IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/woemps/v39y2025i4p787-813.html

Content Creation within the Algorithmic Environment: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Yin Liang

    (Newcastle University Business School, UK)

  • Jiaming Li

    (Birmingham Business School, UK)

  • Jeremy Aroles

    (University of York, UK)

  • Edward Granter

    (Birmingham Business School, UK)

Abstract

While research on platform work has grown exponentially in recent years, the power dynamics between creators and algorithms on digital platforms, as well as their role in shaping online visibility, are yet to be fully understood. Against this backdrop, we ask: How does algorithmic power maintain its dominance and shape the nature of work for content creators? Through a systematic review of the literature on the relationship between algorithms and content creators, this article identified four core themes, namely: (i) market rationality underpinning visibility, (ii) potential power dislocation caused by folk theories, (iii) neo-normative control of creators through algorithms and (iv) subversion of beatific fantasies. Drawing from Tirapani and Willmott’s framework to theorise the power relations framing interactions between algorithms and creators, we argue that the fantasies fabricated by neoliberalism justify, endorse and ultimately support the dominance and dynamic power of algorithms over creators in content creative platforms.

Suggested Citation

  • Yin Liang & Jiaming Li & Jeremy Aroles & Edward Granter, 2025. "Content Creation within the Algorithmic Environment: A Systematic Review," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 39(4), pages 787-813, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:woemps:v:39:y:2025:i:4:p:787-813
    DOI: 10.1177/09500170251325784
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09500170251325784
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/09500170251325784?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ron Berman & Zsolt Katona, 2020. "Curation Algorithms and Filter Bubbles in Social Networks," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 296-316, March.
    2. Aurélie Leclercq-Vandelannoitte & Henri Isaac & Michel Kalika, 2014. "Mobile information systems and organisational control: beyond the panopticon metaphor?," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(5), pages 543-557, September.
    3. Wallace Chipidza & Jie (Kevin) Yan, 2022. "The effectiveness of flagging content belonging to prominent individuals: The case of Donald Trump on Twitter," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(11), pages 1641-1658, November.
    4. Dimitar Nikolov & Mounia Lalmas & Alessandro Flammini & Filippo Menczer, 2019. "Quantifying Biases in Online Information Exposure," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 70(3), pages 218-229, March.
    5. Harrigan, Paul & Daly, Timothy M. & Coussement, Kristof & Lee, Julie A. & Soutar, Geoffrey N. & Evers, Uwana, 2021. "Identifying influencers on social media," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    6. Niyati Aggrawal & Anuja Arora, 2019. "Behaviour of viewers: YouTube videos viewership analysis," International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 20(1), pages 106-128.
    7. Ioannis Arapakis & Berkant Barla Cambazoglu & Mounia Lalmas, 2017. "On the feasibility of predicting popular news at cold start," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(5), pages 1149-1164, May.
    8. Nima Kordzadeh & Maryam Ghasemaghaei, 2022. "Algorithmic bias: review, synthesis, and future research directions," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 388-409, May.
    9. Keran Zhao & Yingda Lu & Yuheng Hu & Yili Hong, 2023. "Direct and Indirect Spillovers from Content Providers’ Switching: Evidence from Online Livestreaming," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 847-866, September.
    10. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13420 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Ro'ee Levy, 2021. "Social Media, News Consumption, and Polarization: Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(3), pages 831-870, March.
    12. Crosby, Paul & McKenzie, Jordi, 2021. "Should subscription-based content creators display their earnings on crowdfunding platforms? Evidence from Patreon," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 16(C).
    13. Hensmans, Manuel, 2021. "Exploring the dark and bright sides of Internet democracy: Ethos-reversing and ethos-renewing digital transformation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    14. Manuel Hensmans, 2021. "Exploring the dark and bright sides of Internet democracy: Ethos-reversing and ethos-renewing digital transformation," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/321232, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    15. Vivek K. Singh & Mary Chayko & Raj Inamdar & Diana Floegel, 2020. "Female librarians and male computer programmers? Gender bias in occupational images on digital media platforms," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(11), pages 1281-1294, November.
