In this study, we explore the power of group dynamics to shape the toxicity of Twitter conversations. First, we examine how the presence of others in a conversation can potentially diffuse Twitter users' responsibility to address a toxic direct reply. Second, we examine whether the toxicity of the first direct reply to a toxic tweet in conversations establishes the group norms for subsequent replies. By doing so, we outline how bystanders and the tone of initial responses to a toxic reply are explanatory factors which affect whether others feel uninhibited to post their own abusive or derogatory replies. We test this premise by analyzing a random sample of more than 156k tweets belonging to ~9k conversations. Central to this work is the social psychological research on the "bystander effect" documenting that the presence of bystanders has the power to alter the dynamics of a social situation. If the first direct reply reaffirms the divisive tone, other replies may follow suit. We find evidence of a bystander effect, with our results showing that an increased number of users participating in the conversation before receiving a toxic tweet is negatively associated with the number of Twitter users who responded to the toxic reply in a non-toxic way. We also find that the initial responses to toxic tweets within conversations is of great importance. Posting a toxic reply immediately after a toxic comment is negatively associated with users posting non-toxic replies and Twitter conversations becoming increasingly toxic.
翻译:在这项研究中,我们探索了团体动态的力量,以形成Twitter对话的毒性。首先,我们审视了其他人在对话中的存在如何可能分散Twitter用户处理有毒直接答复的责任。其次,我们审视了在对话中对有毒推特的第一个直接答复的毒性是否为随后答复确立了团体规范。我们通过这样做,我们概述了旁观者和对有毒答复的初步答复的基调如何成为解释因素,影响他人是否感到不受禁止地发布自己的虐待或贬损性答复。我们通过分析属于~9k对话的超过156k推特的随机抽样,检验了这一前提。这项工作的核心是对“旁观效应”的社会心理研究,记录了旁观者的存在能够改变社会状况的动态。如果第一个直接答复证实了分歧的调子,其他答复可能随之而来。我们发现,旁观效应的证据是,我们的结果表明,在接受有毒推特之前参加谈话的用户数量增多,与以非毒性方式回应的推特用户数量有负面关联。我们发现,在推特用户的最初反应中,毒性谈话变得越来越重要。