Peer Influence of Online Comments in Newspapers: Applying Social Norms and the Social Identification Model of Deindividuation Effects (SIDE)

Abstract

This research aimed to understand social influence of comments by answering the following questions: How do online comments impact subsequent readers’ attitudes and perceptions related to the subject matter covered in the newspaper article? Can such impact vary by the degree of social identification? Drawing on the literature on social norms and the social identification model of deindividuation effects (SIDE), the current study examined how the valence of comments affects comment readers’ responses and how the social identification process influences such responses. Findings from an online experiment supported the SIDE model: Stronger social identification increased social influence. Results showed that comments on newspaper work as peer influence in that comments prompt comment readers to adjust their views with reading of others’ comments.

Keywords

online comment peer influence social identification model of deindividuation effects (SIDE)social norms electronic cigarettes online newspaper

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abrams

Wetherell

Cochrane

Hogg

M. A.

Turner

J. C.

(1990). Knowing what to think by knowing who you are: Self-categorization and the nature of norm formation, conformity and group polarization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 97–119. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1990.tb00892.x

Ajzen

(2006, 9). Constructing a TpB Questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Retrieved from http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/ikg/zick/ajzen%20construction%20a%20tpb%20questionnaire.pdf

Anderson

A. A.

Brossard

Scheufele

D. A.

Xenos

M. A.

Ladwig

(2014). The “nasty effect:” Online incivility and risk perceptions of emerging technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 373–387. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12009

Bechar-Israeli

(1995). From <Bonehead> to <cLoNehEad>: Nicknames, play, and identity on Internet Relay Chat. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 1(2). Retrieved from https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/1/2/JCMC127/4584330

Blom

Carpenter

Bowe

B. J.

Lange

(2014). Frequent contributors within U.S. Newspaper comment forums: An examination of their civility and information value. American Behavioral Scientist, 58, 1314–1328. doi:10.1177/0002764214527094

Borsari

Carey

K. B.

(2003). Descriptive and injunctive norms in college drinking: A meta-analytic integration. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 64, 331–341.

Cabezudo

R. S. J.

Izquierdo

C. C.

Pinto

J. R.

(2013). The persuasion context and results in online opinion seeking: Effects of message and source—The moderating role of network managers. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16, 828–835. doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0647

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015). E-cigarette use triples among middle and high school students in just one year. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2015/p0416-E-cigarette-use.html

Cialdini

R. B.

Kallgren

C. A.

Reno

R. R.

(1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. In Zanna

M. P.

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 201–234). Cambridge, MA: Academic Press. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108603305

10.

Coe

Kenski

Rains

S. A.

(2014). Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in newspaper website comments. Journal of Communication, 64, 658–679. doi:10.1111/jcom.12104

11.

David

Cappella

J. N.

Fishbein

(2006). The social diffusion of influence among adolescents: Group interaction in a chat room environment about antidrug advertisements. Communication Theory, 16, 118–140. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00008.x

12.

Diakopoulos

Naaman

(2011). Towards quality discourse in online news comments. In Hinds

Tang

J. C.

Wang

(Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM 2011 conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 133–142). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.

13.

Edwards

Qing

Wahl

S. T.

(2007). The influence of computer-mediated word-of-mouth communication on student perceptions of instructors and attitudes toward learning course content. Communication Education, 56, 255–277. doi:10.1080/03634520701236866

14.

Festinger

(1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. doi:10.1177/001872675400700202

15.

Harris

P. A.

Scott

K. W.

Lebo

Hassan

Lighter

Pulley

(2012). ResearchMatch: A national registry to recruit volunteers for clinical research. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 87, 66. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31823ab7d2

16.

Henry

K. B.

Arrow

Carini

(1999). A tripartite model of group identification theory and measurement. Small Group Research, 30, 558–581. doi:10.1177/104649649903000504

17.

Hogg

M. A.

Reid

S. A.

(2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication Theory, 16, 7–30. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00003.x

18.

Hsueh

Yogeeswaran

Malinen

(2015). Leave your comment below: Can biased online comments influence our own prejudicial attitudes and behaviors? Human Communication Research, 41, 557–576. doi:10.1111/hcre.12059

19.

Johnson

T. J.

Kaye

B. K.

(2013). The dark side of the boon? Credibility, selective exposure and the proliferation of online sources of political information. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1862–1871. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.011

20.

Kallgren

C. A.

Reno

R. R.

Cialdini

R. B.

(2000). A focus theory of normative conduct: When norms do and do not affect behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1002–1012. doi:10.1177/01461672002610009

21.

Lapinski

M. K.

Rimal

R. N.

(2005). An explication of social norms. Communication Theory, 15, 127–147. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2005.tb00329.x

22.

Larimer

M. E.

Turner

A. P.

Mallett

K. A.

Geisner

I. M.

(2004). Predicting drinking behavior and alcohol-related problems among fraternity and sorority members: Examining the role of descriptive and injunctive norms. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 18(3), 203. doi:10.1037/0893-164X.18.3.203

23.

Lea

Spears

(1991). Computer-mediated communication, de-individuation and group decision-making. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34, 283–301. doi:10.1016/0020-7373(91)90045-9

24.

