Next Article in Journal
Product Owner’s Journey to SAFe®—Role Changes in Scaled Agile Framework®
Previous Article in Journal
Tracking Light Aircraft with Smartphones at Low Altitudes
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Evolution of Language Models Applied to Emotion Analysis of Arabic Tweets
Open AccessArticle

Anonymity and Inhibition in Newspaper Comments

Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies, University of Bergen, 5007 Bergen, Norway
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Diego Reforgiato Recupero
Information 2021, 12(3), 106; https://doi.org/10.3390/info12030106
Received: 19 January 2021 / Revised: 14 February 2021 / Accepted: 27 February 2021 / Published: 3 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Natural Language Processing for Social Media)
Newspaper comment sections allow readers to voice their opinion on a wide range of topics, provide feedback for journalists and editors and may enable public debate. Comment sections have been criticized as a medium for toxic comments. Such behavior in comment sections has been attributed to the effect of anonymity. Several studies have found a relationship between anonymity and toxic comments, based on laboratory conditions or the comparison of comments from different sites or platforms. The current study uses real-world data sampled from The Washington Post and The New York Times, where anonymous and non-anonymous users comment on the same articles. This sampling strategy decreases the possibility of interfering variables, ensuring that any observed differences between the two groups can be explained by anonymity. A small but significant relationship between anonymity and toxic comments was found, though the effects of both the newspaper and the direction of the comment were stronger. While it is true that non-anonymous commenters write fewer toxic comments, we observed that many of the toxic comments were directed at others than the article or author of the original article. This may indicate a way to restrict toxic comments, while allowing anonymity, by restricting the reference to others, e.g., by enforcing writers to focus on the topic. View Full-Text
Keywords: anonymity; inhibition; disinhibition; incivility; toxic comments anonymity; inhibition; disinhibition; incivility; toxic comments
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Knustad, M.; Johansson, C. Anonymity and Inhibition in Newspaper Comments. Information 2021, 12, 106. https://doi.org/10.3390/info12030106

AMA Style

Knustad M, Johansson C. Anonymity and Inhibition in Newspaper Comments. Information. 2021; 12(3):106. https://doi.org/10.3390/info12030106

Chicago/Turabian Style

Knustad, Magnus; Johansson, Christer. 2021. "Anonymity and Inhibition in Newspaper Comments" Information 12, no. 3: 106. https://doi.org/10.3390/info12030106

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop