Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Leslie Morrison Gutman
 -- 998 2024-08-13 03:31:48

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Video Production Services to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Kwok, A.; Younas, F.; Gutman, L.M.; Vlaev, I. Barriers and Facilitators to Binge-Watching Using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/56815 (accessed on 16 November 2024).
Kwok A, Younas F, Gutman LM, Vlaev I. Barriers and Facilitators to Binge-Watching Using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/56815. Accessed November 16, 2024.
Kwok, Ally, Fatima Younas, Leslie Morrison Gutman, Ivo Vlaev. "Barriers and Facilitators to Binge-Watching Using the Theoretical Domains Framework" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/56815 (accessed November 16, 2024).
Kwok, A., Younas, F., Gutman, L.M., & Vlaev, I. (2024, August 13). Barriers and Facilitators to Binge-Watching Using the Theoretical Domains Framework. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/56815
Kwok, Ally, et al. "Barriers and Facilitators to Binge-Watching Using the Theoretical Domains Framework." Encyclopedia. Web. 13 August, 2024.
Peer Reviewed
Barriers and Facilitators to Binge-Watching Using the Theoretical Domains Framework
This is a peer-reviewed entry published in Encyclopedia Journal, full entry can be found at 10.3390/encyclopedia4030081

Using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), this rapid review coded the barriers and facilitators to binge-watching and identified corresponding behaviour change techniques (BCTs) for intervention purposes. Twenty-nine studies reporting influences on binge-watching fulfilled the inclusion criteria and passed quality appraisal checks. Data were extracted and coded accordingly, as informed by the TDF. Findings indicate that most facilitators focused on the goals of binge-watching, such as escapism, and the social influences, such as companionship, while most barriers related to behavioural regulation, such as self-control and self-regulation. BCTs included ‘Goal setting (outcome)’, ‘Social comparison’, and ‘Self-monitoring of behaviour’. Results suggest intervention strategies targeting facilitators to binge-watching by incorporating the identified BCTs may succeed in inhibiting binge-watching behaviours. However, accounting for the intensity of binge-watching was not an objective of the present review; therefore, future research should take into account the varying levels of engagement in binge-watching when developing interventions.

binge-watching television Theoretical Domains Framework behaviour change techniques facilitators intervention strategies
Technological advancements in the digital age have revolutionised television watching practices. Individuals are no longer restricted by the traditional television broadcasting system [1]. Instead, the emergence of online streaming services (e.g., Netflix and Amazon Prime) enables individuals to watch multiple episodes of a television series wherever, whenever, and on whatever device they desire [2]. Consequently, this flexibility is argued to contribute towards overindulgence in television watching, termed binge-watching [3]. The global average of minutes spent streaming Netflix has increased by 57.9% from 2017 to 2021, with an average of 3.2 h per day [4]. The term ‘binge’ itself holds a negative connotation [5], indicating excessive engagement [6]. As such, it is crucial to have a better understanding of this phenomenon to be able to ultimately mitigate this behaviour.
Binge-watching has garnered interest in research since it emerged as a concept in 2013, and researchers agree that binge-watching is a “relatively new behavioural phenomenon” [7]. However, a consensus on its definition has yet to be reached [2]. Some researchers report binge-watching as the “consumption of multiple episodes of a television series in a short period of time” [8], whereas others specify the number of episodes which constitute binge-watching [9][10]. Nevertheless, as summarised by Starosta and Izydorczyk (2020), the present review adopts the definition of binge-watching as “watching multiple episodes of a TV show in one sitting” [7].
As experienced by many individuals, binge-watching has become a frequent behaviour [11], particularly evident during the COVID-19 pandemic due to mandatory quarantines and social isolation restrictions. Individuals are reported to have spent an increased amount of time binge-watching [12], far longer than any of the proposed definitions of binge-watching, indicating excessive engagement. For example, 87% of university students were reported to binge-watch for more than 3 h per week [13].
Despite students acknowledging binge-watching as a distraction from their academic responsibilities [14] and perceiving this behaviour as excessive [15], they report persistently engaging in it. Research has also shown an association between binge-watching and adverse health consequences. Mostly a solitary activity [16], binge-watching can also perpetuate feelings of loneliness and social isolation that result in individuals becoming “distant from friends and family” [17]. Relatedly, loneliness impacts an individual’s mental health, especially in depression, which is reported to have a bi-directional effect with binge-watching [16]. Dandamudi and Sathiyaseelan (2018) documented an increased consumption of unhealthy foods, disturbances in sleep patterns, and prolonged sedentary activity in association with binge-watching [18]. Research also highlights its potentially addictive nature [3], and parallels are drawn between binge-watching and other behavioural addictions [19], including binge-drinking, binge-eating, and gaming disorder; binge-watching provides immediate gratification. The development of binge-watching as an addictive behaviour can be supported by the Interaction of Person–Affect–Cognition–Execution (I-PACE) model, whereby experiences of gratification received from binge-watching are associated with the behaviour [20], therefore resulting in a lack of self-control and an increased duration of binge-watching than initially intended [7]. However, as research in this area is still in its infancy, binge-watching has not yet been definitively established as an addictive behaviour [21].
Understanding behavioural influences is central to implementing successful behavioural change [22]. While technological advances, such as the auto-play function in streaming services, have been suggested to contribute to binge-watching [23], disabling this feature failed to result in a decrease in binge-watching consumption. Therefore, there is a continued need to systematically understand binge-watching in order to suggest feasible and effective intervention strategies. The current review explores binge-watching through a behavioural change perspective using the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) framework and, relatedly, the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) [24]. The prior literature utilised the TDF to inform the development and implementation of different behavioural interventions, including decrease in substance use [25] and alcohol consumption during pregnancy [26], showcasing its applicability as a guide to intervention development, specifically to conduct a behavioural diagnosis of binge-watching.
The TDF provides a well-rounded understanding of the development of behavioural interventions [27] by integrating core theoretical constructs from 83 behaviour change theories and summarising them into 14 domains (including Knowledge, Skills, Social Influences, and Behavioural Regulation, among others) [24]. This allows researchers to comprehensively study the affective, cognitive, environmental, and social influences on behaviour in context [22] and identify “categories of means by which an intervention can change behaviour” [28]. Additionally, TDF domains can be directly mapped onto the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy (BCTTv1) which is instrumental in the development of interventions from a behaviour change lens. Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs) are the “observable, replicable, and irreducible components of an intervention” [24], or the “active ingredients” that can produce behavioural change. As such, pinpointing relevant BCTs for reducing binge-watching enables the identification of targeted intervention strategies to ensure successful behavioural change in this context [29][30].
Given the adverse health consequences and concerns regarding the potentially addictive nature of binge-watching, summative evidence is required to develop interventions for reducing the escalation of this behaviour. To address this need, the present study aims to (i) gain a better understanding of the influences on binge-watching and (ii) use these findings to propose targeted intervention strategies to support the development of successful interventions. Through a rapid review of the research, the present study answers two research questions: (i) Using the TDF, what are the barriers and facilitators to binge-watching? and (ii) Using the BCTTv1, what BCTs can potentially reduce binge-watching?

References

  1. Conlin, L.; Billings, A.; Auverset, L. Time-Shifting vs. Appointment Viewing: The Role of Fear of Missing out within TV Consumption Behaviors; Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Navarra: Pamplona, Spain, 2016.
  2. Flayelle, M.; Maurage, P.; Vögele, C.; Karila, L.; Billieux, J. Time for a Plot Twist: Beyond Confirmatory Approaches to Binge-Watching Research. Psychol. Popul. Media Cult. 2019, 8, 308–318.
  3. Devasagayam, R.; College, S. Media Bingeing: A Qualitative Study of Psychological Influences. In 2014 Annual Spring Conference Proceedings; Marketing Management Association: Chicago, IL, USA, 2014; pp. 40–41.
  4. Dean, B. Netflix Subscriber and Growth Statistics: How Many People Watch Netflix in 2021? Backlinko: Cheyenne, WY, USA, 2021; Available online: https://backlinko.com/netflix-users (accessed on 20 June 2021).
  5. Rubenking, B.; Bracken, C.C. Binge-Watching: A Suspenseful, Emotional, Habit. Commun. Res. Rep. 2018, 35, 381–391.
  6. Pierce-Grove, R. Just One More: How Journalists Frame Binge Watching. First Monday 2017, 22, 12.
  7. Starosta, J.A.; Izydorczyk, B. Understanding the Phenomenon of Binge-Watching—A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4469.
  8. Schweidel, D.A.; Moe, W.W. Binge Watching and Advertising. J. Mark. 2016, 80, 1–19.
  9. Pittman, M.; Sheehan, K. Sprinting a Media Marathon: Uses and Gratifications of Binge-Watching Television through Netflix. First Monday 2015, 20, 1.
  10. Walton-Pattison, E.; Dombrowski, S.U.; Presseau, J. ‘Just One More Episode’: Frequency and Theoretical Correlates of Television Binge Watching. J. Health Psychol. 2018, 23, 17–24.
  11. Sharma, M.; Sharma, M.K.; Anand, N.; Thamilselvan, P.; Suma, N.; John, N.; Sahu, M.; Chakraborty Thakur, P.; Baglari, H.; Singh, P. Binge Watching: An Emerging Manifestation of Technology Use. Asian J. Psychiatry 2019, 45, 81–82.
  12. Boursier, V.; Musetti, A.; Gioia, F.; Flayelle, M.; Billieux, J.; Schimmenti, A. Is Watching TV Series an Adaptive Coping Strategy During the COVID-19 Pandemic? Insights From an Italian Community Sample. Front. Psychiatry 2021, 12, 599859.
  13. Winland, C. An Exploration of Binge-Watching and Its Effects on College Academics. Pediatrics 2015, 75, 807–812.
  14. Ahmed, A.A.-A.M. A New Era of TV-Watching Behavior: Binge Watching and Its Psychological Effects. Media Watch 2017, 8, 192–207.
  15. Chambliss, C.; Gartenberg, C.; Honrychs, D.; Elko, M.; March, R.; McGill, S.; Watters, M.; Bayer, K.; Boylan, C.; Hanson, A.; et al. Distracted by Binge-Watching: Sources of Academic and Social Disruption in Students. ARC J. Pediatr. 2017, 3, 14–17.
  16. de Feijter, D.; Khan, V.-J.; van Gisbergen, M. Confessions of A “Guilty” Couch Potato Understanding and Using Context to Optimize Binge-Watching Behavior. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video; ACM: Chicago, IL, USA, 2016; pp. 59–67.
  17. Vaterlaus, J.M.; Spruance, L.A.; Frantz, K.; Kruger, J.S. College Student Television Binge Watching: Conceptualization, Gratifications, and Perceived Consequences. Soc. Sci. J. 2019, 56, 470–479.
  18. Dandamudi, V.; Sathiyaseelan, A. Binge Watching: Why Are College Students Glued to Their Screens? J. Indian Health Psychol. 2018, 12, 41–52.
