Meta conducted an experiment where thousands of users were shown chronological feeds on Facebook and Instagram for three months. Users of the chronological feeds engaged less with the platforms and were more likely to use competitors like YouTube and TikTok. This suggests that users prefer algorithmically ranked feeds that show them more relevant content, even though some argue chronological feeds provide more transparency. While the experiment found that chronological feeds exposed users to more political and untrustworthy content, it did not significantly impact their political views or behaviors. The researchers note that a permanent switch to chronological feeds could produce different results, but this study provides only a glimpse into the issue.
I think this is bullshit. I exclusively scroll Lemmy in new mode. I scroll I see a post I already have seen. Then I leave. That doesn’t mean I hate it, I’m just done!
More for them and less for me then. I enjoy my Subscribed + New feed and don’t bother with much else.
I’m the opposite, chronological feed made me use social media even more
as soon as instagram lost the chronological feed I stopped using it, it just made it useless to keep track of what friends and family were doing. I dont care they went to dinner two weeks ago, I might have commented something if they were there today though
Instagram went from a friend feed to “Hey you saw a girl with big boobs this one time, here are 100 other girls with big boobs” very quickly.
That and the insane amount of ads made me quit it.
Less engagement is exactly what I would want. Show me my new chronological content and then I’ll get the hell out of there.
But shareholders need to eat! The pushers need to get you addicted to make money!
Yep, i like knowing i have at least seen everything new. But, its bad for business to let the user leave when they are all caught up
Using engagement for metric will ofc render algorithmic feed “better”, i.e. addictive. Their value is not about mental wellbeing.
That’s true but did anyone think Meta cared about mental well-being? They’re a company, their only goal is to make money.
yep note that it didn’t measure addiction or how much screen time in a day or anything, the only metric is “more is better”, which ask anyone and they’ll say it’s the opposite
The fact that they switched to a different algorithmic feed instead of reducing use time indicates that it’s a problem that needs legislation to address, since it will not be in any individual company’s interest to stop.
I found that back in the old days of Facebook (pre-enshitification, or at least full steam enshitification) I could log in, catch up on what all my distant relatives and friends were up to, leave some comments, maybe post something myself, and log out in around 10-15 minutes max. Then they started “improving” things, and suddenly there was “engaging” content, and it took at least ½ an hour.
I think it makes sense that from Facebook’s perspective, a chronological feed is worse.
Having said that, some people post more than others, so I do appreciate using the Hot and Active sorts for Lemmy in addition to Top - Day. It’s a feature I miss from Mastodon. There is a headline bot that I like following, to catch the recent headlines, and the weather. Problem is that something like ¼ of my feed can just be the bot, and yesterday’s headlines aren’t news anymore, I’m more interested in the ongoing discussion. So I do appreciate the non-chronological sorts, when they make things better for me, and not a corporation’s bottom line.
Yep, I basically stopped using Facebook when it changed away from that. It also changed in other ways, in that people would be posting about politics and memes instead of just life updates and holiday pictures.
I agree, I don’t think it’s accurate to say engagement was less. If I want to see what is new with my friends and I can quickly see everything in just a few swipes instead of swiping w For hours to see if I can see something new it will cause me to spend less time on the platform, but I’ll enjoy it more because I can spend more time doing things with them in person.
The headline is ridiculous and leaving instagram for youtube and tiktok is a weird point since they are very different to what people use instagram for?
But why does everything in the world have to be so THIS or THAT??? Why can’t i have a chronological feed that gives me a “recommended” post every 3rd or so post? I want to see everything from everyone I follow while sometimes seeing new stuff and then when ive caught up i want to close the app and go on with my day.
I dont want For You or Following tabs. I want to choose how often im recommended content and see/change what its basing the recommendations off of. Everything in life doesnt have to be a war between red or blue hats for crying out loud
i want to close the app and go on with my day
That’s exactly the “problem” being portrayed here, the expected/ideal mode of interaction with social media is compulsive and perpetual. It’s the best way to maximize advertisement exposure. I’m not opposed to the slot machine of content, but it’s absolutely reasonable to expect users to want to go on with their day.
They don’t “hate” chronological feeds. The study say they are more likely to disengage, and that’s probably because people got what they need from the chronological feed and log off to do other things…
Proving that chronological feed is more healthy.
Yeah, if you were ever unsure where wired stands as a reputable organization, here’s all the evidence you need.
This sounds like a successful efficiency study presented by a horror director.
Why would you “get what you need” quicker with a chronological feed? The more engaged with content is what most people are going to the site for, it’s like browsing Lemmy on top vs new, and frankly new is mostly crap.
What I want is to see the new posts of my network. With chronological, I know when I see a previously seen post, that I’m done. With algorithmic, I’m scrolling past tons of posts I’ve seen before, hoping to find a new one every once in a while. And I never know when I’m done, so I frustratingly close the app after a longer time.
When I look at my subscriptions, I sort by new because it lets me see what I want quicker. Top is filled with old things so I almost never use it. Hot is what I use if not restricting to just subs. Once I’m done looking at what’s new, I’m done. No wasting time on stuff I’ve seen before.
I’m much more “engaged” when you hide my needle in a haystack. Simply handing me the needle allows me to grab it and go.
