Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Society for Journalism & Communication (KSJCS)
[ Article ]
Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication - Vol. 68, No. 6, pp.217-250
ISSN: 2586-7369 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Dec 2024
Received 01 Aug 2024 Revised 26 Nov 2024 Accepted 28 Nov 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2024.68.6.006

유튜브 추천 알고리즘 개인화가 이용자 온라인 커뮤니케이션에 미치는 영향 : 맞춤화 정보 이용과 선택적 노출 효과를 중심으로

전창영** ; 노기영***
**한림대학교 디지털콘텐츠융합스쿨 연구교수 cyjeon8@gmail.com
***한림대학교 미디어스쿨 교수 gnoh@hallym.ac.kr
Impacts of Personalized YouTube Recommendation Algorithms on Users’ Online Communication : Focusing on Customized Information Use and Selective Exposure Effects
Chang Young Jeon** ; Ghee Young Noh***
**Research Professor, Digital Content School, Hallym University cyjeon8@gmail.com
***Distinguished Professor, Media School, Hallym University gnoh@hallym.ac.kr

초록

본 연구는 최근 미디어 정보 환경의 특징인 맞춤화와 개인화 정보이용방식과 선택적 노출 유형이 유튜브 이용자의 온라인상 의견표현과 어떠한 관계를 보이는지 검증하였다. 구체적으로 본 연구에서는 유튜브 알고리즘 추천 영상을 이용하는 경우에도 선택적 노출 현상을 증가시키는지 혹은 다양한 관점의 정보에 대한 교차 노출(cross-cutting exposure)로 이어지는지 등 복합적인 관점에서 유튜브 정보 이용을 조명하였다. 특히 맞춤화(customization) 과정을 독립적인 과정으로 배제하는 것이 아닌 개인화(personalization) 과정과 함께 일어날 수 있음을 고려하고, 유튜브 신뢰도와 정치정향성 등 선행요인을 함께 고려해서 탐색하였다. 분석결과, 유튜브 공간에서 이용자들이 의견을 표현해서 여론을 형성하는 메커니즘은 다양한 경로와 여러 요인들의 복합적인 방식으로 작동하였다. 구독 채널 위주의 정보를 주로 소비하는 이용자 맞춤화는 유튜브 영상에 좋아요·싫어요 클릭과 댓글 작성 등을 통해 활발하게 의견을 표현하였다. 동시에 유튜브 알고리즘을 통해 우연적으로 이견에 노출되거나 스스로 자신과 다른 관점의 정보들을 탐색하는 이용자들도 댓글 작성을 활발하게 하고, 소셜미디어를 통한 정보 공유에 적극적인 것으로 나타났다. 궁극적으로 본 연구를 통하여 필터버블, 에코챔버와 같이 유튜브에는 부정적 효과만이 존재하는 것이 아님이 검증되었다. 이에 기반하여 여러 토픽과 복합적인 관점의 정보가 존재하는 유튜브 공간에서는 우연적이든 의도적이든 다양한 영상에 노출될 수 있으며 이를 지혜롭게 활용한다면 민주주의 사회에서 식견있는 시민을 양성하는 공론장으로서 만들 수 있을 것임을 제안하였다. 결론적으로 본 연구는 기존 온라인 미디어 환경과 다른 유튜브 정보 이용환경 속에서의 복합적인 커뮤니케이션 메커니즘을 탐색하며 이론적·실무적으로 유의미한 결과를 제공했다고 볼 수 있다. 유튜브는 이용자가 어떻게 이용하느냐에 따라 필터 버블이 될 수도, 새로운 대안 공론장이 될 수도 있다. 본 연구 결과는 유튜브 리터러시에 대한 중요성이 갈수록 커지는 이유를 뒷받침해준다. 구체적으로 구독 채널 위주의 정보만을 소비하는 이용자들은 메시지의 질적 수준보다 채널 자체에 대한 신뢰도와 충성도, 내적친밀감 등에 기반해 적극적인 행동성향을 보이는 것으로 추론할 수 있다. 맹목적이고 수동적인 태도로 유튜브 정보를 받아들이게 되면 기존 연구들에서 우려한 것처럼 에코 챔버, 필터 버블 등의 현상에 갇힐 수 있다. 그러나 정반대로 유튜브 추천 알고리즘 개인화 방식을 통해 다양한 정보에 적극적으로 노출될 수 있다면, 기존의 우려와 다르게 유튜브가 민주주의 공론장으로서 의미있는 공간으로 자리잡을 수 있을 것이다.

