When Leisure is Programmed: Algorithmic Awareness, Autonomy, Satisfaction, and Discovery in Digital Platform Use

Öz

As algorithms increasingly shape digital leisure, their psychological effects become crucial to understand. This study conceptualizes leisure as a psychological experience involving autonomy, satisfaction, and discovery, and examines how algorithmic curation influences these elements on platforms such as Netflix, YouTube, Spotify, and TikTok. Survey data from 1,053 adults in Türkiye were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling, explaining 34% of the variance in overall leisure experience. Findings show that algorithmic awareness enhances satisfaction but reduces autonomy and discovery. All three—satisfaction, autonomy, and discovery—significantly predict leisure quality. The results suggest that while personalization can boost short-term enjoyment, it may undermine users’ sense of agency and limit serendipitous exploration. The study highlights the need for transparent, user-centered algorithmic design that safeguards autonomy and discovery as key aspects of leisure.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Algorithms
• Awareness
• Personal Autonomy
• User Satisfaction

Etik Beyan

Ethical approval for this research was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Kırıkkale University, Kırıkkale, Türkiye (Approval No: 2025/06).

Serbest Zaman Programlandığında: Dijital Platform Kullanımında Algoritmik Farkındalık, Özerklik, Tatmin ve Keşif

Öz

Algoritmik sistemler dijital serbest zaman deneyimlerini giderek daha fazla şekillendirdikçe, bunların psikolojik etkilerini anlamak önem kazanmaktadır. Bu çalışma, serbest zamanı özerklik, tatmin ve kendiliğinden keşif unsurlarıyla tanımlanan karmaşık bir psikolojik deneyim olarak ele almaktadır. Öz Belirleme Kuramı, Akış Kuramı ve algoritmik kültür çerçevelerinden yararlanılarak Netflix, YouTube, Spotify ve TikTok gibi platformlarda algoritmik kürasyonun serbest zaman deneyimine etkisi incelenmiştir. Türkiye’de bu platformları boş zaman amaçlı kullanan 1.053 yetişkinden toplanan veriler üzerinde Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi uygulanmış, model genel serbest zaman deneyimindeki varyansın %34’ünü açıklamıştır. Bulgular, algoritmik farkındalığın tatmini artırırken özerklik ve keşif algısını azalttığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca tatmin, özerklik ve keşif, serbest zaman kalitesinin anlamlı yordayıcılarıdır. Sonuçlar, kişiselleştirilmiş algoritmaların kısa vadede tatmini artırabileceğini, ancak kullanıcıların özne olma duygusunu zayıflatıp tesadüfi keşifleri sınırlayabileceğini ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma, özerklik ve keşif gibi serbest zamanın temel unsurlarını koruyacak şeffaf ve kullanıcı merkezli algoritma tasarımlarının önemini vurgulamaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Algoritmalar
• Kullanıcı Memnuniyeti
• Farkındalık
• Kişisel Özerklik

Etik Beyan

Bu araştırma için etik onay, Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Etik Kurulu’ndan (Kırıkkale, Türkiye) alınmıştır (Onay No: 2025/06).

Kaynakça

1. Alter, A. (2018). Irresistible: The rise of addictive technology and the business of keeping us hooked. Penguin.
2. Bucher, T. (2018). If... then: Algorithmic power and politics. Oxford University Press.
3. Caldwell, L. L. (2005). Leisure and health: Why is leisure therapeutic? British Journal of Guidance &
4. Counselling, 33(1), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069880412331335939
5. Chen, X., Lin, A., Webber, S. (2024). Designing Artificial Serendipity. In: Kurosu, M., Hashizume, A. (eds) Human-
6. Computer Interaction. HCII 2024. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14684. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60405-8_3
7. Collie, N., & Wilson-Barnao, C. (2020). Playing with TikTok: Algorithmic culture and the future of creative work. In R. Communian, C. England, B. J. Hracs, & D. Virani (Eds.), The future of creative work (pp. 172–188). Edward Elgar Publishing.
8. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.

9. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum.
10. Eslami, M., Rickman, A., Vaccaro, K., Aleyasen, A., Vuong, A., Karahalios, K., Hamilton, K., & Sandvig, C. (2015). “I always assumed that I wasn’t really that close to [her]”: Reasoning about invisible algorithms in news feeds. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 153–162). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702556
11. Espinoza-Rojas, J., Siles, I., & Castelain, T. (2023). How using various platforms shapes awareness of algorithms. Behaviour & Information Technology, 42(9), 1422–1433. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2078224
12. European Commission. (2020). Ensuring a safe and accountable online environment. https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-services-act-ensuring-safe-and-accountable-online-environment_en
13. Fink, L., Newman, L., & Haran, U. (2024). Let me decide: Increasing user autonomy increases recommendation acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 156, 108244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108244
14. Gillespie, T., Boczkowski, P. J., & Foot, K. A. (Eds.). (2014). Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society. MIT Press.
15. Harambam, J., Helberger, N., & Van Hoboken, J. (2018). Democratizing algorithmic news recommenders: How to materialize voice in a technologically saturated media ecosystem. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376(2133), 20180088. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0088
16. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
17. Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1980). The social psychology of leisure and recreation. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers.
18. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
19. Knijnenburg, B. P., Willemsen, M. C., Gantner, Z., Soncu, H., & Newell, C. (2012). Explaining user experiences of recommender systems. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 22(4–5), 441–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-011-9118-4
20. Kuykendall, L., Tay, L., & Ng, V. (2015). Leisure engagement and subjective well-being: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 141(2), 364–403. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038508
21. McCay-Peet, L., & Toms, E. G. (2022). Researching serendipity in digital information environments. Springer Nature.
22. Montag, C., Lachmann, B., Herrlich, M., & Zweig, K. (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 Health, 16(14), 2612. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16142612
23. Newman, D. B., Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2014). Leisure and subjective well-being: A model of psychological mechanisms as mediating factors. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(3), 555–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9435-x
24. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. Penguin Press. Rheinberg, F., Vollmeyer, R., & Engeser, S. (2003). The assessment of flow experience. In J. Stiensmeier-Pelster & F. Rheinberg (Eds.), Diagnostik von Motivation und Selbstkonzept (pp. 261–279). Hogrefe.
25. Ruckenstein, M., & Granroth, J. (2020). Algorithms, advertising and the intimacy of surveillance. Journal of Cultural Economy, 13(1), 12–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2019.1574866
26. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
27. Rydenfelt, H., Lehtiniemi, T., Haapoja, J., & Haapanen, L. (2025). Autonomy and algorithms: Tracing the significance of content personalization. International Journal of Communication, 19, 481–500. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/23474
28. Stebbins, R. A. (2007). Serious leisure: A perspective for our time. Transaction Publishers.
29. Striphas, T. (2015). Algorithmic culture. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(4–5), 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549415577392
30. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
31. Yeung, K. (2018). Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation. Regulation & Governance, 12(4), 505–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12158
32. Yeung, K. (2019). ‘Hypernudge’: Big data as a mode of regulation by design. In D. Beer (Ed.), The social power of algorithms (pp. 118–136). Routledge.
33. Yeung, K., & Lodge, M. (Eds.). (2019). Algorithmic regulation. Oxford University Press.
34. Zuboff, S. (2023). The age of surveillance capitalism. In W. Longhofer & D. Winchester (Eds.), Social theory re-wired (3rd ed., pp. 203–213). Routledge.