It's the aggression, stupid!: An examination of commenters' motives for using incivility in online political discussions

Jan P. Kluck, N. Krämer
{"title":"It's the aggression, stupid!: An examination of commenters' motives for using incivility in online political discussions","authors":"Jan P. Kluck, N. Krämer","doi":"10.1145/3400806.3400826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Incivility in online political discussions is an urgent problem for society as it can have detrimental effects on democratic discourse. However, knowledge about people's inherent motives for behaving in an uncivil way is scarce. To close this gap, this online study employed a mixed-methods approach and surveyed 115 discussion commenters to explore their motives for communicating in an uncivil manner. Qualitative analyses revealed that in individual cases, people's motives for uncivil commenting can be very complex, and differ between distinct forms of incivility. Participants also indicated that they often try to counteract other comments. In contrast, quantitative data revealed that motives related to aggression were the key drivers for frequent uncivil commenting behavior among different forms of incivility. In sum, the study demonstrated that although aggressive motives are not the only predictors of uncivil commenting, they still seem to be a key factor for an individual's tendency to write uncivil comments.","PeriodicalId":93402,"journal":{"name":"8th International Conference on Social Media & Society : Social Media for Good or Evil : Toronto, Canada, July 28-30, 2017. International Conference on Social Media & Society (8th : 2017 : Toronto, Ont.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"8th International Conference on Social Media & Society : Social Media for Good or Evil : Toronto, Canada, July 28-30, 2017. International Conference on Social Media & Society (8th : 2017 : Toronto, Ont.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3400806.3400826","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Incivility in online political discussions is an urgent problem for society as it can have detrimental effects on democratic discourse. However, knowledge about people's inherent motives for behaving in an uncivil way is scarce. To close this gap, this online study employed a mixed-methods approach and surveyed 115 discussion commenters to explore their motives for communicating in an uncivil manner. Qualitative analyses revealed that in individual cases, people's motives for uncivil commenting can be very complex, and differ between distinct forms of incivility. Participants also indicated that they often try to counteract other comments. In contrast, quantitative data revealed that motives related to aggression were the key drivers for frequent uncivil commenting behavior among different forms of incivility. In sum, the study demonstrated that although aggressive motives are not the only predictors of uncivil commenting, they still seem to be a key factor for an individual's tendency to write uncivil comments.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
这是侵略,笨蛋!一项关于评论者在网络政治讨论中使用无礼行为动机的调查
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
It's the aggression, stupid!: An examination of commenters' motives for using incivility in online political discussions The Cognitive Benefits of Social Media Use in Later Life: Results of a Randomized, Controlled Pilot Study. The affordance effect: Gatekeeping and (non)reciprocal journalism on Twitter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1