Needle in this case is finding out what my friends are up to
I think this is bullshit.
I think it is exactly how people are behaving. And I can even recall witnessing many people first hand who flip a newspaper to the sports section. Never learning anything about science news, medical news, unless it’s some kind of social column about a diet.
People wanting to cut out and block things they don’t want to read in a newspaper is what I consider the “default behavior” of most of humanity. No surprise they do not care about the news their friends share. An intelligent computer system that filters out (based on topic/content study) what they don’t want to see before-hand is always going to be popular with such people.
“One of the effects of living with electric information is that we live habitually in a state of information overload. There’s always more than you can cope with.” — Marshall McLuhan.
Accidentally deleted my comment instead of saving edits. Here it is again.
I favor OP’s perspective, but that’s because I sub to/follow the stuff I find interesting so I can ignore everything else. I already “made” my own algorithm by only following the stuff I care about, now show it to me chronologically instead of according to your algorithm (because honestly, either your algorithm is optimized for engagement and shows tons of ragebait because it gets engagement and it gets me mad, or it’s actually good and I spend more time online than I wanted to and feel bad. Yes, I know not being able to just cut myself off is a problem, but there’s something to be said for engineering addictive algorithms too).
My experience with algorithms and “for you” is algorithms shoving ragebait in my face and me not always being able to resist clicking. Content delivery algorithms have not been good to me, which heavily influences my view.
I favor OP’s perspective, but that’s because I sub to/follow the stuff I find interesting so I can ignore everything else. I already “made” my own algorithm by only following the stuff I care about, now show it to me chronologically instead of jamming in the stuff you think I’ll like (because honestly, either your algorithm is optimized for engagement and shows tons of ragebait because it gets engagement, or it’s good and I spend more time online than I wanted to and feel bad. Yes, I know not being able to just cut myself off is a problem, but there’s something to be said for engineering addictive algorithms too).
I think this is bullshit. I exclusively scroll Lemmy in new mode. I scroll I see a post I already have seen. Then I leave.
From Facebook point of view, then your engagement is low. Low engagement = less ad views = they make less money
So they need to maximize doom scrolling. Turn off your brain and scroll for a couple hours with stuff the algorithm choose for you, thanks
This.
The headline is kind of awful - users finding satiation and logging off to do something else is not a sign that users had an unsatisfactory or suboptimal experience. Maybe they actually enjoy the experience more.
But it’s not optimizing for Meta’s business goals.
Usage time ≠ enjoyment.
But unfortunately more usage time = more ads = more profit
That’s the only thing they really care about.
ITT: tech people and power users struggle to understand that the masses use devices and services differently than they do.
@monsterpiece42 @trashhalo as much as we struggle to see how the masses use technology I also wonder how many tech people just don’t care how normal non-tech people use their devices and services.
The actual problem is that they think they should just force one or the other on us. Give us a choice to sort our feed and we’ll figure out what we like best.
But then people can choose the option that does not have them scrolling for hours. Which means less time and less views on the platform. Why would they give you that option?
Goes to show I am getting tired. Why didn’t I think of that. Ofcourse meta wants to keep you on their platform as long as possible. Thanks for pointing that out to me.
How about you give people the choice?
The best thing about reddit/Lemmy is you can sort content by new, hot, controversial, etc. Depending on what you’re in the mood to view.
Instagram, facebook and threads all have chronological feeds they are just hidden
I’m pretty sure you can actually do that with FB/IG too, most just don’t bother
How much additional shit did Facebook push to the users feeds though? People are engaging less because Facebook has added a million ads and a billion posts from people and groups you never agreed to follow. Facebook can’t be trusted for anything. They’ll game any study to support whatever outcome they wanted in the first place. It’s run by a sociopathic, lying, thief.
Prefer is weasel language. The utility function they are using is if a User stays on the platform, while the user utility function may be simply - Did I get updates on everything I care about?
Giving users agency over their feed is empowering, sure some people may want to be stuck in a never-ending loop of content - and thats fine for them, but the option for someone to see the most relevant posts from their subscribed communities/friends in a quick fashion is important.
I’m excited to see more user configurable agency in the fediverse. Imagine you have 100 friends, a few rarely post, a few post every 5 minutes, and everyone else in between. If my goal is to stay updated with all 100 friends, but in 10 minute a day increments then I want a agent that shows me the top content uniformly distributed across all 100 of my contacts, such that I see the one post from the introvert rather then the 95 shit posts from the extrovert drowning out that content (the influencer/engagement enshitification cycle).
The same applies to lemmy communities, and while our feed algorithms are not there yet, I’m excite to see development continue.
Yep, exactly. With a chronological feed, I can scroll until I know I’m caught up. The algorithmic feed keeps throwing stuff at you and you’re never ‘caught up’. So yeah, great for engagement, but they didn’t actually ask the users how they felt about it.
Agreed. Chronological is a good first step. Lemmy devs - Don’t stop there! Chronological isn’t the be all end all of feeds. For most people I think they would want Chronological feeds, but sampled across all their subscriptions/friends.
I wouldn’t be opposed to some sort of recommendation algorithm, but it should be in a separate section. Especially for new users it’s hard to find people/lemmits to follow, so it would be useful for that.
