Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Binge-Watching: What Do we Know So Far? A First Systematic Review of the Evidence

  • Technology Addiction (J Billieux, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Addiction Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Along with the expansion of on-demand viewing technology, the practice of binge-watching (i.e., watching multiple episodes of TV series back-to-back) has recently gained increasing research interest, given its potential harmfulness and presumed addictive characteristics. The present article provides the first systematic review of the evidence regarding this increasingly widespread behavior.

Recent Findings

The results of this systematic review (including 24 studies and 17,545 participants) show that binge-watching remains an ill-defined construct as no consensus exists on its operationalization and measurement. Although such methodological disparities across studies hinder the comparability of results, the preliminary findings gathered here mainly point to the heterogeneous nature of binge-watching which covers at least two distinct realities, i.e., high but non-harmful engagement and problematic involvement in TV series watching.

Summary

In these early stages of research, there is a major need for more consistency and harmonization of constructs and their operationalizations to move forward in the understanding of binge-watching. Just as important, future research should maintain the distinction between high and problematic involvement in binge-watching to avoid overpathologizing this common behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Google Trends (https://www.google.com/trends/) clearly shows that “binge-watching” started to become a search term of interest in February 2013, coinciding with the first time when Netflix released simultaneously all 13 episodes of the first season of House of Cards.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Deloitte’s digital media trends survey 12th edition. A new world of choice for digital consumers 2018. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/articles/4479_Digital-media trends/4479_Digital_media%20trends_Exec%20Sum_vFINAL.pdf. Accessed 20 Sep 2019.

  2. Deloitte’s digital media trends survey 13th edition. Piecing it together 2019. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/articles/4782_digital-media-trends-13th-edition/DI_Digital-media-trends-13th-edition.pdf. Accessed 20 Sep 2019.

  3. Netflix Media Center. About Netflix 2019. https://media.netflix.com/en/about-netflix. Accessed 18 Sep 2019.

  4. YouGov Omnibus. 58% of Americans binge-watch TV show 2017. https://today.yougov.com/news/2017/09/13/58-americans-binge-watch-tv-shows/. Accessed 20 Sep 2019.

  5. Brookes S, Ellithorpe M. Good for your mood, bad for your health: Narrative involvement, health behaviors, and binge watching. San Diego: Poster presented at: 67th ICA Annual Conference; 2017. p. 25–9.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Vaterlaus JM, Spruance LA, Frantz K, Kruger JS. College student television binge watching: conceptualization, gratifications, and perceived consequences. Soc Sci J. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2018.10.004.

  7. De Feijter D, Khan JV, Van Gisbergen, MS. Confessions of a ‘guilty’ couch potato: Understanding and using context to optimize binge-watching behavior. In: TVX ‘16 Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video; 2016 Jun 22–24; Chicago (IL): p.59–67. https://doi.org/10.1145/2932206.2932216

  8. Rubenking B, Bracken CC, Sandoval J, Rister A. Defining new viewing behaviours: What makes and motivates TV binge-watching? Int J Digital Television. 2018;9:69–85. https://doi.org/10.1386/jdtv.9.1.69_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hernández Pérez JF, Martínez Díaz MA. Nuevos modelos de consumo audiovisual: Los efectos del binge-watching sobre los jóvenes universitarios [New forms of audiovisual consumption: Binge-watching effects on university students] In: Felici JM, Ripollés AC, editors. En adComunica. Revista Cientíca de Estrategias, Tendencias e Innovación en Comunicación; 2016; Castellón (Spain): p. 201–221. https://doi.org/10.6035/21740992.2017.13.11

  10. Devasagayam, R. Media bingeing: A qualitative study of psychological influences. In: De Long D, Edmiston D, Hightower R, editors. Once Retro Now Novel Again: Proceedings of the Marketing Management Association; 2014 Mar 26–28; Chicago (IL); p. 40–44.

  11. Sung YH, Kang EY, Wee L. A bad habit for your health? An exploration of psychological factors for binge-watching behavior. Poster presented at: 65th ICA Annual Conference; 2015 May 21–25; San Juan, Puerto Rico.

  12. Umesh S, Bose S. Binge-watching: a matter of concern? Indian J Psychol Med. 2019;41:182–4. https://doi.org/10.4103/IJPSYM.IJPSYM_279_18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Steiner E, Xu K. Binge-watching motivates change: Uses and gratifications of streaming video viewers challenge traditional TV research. Convergence. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517750365.

  14. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Altman D, Antes G, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Downes MJ, Brennan ML, Williams HC, Dean RS. Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS). BMJ Open. 2016;6:e011458. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011458.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Sacolo H, Chimbari M, Kalinda C. Knowledge, attitudes and practices on Schistosomiasis in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. BMC Infect Dis. 2018;18:46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-017-2923-6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Pittman M, Sheehan K. Sprinting a media marathon: uses and gratifications of binge-watching television through Netflix. First Monday 2015:20. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i10.6138.

