Implicit theories of online trolling: Evidence that attention‐seeking conceptions are associated with increased psychological resilience

Abstract

Three studies were conducted to investigate people's conceptions of online trolls, particularly conceptions associated with psychological resilience to trolling. In Study 1, factor analytic analysis of participants' ratings of characteristics of online trolls found a replicable bifactor model of conceptions of online trolls, with both a general factor of general conceptions towards online trolls being identified, but five group factors (attention-conflict seeking, low selfconfidence, viciousness, uneducated, amusement) as most salient. In Study 2, participants evaluated hypothetical profiles of online trolling messages to establish the validity of the five factors. Three constructs (attention-conflict seeking, viciousness, and uneducated) were actively employed when people considered profiles of online trolling scenarios. Study 3 introduced a 20-item 'Conceptions of Online Trolls scale' to examine the extent to which the five group factors were associated with resilience to trolling. Results indicated that viewing online trolls as seeking conflict or attention was associated with a decrease in individuals' negative affect around previous trolling incidents. Overall, the findings suggest that adopting an implicit theories approach can further our understanding and measurement of conceptions towards trolling through the identification of five salient factors, of which at least one factor may act as a resilience strategy.Keywords: Trolling, Implicit, Conception, Conflict, Attention, Negative Affect, Resilience.IMPLICIT THEORIES OF ONLINE TROLLING 3 Implicit theories of online trolling: Evidence of possible resilient conceptions to "attention seekers"Trolling via social media (such as social networking sites or message boards) is frequently an attempt to argue with and upset people by posting inflammatory and malicious messages (Buckels, Trapnell, & Paulhus, 2014;Hardaker, 2010Hardaker, , 2013. The severity of trolling can range from relatively minor incidents, such as "accidental trolls" (someone who is just speaking their mind), to more extreme versions in which individuals intend to cause grief to bereaved families (Hardaker, 2010(Hardaker, , 2013. Recently, the CEO of Twitter admitted to its ineffectiveness at dealing with trolling incidents (Hern, 2015), and recent high-profile cases in the media have drawn attention to the criminality that surrounds acts of trolling. Consequently, several individuals have been jailed for this online behaviour (Morris, 2011; Press Association, 2014a, 2014b how it can operate as a status-enhancing activity, with the troll gaining approval from others, potentially receiving greater recognition than they do in their offline lives.The psychological approaches individuals adopt when dealing with trolling are yet to be empirically studied. Early research findings suggest different outcomes of trolling behaviour, with deleterious outcomes for some victims of trolling, including suicide (Robson, 2014; Sky News, 2014;Zetter, 2009). Some view trolling as simple stupidity (Chamo...

Hate in a Tweet: Exploring Internet-Based Islamophobic Discourses

“…The type of interactions people experience on Twitter-short messages that can be circulated by many users-also favors the emergence of certain actors: the so-called "trolls" and "bots." Trolls are users that intervene in online debates with the aim of creating conflicts with inflammatory messages for the purpose of their own amusement (Maltby et al 2016;Sanfilippo et al 2018). Trolls often target an individual or a group to provoke a reaction or prove a point, such as the importance of free speech (Golf-Papez and Veer 2017).…”

Internet trolling and everyday sadism: Parallel effects on pain perception and moral judgment

“…We suggest that Tay embodied supreme troll bait: an unprecedented lure for the so‐called “Twitter trolls” to corrupt a scientific advance for their own amusement (see Ohlheiser, ). Online trolling has only become widely known over the past decade (Maltby et al, ) and is proliferated across all social media by a small but energetic minority (Gammon, ). Trolling behaviors are diverse and continue to evolve (Fichman & Sanfilippo, ; Phillips, ); they exemplify the trade‐off between pro‐social and antisocial aspects of Internet culture.…”

Under the bridge: An in-depth examination of online trolling in the gaming context

“…In addition to what trolls do, limited research has been conducted into the motivations and goals behind their actions – why and who they choose to troll and what gratifies them. Those that do address the community itself only indirectly (Herring et al, 2002; Luzón, 2011), examine only the victims’ or bystanders’ perspective (Maltby and et al, 2015; Shachaf and Hara, 2010), or lack an in-depth interview method (Buckels et al, 2014; Thacker and Griffiths, 2012). Finally, there is almost no available research pertaining to the influence the online community might have on trolling, despite multiple studies suggesting that the actions and attitudes of other netizens can have an important impact on both on- and offline behaviour (Ridout and Campbell, 2014; Whitty and Carr, 2006; Young and Jordan, 2013).…”