Uncivil Discussion Research Articles

Social Media and Perceived Political Polarization: Role of Perceived Platform Affordances, Participation in Uncivil Political Discussion, and Perceived Others’ Engagement

This research applies a perceived affordance approach to examine the distinctive role of social media technologies in shaping (mis)perceptions of political polarization. We argue that users’ perceptions of platform affordances influence both (a) their self-participation in uncivil political discussion on social media and (b) perceptions of others’ engagement, which eventually shape their perceptions of polarization. Our analysis of US survey data found that perceptions of lower privacy and stronger network association on Facebook are related to perceptions of a higher level of uncivil discussion by other users, which in turn predicts greater perceived polarization. Perceptions of higher anonymity relate to higher self-participation in uncivil discussion, which is surprisingly associated with perceptions of reduced polarization. Our follow-up experimental study illustrated that participants with more frequent engagement in uncivil discussion, irrespective of interacting with civil or uncivil comments, showed consistently higher levels of intrapersonal reflection, which reduces perceived polarization.

Appraising Uncivil Comments in Online Political Discussions: How Do Preceding Incivility and Senders’ Stance Affect the Processing of an Uncivil Comment?

Although the appraisal of online incivility highly depends on the social context in which it occurs, little research has focused on this aspect. Drawing on the general aggression model, we assumed that the appraisal of and the reaction to an uncivil discussion comment is affected by the represented stance and the appearance of accompanying comments. To examine these assumptions, we conducted an online experiment ( N = 611) with a three ( uncivil vs. civil vs. no preceding comments as a control) × two ( opposing vs. conforming recipient’s views) between-subjects design. Data revealed that the influence of preceding comments is limited. However, people were more likely to attribute aggressive motives to senders of incivility when they opposed their opinion. In turn, these attributions increased individuals’ anger, anxiety, hostile cognitions, but also enthusiasm. Furthermore, aggressive motive attributions, participants’ emotions, and hostile cognitions guided participants’ intentions to answer in a discussion-centered and/or aggressive way.

Examining the Role of Online Uncivil Discussion and Ideological Extremity on Illegal Protest

In recent years, there has been an increased academic interest revolving around the beneficial or pernicious effects of ideological extremity and (uncivil) political discussion over democracy. For instance, citizens’ ideological predispositions and higher levels of political discussion have been linked with a more active and vibrant political life. In fact, ideological extremity and uncivil discussion foster institutionalized political engagement. However, less explored in the literature remains whether such polarization and uncivil discussions may be related to unlawful political behavior such as illegal protest. This study contends that one of the main drivers of illegal protest behavior lies in online uncivil political discussion, specifically through the normalization and activation of further incivility. We tested this through a two-wave panel data drawn from a diverse US sample and cross-sectional, lagged, and autoregressive regression models. Mediation analysis was also conducted to test whether uncivil online discussion mediated the relationship between frequency of online political discussion and illegal protest engagement. Overall, we found that illegal protest was particularly associated with online uncivil discussion, while ideological extremity and other forms of online and offline discussions seemed to have no effect on unlawful protest over time.

Supportive and uncivil expressions in discussions on out-groups by in-group members in anonymous computer-mediated communication

Previous studies have investigated intergroup uncivil discussions in anonymous computer-mediated communication, but there is a scarcity of research on supportive expressions in discussions on out-groups by in-group members. In this research, we conducted two studies to investigate uncivil and supportive expressions in discussions on an out-group among in-group members on an anonymous discussion forum. Study 1 analysed a massive dataset of posts and responses collected from HKGolden, the most popular local discussion forum during the study period (i.e., 2013–2018). In Study 2, an experiment was conducted to test the effects of initial supportive expressions in discussions on the out-group Mainland Chinese on subsequent uncivil and supportive expressions. The findings suggested use of supportive expressions on the out-group in the initiation of interactions among in-group members decreased the use of subsequent uncivil responses and increased the number of subsequent supportive responses about the out-group. This research represents one of few attempts to understand the alleviation of uncivil expressions and facilitation of deliberative discussions in computer-mediated communication.

