When online harassment is perceived as justified
Lindsay Blackwell, PhD candidate
@linguangst
Hello!
I’m Lindsay Blackwell,
a PhD candidate at the University of Michigan School of Information, where I research online harassment.
2
What is online harassment?
1.
What is online harassment?
Lindsay Blackwell, Jill Dimond, Sarita Schoenebeck, and Cliff Lampe. 2017. Classification and Its Consequences for Online Harassment: Design Insights from HeartMob. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 1, No. 2, Article 24 (November 2017), 19 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3134659�
Online harassment refers to a broad spectrum of abusive behaviors enabled by technology platforms and used to target a specific user or users.
4
What is online harassment?
Lindsay Blackwell, Jill Dimond, Sarita Schoenebeck, and Cliff Lampe. 2017. Classification and Its Consequences for Online Harassment: Design Insights from HeartMob. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 1, No. 2, Article 24 (November 2017), 19 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3134659�
This includes, but is not limited to, flaming, doxing, impersonation, and public shaming. These tactics are often used together— particularly when many individuals collectively target one individual (sometimes referred to as “dogpiling”). �
5
Why do people engage in harassing behaviors online?
2.
41%
of American adults have personally�experienced online harassment
Maeve Duggan. 2017. Online Harassment 2017. Pew Research Center.
9
66%
of American adults have witnessed online�harassment directed toward others
Maeve Duggan. 2017. Online Harassment 2017. Pew Research Center.
10
Why do people engage in harassing behaviors online?
2.
Harassment as social sanctioning
The use of harassing behaviors to sanction norm violations online.
Retributive justice
A theory of punishment in which individuals who knowingly commit an act deemed to be morally wrong receive a proportionate punishment for their misdeeds, sometimes referred to as “an eye for an eye.”�
Retributive justice
A theory of punishment in which individuals who knowingly commit an act deemed to be morally wrong receive a proportionate punishment for their misdeeds, sometimes referred to as “an eye for an eye.”�
😡
Criminal�offense
1
Proportionate punishment
2
Justice is�served
3
Retributive justice
A theory of punishment in which individuals who knowingly commit an act deemed to be morally wrong receive a proportionate punishment for their misdeeds, sometimes referred to as “an eye for an eye.”�
😡
Criminal�offense
1
Proportionate punishment
2
Justice is�served
3
Retributive harassment
The use of harassing behaviors to sanction norm violations online.
😡
Norm violation
1
Sanction
2
Perceived justice
3
Study 1: Retributive priming
H1: Priming
Exposure to a retributive prime increases belief that a transgression is justified, deserved, and appropriate.
H2: Retributive Justice
Propensity for retributive justice increases belief that a transgression is justified, deserved, and appropriate.
Study 1: Retributive priming
3x1 between-subjects experiment
Group 3
High retributive prime
Group 1
Control (no prime)
Group 2
Low retributive prime
Group 3
High retributive prime
Study 1: Retributive priming
3x1 between-subjects experiment
Sarah stole $100 from an elderly couple.
Sarah stole $10,000 from
an elderly couple.
Group 1
Control (no prime)
Group 2
Low retributive prime
Online harassment of an offender is justified and deserved,�but not appropriate
People who favor retributive justice find online harassment of an offender more deserved�and more justified
If you saw this online,�how would you feel?
I think it's wrong to tell people to kill themselves (obviously), but who steals $10,000 from an elderly couple? She should be told in no uncertain terms what a horrible person she is.”�
42
At least some kids still have morals these days, even if they have foul mouths.”
43
“Sounds like Sarah's an asshole, but yelling garbage into the void does nothing to help the wronged.”
44
If you saw this online, what (if anything) would you do?
“I honestly feel so desensitized to responses like Amy's. They are everywhere. I wouldn't feel much of anything—other than rolling my eyes and moving on.” �
46
Study 2: Bystander intervention
Bystander intervention reduces the perception of retributive harassment as justified�or deserved.
Where do we go from here?
3.
Why does online matter?
Future work will focus on the specific affordances of social network sites that may exacerbate this effect, such as visibility, persistence, and archivability—as well as social and individual factors that may contribute to a person’s likelihood to engage in a retributive sanction online.
Designing for justice-seeking
An emerging alternative to Western, retributivism-based criminal justice is restorative justice, or the restoration of justice through a shared understanding between victim, offender, and community (Wenzel, Okimoto, Feather, & Platow, 2007).
One direction for future work is to explore ways of integrating restorative approaches into online communities. This might involve using deescalating language that draws on shared experiences and understanding, or creating spaces where communities of people can come together to express their feelings and concerns.
When online harassment is perceived as justified
Lindsay Blackwell, @linguangst
Slides available at: bit.ly/doxingnazis
1.
People believe online harassment is more justified and more deserved when the target has committed an offense.
2.
People who favor retributive justice find online harassment of an offender more deserved and more justified than others.
3.
Bystander intervention reduces the perception of retributive harassment as justified or deserved.
54