测量仇恨:一个定义会影响自我报告的犯罪水平和调查中的在线仇恨暴露吗?

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
James Hawdon, Ashley Reichelmann, Matthew Costello, Vicente J. Llorent, Pekka Räsänen, Izabela Zych, Atte Oksanen, Catherine Blaya
{"title":"测量仇恨:一个定义会影响自我报告的犯罪水平和调查中的在线仇恨暴露吗?","authors":"James Hawdon, Ashley Reichelmann, Matthew Costello, Vicente J. Llorent, Pekka Räsänen, Izabela Zych, Atte Oksanen, Catherine Blaya","doi":"10.1177/08944393231211270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this research is to test the validity of commonly used measures of exposure to and production of online extremism. Specifically, we investigate if a definition of hate influences survey responses about the production of and exposure to online hate. To explore the effects of a definition, we used a split experimental design on a sample of 18 to 25-year-old Americans where half of the respondents were exposed to the European Union’s definition of hate speech and the other half were not. Then, all respondents completed a survey with commonly used items measuring exposure to and perpetration of online hate. The results reveal that providing a definition affects self-reported levels of exposure and perpetration, but the effects are dependent on race. The findings provide evidence that survey responses about online hate may be conditioned by social desirability and framing biases. The findings that group differences exist in how questions about hate are interpreted when definitions of it are not provided mean we must be careful when using measures that try to capture exposure to and the production of hate. While more research is needed, we recommend providing a clear, unambiguous definition when using surveys to measure online hate.","PeriodicalId":49509,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Computer Review","volume":"55 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring Hate: Does a Definition Affect Self-Reported Levels of Perpetration and Exposure to Online Hate in Surveys?\",\"authors\":\"James Hawdon, Ashley Reichelmann, Matthew Costello, Vicente J. Llorent, Pekka Räsänen, Izabela Zych, Atte Oksanen, Catherine Blaya\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08944393231211270\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this research is to test the validity of commonly used measures of exposure to and production of online extremism. Specifically, we investigate if a definition of hate influences survey responses about the production of and exposure to online hate. To explore the effects of a definition, we used a split experimental design on a sample of 18 to 25-year-old Americans where half of the respondents were exposed to the European Union’s definition of hate speech and the other half were not. Then, all respondents completed a survey with commonly used items measuring exposure to and perpetration of online hate. The results reveal that providing a definition affects self-reported levels of exposure and perpetration, but the effects are dependent on race. The findings provide evidence that survey responses about online hate may be conditioned by social desirability and framing biases. The findings that group differences exist in how questions about hate are interpreted when definitions of it are not provided mean we must be careful when using measures that try to capture exposure to and the production of hate. While more research is needed, we recommend providing a clear, unambiguous definition when using surveys to measure online hate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49509,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Science Computer Review\",\"volume\":\"55 5\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Science Computer Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393231211270\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science Computer Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393231211270","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是测试通常使用的测量网络极端主义暴露和产生的有效性。具体地说,我们调查了仇恨的定义是否会影响关于在线仇恨的产生和暴露的调查反应。为了探索定义的影响,我们对18至25岁的美国人样本进行了分裂实验设计,其中一半的受访者接触到欧盟对仇恨言论的定义,另一半则没有。然后,所有受访者都完成了一项调查,其中包括衡量网络仇恨暴露和实施的常用项目。结果表明,提供一个定义会影响自我报告的暴露和犯罪水平,但影响取决于种族。这些发现提供了证据,表明关于网络仇恨的调查反应可能受到社会期望和框架偏见的制约。研究发现,当没有提供仇恨的定义时,如何解释仇恨的问题存在群体差异,这意味着我们在使用试图捕捉仇恨暴露和产生的措施时必须谨慎。虽然需要更多的研究,但我们建议在使用调查来衡量网络仇恨时提供一个清晰、明确的定义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Measuring Hate: Does a Definition Affect Self-Reported Levels of Perpetration and Exposure to Online Hate in Surveys?
The purpose of this research is to test the validity of commonly used measures of exposure to and production of online extremism. Specifically, we investigate if a definition of hate influences survey responses about the production of and exposure to online hate. To explore the effects of a definition, we used a split experimental design on a sample of 18 to 25-year-old Americans where half of the respondents were exposed to the European Union’s definition of hate speech and the other half were not. Then, all respondents completed a survey with commonly used items measuring exposure to and perpetration of online hate. The results reveal that providing a definition affects self-reported levels of exposure and perpetration, but the effects are dependent on race. The findings provide evidence that survey responses about online hate may be conditioned by social desirability and framing biases. The findings that group differences exist in how questions about hate are interpreted when definitions of it are not provided mean we must be careful when using measures that try to capture exposure to and the production of hate. While more research is needed, we recommend providing a clear, unambiguous definition when using surveys to measure online hate.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Science Computer Review
Social Science Computer Review 社会科学-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
4.90%
发文量
95
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Unique Scope Social Science Computer Review is an interdisciplinary journal covering social science instructional and research applications of computing, as well as societal impacts of informational technology. Topics included: artificial intelligence, business, computational social science theory, computer-assisted survey research, computer-based qualitative analysis, computer simulation, economic modeling, electronic modeling, electronic publishing, geographic information systems, instrumentation and research tools, public administration, social impacts of computing and telecommunications, software evaluation, world-wide web resources for social scientists. Interdisciplinary Nature Because the Uses and impacts of computing are interdisciplinary, so is Social Science Computer Review. The journal is of direct relevance to scholars and scientists in a wide variety of disciplines. In its pages you''ll find work in the following areas: sociology, anthropology, political science, economics, psychology, computer literacy, computer applications, and methodology.
×
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