Advertisement

Subjectivity

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 228–246 | Cite as

Streams of fun and cringe: talking about Snapchat as mediated affective practice

  • Erik CarlquistEmail author
  • Lin Prøitz
  • Katrina Roen
Original Article
  • 72 Downloads

Abstract

How do young people interpret and negotiate their sense of being affected in the context of social media use? Our study draws on recent theorizing that views affective practices as discursive, relational and imbued with power. We specifically address practices that users engage in as they pursue forms of digitally mediated emotional involvement when using Snapchat, an image-based social media application. Our data consist of focus group dialogues with Norwegian students aged 16–19, recruited from schools selected for socio-economic and multicultural diversity. Excerpts exemplify how Snapchat use is not only engagingly talked about, but also affects non-digital everyday interactions. The analysis illustrates how young people’s talk about Snapchat deploys various discursive objects that convey promises of happiness and well-being, and affords particular forms of subjectivity. Image-sharing practices, and how they are communicated and felt, are embedded in and reproduce social norms, yet also provide spaces of belonging.

Keywords

Affective practices Well-being Youth Negotiating norms Relationships Intimacy Embodiment 

Notes

Funding

This work was supported by the Norwegian Research Council (Samansvar programme) Grant Number 247921/O70, and the University of Oslo.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

  1. Ahmed, S. 2004. Affective economies. Social Text 22 (2): 117–139.Google Scholar
  2. Ahmed, S. 2008. Sociable happiness. Emotion Space and Society 1 (1): 10–13.Google Scholar
  3. Ahmed, S. 2010. The promise of happiness. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Alhabash, S., and M. Ma. 2017. A tale of four platforms: motivations and uses of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat among college students. Social Media + Society.  https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117691544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barrett, L.F. 2014. The conceptual act theory: A précis. Emotion Review 6 (4): 292–297.Google Scholar
  6. Bayer, J.B., N.B. Ellison, S.Y. Schoenebeck, and E.B. Falk. 2016. Sharing the small moments: Ephemeral social interaction on Snapchat. Information, Communication & Society 19 (7): 956–977.Google Scholar
  7. Benedek, M., and C. Kaernbach. 2011. Physiological correlates and emotional specificity of human piloerection. Biological Psychology 86 (3): 320–329.Google Scholar
  8. Billig, M. 2006. A psychoanalytic discursive psychology: From consciousness to unconsciousness. Discourse Studies 8 (1): 17–24.Google Scholar
  9. Binkley, S. 2011. Happiness, positive psychology and the program of neoliberal governmentality. Subjectivity 4 (4): 371–394.Google Scholar
  10. Blackman, L., J. Cromby, D. Hook, D. Papadopoulos, and V. Walkerdine. 2008. Creating subjectivities. Subjectivity 22 (1): 1–27.Google Scholar
  11. boyd, d. 2014. It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Castellacci, F., and V. Tveito. 2018. Internet use and well-being: A survey and a theoretical framework. Research Policy 47 (1): 308–325.Google Scholar
  13. Charteris, J., S. Gregory, and Y. Masters. 2018. ‘Snapchat’, youth subjectivities and sexuality: Disappearing media and the discourse of youth innocence. Gender and Education 30 (2): 205–221.Google Scholar
  14. Diener, E. 2012. New findings and future directions for subjective well-being research. American Psychologist 67 (8): 590–597.Google Scholar
  15. Döveling, K., A.A. Harju, and D. Sommer. 2018. From mediatized emotion to digital affect cultures: New technologies and global flows of emotion. Social Media + Society.  https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117743141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gibbs, A. 2010. After affect: Sympathy, synchrony and mimetic communication. In The affect theory reader, ed. M. Gregg and G.J. Seigworth, 186–205. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Gillespie, A., K. Corti, S. Evans, and B. Heasman. 2018. Imagining the self through cultural technologies. In Handbook of imagination and culture, ed. T. Zittoun and V. Glaveanu, 303–318. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Giroux, H.A. 2015. Selfie culture in the age of corporate and state surveillance. Third Text 29 (3): 155–164.Google Scholar
  19. Grieve, R. 2017. Unpacking the characteristics of Snapchat users: A preliminary investigation and an agenda for future research. Computers in Human Behavior 74: 130–138.Google Scholar
  20. Handyside, S., and J. Ringrose. 2017. Snapchat memory and youth digital sexual cultures: mediated temporality, duration and affect. Journal of Gender Studies 26 (3): 347–360.Google Scholar
  21. Havas, J., and M. Sulimma. 2018. Through the gaps of my fingers: Genre, femininity, and cringe aesthetics in dramedy television. Television & New Media.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418777838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heidkamp, B., and D. Kergel. 2017. Precarity and social media from the entrepreneurial self to the precariatised mind. In Precarity within the digital age: Media change and social insecurity, ed. B. Heidkamp and D. Kergel, 99–113. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.Google Scholar
  23. Ipsos. 2018. Sosiale medier tracking Q4’17: Oktober-desember 2017. Oslo: Ipsos.Google Scholar
  24. Jeong, D.C., and J. Lee. 2017. Snap back to reality: Examining the cognitive mechanisms underlying Snapchat. Computers in Human Behavior 77 (Supplement C): 274–281.Google Scholar
  25. Kahneman, D., E. Diener, and N. Schwartz (eds.). 1999. Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Livingstone, S. 2008. Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: Teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society 10 (3): 393–411.Google Scholar
  27. Marková, I., P. Linell, M. Grossen, and A. Salazar-Orvig. 2007. Dialogue in focus groups: Exploring socially shared knowledge. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
  28. Martinussen, M., and M. Wetherell. 2019. Affect, practice and contingency: Critical discursive psychology and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick. Subjectivity 12 (2): 101–116.Google Scholar
  29. Marwick, A.E., and d boyd. 2014. Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media & Society 16 (7): 1051–1067.Google Scholar
  30. Massumi, B. 1995. The autonomy of affect. Cultural Critique 31: 83–109.Google Scholar
  31. Minh-ha, T.T. 1997. Not you/like you: Postcolonial women and the interlocking questions of identity and difference. In Dangerous liaisons: Gender, nation and postcolonial perspectives, ed. A. McClintock, A. Mufti, and E. Shohat, 415–419. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  32. Moran, J.B., K.J. Salerno, and T.J. Wade. 2018. Snapchat as a new tool for sexual access: Are there sex differences? Personality and Individual Differences 129: 12–16.Google Scholar
  33. Paasonen, S. 2015. A midsummer’s bonfire: Affective intensities of online debate. In Networked affect, ed. K. Hillis, S. Paasonen, and M. Petit, 27–42. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Piwek, L., and A. Joinson. 2016. “What do they snapchat about?” Patterns of use in time-limited instant messaging service. Computers in Human Behavior 54 (Supplement C): 358–367.Google Scholar
  35. Prøitz, L., E. Carlquist, and K. Roen. 2018. Affected and connected: feminist and psychological perspectives on emotion in social media. Feminist Media Studies.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1546210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sedgwick, E.K. 2003. Touching, feeling: Affect, pedagogy, performativity. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Thrift, N. 2008. The material practices of glamour. Journal of Cultural Economy 1 (1): 9–23.Google Scholar
  38. Tomkins, S. 1978. Script theory: Differential magnification of affects. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 26: 201–236.Google Scholar
  39. Utz, S., N. Muscanell, and C. Khalid. 2015. Snapchat elicits more jealousy than Facebook: A comparison of Snapchat and Facebook use. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 18 (3): 141–146.Google Scholar
  40. Valsiner, J. 2014. An invitation to cultural psychology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Vaterlaus, J.M., K. Barnett, C. Roche, and J.A. Young. 2016. “Snapchat is more personal”: An exploratory study on Snapchat behaviors and young adult interpersonal relationships. Computers in Human Behavior 62 (Supplement C): 594–601.Google Scholar
  42. Veum, A., and L.V.M. Undrum. 2018. The selfie as a global discourse. Discourse & Society 29 (1): 86–103.Google Scholar
  43. Waddell, T.F. 2016. The allure of privacy or the desire for self-expression? Identifying users’ gratifications for ephemeral, photograph-based communication. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 19 (7): 441–445.Google Scholar
  44. Weinstein, E. 2018. The social media see-saw: Positive and negative influences on adolescents’ affective well-being. New Media & Society.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818755634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wetherell, M. 2012. Affect and emotion: A new social science understanding. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  46. Wetherell, M. 2013. Affect and discourse—what’s the problem? From affect as excess to affective/discursive practice. Subjectivity 6 (4): 349–368.Google Scholar
  47. Wetherell, M. 2015a. Tears, bubbles and disappointment—new approaches for the analysis of affective-discursive practices: A commentary on “researching the psychosocial”. Qualitative Research in Psychology 12 (1): 83–90.Google Scholar
  48. Wetherell, M. 2015b. Trends in the turn to affect: A social psychological critique. Body & Society 21 (2): 139–166.Google Scholar
  49. Wetherell, M., T. McCreanor, A. McConville, H. Moewaka Barnes, and J. le Grice. 2015. Settling space and covering the nation: Some conceptual considerations in analysing affect and discourse. Emotion, Space and Society 16: 56–64.Google Scholar
  50. Wetherell, M., L. Smith, and G. Campbell. 2018. Introduction: Affective heritage practices. In Emotion, affective practices, and the past in the present, ed. L. Smith, M. Wetherell, and G. Campbell, 1–22. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Limited 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bjørknes University CollegeOsloNorway
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  3. 3.Østfold University CollegeHaldenNorway

Personalised recommendations