The Internet’s relatively unfettered transmission of information risks exposing individuals to extremist content. Using online survey data (N = 768) of American youth and young adults, we examine factors that bring individuals into contact with online material advocating violence. Combining aspects of social structure-social learning theory with insights from routine activity theory, we find that exposure to violence-advocating materials is positively correlated with online behaviors, including the use of social media platforms and the virtual spaces individuals frequent. Target antagonism is also correlated with exposure to violence-advocating materials, but guardianship and online and offline associations are not. Finally, feelings of dissatisfaction with major social institutions and economic disengagement are associated with exposure to violent materials online.
Exposure to hate material is related to a host of negative outcomes. Young people might be especially vulnerable to the deleterious effects of such exposure. With that in mind, this article examines factors associated with the frequency that youth and young adults, ages 15 to 24, see material online that expresses negative views toward a social group. We use an online survey of individuals recruited from a demographically balanced sample of Americans for this project. Our analysis controls for variables that approximate online routines, social, political, and economic grievances, and sociodemographic traits. Findings show that spending more time online, using particular social media sites, interacting with close friends online, and espousing political views online all correlate with increased exposure to online hate. Harboring political grievances is likewise associated with seeing hate material online frequently. Finally, Whites are more likely than other race/ethnic groups to be exposed to online hate frequently.
Why do some people find online hate material more disturbing than others? We use a random sample of Americans between the ages 15 and 36 to address this question.Descriptive results indicate that a majority of respondents surveyed find online hate material very or extremely disturbing, while smaller shares find it moderately, slightly, or not at all disturbing. We utilize an ordinal logistic regression to explore factors associated with these varying perceptions of hate material. Results demonstrate that males and political conservatives find hate material less disturbing than females and political moderates or liberals. These results are expected, as online hate is largely dominated by right-wing extremists who frequently target females and non-conservatives. We also find that individuals who see hate material more frequently find it more disturbing, as do those who have been the target of hate or criminality online. Finally, individuals who are more accepting of violating social norms are less disturbed by online hate.
Does hateful rhetoric appeal to supporters of President Trump? Prior studies link sexism, racism, Islamophobia, anti-immigrant sentiment, and intolerant forms of Christianity to supporting or voting for President Trump. We extend this literature by examining whether individuals who approve of President Trump’s job performance are more accepting of the hateful rhetoric and imagery they encounter online. We do so using online survey data ( N = 465) of youth and young adults collected in December 2017. Building on previous theoretical explanations of participating in online hate that utilize routine activity theory and social learning–social structure theory, we argue that support for President Trump is a result of the “politics of status,” and support for the President thus represents an enthymeme. Our key finding is that agreement with online hate material is indeed positively associated with support for the President. Additionally, we find that one’s differential location in the social structure, online and off-line social bonds, and attitudes toward norm violations are associated with agreement with online extremist content.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.