Abstract

This study examined the relationship between the use of customization and personalization and the type of selective exposure that characterizes the current media information environment and the online expression of opinion by YouTube users. Specifically, this study examined the use of YouTube information from a complex perspective, including whether the use of YouTube algorithmic recommendations increases the phenomenon of selective exposure or leads to cross-cutting exposure to information from different perspectives. In particular, this study did not exclude the customization process as an independent process, but considered that it may occur together with the personalization process, and considered antecedent factors such as YouTube trust and political affiliation. This study showed that the mechanisms by which users express opinions and shape public opinion in the YouTube space operate in a complex manner through multiple pathways and multiple factors. Personalized users, who consumed information mainly from subscribed channels, actively express their opinions by liking and disliking YouTube videos and writing comments. At the same time, users who are accidentally exposed to other-side views through YouTube's recommendation algorithms or who seek out information from perspectives different from their own are also active in commenting and sharing information on social media. Ultimately, this study suggested that in YouTube, where information on various topics and complex perspectives exists, users can be exposed to a variety of videos, whether accidentally or intentionally, and if utilized wisely, it can be made into a public forum to foster knowledgeable citizens in a democratic society. In conclusion, this study provides theoretically and practically significant results by exploring the complex communication mechanisms in the information environment of YouTube, which is different from the existing online media environment. YouTube can be a filter bubble or a new alternative public forum, depending on how users use it. Our findings support the growing importance of YouTube literacy. Specifically, it can be inferred that users who only consume information from subscribed channels are more likely to take active actions based on their trust, loyalty, and internal familiarity with the channel itself rather than the quality of the message. Blindly and passively consuming information on YouTube can lead to echo chambers, filter bubbles, and other phenomena that previous studies have warned about. On the contrary, however, if YouTube's recommendation algorithm personalization allows users to be actively exposed to a variety of information, YouTube may become a meaningful space for democratic public discourse, contrary to existing concerns.

Keywords:

YouTube recommendation algorithm, customization, personalization, selective exposure, online communication

키워드:

유튜브 추천 알고리즘, 맞춤화, 개인화, 선택적 노출, 온라인 커뮤니케이션

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea(이 논문 또는 저서는 2022년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임)[NRF-2022S1A5C2A03091539].

References

  • Beam, M. A., & Kosicki, G. M. (2014). Personalized news portals: Filtering systems and increased news exposure. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91(1), 59-77. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699013514411]
  • Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58, 707-731. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00410.x]
  • Brundidge, J. (2010). Encountering “difference” in the contemporary public sphere: The contribution of the Internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks. Journal of Communication, 60(4), 680-700. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01509.x]
  • Cho, J., Ahmed, S., Hilbert, M., Liu, B., & Luu, J. (2020). Do search algorithms endanger democracy? An experimental investigation of algorithm effects on political polarization. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 64(2), 150-172. [https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2020.1757365]
  • Choi, J., & Lee, J. K. (2015). Investigating the effects of news sharing and political interest on social media network heterogeneity. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 258-266. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.029]
  • Dvir-Gvirsman, S., Tsfati, Y., & Menchen-Trevino, E. (2016). The extent and nature of ideological selective exposure online: Combining survey responses with actual web log data from the 2013 Israeli Elections. New Media & Society, 18(5), 857-877. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814549041]
  • Dylko, I. B. (2016). How technology encourages political selective exposure. Communication Theory, 26(4), 389-409. [https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12089]
  • Festinger, L. (1957). Social comparison theory. Selective Exposure Theory, 16(401), 3.
  • Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298-320. [https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006]
  • Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2017). Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2450-2468. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817724170]
  • Garrett, R. K. (2009). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication, 59(4), 676-699. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01452.x]
  • Garrett, R. K., Carnahan, D., & Lynch, E. K. (2013). A turn toward avoidance? Selective exposure to online political information. Political Behavior, 35, 113-134. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-011-9185-6]
  • Gearhart, S., & Zhang, W. (2015). “Was it something I said?” “No, it was something you posted!” A study of the spiral of silence theory in social media contexts. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(4), 208-213. [https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0443]
  • Hahn, K., Park, J., Lee, D., & Lee, H. (2013). A test of representativeness and polarization in Twitter followership: A cross-national assessment of legislators’ Twitter followers in the U.S. and South Korea. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 30(1), 295-336. [한규섭·박주용·이덕재·이혜림 (2013). 트위터 팔로잉 관계에 대한 대표성과 양극화에 대한 논의 검증: 한국과 미국의 의회구성원들의 트위터 팔로워들 네트워크 비교 연구. <사이버커뮤니케이션학보>, 30권 1호, 295-336.]
  • Haim, M., Graefe, A., & Brosius, H. B. (2018). Burst of the filter bubble? Effects of personalization on the diversity of Google News. Digital Journalism, 6(3), 330-343. [https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1338145]
  • Hollander, B. A. (1996). Talk radio: Predictors of use and effects on attitudes about government. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73(1), 102-113. [https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909607300110]
  • Hwang, Y. (2013). Ideological polarization in the Twitter as seen through selective exposure. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 57(2), 58-79. [황유선. (2013). 선택적 노출 행위를 통해 바라본 트위터 공간의 이념적 양극화. <한국언론학보>, 57권 2호, 58-79.]
  • Hyun, K., & Seo, M. (2019). Comparing conservative and progressive audiences in their partisan perception, trust and use of hostile and friendly news media. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 63(2), 46-76. [현기득·서미혜 (2019). 한국 정파언론 환경의 특수성은 보수와 진보 수용자의 매체 태도와 이용에 차별적 영향을 미치는가?: 적대적 및 우호적 매체에 대한 정파성 지각이 매체 신뢰와 이용에 미치는 영향. <한국언론학보>, 63권 2호, 46-76.] [https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2019.63.2.002]
  • Kalyanaraman, S., & Sundar, S. S. (2006). The psychological appeal of personalized content in web portals: Does customization affect attitudes and behavior? Journal of Communication, 56(1), 110-132. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00006.x]
  • Kang, H., & Sundar, S. S. (2016). When self is the source: Effects of media customization on message processing. Media Psychology, 19(4), 561-588. [https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1121829]
  • Kang, U. (2023). YouTube creators shaking up politics...how big are the top channels?. Newsis. https://www.newsis.com/view/NISX20230412_0002264182, [강운지 (2023, 4, 17). 정치판 흔드는 유튜버들…상위 채널 규모는?”. <뉴시스>.]
