1 - 4 of 4
Item“They Deserved It”: Using the Just World Hypothesis to Understand Blaming, Apathy, and Support on Social Media( 2020-01-07)Social media offers a forum for individuals to share experiences after being wronged by an individual, an organization, a group, or a government. While some individuals gain support through sharing experiences on social media, other victims become the subject of attacks or receive little to no response from others regarding their injustice. An individual’s response to a victim’s social media post may be explained by the just world hypothesis. In this article, we explain the just world hypothesis and how this theory applies to when individuals respond to victims on social media. The just world hypothesis offers a means to understand factors that encourage negative social media behaviors. In this conceptual article, we explain how future research may leverage the just world hypothesis as a theoretical lens to examine why individuals engage in victim blaming, victim apathy, or victim support using social media.
ItemGlobal Trolling: The Case of “America First”( 2020-01-07)This study examines a global trolling event, “America First,” with the intention to identify whether non-state-sponsored global trolling exists, and if so, what trolling behaviors and tactics characterize global trolling. Through an analysis of sixty videos from different countries, that featured “America First”as their common theme, we were able to focus on the specific cultural manifestations of global trolling. Back in 2017, the videos were posted over a three-week period and they all exhibit repetitive, provocative, pseudo sincere, and satirical trolling behaviors. While trolling behaviors crossed national boundaries, at times they were correlated with Hofstede’s dimensions of cultural diversity. Future research may examine the extent to which these relationships exist in other global trolling events.
ItemHow does Information Spread? An Exploratory Study of True and Fake News( 2020-01-07)The intentional and non-intentional use of social media platforms resulting in digital wildfires of misinformation has increased significantly over the last few years. However, the factors that influence this rapid spread in the online space remain largely unknown. We study how believability and intention to share information are influenced by multiple factors, in addition to confirmation bias. We conducted an experiment where a mix of true and false articles was evaluated by study participants. Using hierarchical linear modelling to analyze our data, we found that, in addition to confirmation bias, believability is influenced by source endorser credibility and argument quality, both of which are moderated by the type of information – true or false. Source likeability had a positive main effect on believability. After controlling for belief and confirmation bias, intention to share information was affected by source endorser credibility and information source likeability.