COVID-19 vaccine online misinformation in Fiji: Preliminary findings

Digital media, opens a vast array of avenues for lay people to effectively engage with news, information and debates about important science and health issues. However, they have also become a fertile ground for various stakeholders to spread misinformation and disinformation, stimulate uncivil discussions and engender ill-informed, dangerous public decisions. During the COVID-19 pandemic, antivaccination social media accounts are proliferating online, threatening to further escalate vaccine hesitancy. The pandemic signifies not only a global health crisis, it has also proven to be an infodemic characterised by many conspiracy theories. Prior research indicates that belief in health-related conspiracies can harm efforts to curtail the spread of a virus. This article presents and examines preliminary research findings on COVID-19 vaccine related misinformation being circulated on Fijian Facebook Forums.

COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and its effect on human psychology

Digital media, while opening a vast array of avenues for lay people to effectively engage with news, information and debates about important science and health issues, have become a fertile land for various stakeholders to spread misinformation and disinformation, stimulate uncivil discussions and engender ill-informed, dangerous public decisions. Recent developments of the Covid-19 infodemic might just be the tipping point of a process that has been long simmering in controversial areas of health and science (e.g., climate-change denial, anti-vaccination, anti-5G, Flat Earth doctrines). We bring together a wide range of fresh data and perspectives from four continents to help media scholars, journalists, science communicators , scientists, health professionals and policy-makers to better undersand these developments and what can be done to mitigate their impacts on public engagement with health and science controversies.

Social media filtering and democracy: Effects of social media news use and uncivil political discussions on social media unfriending

In todays' progressively polarized society, social media users are increasingly exposed to blatant uncivil comments, dissonant views, and controversial news contents, both from their peers and the media organizations they follow. Recent scholarship on selective avoidance suggests that citizens when exposed to contentious stimuli tend to either neglect, avoid, or by-pass such content, a practice scholarly known as users' filtration tactics or unfriending. Drawing upon a nationally representative panel survey from the United States (W1 = 1338/W2 = 511) fielded in 2019/2020, this study seeks to a) examine whether social media news use is associated to exposure to uncivil political discussions, and 2) explore the ways in which both constructs causally affect users' unfriending behavior. Finally, the study investigates the contingent moderating role of uncivil political discussion in energizing the relationship between social media use for news and unfriending. Our findings first find support for the idea that social media news use directly activates citizens' uncivil discussions and unfriending, while uncivil political discussion directly triggers unfriending behavior and significantly contributes to intensify the effect of social media news use over citizens’ unfriending levels. These findings add to current conversations about the potential motivations and deleterious effects of social media filtering in contemporary democracies.

Digital Mis/Disinformation and Public Engagment with Health and Science Controversies: Fresh Perspectives from Covid-19

Digital media, while opening a vast array of avenues for lay people to effectively engage with news, information and debates about important science and health issues, have become a fertile land for various stakeholders to spread misinformation and disinformation, stimulate uncivil discussions and engender ill-informed, dangerous public decisions. Recent developments of the Covid-19 infodemic might just be the tipping point of a process that has been long simmering in controversial areas of health and science (e.g., climate-change denial, anti-vaccination, anti-5G, Flat Earth doctrines). We bring together a wide range of fresh data and perspectives from four continents to help media scholars, journalists, science communicators, scientists, health professionals and policy-makers to better undersand these developments and what can be done to mitigate their impacts on public engagement with health and science controversies.

Toward an integrative model for online incivility research: A review and synthesis of empirical studies on the antecedents and consequences of uncivil discussions online

Toward an integrative model for online incivility research: A review and synthesis of empirical studies on the antecedents and consequences of uncivil discussions online

The Role of Civility and Metacommunication in Facebook Discussions

Social media’s potential for political and social discussion provides great promise since deliberation is key for democracy. Unfortunately, there is a problematic presence of incivility in conversations on digital platforms. We conducted an experiment to examine the effects of this phenomenon, driven by the elaboration likelihood model. Each of our four conditions showed a media outlet’s Facebook post with a story about genetically modified organisms and a comment section beneath with one of the following: a civil discussion, an uncivil discussion, an uncivil conversation with metacommunication encouraging civility, and a control group. Results revealed a mediated relationship of exposure to civil and metacommunicative comments on willingness to engage in a discussion through mental elaboration. We also found evidence of modeling behavior for civility and metacommunication.

