The digital outcry: What incites participation behavior in an online firestorm?

Johnen, Marius; Jungblut, Marc; Ziegele, Marc

doi:10.1177/1461444817741883

Cited by 79 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These results contribute to the existing literature on attacks against public figures and journalists (Barlow and Awan, 2016;Johnen et al, 2018;Preuss et al, 2017;Shin et al, 2017), which is largely anecdotal and limited to women. Our results enrich this literature by a theoretically driven and quantitative comparison of the prevalence rate of three avoidance strategies for both genders and two contrasting explanations of gendered avoidance.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Female journalists under attack? Explaining gender differences in reactions to audiences’ attacks

Stahel

Schoen

2019

New Media & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature on public figures attacked by their audiences is unclear why female and male figures react differently to attacks. This study examines why female journalists are more likely than male journalists to use avoidance strategies as a reaction to online attacks. Avoidance includes limiting audience engagement, adapting reporting behavior, and thinking about quitting journalism. Drawing on social role theory and gender stereotypes, this study contrasts two explanatory hypotheses. The results, based on mediation analyses of online survey data of 637 journalists representative of Switzerland, show that women are more likely than men to use avoidance strategies because women are more stressed by attacks. This heightened stress is argued to result from differences in gender role socialization. In contrast, while women are somewhat more severely attacked than men, this cannot explain their greater probability of avoidance. Results contribute a theoretically and empirically rich explanation of gendered reactions to attacks.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

“…Generally, public figures such as politicians, celebrities, popular academics, and journalists have become highly exposed and accessible. This has made them easy targets for shaming, defamation, and trolling (Barlow and Awan, 2016;Johnen et al, 2018;Preuss et al, 2017;Shin et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Female journalists under attack? Explaining gender differences in reactions to audiences’ attacks

Stahel

Schoen

2019

New Media & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some pioneering studies support the effects of the spiral of silence in online reviews (Askay, 2015;Johnen et al, 2018;Pan et al, 2018;Zerback and Fawzi, 2017). For example, Askay 2015shows that consumers tend to contribute to the dominant opinion in online review systems and avoid belonging to the minority.…”

Section: Ewom-giving Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do online reviews still matter post-purchase?

Liu

Jayawardhena

Osburg

et al. 2019

INTR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The influence of electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) information, such as online reviews, on consumers’ decision making is well documented, but it is unclear if online reviews still matter in post-purchase evaluation and behaviours. The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which online reviews (aggregate rating (AR) and individual reviews (IR)) influence consumers’ evaluation and post-purchase behaviour by considering the valence congruence of online reviews and consumption experience (CE). Design/methodology/approach Following social comparison theory and relevant literature, the authors conduct an online experiment (pre-test: n=180; main study: n=347). The authors rely on a 2 (CE valence) ×2 (AR valence) ×2 (IR valence) between-subjects design. Findings Congruence/incongruence between the valences of CE, AR and IR affects consumers’ post-purchase evaluation at the emotional, brand and media levels and review-writing behaviour. In comparison to aggregated rating, IR are more important in the post-purchase stage. Similarly, consumers have a higher eWOM-writing intention when there is congruence between the valences of CE, AR and IR. Practical implications The authors demonstrate the importance of service providers continually monitoring their business profiles on review sites to ensure consistency of review information, as these influence consumers’ post-purchase evaluation and behaviours. For this reason, the authors illustrate the utility of why media owners of review sites should support the monitoring process to facilitate the engagement of both businesses and customers. Originality/value The authors break new ground by empirically testing the impact of online review information post-purchase seen through the theoretical lens of social comparison. The approach is novel in breaking down and testing the dimensions of post-purchase evaluation and behavioural intentions in understanding the social comparison elicited by online reviews in the post-purchase phase.

show abstract

“…Value-based discussions are prone to conflict, as individuals engaged in such conversations are often passionately invested in their beliefs and positions [2][3][4][5]. A body of research has noted that, particularly in the context of social media environments and electronic communication methods, public discussion of controversial topics has become even more volatile over recent years [6][7][8][9]. A number of reasons for such conflicts have been suggested in recent literatures, many of which have shown a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 great promise in describing or predicting caustic forms of dialogue.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral Grandstanding in Public Discourse: Status-seeking Motives as a Potential Explanatory Mechanism in Predicting Conflict

Grubbs¹,

Warmke²,

Tosi³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public discourse is often caustic and conflict-filled. This trend seems to be particularly evident when the content of such discourse is around moral issues (broadly defined) and when the discourse occurs on social media. Several explanatory mechanisms for such conflict have been explored in recent psychological and social-science literatures. The present work sought to examine a potentially novel explanatory mechanism defined in philosophical literature: Moral Grandstanding. According to philosophical accounts, Moral Grandstanding is the use of moral talk to seek social status. For the present work, we conducted six studies, using two undergraduate samples (Study 1, N = 361; Study 2, N = 356); a sample matched to U.S. norms for age, gender, race, income, Census region (Study 3, N = 1,063); a YouGov sample matched to U.S. demographic norms (Study 4, N = 2,000); and a brief, one-month longitudinal study of Mechanical Turk workers in the U.S. (Study 5, Baseline N = 499, followup n = 296), and a large, one-week YouGov sample matched to U.S. demographic norms (Baseline N = 2,519, follow-up n = 1,776). Across studies, we found initial support for the validity of Moral Grandstanding as a construct. Specifically, moral grandstanding motivation was associated with status-seeking personality traits, as well as greater political and moral conflict in daily life.

show abstract

The digital outcry: What incites participation behavior in an online firestorm?

Cited by 79 publications

References 47 publications

Female journalists under attack? Explaining gender differences in reactions to audiences’ attacks

Female journalists under attack? Explaining gender differences in reactions to audiences’ attacks

Do online reviews still matter post-purchase?

Moral Grandstanding in Public Discourse: Status-seeking Motives as a Potential Explanatory Mechanism in Predicting Conflict

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About