Algorithmic Literacy, Digital Literacy, and Perceived Digital Self-Efficacy as Predictors of Social Media Engagement Among Filipino Emerging Adults in the City of Manila
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.07.08.13Keywords:
Algorithmic Literacy, Digital Literacy, Emerging Adults, Perceived Digital Self-Efficacy, Philippines, Social Media EngagementAbstract
The rapid spread of recommender algorithms has made the competencies that govern how young people interpret and act in digital spaces a pressing concern. This study examined levels of algorithmic and digital literacy, as well as perceived digital self-efficacy, among Filipino emerging adults and tested whether these competencies predicted their social media engagement. Using a descriptive-correlational and predictive design, a researcher-adapted survey was administered through non-probability sampling to 77 eligible emerging adults from the City of Manila. Given the non-probability sampling and ordinal data, levels were summarized using the median (Mdn) and interquartile range; associations were tested with Spearman’s rank-order correlation; and predictors were identified through median (quantile) regression. Respondents showed a very high level of algorithmic literacy (Mdn = 4.50) and high levels of digital literacy (Mdn = 4.11), perceived digital self-efficacy (Mdn = 4.20), and social media engagement (Mdn = 3.83). All three competencies were significantly and positively associated with engagement: algorithmic literacy (ρ = .30, p = .003), digital literacy (ρ = .39), and perceived digital self-efficacy (ρ = .41), the latter two at p < .001. In the median regression, however, digital literacy was the only significant unique predictor of engagement (b = 0.47, p = .003); perceived digital self-efficacy and algorithmic literacy did not contribute uniquely once digital literacy was accounted for. Practical digital competence, rather than algorithm awareness or digital confidence alone, appears to most directly account for how emerging adults engage online, underscoring the value of competency-based digital citizenship programs.
Downloads
References
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Bucher, T. (2017). The algorithmic imaginary: Exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1154086
Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189–211. https://doi.org/10.2307/249688
Cotter, K., & Reisdorf, B. C. (2020). Algorithmic knowledge gaps: A new horizon of (digital) inequality. International Journal of Communication, 14, 745–765. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/12450
Di Gangi, P. M., & Wasko, M. M. (2016). Social media engagement theory: Exploring the influence of user engagement on social media usage. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 28(2), 53–73. https://doi.org/10.4018/JOEUC.2016040104
Dolan, R., Conduit, J., Fahy, J., & Goodman, S. (2016). Social media engagement behavior: A uses and gratifications perspective. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(3–4), 261–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2015.1095222
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). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702556
Gran, A.-B., Booth, P., & Bucher, T. (2021). To be or not to be algorithm aware: A question of a new digital divide? Information, Communication & Society, 24(12), 1779–1796. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1736124
Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people’s online skills. First Monday, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v7i4.942
Hobbs, R. (2010). Digital and media literacy: A plan of action. The Aspen Institute.
Kemp, S. (2024, February 21). Digital 2024: The Philippines. DataReportal. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2024-philippines
Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065–1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326
Swart, J. (2021). Experiencing algorithms: How young people understand, feel about, and engage with algorithmic news selection on social media. Social Media + Society, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211008828
van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2011). Internet skills and the digital divide. New Media & Society, 13(6), 893–911. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810386774
Zarouali, B., Boerman, S. C., & de Vreese, C. H. (2021). Is this recommended by an algorithm? The development and validation of the algorithmic media content awareness scale (AMCA-scale). Telematics and Informatics, 62, Article 101607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2021.101607
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Maria Alexandra C. Odvina, Renee Maxine S. Lazaro, Yashas N. Sah, Edmond Jacob C. Sy, Andrew C. Lim Un, Myla M. Arcinas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access).
