Papers › An Empirical Investigation of Personalization Factors on TikTok

An Empirical Investigation of Personalization Factors on TikTok

28 Jan 2022arXiv:2201.12271links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Maximilian Boeker, Aleksandra Urman

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

TikTok currently is the fastest growing social media platform with over 1 billion active monthly users of which the majority is from generation Z. Arguably, its most important success driver is its recommendation system. Despite the importance of TikTok's algorithm to the platform's success and content distribution, little work has been done on the empirical analysis of the algorithm. Our work lays the foundation to fill this research gap. Using a sock-puppet audit methodology with a custom algorithm developed by us, we tested and analysed the effect of the language and location used to access TikTok, follow- and like-feature, as well as how the recommended content changes as a user watches certain posts longer than others. We provide evidence that all the tested factors influence the content recommended to TikTok users. Further, we identified that the follow-feature has the strongest influence, followed by the like-feature and video view rate. We also discuss the implications of our findings in the context of the formation of filter bubbles on TikTok and the proliferation of problematic content.

PaperPDFCode

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections