The Practice of Negative-performancism: A Study Based on the Digital Hoarding Behavior of Young People in Social Platforms

ZHU Lili, JIANG Hongli

Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2024, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (6) : 154-176.

PDF(1773 KB)
PDF(1773 KB)
Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2024, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (6) : 154-176.
Research Articles

The Practice of Negative-performancism: A Study Based on the Digital Hoarding Behavior of Young People in Social Platforms

Author information +
History +

Abstract

This study redefines the concept of digital hoarding from the perspective of communication and explores the psychological motivation associated with digital hoarding among young people through in-depth interviews. The research found that digital content hoarded by youth groups on social platforms pointed to “useful” self-optimization practices and “interesting” digital experience practices, the former stems from anxiety about coping with the dual performance of social space and real-life in the rat race, while the latter points to the need for positive emotional energy. We believe that the current widespread digital hoarding among young people is a kind of passive performance-oriented practice in the form of compliance and action laziness, and its psychological drive is the superposition effect of auto-exploitation and allo-exploitation, it can also be seen as a swaying practice of “enterprising lying flat” under the shadow of utilitarianism, which reflects the inner contradictions in the feelings and behaviors of the youth group. We need to be alert to the “suspension” mentality behind digital hoarding. Digital hoarding has the potential to magnify the risks of digital practices getting off track with reality. Beyond this case study, we need to continue to reflect on how the practice of negative-performancism based digital hoarding can address and whitewash the structuralism dilemmas of today’s society.

Key words

digital hoarding / negative-performancism / emotional circulation / suspension / enterprising lying-flat

Cite this article

Download Citations
ZHU Lili , JIANG Hongli. The Practice of Negative-performancism: A Study Based on the Digital Hoarding Behavior of Young People in Social Platforms[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2024, 46(6): 154-176