  • Kim, K., & Song, K. (2018). Who are Daum news readers?: User characteristics and their perceptions on news portals. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 62(6), 141-164. [김경희·송경재 (2018). 누가 2 위 포털인 다음 뉴스를 이용하는가?: 포털 뉴스 이용자의 특성과 포털 뉴스에 대한 이용자의 인식을 중심으로: 포털 뉴스 이용자의 특성과 포털 뉴스에 대한 이용자의 인식을 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 62권 6호, 141-164.] [https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2018.62.6.005]
  • Kim, M. (2022). The effect of perception of the usefulness of Youtube algorithm recommendation on media trust on Youtube: Mediated effects of perceived harm, confirmation bias, and privacy concerns. Journal of Speech, Media & Communication Research, 21(4), 7-42. [김미경 (2022). 유튜브 알고리즘 추천의 유용성 인식에 따른 유튜브에 대한 미디어 신뢰도: 지각된 유해성, 확증편향, 프라이버시 염려의 매개 효과. <한국소통학보>, 21권 4호, 7-42.] [https://doi.org/10.51652/ksmca.2022.21.4.1]
  • Kim, Y. (2011). The contribution of social network sites to exposure to political difference: The relationships among SNSs, online political messaging, and exposure to cross-cutting perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 971-977. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.001]
  • Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2009). Looking the other way selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counterattitudinal political information. Communication Research, 36(3), 426-448. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209333030]
  • Korean Press Foundation (2023). Media Users in Korea 2023. Korea Press Foundation. [한국언론진흥재단 (2023). <2023 언론수용자 조사>. 한국언론진흥재단.]
  • Kümpel, A. S., Karnowski, V., & Keyling, T. (2015). News sharing in social media: A review of current research on news sharing users, content, and networks. Social Media + Society, 1(2). [https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115610141]
  • Lee, J. K., Choi, J., Kim, C., & Kim, Y. (2014). Social media, network heterogeneity, and opinion polarization. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 702-722. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12077]
  • Lee, N., & Cho, Y. (2017). Partisan knowledge learning or partisan interpretations: The influence of partisan media usage on attitude polarization toward partisan issues. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 61(5), 204-240. [이나연·조윤정 (2017). 지식 습득인가 정파적 해석인가: 정파적 미디어 이용이 정파적 이슈에 대한 태도 극화에 미치는 영향: 정파적 미디어 이용이 정파적 이슈에 대한 태도 극화에 미치는 영향. <한국언론학보>, 61권 5호, 204-240.]
  • Lee, S., & Kang, S. (2024). User understanding and perceptions of news recommendation algorithms: Relationships with attitude-consistent news exposure, news trust, and news-seeking behavior. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 68(1), 348-385. [이슬기·강신후 (2024). 맞춤화 정보 환경에서 뉴스 추천 알고리즘에 대한 이용자 이해도와 인식의 중요성: 관점 일치 뉴스 노출, 뉴스 신뢰, 뉴스 추구 행위와의 관계를 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 68권 1호, 348-385.] [https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2024.68.1.010]
  • Liu, Y., Keum, H., & Cho, J. (2020). The effects of customized information environments on knowledge and expression on SNS focusing on the roles of selective exposure and incidental exposure. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 64(4), 289-324. [유연·금희조·조재호 (2020). 이용자의 정보 환경 맞춤화가 시사 지식과 SNS상의 의견 표현에 미치는 영향: 정치 성향에 따른 선택적 노출과 우연적 이견 노출의 역할을 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 64권 4호, 289-324.] [https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2020.64.4.008]
  • McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication, 16(3), 315-336. [https://doi.org/10.1080/105846099198659]
  • Möller, J., Trilling, D., Helberger, N., & van Es, B. (2018). Do not blame it on the algorithm: An empirical assessment of multiple recommender systems and their impact on content diversity. Information, Communication & Society, 21(7), 959-977. [https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1444076]
  • Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511617201]
  • Nechushtai, E., & Lewis, S. C. (2019). What kind of news gatekeepers do we want machines to be? Filter bubbles, fragmentation, and the normative dimensions of algorithmic recommendations. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 298-307. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.043]
  • Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The spiral of silence: A theory of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 24(2), 43-51. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1974.tb00367.x]
  • Park, S., Sung, I., Seo, S., Hwang, J., Noh, J., & Kim, D. (2017). News recommendation service using machine learning: focusing on Kakao’s RUBICS. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 34(1), 5-48. [박승택·성인재·서상원·황지수·노지성·김대원 (2017). 기계학습 기반의 뉴스 추천 서비스 구조와 그 효과에 대한 고찰: 카카오의 루빅스를 중심으로: 카카오의 루빅스를 중심으로. <사이버커뮤니케이션학보>, 34권 1호, 5-48.]
  • Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere. New Media & Society, 4(1), 9-27. [https://doi.org/10.1177/14614440222226244]
  • Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin Press. [https://doi.org/10.3139/9783446431164]
  • Roh, J., & Min, Y. (2021). Effects of politically motivated selective exposure on attitude polarization: A study of non-political online community users. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 56(2), 226-248. [노정규·민영 (2012). 정치 정보에 대한 선택적 노출이 태도 극화에 미치는 효과: 비정치적 온라인 커뮤니티 이용자들을 대상으로: 비정치적 온라인 커뮤니티 이용자들을 대상으로. <한국언론학보>, 56권 2호, 226-248.]
  • Shin, D., & Lee, J. (2014). Does survey response on the use of Internet news sites reflect actual use of the sites? An exploration of selective exposure and in-group bias. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 28(4), 157-197. [신동호·이종혁 (2014). 인터넷 뉴스 매체 이용 행태와 설문 응답 간 차이 비교: 선택적 노출과 내집단 편향을 중심으로: 선택적 노출과 내집단 편향을 중심으로. <한국방송학보>, 28권 4호, 157-197.]
  • Slater, M. D. (2007). Reinforcing spirals: The mutual influence of media selectivity and media effects and their impact on individual behavior and social identity. Communication Theory, 17, 281-303. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00296.x]
  • Slater, M. D. (2015). Reinforcing spirals model: Conceptualizing the relationship between media content exposure and the development and maintenance of attitudes. Media Psychology, 18, 370-395. [https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2014.897236]
  • Stromer-Galley, J. (2003). Diversity of political conversation on the Internet: Users’ perspectives. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(3). [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2003.tb00215.x]
  • Stroud, N. J. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 556-576. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.x]
  • Sundar, S. S. (2008). Self as source: Agency and customization in interactive media. In E. A. Konijn, S. Utz, M. Tanis, & S. B. Barnes (Eds.), Mediated interpersonal communication (pp. 72-88). Routledge. [https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203926864-12]
  • Sundar, S. S., Bellur, S., Oh, J., Jia, H., & Kim, H. S. (2016). Theoretical importance of contingency in human-computer interaction: Effects of message interactivity on user engagement. Communication Research, 43(5), 595-625. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650214534962]
  • Sundar, S. S., & Marathe, S. S. (2010). Personalization versus customization: The importance of agency, privacy, and power usage. Human Communication Research, 36(3), 298-322. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01377.x]
  • Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Rupublic.com. Princeton University Press.
  • Sunstein, C. R. (2007). The polarization of extremes. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(16), 9.
  • Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton University Press.
  • Tewksbury, D., Weaver, A. J., & Maddex, B. D. (2001). Accidentally informed: Incidental news exposure on the world wide web. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 533-554. [https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900107800309]
  • Thurman, N., & Schifferes, S. (2012). The future of personalization at news websites: Lessons from a longitudinal study. Journalism Studies, 13(5-6), 775-790. [https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2012.664341]
  • Valentino, N. A., Banks, A. J., Hutchings, V. L., & Davis, A. K. (2009). Selective exposure in the internet age: The interaction between anxiety and information utility. Political Psychology, 30(4), 591-613. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2009.00716.x]
  • Valeriani, A., & Vaccari, C. (2016). Accidental exposure to politics on social media as online participation equalizer in Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom. New Media & Society, 18, 1857-1874. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815616223]
  • Vraga, E. K., Thorson, K., Kliger-Vilenchik, N., & Gee, E. (2015). How individual sensitivities to disagreement shape youth political expression on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 281-189. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.025]
  • Weeks, B. E., Lane, D. S., Kim, D. H., Lee, S. S., & Kwak, N. (2017). Incidental exposure, selective exposure, and political information sharing: Integrating online exposure patterns and expression on social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(6), 363-379. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12199]
  • Wojcieszak, M. E., & Mutz, D. C. (2009). Online groups and political discourse: Do online discussion spaces facilitate exposure to political disagreement? Journal of Communication, 59, 40-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01403.x]
  • Yadamsuren, B., & Erdelez, S. (2010). Incidental exposure to online news. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 47(1), 1-8. [https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.14504701237]