  18. Conlin L, Billings AC, Averset L. Time-shifting vs. appointment viewing: The role of fear of missing out within TV consumption behaviors. Commun Soc. 2016;29:151–64. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.29.4.151-164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Orosz G, Bőthe B, Tóth-Király I. The development of the problematic series watching scale (PSWS). J Behav Addict. 2016;5:144–50. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.5.2016.0111.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Ahmed A. New era of TV-watching behavior: Binge-watching and its psychological effects. Media Watch. 2017;8:192–207. https://doi.org/10.15655/mw/2017/v8i2/49006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Exelmans L, Van den Bulck J. Binge viewing, sleep, and the role of pre-sleep arousal. J Clin Sleep Med. 2017;13:1001–8. https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.6704.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Horvath JC, Horton AJ, Lodge JM, Hattie JA. The impact of binge watching on memory and perceived comprehension. First Monday 2017:22. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v22i9.7729.

  23. Panda S, Pandey SC. Binge-watching and college students: motivations and outcomes. Young Consum. 2017;18:425–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/YC-07-2017-00707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. •• Riddle K, Peebles A, Davis C, Xu F, Schroeder E. The addictive potential of television binge-watching: Comparing intentional and unintentional binges. Psychol Pop Media Cult. 2017;7:589–604. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000167This study was the first one to introduce the notion that binge-watching is not to be approached as a unitary construct by showing that there are two types of binge-watching behaviors, i.e. intentional and unintentional. In addition, this study emphasized that only unintentional binge-watching was related to impulsivity and symptoms of addiction.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Spruance LA, Karmakar M, Kruger JS, Vaterlaus JM. “Are you still watching?”: Correlations between binge TV watching, diet and physical activity. J Obesity Weight Manag 2017.