    16. Reisach, Ulrike, 2021. "The responsibility of social media in times of societal and political manipulation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(3), pages 906-917.
    17. Napoli, Philip M., 2015. "Social media and the public interest: Governance of news platforms in the realm of individual and algorithmic gatekeepers," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 751-760.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arora, Swapan Deep & Singh, Guninder Pal & Chakraborty, Anirban & Maity, Moutusy, 2022. "Polarization and social media: A systematic review and research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    2. Yang, Hui & Li, Dan & Hu, Peng, 2024. "Decoding algorithm fatigue: The role of algorithmic literacy, information cocoons, and algorithmic opacity," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    3. Guo, Cunzhi & Ho, Kung-Cheng & Gong, Yujing & Yu, Jia-Qi, 2025. "Public opinion shaping: The impact of corporate digital transformation on analysts' optimistic forecast bias," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    4. Ying Bao & Jessie Liu, 2025. "Spiral of Silence: How Neutral Moderation Polarizes Content Creation," Papers 2511.19680, arXiv.org.
    5. Maciel M. Queiroz & Samuel Fosso Wamba, 2024. "A structured literature review on the interplay between emerging technologies and COVID-19 – insights and directions to operations fields," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 335(3), pages 937-963, April.
    6. Apostolos Filippas & John Horton, 2021. "The Production and Consumption of Social Media," Papers 2104.00834, arXiv.org.
    7. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    8. Monica Lestari Paramita & Maria Kasinidou & Styliani Kleanthous & Paolo Rosso & Tsvi Kuflik & Frank Hopfgartner, 2024. "Towards improving user awareness of search engine biases: A participatory design approach," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 75(5), pages 581-599, May.
    9. Rieder, Bernhard & Hofmann, Jeanette, 2020. "Towards platform observability," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 9(4), pages 1-28.
    10. Umar, Tarik, 2022. "Complexity aversion when SeekingAlpha," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2).
    11. Germano, Fabrizio & Gómez, Vicenç & Sobbrio, Francesco, 2026. "Ranking for engagement: How social media algorithms fuel misinformation and polarization," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    12. Ying Bao & Jessie Liu, 2025. "Spiral of Silence: How Neutral Moderation Polarizes Content Creation," CESifo Working Paper Series 12008, CESifo.
    13. Luca Braghieri & Ro'ee Levy & Hannah Trachtman, 2025. "Frictions in News Consumption: How to Improve the Social Media News Diet," EconPol Forum, CESifo, vol. 26(04), pages 12-16, October.
    14. Felix Chopra & Ingar Haaland & Fabian Roeben & Christopher Roth & Vanessa Sticher, 2025. "News Customization with AI," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 372, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    15. Stéphanie Camaréna, 2021. "Engaging with Artificial Intelligence (AI) with a Bottom-Up Approach for the Purpose of Sustainability: Victorian Farmers Market Association, Melbourne Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-28, August.
    16. Nicolás Ajzenman & Bruno Ferman & Pedro C. Sant'Anna, 2025. "Discrimination in the Formation of Academic Networks: A Field Experiment on #EconTwitter," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 357-375, September.
    17. Maurizio Pugno, 2024. "Social media effects on well‐being: The hypothesis of addiction of a new variety," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 77(3), pages 690-704, August.
    18. Ester Faia & Andreas Fuster & Vincenzo Pezone & Basit Zafar, 2024. "Biases in Information Selection and Processing: Survey Evidence from the Pandemic," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(3), pages 829-847, May.
    19. Tommaso Bondi & Omid Rafieian & Yunfei (Jesse) Yao, 2026. "Privacy and Polarization: An Inference-Based Framework," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(2), pages 1389-1409, February.
    20. Gruener, Sven, 2019. "An empirical study on Internet-based false news stories: experiences, problem awareness, and responsibilities," SocArXiv xbez9, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:woemps:v:39:y:2025:i:4:p:787-813. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.britsoc.co.uk/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.