Incivility and Political Identity on the Internet: Intergroup Factors as Predictors of Incivility in Discussions of News Online

Abstract

Although incivility is an increasing concern among scholars and the public, explanations for this phenomenon sometimes overlook the role of computer‐mediated communication. Drawing from the social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE), we consider incivility as a form of identity performance occurring in the visually anonymous contexts that are typical online. Specifically, we examine partisan political identities and intergroup factors as predictors of incivility in a newspaper discussion forum. Contrary to expectations, conservatives were less likely to be uncivil as the proportion of ingroup members (i.e., other conservatives) in the discussion increased and less sensitive to incivility directed at outgroup members (i.e., liberals) than were nonconservatives. Audience members had more extreme evaluations of uncivil comments made by partisans than nonpartisans.

Rousing the Partisan Combatant: Elite Incivility, Anger, and Antideliberative Attitudes

“…Included in the model are controls for other factors known to mediate the effects of incivility, including partisan identity (1 = Democrat, 2 = Republican) strength of partisanship (1 = strong partisan, 0 = not strong partisan), and ideology (1 = very liberal, 7 = very conservative) (Mutz, , pp. 105, 106; Rains et al, ; Suhay et al, ). To be consistent with the models exploring antideliberative attitudes below—in which independents are necessarily excluded—self‐identified independents were not included in the model.…”

“…That is, feelings of anger towards the outgroup are aggravated when they are depicted in a highly negative light or accused of some offense. However, a spate of recent studies has demonstrated that like‐minded uncivil messages either have little impact on those exposed to them or might even improve feelings towards the other side (Druckman, Gubitz, Levendusky, & Lloyd, in press; Gervais, ; Rains, Kenski, Coe, & Harwood, ). This mixed record invites a clear test of the relationship between proattitudinal incivility, anger, and antideliberative attitudes.…”

La polarización de “La Manada”

“…En este sentido, según Herbst (2010), se considera incivility al uso de expresiones vulgares o irónicas, donde algunos de los interlocutores se muestran de forma poco educada (rude). Además, entre las diferentes expresiones de incivility tam-bién se han asociado discursos cargados de emociones e incluso la falta de capacidad de comunicación (Sobieraj y Berry, 2011), así como el insulto y el menosprecio directo (Rains et al, 2017). Por otro lado, otros autores se han mostrado reacios a denominar incivility a las expresiones listadas anteriormente.…”

“…Los expertos han demostrado el papel protagonista del anonimato característico de muchos contextos de comunicación digital como factor favorecedor de expresiones poco apropiadas (Rains et al, 2017). De hecho, Rowe (2015) defiende que conforme los debates de trasladan desde esferas privadas a esferas públicas, la frecuencia de comentarios incívicos aumenta.…”

Impulsivity, internalizing symptoms, and online group behavior as determinants of online hate

“…Antisocial behavior on the Internet is also related to online group behavior that motivates hostilities between different identity-based groups. Especially, social identification and deindividuation are suggested as a psychological mechanism of online hostilities [19,20,21]. Social homophily and polarization between different online communities have also been reported to motivate aggression in social media [22,23].…”