Cited by 129Gender, Feminism, and MediaImpact of Technology on AdolescentsSexuality, Behavior, and Technology

Snapchat memory and youth digital sexual cultures: mediated temporality, duration and affect

Open access
Handyside, Sarah, Ringrose, Jessica·2017·Journal of Gender Studies

Abstract

This paper explores how the photo and video-sharing app Snapchat mediates memory and intimacy, using focus group data with 18-year-olds. We use Bergson’s ideas about duration and Deleuze and Guattari’s theories of affect and assemblages to think about how the digital affordances of ‘disappearing’ Snapchat technology reshape memory and intimacy in youth sexual and relationship cultures. Our findings illustrate that Snapchat offers a temporal fastness and ephemerality – but also forms of fixity through the screenshotting of ‘disappearing’ snaps. Because judgement from peers cannot take place publicly within the app, offline discussion of Snapchat activity gains significant traction, making interview accounts of Snapchat use highly relevant. Our analysis of discussions of ‘Snapchat memory’ explores the gendered aspects of performative ‘showing off’ and sexual scrutiny, considering what happens when snaps do not disappear and how Snap exchanges can be used as relationship currency; for instance exploring how some participant’s challenged Snapchat related slut shaming through their uses of humour. Overall we show how Snapchat is mediating youth intimacy, highlighting the reconditioning that occurs between and across the digital world of Snapchat and the physical world of its youth users – evidence of the blurring of online and offline experiences that disrupts digital dualisms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09589236.2017.1280384

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Handyside, S., & Ringrose, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Warwick (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Ringrose, Jessica
Venue
Journal of Gender Studies
Published
2017-02-02
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
347-360
ISSN
  • 0958-9236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-3869
OpenAlex
W2585460871
Cited by
129
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2
FWCI
29.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Gender Studies (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Keywords
Snapchat, intimacy, memory, duration, affect, assemblage, Henri Bergson, Deleuze and Guattari, transience, slut-shaming, online-offline boundaries, digital affordances, gendered performance, humour

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