Influence of Discussion Incivility on Deliberation: An Examination of the Mediating Role of Moral Indignation

Isolating causal relationships is very difficult in natural discussion because discussion is, by nature, a causally complex interactive process. This study provides a novel approach to this problem by using simulated online discussion to experimentally manipulate message characteristics in a timed script that participants believed to be a discussion with other participants. In particular, we manipulated whether simulated online discussion partners expressed disagreement civilly or uncivilly. With this unique design, we examined how individuals differently react to opposing views in an online discussion setting depending on tone of disagreement expression. Our results showed that exposure to uncivil discussion results in increased negative emotions toward the other side, which in turn led to more closed-mindedness and more expression of disagreement with the discussion partner on the other side of the issue, although uncivil discussion and negative emotions are positively related to recall of the other side’s reasons.

Playing Nice: Modeling Civility in Online Political Discussions

This article explores a way to promote civility in online political discussions through modeling behaviors. An online experiment (N = 130) was conducted to investigate the influence of civil and uncivil political discourse on participants’ mode of discussion and participatory intentions. Results show that those who were exposed to civil discussion demonstrated a civil mode of discourse in their own comments and reported a higher level of willingness to participate in discussions, compared to those who were exposed to uncivil discussion. This study illuminates the possibility that civil participants may have more control over the online environment than they think.

Seeing is Believing: Effects of Uncivil Online Debate on Political Polarization and Expectations of Deliberation

The present study examines how exposure to uncivil online comments influences individuals' attitude polarization along political party lines, perceived political polarization of the public, and expectations about public deliberation. Findings show that exposure to uncivil online discussion does not affect attitude polarization, but it does significantly affect the perceived polarization of the public. In addition, exposure to uncivil online discussion leads to lower expectations about public deliberation and such effect of uncivil discussion on expectations of public deliberation was mediated by perceived public polarization but not by attitude polarization.

Interactions of News Frames and Incivility in the Political Blogosphere: Examining Perceptual Outcomes

The anonymity and flexibility of the online world allows the free expression of views. This same anonymity and unconstrained expression can initiate uncivil debate. The political blogosphere is thus replete with uncivil discussions and becomes an apt context to examine the influence of incivility on news frames. Moreover, although there is an increasingly growing literature on framing, few have examined framing effects in the contemporary media landscape. Thus, the present study brings in literature from incivility and framing effects to examine the influence of incivility on news frames for perceptual outcomes. The study uses an experiment embedded in a Web survey. Findings show that incivility increases the credibility of a news article while decreasing political trust and political efficacy. Further, results demonstrate the interactions of incivility and news frames. For instance, news credibility is increased only in the value framed condition. And a combination of strategic frames and incivility results in the least political trust and external efficacy. Implications are discussed. [Supplementary material is available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of Political Communication for the following free supplemental resource(s): stimulus material for the experiment.]

Does It Matter Where You Read the News Story? Interaction of Incivility and News Frames in the Political Blogosphere

The political blogosphere is replete with uncivil discussions and is apt to examine the influence of incivility on news frames. The present study brings in literature from incivility and framing effects and uses two experiments to examine the influence of incivility on news frames for democratic outcomes such as willingness to participate, online participation, openmindedness, and attitude certainty. Primary findings indicate the detrimental effects of incivility causing less openmindedness and more attitude certainty. At the same time, incivility causes more willingness to participate and online participation. More importantly, the findings demonstrate how incivility interacts with news frames. Implications for news framing effects in the social media landscape are discussed.

Getting political on social network sites: Exploring online political discourse on Facebook

This study explores use of the social network site Facebook for online political discussion. Online political discussion has been criticized for isolating disagreeing persons from engaging in discussion and for having an atmosphere of uncivil discussion behavior. Analysis reveals the participation of disagreeing parties within the discussion with the large majority of posters (73 percent) expressing support for the stated position of the Facebook group, and a minority of posters (17 percent) expressing opposition to the position of the group. Despite the presence of uncivil discussion posting within the Facebook group, the large majority of discussion participation (75 percent) is devoid of flaming. Results of this study provide important groundwork and raise new questions for study of online political discussion as it occurs in the emergent Internet technologies of social network sites.