Are TikTok Algorithms Influencing Users’ Self-Perceived Identities and Personal Values? A Mini Review

Abstract

The use of TikTok is more widespread now than ever, and it has a big impact on users’ daily lives, with self-perceived identity and personal values being topics of interest in light of the algorithmically curated content. This mini-review summarizes current findings related to the TikTok algorithm, and the impact it has on self-perceived identity, personal values, or related concepts of the Self. We pass through the contents of algorithmic literacy and emphasize its importance along with users’ attitudes toward algorithms. In the first part of our results, we show conceptual models of algorithms like the crystal framework, platform spirit, and collective imaginaries. In the second part, we talk about the degree of impact a social media algorithm may exert over an individual’s sense of self, understanding how the algorithmized self and domesticated algorithm are trying to sum up the dual development of this relationship. In the end, with the concept of Personal Engagement and the role of cognitive biases, we summarize the current findings and discuss the questions that still need to be addressed. Performing research on the topic of social media, especially TikTok, poses ethical, cultural, and regulatory challenges for researchers. That is why we will discuss the main theoretical frameworks that were published with their attached current studies and their impact on the current theoretical models as well as the limitations within these studies. Finally, we discuss further topics of interest related to the subject and possible perspectives, as well as recommendations regarding future research in areas like impact on personal values and identity, cognitive biases, and algorithmic literacy.

Susceptibility and Resilience, a Fig Tree and a Scream

“…Surgeon General's Advisory [79]. On the cognitive and mental health impacts, see also Reyman et al [77], Hari [75], Tibber et al [80], Ugwu et al [81], Ionescu et al [82] and Winstone et al [83].…”