The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Interactivity in Society: Locating an Elusive Concept
Abstract
Interactivity has been identified as a core concept of new media, yet despite nearly three decades of study and analysis, we scarcely know what interactivity is, let alone what it does, and have scant insight into the conditions in which interactive processes are likely to be consequential for members of a social system. This article attempts to address this deficiency by critiquing three self-defeating tendencies and an erroneous assumption of interactivity research, then proposes four basic propositions around which systematic knowledge regarding interactivity in society may be built. In the spirit of bridging mass and interpersonal processes, a model of interactivity is proposed to initiate discussion about the concept as a cross-level and multivalent phenomenon—one with both positive and negative consequences—and to spur more socially relevant research. For interactivity to succeed as a concept, it must have some meaningful social and psychological relevance beyond its technical status as a property of media systems or message exchanges.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Putnam, R. (2000) · doi:10.1145/358916.361990 · Cited by 17,114
Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology
Portes, A. (1998) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1 · Cited by 12,037 · cited 3×
“Noting that “sociability cuts both ways,” Portes (1998, p. 15) identifies four such forms of negative social capital :e xclusion of outsiders, excess claims on group members, restrictions on individual freedoms, and downward leveling norms.”
BackgroundInfluentialCybernetics. Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine
N., E., & Wiener, N. (1949) · The Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.2307/2020260 · Cited by 3,590
Mass Media Flow and Differential Growth in Knowledge
Tichenor, P. J., Donohue, G. A., & Olien, C. N. (1970) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/267786 · Cited by 1,537
Interactivity: a concept explication
Kiousis, S. (2002) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/146144480200400303 · Cited by 666
Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Ramirez, A., Dunbar, N. E., Kam, K., & Fischer, J. (2002) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02567.x · Cited by 400 · cited 2×
“From their investigations on the effects of varying degrees of interactivity and communication modalities on interpersonal interaction, Burgoon et al. (2002) conclude that “interactivity itself is value-neutral, although the outcomes associated with it may be valueladen” (p. 661), that is, positive…”
Background
Cited by
The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power
Chadwick, A. (2017) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190696726.001.0001 · Cited by 1,174
Real-time hermeneutics: meaning-making in ludonarrative digital games
Arjoranta, J. (2018) · doi:10.31237/osf.io/uep74 · Cited by 21
(2011) · Jyväskylä University Digital Archive (University of Jyväskylä) · Cited by 9
Do We Need Real-Time Hermeneutics? Structures of Meaning in Games
Arjoranta, F., & Jonne, F. (2011) · DiGRA Digital Library · doi:10.26503/dl.v2011i1.595 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Bucy, E. P.
- Venue
- The Information Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-11
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 373-383
- ISSN
- 0197-2243 (ISSN-L)
- 1087-6537
- OpenAlex
- W2077033088
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 8.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.