Lea

Spears

Watt

S. E.

Rogers

(2000). The InSIDE story: Social psychological processes affecting on-line groups. In Postmes

Lea

Spears

Reicher

S. D.

(Eds.), SIDE issues centre stage: Recent developments in studies of de-individuation in groups (pp. 47–62). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.

25.

Lee

E.-J.

(2006). When and how does depersonalization increase conformity to group norms in computer-mediated communication? Communication Research, 33, 423–447. doi:10.1177/0093650206293248

26.

Lee

E.-J.

(2012). That’s not the way it is: How user-generated comments on the news affect perceived media bias. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18, 32–45. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01597.x

27.

Lee

E.-J.

Jang

Y. J.

(2010). What do others’ reactions to news on internet portal sites tell us? Effects of presentation format and readers’ need for cognition on reality perception. Communication Research, 37, 825–846. doi:10.1177/0093650210376189

28.

Meyer

H. K.

Carey

M. C.

(2015). Men more likely to post online newspaper comments. Newspaper Research Journal, 36, 469–481. doi:10.1177/0739532915618417

29.

National Institutes of Health. (2015). HINTS-FDA (2015) survey materials. Retrieved from http://hints.cancer.gov/instrument.aspx

30.

Nunnally

J. C.

(1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

31.

Padon

A. A.

Maloney

E. K.

Cappella

J. N.

(2017). Youth-targeted e-cigarette marketing in the US. Tobacco Regulatory Science, 3, 95–101. doi:10.18001/TRS.3.1.9

32.

Palmgreen

Lorch

E. P.

Stephenson

M. T.

Hoyle

R. H.

Donohew

(2007). Effects of the Office of National Drug Control Policy’s marijuana initiative campaign on high-sensation-seeking adolescents. American Journal of Public Health, 97, 1644–1649. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2005.072843

33.

Postmes

Spears

Lea

(2000). The formation of group norms in computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 26, 341–371. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2000.tb00761.x

34.

Postmes

Spears

Sakhel

& de Groot

(2001). Social influence in computer-mediated communication: The effects of anonymity on group behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1243–1254. doi:10.1177/01461672012710001

35.

Purcell

Rainie

Mitchell

Rosenstiel

Olmstead

(2010, 3 1). Understanding the participatory news consumer. Washington DC: Pew Internet. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2010/03/01/understanding-the-participatory-news-consumer/

36.

Reicher

S. D.

Spears

Postmes

(1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161–198. doi:10.1080/14792779443000049

37.

Rimal

R. N.

Lapinski

M. K.

(2015). A re-explication of social norms, ten years later. Communication Theory, 25, 393–409. doi:10.1111/comt.12080

38.

Rimal

R. N.

Real

(2003). Understanding the influence of perceived norms on behaviors. Communication Theory, 13, 184–203. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2003.tb00288.x

39.

Ruiz

Domingo

Micó

J. L.

Díaz-Noci

Masip

Meso

(2011). Public sphere 2.0? The democratic qualities of citizen debates in online newspapers. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 16, 463–487. doi:10.1177/1940161211415849

40.

Sadasivam

R. S.

Borglund

E. M.

Adams

Marlin

B. M.

Houston

T. K.

(2016). Impact of a collective intelligence tailored messaging system on smoking cessation: The Perspect randomized experiment. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18, e285. doi:10.2196/jmir.6465

41.

Santana

A. D.

(2011). Online readers’ comments represent new opinion pipeline. Newspaper Research Journal, 32, 66–81. doi:10.1177/073953291103200306

42.

Southwell

B. G.

(2013). Social networks and popular understanding of science and health: Sharing disparities. Baltimore, MD: JHU Press.

43.

Spears

Lea

(1992). Social influence and the influence of the “social” in computer-mediated communication. In Lea

(Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 30–65). London, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

44.

Straub

D. W.

(1989). Validating instruments in MIS research. MIS Quarterly, 13, 147–169.

45.

Toepfl

Piwoni

(2015). Public spheres in interaction: Comment sections of news websites as counterpublic spaces. Journal of Communication, 65, 465–488. doi:10.1111/jcom.12156

46.

Trumbo

C. W.

Harper

(2013). Use and perception of electronic cigarettes among college students. Journal of American College Health, 61, 149–155. doi:10.1080/07448481.2013.776052

47.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2015). Trends in various attitudes toward cigarette use for grades 8, 10, and 12. Retrieved from http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/data/15data/15cigtbl3.pdf

48.

Walther

J. B.

DeAndrea

Kim

Anthony

J. C.

(2010). The influence of online comments on perceptions of antimarijuana public service announcements on YouTube. Human Communication Research, 36, 469–492. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01384.x

49.

Walther

J. B.

Jang

(2012). Communication processes in participatory websites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18, 2–15. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01592.x

50.

Wang

Walther

J. B.

Hancock

J. T.

(2009). Social identification and interpersonal communication in computer-mediated communication: What you do versus who you are in virtual groups. Human Communication Research, 35, 59–85. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.01338.x

51.

Weber

(2014). Discussions in the comments section: Factors influencing participation and interactivity in online newspapers’ reader comments. New Media & Society, 16, 941–957. doi:10.1177/1461444813495165

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.61 MB