This study examines how young Douyin users navigate algorithm-driven short video platforms, emphasizing their sense of agency (SoA) in shaping engagement strategies. Based on in-depth interviews with 25 users, we identified four engagement statuses—High SoA Use, Low SoA Use, High SoA Nonuse, and Low SoA Nonuse—and two strategic transitions: Disengagement and Reengagement. These transitions illustrate users’ reflective processes regarding past behaviors and highlight deliberate efforts to regain control over platform use. Our findings reveal a complex interplay between user autonomy and algorithmic influence, highlighting the psychological mechanisms underpinning user-driven adaptations. By exploring users’ psychological coping strategies, this study positions user agency as central to fostering sustainable interactions with algorithmic platforms. By advancing our understanding of algorithmic engagement, this research emphasizes user autonomy and offers actionable insights into strategic adaptations, digital wellness, and algorithmic literacy, suggesting the value of mindful social media use.
BartolomeANiuS (2023) A literature review of video-sharing platform research in HCI. In: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Yokohama, Japan, 26 April–1 May, pp. 1–20. New York: ACM.
2.
BaumerEPSSunRSchaedlerP (2018) Departing and returning: sense of agency as an organizing concept for understanding social media non/use transitions. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 1(CSCW): 23:1–23:19.
3.
BeckBDi CostaSHaggardP (2017) Having control over the external world increases the implicit sense of agency. Cognition162: 54–60.
4.
BhandariABimoS (2022) Why’s everyone on TikTok now? The algorithmized self and the future of self-making on social media. Social Media + Society8(1), 205630512210862.
BrailovskaiaJMargrafJ (2021) The relationship between burden caused by coronavirus (Covid-19), addictive social media use, sense of control and anxiety. Computers in Human Behavior119: 106720.
7.
BraunVClarkeV (2019) Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health11(4): 589–597.
8.
BucherT (2017) The algorithmic imaginary: exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication & Society20(1): 30–44.
9.
CornelioPHaggardPHornbaekK, et al (2022) The sense of agency in emerging technologies for human–computer integration: a review. Frontiers in Neuroscience16: 949138.
10.
CotterKReisdorfB (2020) Algorithmic knowledge gaps: a new horizon of (digital) inequality. International Journal of Communication14: 745–765.
11.
DeALuZ (2024) #PoetsOfInstagram: navigating the practices and challenges of novice poets on Instagram. In: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Honolulu, HI, 11–16 May, pp. 1–16. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
12.
DiasPDuarteA (2022) TikTok Practices among teenagers in Portugal: a uses & gratifications approach. Journalism and Media3: 615–632.
13.
DingLAntonucciGVendittiM (2024) Unveiling user responses to AI-powered personalised recommendations: a qualitative study of consumer engagement dynamics on Douyin. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal28: 234–255.
14.
DogruelL (2021) Folk theories of algorithmic operations during Internet use: a mixed methods study. The Information Society37(5): 287–298.
15.
GallagherS (2000) Philosophical conceptions of the self: implications for cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences4(1): 14–21.
16.
HaggardP (2017) Sense of agency in the human brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience18(4): 196–207.
17.
HelmPMatznerT (2024) Co-addictive human–machine configurations: relating critical design and algorithm studies to medical-psychiatric research on “problematic Internet use.”New Media & Society26: 7295–7313.
IssarS (2024) The social construction of algorithms in everyday life: examining TikTok users’ understanding of the platform’s algorithm. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction40(18): 5384–5398.
20.
KangHLouC (2022) AI agency vs. human agency: understanding human–AI interactions on TikTok and their implications for user engagement. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication27(5): zmac014.
21.
KayeDBVChenXZengJ (2021) The co-evolution of two Chinese mobile short video apps: parallel platformization of Douyin and TikTok. Mobile Media & Communication9(2): 229–253.
22.
KrugwasserARSternYFaivreN, et al (2022) Impaired sense of agency and associated confidence in psychosis. Schizophrenia8(1): 32.
23.
LazarusRFolkmanS (1984) Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer.
24.
LeeAYEllisonNBHancockJT (2023) To use or be used? The role of agency in social media use and well-being. Frontiers in Computer Science5: 1123323.
25.
LiangM (2022) The end of social media? How data attraction model in the algorithmic media reshapes the attention economy. Media, Culture & Society44(6): 1110–1131.
