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format