Periodic Reporting for period 2 - STANDBY (Standing by: Pro-social Bystander Reactions to Online Political Hostility)
Reporting period: 2023-03-01 to 2024-08-31
Online political hostility, such as online hate speech, constitutes a challenge to democracy. The challenge is amplified by widespread apathy among witnesses. While research within political science has focused on the aggressors and explored how politically hostility develops, much less attention is given to bystanders and the potential of pro-social bystander reactions to mitigate the negative impact of hostility. This is problematic for at least two reasons.
First, in choosing between pro-social (e.g. counter-speech or reporting) and anti-social (do nothing; join hostility) reactions, the bystander provides immediate feedback on the acceptability of behavior and may contribute to changing norms. By being present in politically hostile situations, when authorities are often not, the bystander holds considerable power to defuse hostile situations and mitigate the negative impact on victims and deliberation. Second, while research on helping behavior finds ample support for the ‘bystander effect’, it also shows that apathy can be reduced by encouraging pro-social bystander reactions through interventions. It is unknown whether these insights extend to online political hostility, yet it provides grounds for optimism.
To realize the potential of pro-social bystander reactions, STANDBY advances a new research agenda that shifts focus from explaining the anti-social behavior of online political hostility to explaining when and why bystanders react pro-socially and analyzing the short- and long-term consequences of this. Thus, the overall research question of STANDBY is: When and why do bystanders to online political hostility react pro-socially, and what are the consequences?
To answer this question, STANDBY pursues several objectives. First, STANDBY aims to develop a novel conceptualization of what pro-social bystander reactions to online political hostility entail. Second, STANDBY will develop/test an interdisciplinary framework for explaining pro-social bystander reactions to online political hostility. Third, we theorize and investigate the consequences of exposure to pro-social bystander reactions, specifying how they may animate further reactions and help change norms of interaction. Fourth, we test whether pro-social bystander reactions can be effectively encouraged through interventions. Finally, STANDBY aims to contribute to methodological innovation that enables empirical studies across national contexts and time, in a realistic, yet ethical manner.
First, in choosing between pro-social (e.g. counter-speech or reporting) and anti-social (do nothing; join hostility) reactions, the bystander provides immediate feedback on the acceptability of behavior and may contribute to changing norms. By being present in politically hostile situations, when authorities are often not, the bystander holds considerable power to defuse hostile situations and mitigate the negative impact on victims and deliberation. Second, while research on helping behavior finds ample support for the ‘bystander effect’, it also shows that apathy can be reduced by encouraging pro-social bystander reactions through interventions. It is unknown whether these insights extend to online political hostility, yet it provides grounds for optimism.
To realize the potential of pro-social bystander reactions, STANDBY advances a new research agenda that shifts focus from explaining the anti-social behavior of online political hostility to explaining when and why bystanders react pro-socially and analyzing the short- and long-term consequences of this. Thus, the overall research question of STANDBY is: When and why do bystanders to online political hostility react pro-socially, and what are the consequences?
To answer this question, STANDBY pursues several objectives. First, STANDBY aims to develop a novel conceptualization of what pro-social bystander reactions to online political hostility entail. Second, STANDBY will develop/test an interdisciplinary framework for explaining pro-social bystander reactions to online political hostility. Third, we theorize and investigate the consequences of exposure to pro-social bystander reactions, specifying how they may animate further reactions and help change norms of interaction. Fourth, we test whether pro-social bystander reactions can be effectively encouraged through interventions. Finally, STANDBY aims to contribute to methodological innovation that enables empirical studies across national contexts and time, in a realistic, yet ethical manner.
During the initial phase of the project, the STANDBY research team has developed a novel conceptualization of bystander reactions to online hostility, which builds on a review of previous research, pre-existing datasets and interviews with pro-social bystanders. This framework has been applied to annotate +10.000 tweets, which is being used to train an automated classifier of pro-social bystander reactions. Also, we developed a factorial survey experiment to be fielded to national representative samples in four case countries, investigating key drivers of pro-social bystander reactions to online hostility (severity, social identification and previous bystander reactions). Alongside the ongoing development of survey experiments testing the consequences of exposure to pro-social bystander reactions, this study will test central aspects of our theoretical model. Furthermore, we have devised and tested a theoretical argument stating that the distribution of benefits/costs of engaging in pro-social bystander reactions at the individual level forecast a collective action problem, which at an aggregate level situates an enjoyable online debate as a public goods problem.
In terms of methodological innovation, STANDBY has implemented a novel, mock social media platform for conducting behavioural experiments. In doing so, we increase ecological validity of our studies, as interaction with the mock platform resembles actual social media sessions, and enables tracking actual behaviours (e.g. likes, comments), while having full control over what content participants are exposed to.
Finally, we have developed and experimentally tested five text-based interventions providing advice on how to be a pro-social bystander online. Especially one intervention – the ‘Speak up, Report, Support’-intervention – proved effective in mobilising pro-social bystander reactions. This content was developed into an animated video intervention, which we are currently (early spring 2024) testing in a large-scale, four-wave panel survey experiment. Encouraged by these first findings, we applied for and secured an ERC-PoC grant focused on further developing, testing and disseminating to end-users the ‘Speak up, Report, Support’-intervention.
First publication: Hansen, T. M., Karg, S. & L. Lindekilde (2023). ’The Devil is in the Detail: Reconceptualizing Bystander Reactions to Online Political Hostility’, Behaviour & Information Technology, https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2023.2282653(opens in new window).
In terms of methodological innovation, STANDBY has implemented a novel, mock social media platform for conducting behavioural experiments. In doing so, we increase ecological validity of our studies, as interaction with the mock platform resembles actual social media sessions, and enables tracking actual behaviours (e.g. likes, comments), while having full control over what content participants are exposed to.
Finally, we have developed and experimentally tested five text-based interventions providing advice on how to be a pro-social bystander online. Especially one intervention – the ‘Speak up, Report, Support’-intervention – proved effective in mobilising pro-social bystander reactions. This content was developed into an animated video intervention, which we are currently (early spring 2024) testing in a large-scale, four-wave panel survey experiment. Encouraged by these first findings, we applied for and secured an ERC-PoC grant focused on further developing, testing and disseminating to end-users the ‘Speak up, Report, Support’-intervention.
First publication: Hansen, T. M., Karg, S. & L. Lindekilde (2023). ’The Devil is in the Detail: Reconceptualizing Bystander Reactions to Online Political Hostility’, Behaviour & Information Technology, https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2023.2282653(opens in new window).
The ambition of STANDBY is to advance a new research agenda examining when and why bystanders react pro-socially to online political hostility and analyzing the short- and long-term consequences of this. In doing so, STANDBY aims to move beyond the state-of-the-art by making four theoretical contributions: (1) offering a novel conceptualization of online bystanding and pro-social bystander reactions; (2) specifying a cognitive mechanism explaining pro-social bystander reactions in response to online political hostility; (3) theorizing the short- and long-term consequences of pro-social bystander reactions; and (4) devising an understanding of how interventions may encourage pro-social bystander reactions to online political hostility. Moreover, the STANDBY-project yields high societal value and potential impact. Considering the mainstreaming of toxic and hateful speech on social media, it is more urgent than ever to understand the causes and consequences of pro-social bystander reactions to online political hostility, and how to engage bystanders in mitigation. We aim to pursue the potential of wider societal impact of our research particularly through the implementation of the related ERC-PoC grant project, STANDBYCOMMS.