Different platforms, different uses: testing the effect of platforms and individual differences on perception of incivility and self-reported uncivil behavior

Daniel J. Sude, S. Dvir-Gvirsman
{"title":"Different platforms, different uses: testing the effect of platforms and individual differences on perception of incivility and self-reported uncivil behavior","authors":"Daniel J. Sude, S. Dvir-Gvirsman","doi":"10.1093/jcmc/zmac035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Two large surveys with adult samples of Americans (N = 1,105; N = 1,035) investigated differences in perceived incivility between seven social media platforms. Perceptions of incivility were targeted, given both their inherent societal relevance and the personalized nature of each user’s platform experience. Utilizing a novel approach, observations per platform were nested within each user, facilitating disentangling user-level from platform-level factors. Study 1 demonstrated that even accounting for differences between users, perceptions vary by platform. Further, while individual users do admit to generating uncivil content themselves, self-perceptions were in contrast largely stable across platforms. Study 2 built upon Study 1 by investigating additional platform-level factors that could impact perceptions of incivility: Differences in perceived affordances between platforms were related to differences in perceptions of incivility’s prevalence. Specifically, platforms characterized by either perceived anonymity or perceived network association were in turn perceived to be more uncivil.","PeriodicalId":14832,"journal":{"name":"J. Comput. Mediat. Commun.","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Comput. Mediat. Commun.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmac035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Two large surveys with adult samples of Americans (N = 1,105; N = 1,035) investigated differences in perceived incivility between seven social media platforms. Perceptions of incivility were targeted, given both their inherent societal relevance and the personalized nature of each user’s platform experience. Utilizing a novel approach, observations per platform were nested within each user, facilitating disentangling user-level from platform-level factors. Study 1 demonstrated that even accounting for differences between users, perceptions vary by platform. Further, while individual users do admit to generating uncivil content themselves, self-perceptions were in contrast largely stable across platforms. Study 2 built upon Study 1 by investigating additional platform-level factors that could impact perceptions of incivility: Differences in perceived affordances between platforms were related to differences in perceptions of incivility’s prevalence. Specifically, platforms characterized by either perceived anonymity or perceived network association were in turn perceived to be more uncivil.
不同的平台,不同的用途:测试平台和个体差异对不文明感知和自述不文明行为的影响
两项以美国成年人为样本的大型调查(N = 1105;N = 1035)调查了7个社交媒体平台对不文明行为的感知差异。考虑到其固有的社会相关性和每个用户平台体验的个性化性质,对不文明的看法是有针对性的。利用一种新颖的方法,将每个平台的观察结果嵌套在每个用户中,从而有助于将用户级因素与平台级因素分离开来。研究1表明,即使考虑到用户之间的差异,人们的看法也因平台而异。此外,尽管个别用户确实承认自己制造了不文明的内容,但相比之下,各平台的自我认知基本稳定。研究2建立在研究1的基础上,调查了可能影响不文明感知的其他平台层面因素:平台之间感知能力的差异与对不文明流行程度的感知差异有关。具体而言,以感知匿名或感知网络关联为特征的平台反过来被认为更不文明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信