References

[1]
蔡永红, 林崇德(2001). 绩效评估研究的现状及其反思. 《北京师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,(4),119-126.
[2]
程思琪, 喻国明(2020). 情感体验: 一种促进媒体消费的新动力——试论过剩传播时代的新传播范式. 《编辑之友》,(5),32-37.
[3]
付茜茜(2022). 从“内卷”到“躺平”:现代性焦虑与青年亚文化审思. 《青年探索》,(2),80-90.
[4]
哈特穆特·罗萨(2013/2018). 《新异化的诞生——社会加速批判理论大纲》(郑作彧译). 上海: 上海人民出版社.
[5]
韩炳哲(2011/2019). 《暴力拓扑学》(安尼,马琰译). 北京: 中信出版集团.
[6]
韩炳哲(2014/2019). 《精神政治学》(关玉红译). 北京: 中信出版社.
[7]
韩炳哲(2015/2019). 《在群中》(程巍译). 北京: 中信出版社.
[8]
韩炳哲(2016/2019). 《倦怠社会》(王一力译). 北京: 中信出版集团.
[9]
话媒书会(2021). 项飚:“悬浮”——现在的一切,都是为了未来, 但未来在哪里?检索于 https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/H8Gv-x3dMBd_CaJEDFzBMQ.
[10]
贾明霞, 徐跃权, 赵宇翔(2022). 大学生数字囤积行为的探索性研究——基于个人信息管理视角. 《图书情报工作》,(10),74-88.
[11]
兰德尔·柯林斯(2005/2016). 《互动仪式链》(林聚任,王鹏,宋丽娟译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
[12]
蓝江(2022). 功绩社会下的倦怠:内卷和焦虑现象的社会根源. 《理论月刊》,(7),5-11.
[13]
理查德·桑内特(2003/2014). 《公共人的衰落》(李继宏译). 上海: 上海译文出版社.
[14]
令小雄, 李春丽(2022). “躺平主义”的文化构境、叙事症候及应对策略. 《新疆师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,(2),124-139.
[15]
刘天元, 贾煜(2023). 青年群体数字囤积行为的形成机理及其结果效应——基于内部动因视角的分析. 《中国青年研究》,(2),93-100.
[16]
迈克·费瑟斯通(1990/2000). 《消费文化与后现代主义》(刘精明译). 江苏: 译林出版社.
[17]
尼克·库尔德利(2012/2014). 《媒介、社会与世界:社会理论与数字媒介实践》(何道宽译). 上海: 复旦大学出版社.
[18]
齐格蒙特·鲍曼(1998/2021). 《工作、消费主义和新穷人》(郭楠译). 上海: 社会科学院出版社.
[19]
全媒派(2021). 人人都是数字仓鼠:我们为何越来越喜欢将信息存储到网上?检索于 https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/l-YXDzdsYbycOxZcsEYNaA.
[20]
斯塔夫里阿诺斯(1998/2020). 《全球通史:从史前到21世纪(上册)》(吴象婴,梁赤民译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
[21]
斯图亚特·霍尔, 托尼·杰斐逊(2002/2015). 《通过仪式抵抗:战后英国的青年亚文化》(孟登迎,胡疆锋,王蕙译). 北京: 中国青年出版社.
[22]
孙亮(2020). 马克思主义政治经济学批判语境中的“精神政治学”. 《求索》,(4),63-71.
[23]
孙亮洁, 刘明明(2020). 论齐泽克对韩炳哲“自我剥削”理论的批判及对共产主义的辩护. 《天府新论》,(6),10-19.
[24]
孙信茹(2016). 微信的“书写”与“勾连”——对一个普米族村民微信群的考察. 《新闻与传播研究》,(10),6-24+126.
[25]
托马斯·古德尔, 杰弗瑞·戈比(1988/1999). 《人类思想史中的休闲》(成素梅,马惠娣,季斌,冯世梅译). 昆明: 云南人民出版社.
[26]
王斌(2022). 平台社会的主体化模式危机:理解“躺平”情绪的新视角. 《当代青年研究》,(6),59-66+77.
[27]
温旭(2022). 从数字异化到数字共鸣:数字资本主义社会加速的双重幻象——以罗萨的社会加速批判理论为视角. 《新闻界》,(9),55-65.
[28]
吴飞(2015). 共情传播的理论基础与实践路径探索. 《新闻与传播研究》,(5),59-76+127.
[29]
吴旭瑶, 黄旭, 李静(2021). 数字囤积行为量表的编制及信效度检验. 《心理技术与应用》,(2),116-125.
[30]
吴旭瑶, 李静(2021). 信息时代的“数字占有”——数字囤积及其相关研究. 《心理科学》,(4),800-806.
[31]
新周刊(2019). 你在朋友圈又佛又丧, 却在收藏夹天天向上.检索于 https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/0RZwUKtUGYstBuayKO8DA.
[32]
袁光锋(2022). 增值、转化与创造边界:论数字媒介时代的情感流通. 《南京社会科学》,(9),110-119.
[33]
袁光锋(2023). 《情的力量——公共生活中的情感政治》. 江苏: 江苏人民出版社.
[34]
朱丽丽, 李慕琰(2017). 数字体验主义:基于社交网络的青年群体生活风格. 《新闻记者》,(9),34-42.
[35]
Bernardin H. J., & Beatty R. W. (1984). Performance appraisal:Assessing human behavior at work. Boston, MA: Kent Publishing Company.
[36]
Borman W. C., & Brush D. H. (1993). More progress toward a taxonomy of managerial performance requirements. Human Performance, 6(1), 1-21.
[37]
Borman W. C., White L. A., & Dorsey D. W. (1995). Effects of ratee task performance and interpersonal factors on supervisor and peer performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(1), 168.
[38]
Bozacıa İ., & Gökdeniza İ. (2020). Development of a digital photo hoarding scale: A research with undergraduate students. Management Science Letters, 10, 2193-2200.
[39]
Campbell J. P., McCloy R. A., Oppler S. H., & Sager C. E. (1993). A theory of performance. Personnel Selection in Organizations, 3570, 35-70.
[40]
Chen A. (2014). Disorder: Vocabularies of hoarding in personal digital archiving practices. Archivaria, 78, 115-134.
[41]
Conway J. M. (1999). Distinguishing contextual performance from task performance for managerial jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 3.
[42]
Devos S., Schreurs L., Eggermont S., & Vandenbosch L. (2023). Go big or go home: Examining the longitudinal relations between exposure to successful portrayals on social media and adolescents’ feelings of discrepancy. New Media & Society, DOI: 14614448231188935.
[43]
Hulber C. (2020). Digital collection: What makes it different from digital hoarding. Master dissertation, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham.
[44]
Husen T. (1985). The school in the achievement-oriented society: Crisis and reform. The Phi Delta Kappan, 66(6), 398-402.
[45]
Mayer-Schönberger V. (2011). Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age. Princeton University Press.
[46]
Miller D., & Wang X. (2021). Introduction: Smartphone-based visual normativity: Approaches from digital anthropology and communication studies. Global Media and China, 6(3), 251-258.
[47]
Neave N., Briggs P., McKellar K., & Sillence E. (2019). Digital hoarding behaviours: Measurement and evaluation. Computers in Human Behavior, 96, 72-77.
[48]
Ngai S. (2008). Merely interesting. Critical Inquiry, 34(4), 777-817.
[49]
Nordsletten A. E., de la Cruz L. F., Pertusa A., Reichenberg A., Hatch S. L., & Mataix-Cols D. (2013). The Structured Interview for Hoarding Disorder (SIHD): development, usage and further validation. Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders, 2(3), 346-350.
[50]
Organ D. W. (1994). Personality and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Management, 20(2), 465-478.
[51]
Przybylski A. K., Murayama K., DeHaan C. R., & Gladwell V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in human behavior, 29(4), 1841-1848.
[52]
Qian J. (2017). Re-visioning the public in post-reform urban China:Poetics and politics in Guangzhou. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
[53]
Scheer M. (2012). Are emotions a kind of practice (and is that what makes them have a history)? A Bourdieuian approach to understanding emotion. History and Theory, 51(2), 193-220.
[54]
Schüll N. D. (2018). Digital containment and its discontents. History and Anthropology, 29(1), 42-48.
[55]
Schulze G. (1992). Die erlebnisgesellschaft: Kultursoziologie der gegenwart. Frankfurt am Main, DE: Campus-Verllag.
[56]
Sedera D., Lokuge S., & Grover V. (2022). Modern-day hoarding: A model for understanding and measuring digital hoarding. Information & Management, 59(8), 103700.
[57]
Sonnentag S., & Frese M. (2002). Performance concepts and performance theory. Psychological Management of Individual Performance, 23(1), 3-25.
[58]
Su C. (2020). Give or keep? A transactive memory approach to understanding knowledge hoarding on the organisational digital knowledge repository. International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies, 11(1), 41-58.
[59]
Sweeten G., Sillence E., & Neave N. (2018). Digital hoarding behaviours: Underlying motivations and potential negative consequences. Computers in Human Behavior, 85, 54-60.
[60]
Tchividjian T. (2013). One way love: Inexhaustible grace for an exhausted world. Colorado Springs, CO: David C Cook.
[61]
Timpano K. R., Çek D., Fu Z. F., Tang T., Wang J. P., & Chasson G. S. (2015). A consideration of hoarding disorder symptoms in China. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 57, 36-45.
[62]
Uğur N. G., & Çalışkan K. (2022). Time for De-cluttering: Digital clutter scaling for individuals and enterprises. Computers & Security, 119, 102751.
[63]
Van Bennekom M. J., Blom R. M., Vulink N., & Denys D. (2015). A case of digital hoarding. Case Reports, DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2015-210814.
[64]
Van Scotter J. R., & Motowidlo S. J. (1996). Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate facets of contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 525.
[65]
Vannevar Bush (1945). As We May Think. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/303881/.
[66]
Vitale F., Janzen I., & McGrenere J. (2018, April). Hoarding and minimalism:Tendencies in digital data preservation. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Montreal.
[67]
Xiang B. (2021). Suspension: Seeking agency for change in the hypermobile world. Pacific Affairs, 94(2), 233-250.