  19. Flayelle, M.; Maurage, P.; Billieux, J. Toward a Qualitative Understanding of Binge-Watching Behaviors: A Focus Group Approach. J. Behav. Addict. 2017, 6, 457–471.
  20. Brand, M.; Wegmann, E.; Stark, R.; Müller, A.; Wölfling, K.; Robbins, T.W.; Potenza, M.N. The Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE) Model for Addictive Behaviors: Update, Generalization to Addictive Behaviors beyond Internet-Use Disorders, and Specification of the Process Character of Addictive Behaviors. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2019, 104, 1–10.
  21. Dixit, A.; Marthoenis, M.; Arafat, S.M.Y.; Sharma, P.; Kar, S.K. Binge Watching Behavior during COVID 19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional, Cross-National Online Survey. Psychiatry Res. 2020, 289, 113089.
  22. Atkins, L.; Francis, J.; Islam, R.; O’Connor, D.; Patey, A.; Ivers, N.; Foy, R.; Duncan, E.M.; Colquhoun, H.; Grimshaw, J.M.; et al. A Guide to Using the Theoretical Domains Framework of Behaviour Change to Investigate Implementation Problems. Implement. Sci. 2017, 12, 77.
  23. Hanley, J. “Switching off”: A Diary Study Investigating the Effect of the Netflix Auto-Play Feature on Binge-Watching and Mindful Attention Awareness. Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Art, Design+ Technology, Dublin, Ireland, 2024.
  24. Michie, S.; Atkins, L.; West, R. The Behaviour Change Wheel: A Guide to Designing Interventions; Silverback Publishing: London, UK, 2014.
  25. Oluwoye, O.; Fraser, E. Barriers and Facilitators That Influence Providers’ Ability to Educate, Monitor, and Treat Substance Use in First-Episode Psychosis Programs Using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Qual. Health Res. 2021, 31, 1144–1154.
  26. Smith, L.A.; Dyson, J.; Watson, J.; Schölin, L. Barriers and Enablers of Implementation of Alcohol Guidelines with Pregnant Women: A Cross-Sectional Survey among UK Midwives. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2021, 21, 134.
  27. Cane, J.; O’Connor, D.; Michie, S. Validation of the Theoretical Domains Framework for Use in Behaviour Change and Implementation Research. Implement. Sci. 2012, 7, 37.
  28. Atkins, L.; Michie, S. Designing Interventions to Change Eating Behaviours. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 2015, 74, 164–170.
  29. Porcheret, M.; Main, C.; Croft, P.; McKinley, R.; Hassell, A.; Dziedzic, K. Development of a Behaviour Change Intervention: A Case Study on the Practical Application of Theory. Implement. Sci. 2014, 9, 42.
  30. Michie, S.; Richardson, M.; Johnston, M.; Abraham, C.; Francis, J.; Hardeman, W.; Eccles, M.P.; Cane, J.; Wood, C.E. The Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy (v1) of 93 Hierarchically Clustered Techniques: Building an International Consensus for the Reporting of Behavior Change Interventions. Ann. Behav. Med. 2013, 46, 81–95.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Behavioral Sciences
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Ally Kwok
,
Fatima Younas
,
Leslie Morrison Gutman
,
Ivo Vlaev
View Times: 659
Online Date: 13 Aug 2024
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    ScholarVision Creations
    Feedback