26.
LukoffKLyngsUZadeH, et al (2021) How the design of YouTube influences user sense of agency. In: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Yokohama, Japan, 8–13 May, pp. 1–17. New York: ACM.
27.
MolemAMakriSMckayD (2024) Keepin’it reel: investigating how short videos on TikTok and Instagram reels influence view change. In: Proceedings of the 2024 conference on human information interaction and retrieval, Sheffield, 10–14 March, pp. 317–327. New York: ACM.
28.
MontagCLachmannBHerrlichM, et al (2019) Addictive features of social media/messenger platforms and freemium games against the background of psychological and economic theories. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health16(14): 2612.
29.
MooreJW (2016) The sense of agency and why it matters. Frontiers in Psychology7: 1272.
30.
ObrejaDM (2024) When stories turn institutional: how TikTok users legitimate the algorithmic sensemaking. Social Media+ Society10(1): 20563051231224114.
31.
O’BrienHCairnsP (2015) An empirical evaluation of the User Engagement Scale (UES) in online news environments. Information Processing & Management51(4): 413–427.
32.
O’BrienHLTomsEG (2008) What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology59(6): 938–955.
33.
PlaisantCShneidermanB (1992) Scheduling home control devices: design issues and usability evaluation of four touchscreen interfaces. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies36(3): 375–393.
34.
QuDWangWWangJ, et al (2024) The longitudinal relationships between short video addiction and depressive symptoms: a cross-lagged panel network analysis. Computers in Human Behavior152: 108059.
35.
RegisterYQinLBaughanA, et al (2023) Attached to “The algorithm”: making sense of algorithmic precarity on Instagram. In: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Hamburg, 23–28 April, pp. 1–15. New York: ACM.
36.
RobertsJADavidME (2023) Instagram and TikTok flow states and their association with psychological well-being. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking26(2): 80–89.
37.
RyanELinehanC (2022) A qualitative exploration into personal psychological agency in Instagram use. Computers in Human Behavior Reports6: 100196.
38.
SchäetzNGagrčinETothR, et al (2023) Algorithm dependency in platformized news use. New Media & Society27(3): 1360–1377.
39.
SchaffnerBStefanescuACampiliO, et al (2023) Don’t Let Netflix Drive the bus: user’s sense of agency over time and content choice on Netflix. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction7(CSCW1): 1–32.
40.
SchellewaldA (2022) Theorizing “stories about algorithms” as a mechanism in the formation and maintenance of algorithmic imaginaries. Social Media + Society8(1): 20563051221077025.
41.
ShiWLiJ (2024) New digital divide shaped by algorithm? Evidence from agent-based testing on Douyin’s health-related video recommendation. Communication Research51(7): 867–890.
42.
SuCZhouHWangC, et al (2021) Individualized video recommendation modulates functional connectivity between large scale networks. Human Brain Mapping42(16): 5288–5299.
43.
SunLZhangHZhangS, et al (2020). Content-based analysis of the cultural differences between TikTok and Douyin. In 2020 IEEE International conference on Big Data (Big Data), Atlanta, GA, 10–13 December, pp. 4779–4786. New York: IEEE.
44.
SunMSunS (2024) Users’ engagement in WeChat-based support communities: a multilevel perspective. Information Processing & Management61(2): 103604.
45.
SundarSS (2020) Rise of machine agency: a framework for studying the psychology of Human–AI Interaction (HAII). Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication25(1): 74–88.
46.
TurelO (2021) Agency over social media use can be enhanced through brief abstinence, but only in users with high cognitive reflection tendencies. Computers in Human Behavior115: 106590.
47.
WeiZGuoYTsangMHL, et al (2024) Social media distractions alter behavioral and neural patterns to global-local attention: the moderation effect of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior157: 108258.
48.
YangXLiuQChenH, et al (2024) Compensating for uncontrollability: the association between sense of control and problematic mobile phone use. Current Psychology43(15): 13575–13586.
49.
Ytre-ArneBMoeH (2021) Folk theories of algorithms: understanding digital irritation. Media Culture & Society43(5): 807–824.
50.
ZannettouSNemes -NemethOAyalonO, et al (2024) Analyzing user engagement with TikTok’s short format video recommendations using data donations. In: Proceedings of the CHI conference on human factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, 11–16 May, pp. 1–16. New York: ACM.