Footnotes

1. 需要指出的是,韩炳哲所谓的“功绩社会”“绩效”的原文对应的是《倦怠社会》中的德文“leistungsgesellschaft”和“leistung”,英译版图书《The burnout society》中将其译为“achievement society”。在中文译本中出现了不同的译法:前者多译为“绩效社会”“功绩社会”,后者译为“绩效”“表现”“产出”等,为了不造成理解上的含混,同时考量译法传播的接受度,本文统一采用“功绩社会”“绩效”的译法。

2. 经统计,17位受访者在8大平台约囤积12615条数字内容,平均每位受访者约囤积823条数字内容,其中受访者F5囤积数最多,达到2466条,M5囤积数最少,为68条。受访人最常囤积数字内容的八大社交平台为b站、微信、小红书、抖音、豆瓣、知乎、QQ、微博。其中,由于微信、微博、抖音等社交平台的收藏功能均不显示内容总数,因此受访者只能提供自己估算的在这些平台中囤积的数字内容概数,其他平台则是截止到正式访谈开始前的确数。受访者持有数字内容总数的计算方式是将他们自述的不同社交平台对应的概数和确数加和。

3. OKR(Objectives and Key Results),全称目标和关键成果,是一套明确和跟踪目标及其完成情况的管理工具和方法。

4. KPI(Key Performance Indicator),全称企业关键绩效指标,是通过对组织内部流程的输入端、输出端的关键参数进行设置、取样、计算、分析,衡量流程绩效的一种目标式量化管理指标。

5. 360环评又称为全方位考评方法,一种通过自己的上级、同级、下级以及自身进行的多个维度能力的全方位评价体系。

Funding

The article is a phased achievement of the General Project of National Social Science Fund of China “Research on multiple mechanisms and collaborative governance of fandom organization from a platform perspective”(23BXW116)
PDF(1773 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/