It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Social media has become a modern arena for human life, with billions of daily users worldwide. The intense popularity of social media is often attributed to a psychological need for social rewards (likes), portraying the online world as a Skinner Box for the modern human. Yet despite such portrayals, empirical evidence for social media engagement as reward-based behavior remains scant. Here, we apply a computational approach to directly test whether reward learning mechanisms contribute to social media behavior. We analyze over one million posts from over 4000 individuals on multiple social media platforms, using computational models based on reinforcement learning theory. Our results consistently show that human behavior on social media conforms qualitatively and quantitatively to the principles of reward learning. Specifically, social media users spaced their posts to maximize the average rate of accrued social rewards, in a manner subject to both the effort cost of posting and the opportunity cost of inaction. Results further reveal meaningful individual difference profiles in social reward learning on social media. Finally, an online experiment (n = 176), mimicking key aspects of social media, verifies that social rewards causally influence behavior as posited by our computational account. Together, these findings support a reward learning account of social media engagement and offer new insights into this emergent mode of modern human behavior.
Despite the popularity of social media, the psychological processes that drive people to engage in it remain poorly understood. The authors applied a computational modeling approach to data from multiple social media platforms to show that engagement can be explained by mechanisms of reward learning.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details


1 University of Amsterdam, Department of Psychology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.7177.6) (ISNI:0000000084992262)
2 Karolinska Institutet, Center for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Stockholm, Sweden (GRID:grid.4714.6) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0626)
3 Boston University, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Boston, USA (GRID:grid.189504.1) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7558)
4 University of Zürich, Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, Zürich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.7400.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0650)
5 University of Amsterdam, Department of Psychology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.7177.6) (ISNI:0000000084992262); New York University, Department of Psychology, New York, USA (GRID:grid.137628.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8753)