  26. Tóth-Király I, Böthe B, Tóth-Fáber E, Gyözö H, Orosz G. Connected to TV series: quantifying series watching engagement. J Behav Addict. 2017;6:472–89. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.6.2017.083.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Granow V, Reinecke L, Ziegele M. Binge-watching & psychological well-being: media use between lack of control and perceived autonomy. Commun Res Rep. 2018;35:392–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2018.1525347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Merikivi J, Salovaara A, Mäntymäki M, Zhang L. On the way to understanding binge watching behavior: the over-estimated role of involvement. Electron Mark. 2018;28:111–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-017-0271-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rubenking B, Bracken CC. Binge-watching: a suspenseful, emotional, habit. Commun Res Rep. 2018;35:381–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2018.1525346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Shim H, Lim S, Jung EE, Shin E. I hate binge-watching but I can’t help doing it: the moderating effect of immediate gratification and need for cognition on binge-watching attitude-behavior relation. Telematics Inform. 2018;35:1971–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shim H, Kim KJ. An exploration of the motivations for binge-watching and the role of individual differences. Comput Hum Behav. 2018;82:94–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sung YH, Kang EY, Wee L. Why do we indulge? Exploring motivations for binge watching. J Broadcast Electron Media. 2018;62:408–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2018.1451851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Tefertiller AC, Maxwell LC. Depression, emotional states, and the experience of binge-watching narrative television. Atl J Commun. 2018;26:278–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2018.1517765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. •• Tukachinsky R, Eyal K. The psychology of marathon television viewing: antecedents and viewer involvement. Mass Commun Soc. 2018;21:275–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2017.1422765This study showed that binge-watching is not inherently pathological or dysfunctional as it can also reflect an active and very meaningful experience for viewers. This study also argues that the dynamic relationship between depression and self-regulation deficiency is a possible psychological mechanism in binge-watching.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Walton-Pattison E, Dombrowski SU, Presseau J. “Just one more episode”: Frequency and theoretical correlates of television binge watching. J Health Psychol. 2018;23:17–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105316643379.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Erickson SE, Dal Cin S, Byl H. An experimental examination of binge watching and narrative engagement. Sociol Sci. 2019;8:19. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8010019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Flayelle M, Canale N, Vögele C, Karila L, Maurage P, Billieux J. Assessing binge-watching behaviors: development and validation of the “watching TV series motives” and “binge-watching engagement and symptoms” questionnaires. Comput Hum Behav. 2019;90:26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. • Merrill K, Rubenking B. Go long or go often: Influences on binge-watching frequency and duration among college students. Sociol Sci. 2019;8:10. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8010010The results of this study point out the heterogeneous and multi-determined nature of binge-watching by showing that binge-watching frequency and duration are predicted by two non-overlapping sets of variables (e.g., low self-regulation predicted frequency while viewing enjoyment predicted duration).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pittman M, Steiner E. Transportation or narrative completion? Attentiveness during binge-watching moderates regret. Sociol Sci. 2019;8:1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8030099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Starosta J, Izydorczyk B, Lizińczyk S. Characteristics of people’s binge-watching behavior in the “entering into early adulthood” period of life. Health Psychol Rep. 2019;7:149–64. https://doi.org/10.5114/hpr.2019.83025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Vandewater EA, Lee SJ. Measuring children's media use in the digital age: issues and challenges. Am Behav Sci. 2009;52:1152–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764209331539.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Katz E, Blumler JG, Gurevitch M. Uses and gratifications research. Public Opin Q. 1973;37:509–23. https://doi.org/10.1086/268109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Rubin AM. Uses-and-gratifications perspective on media effects. In: Bryant J, Oliver MB, editors. Media effects: advances in theory and research. New York: Routledge; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Flayelle M, Maurage P, Vögele C, Karila L, Billieux J. Time for a plot twist: beyond confirmatory approaches to binge-watching research. Psychol Pop Media Cult. 2019;8:308–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Blasi MD, Giardina A, Giordano C, Coco GL, Tosto C, Billieux J, et al. Problematic video game use as an emotional coping strategy: evidence from a sample of MMORPG gamers. J Behav Addict. 2019;8:25–34. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.8.2019.02.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Billieux J, Gay P, Rochat L, Van der Linden M. The role of urgency and its underlying psychological mechanisms in problematic behaviours. Behav Res Ther. 2010;48:1085–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2010.07.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Selby EA, Anestis MD, Joiner TE. Understanding the relationship between emotional and behavioral dysregulation: emotional cascades. Behav Res Ther. 2008;46:593–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2008.02.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Wimmer RD, Dominick JR. Mass media research: an introduction. Boston: Wadsworth; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Raney AA. The psychology of disposition-based theories of media enjoyment. In: Bryant J, Vorderer P, editors. Psychology of entertainment. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Reinecke L, Hofmann W. Slacking off or winding down? An experience sampling study on the drivers and consequences of media use for recovery versus procrastination. Hum Commun Res. 2016;42:441–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Hoffmann W, Reinecke L, Meier A. Of sweet temptations and bitter aftertaste: Selfcontrol as a moderator of the effects of media use on well-being. In: Reinecke L, Oliver MB, editors. The Routledge handbook of media use and well-being: international perspectives on theory and research on positive media effects. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Panek E. Left to their own devices: college students’ “guilty pleasure” media use and time management. Commun Res. 2014;41:561–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650213499657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Cao F, Su L, Liu T, Gao X. The relationship between impulsivity and internet addiction in a sample of Chinese adolescents. Eur Psychiatry. 2007;22:466–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2007.05.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Mottram AJ, Fleming MJ. Extraversion, impulsivity, and online group membership as predictors of problematic internet use. CyberPsychol Behav. 2009;12:319–21. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.0170.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. LaRose R, Eastin MS. A social cognitive theory of internet uses and gratifications: toward a new model of media attendance. J Broadcast Electron Media. 2004;48:358–77. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4803_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Kwon M, Lee JY, Won WY, Park JW, Min JA, Hahn C, et al. Development and validation of a smartphone addiction scale (SAS). PLoS One. 2013;8:e56936. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0056936.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Green M, Brock T, Kaufman G. Understanding media enjoyment: the role of transportation into narrative worlds. Commun Theory. 2004;14:311–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00317.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Reinecke L, Oliver MB. Media use and well-being. Status quo and open questions. In: Reinecke L, Oliver MB, editors. The Routledge handbook of media use and well-being: international perspectives on theory and research on positive media effects. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Brand M, Laier C, Young KS. Internet addiction: coping styles, expectancies, and treatment implications. Front Psychol. 2014;5:1256. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01256.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Brand M, Young KS, Laier C, Wolfling K, Potenza MN. Integrating psychological and neurobiological considerations regarding the development and maintenance of specific internet-use disorders: an interaction of person-affect-cognition-execution (I-PACE) model. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016;71:252–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.08.033.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Billieux J, Flayelle M, Rumpf HJ, Stein D. High involvement versus pathological involvement in video games: a crucial distinction for ensuring the validity and utility of gaming disorder. Curr Addict Rep. 2019;6:323–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-019-00259-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Swanton TB, Blaszczynski A, Forlini C, Starcevic V, Gainsbury SM. Problematic risk-taking involving emerging technologies: A stakeholder framework to minimize harms. J Behav Addict. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.8.2019.52.

Download references

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Pierre Maurage (Senior Research Associate) is funded by the Belgian Fund for Scientific Research (FRS-FNRS, Belgium).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Addictive and Compulsive Behaviours Lab, Institute for Health and Behaviour, University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg

    Maèva Flayelle, Kim Ridell Di Lorenzo & Joël Billieux

  2. Louvain Experimental Psychopathology Research Group (LEP), Psychological Sciences Research Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

    Pierre Maurage

  3. Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences, Institute for Health and Behaviour, University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg

    Claus Vögele

  4. School of Psychology, Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Sally M. Gainsbury

  5. Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Joël Billieux

Authors
  1. Maèva Flayelle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pierre Maurage
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kim Ridell Di Lorenzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Claus Vögele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sally M. Gainsbury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Joël Billieux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Maèva Flayelle or Joël Billieux.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. This article has been edited by Editor-in-Chief Marc Potenza instead of Joël Billieux, as Joël Billieux is the Section Editor of the “Technological Addictions” topical collection.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Technology Addiction

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Flayelle, M., Maurage, P., Di Lorenzo, K.R. et al. Binge-Watching: What Do we Know So Far? A First Systematic Review of the Evidence. Curr Addict Rep 7, 44–60 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-020-00299-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-020-00299-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation