Flaming among first-time group support system users

Aiken, Milam; Waller, Bennie D.

doi:10.1016/s0378-7206(99)00036-1

Cited by 60 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, flaming emails are often characterized as containing such elements as profanity, insults, sarcasm, or offensive statements (Alonzo & Aiken, 2004;Turnage, 2008). Furthermore, to constitute a flame, some argue (e.g., Aiken & Waller, 2000;O'Sullivan & Flanagin, 2003) that these emails must violate interactional norms and reflect intention on the part of the sender. Thus, one might draw a parallel between flaming in email communication and aggression.…”

Section: Workplace Incivility Definition and Perpetrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of workload and civility of treatment on the perpetration of email incivility

Francis

Holmvall

O’Brien

2015

Computers in Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Workplace Incivility Definition and Perpetrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of workload and civility of treatment on the perpetration of email incivility

Francis

Holmvall

O’Brien

2015

Computers in Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…high levels of assertiveness and sensation seeking (Alonso & Aiken 2002). Also, males tend to engage in flaming more than females (Aiken & Waller 2000). Relying on this, we can conclude that there are a number of mutually supportive reasons for online aggression.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 53%

“…The message and its tone is usually a result of attitudes combined with motivation, disinhibition and an opportunity to aggress, all embedded in the situation. Researchers have discovered that the same flamers may "attack" different contexts with similar flames (Aiken & Waller 2000). Exchanging witty remarks can often take the form of seemingly offensive statements, although it is in fact just rough-and-tumble play (only, of course, if both or all participants perceive it as such) (Kendall 2002).…”

Section: Flaming and Humourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verbal expressions of aggressiveness on the Estonian Internet

Laineste¹

2013

ESTONIA AND POLAND: Creativity and Tradition in Cultural Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The focus of this paper is on the nature and role of online aggression in larger scale societal tensions and its interaction with the use of humor. The study analyses expressions of online aggression in different online environments. The study involves content analysis of online media from discussion forums and less regulated social media like blogs. The material was gathered for a research coordinated by the Ministry of Justice in Estonia, and it covers the time span of eight years: 2000-2007. The discussion addresses three types of sources in particular (1) anonymous comments (2) thematic forums and social networking media, and (3) blogs. This allows for insights into how anonymity affects the contents of electronic utterances, including the degree of aggression in them. We aim to describe the phenomenon of online aggressiveness in general: its extent, content, and context. Attention is given to how verbal aggression on the Internet goes hand in hand with banter, or friendly teasing. An overview of the flaming/ joking patterns in the commentaries leads to the questions on how humour is embedded in Internet flaming, and finally to the dynamics of "us" and "them" in the material. In this way, the paper touches upon the very narrow and hard-todefine line between aggression and humour.

show abstract

“…For example, in one study, groups discussing the parking problem on campus generated 12.5% irrelevant comments, while groups discussing who should be president generated 21.9%. [7]. In another study of 14 meetings with different topics [3], the percentage of relevant comments ranged from 54% to 89%, and thus, irrelevant comments ranged from 11% to 46%, as shown in Table 1 Group members might add irrelevant comments (e.g., "When will this meeting be over?")…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic Detection of Irrelevant Comments in an Electronic Meeting

Aiken

Garner

2017

IJMIT

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I S S N 2 2 7 8 -5 6 1 2 V o l u m e 12 N u m b e r 1 I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l o f M a n a g e m e n t a n d I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y 3123 | P a g e M ay 2 0 1 7 w w w . c i r w o r l d . c o m Automatic Detection of Irrelevant Comments in an Electronic MeetingMilam Aiken, Bart GarnerSchool of Business Administration, University of Mississippi, University, MS 38677 ABSTRACTGroups exchanging ideas in electronic meetings often generate irrelevant or off-topic comments that can detract from the conversation. Here, we describe a system that seeks to identify this immaterial text using previously identified keywords.Results of an experiment with the system show that group members believe meetings do have irrelevant comments that waste time, but participants often enjoy them. The system achieved an F measure of 42.3% for recall and precision, and further research is necessary to determine if this is sufficient or what can be done to improve this score.

show abstract

Flaming among first-time group support system users

Cited by 60 publications

References 14 publications

The influence of workload and civility of treatment on the perpetration of email incivility

The influence of workload and civility of treatment on the perpetration of email incivility

Verbal expressions of aggressiveness on the Estonian Internet

Automatic Detection of Irrelevant Comments in an Electronic Meeting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About