This study investigates the dynamics of hate speech, looking at feedback on comments and subsequent commenting. We examine the relationship between feedback on comments, hate speech presence, and commenter types, with analysis of news comments during the 2022 South Korean presidential election campaigns. The data include 25 million comments, analyzed with a deep learning hate speech detection model. It was found that positive feedback encourages more commenting for non-hateful content, and negative feedback reduces subsequent non-hateful comments. However, surprisingly, negative feedback was found to rather increase the frequency of hateful comments, particularly among light commenters. Implications of the findings are discussed.
AbramsD.WetherellM.CochraneS.HoggM. A.TurnerJ. 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(2), 97–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1990.tb00892.x
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
4.
Álvarez-BenjumeaA.WinterF. (2018). Normative change and culture of hate: An experiment in online environments. European Sociological Review, 34(3), 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcy005
5.
AntonioniD. (1998). Relationship between the big five personality factors and conflict management styles. International Journal of Conflict Management, 9, 336–355. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022814
6.
BaldassareM.KatzC. (1996). Measures of attitude strength as predictors of willingness to speak to the media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73(1), 147–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909607300113
7.
BradyW. J.McLoughlinK.DoanT. N.CrockettM. J. (2021). How social learning amplifies moral outrage expression in online social networks. Science Advances, 7(33), eabe5641. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abe5641
8.
BranscombeN. R.EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In EllemersN.SpearsR. (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 35–58). Blackwell Science.
9.
BuckleyK. E.WinkelR. E.LearyM. R. (2004). Reactions to acceptance and rejection: Effects of level and sequence of relational evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00064-7
10.
CarrC. T.HayesR. A.SumnerE. M. (2018). Predicting a threshold of perceived Facebook post success via likes and reactions: A test of explanatory mechanisms. Communication Research Reports, 35(2), 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2017.1409618
11.
CarrC. T.WohnD. Y.HayesR. A. (2016). As social support: Relational closeness, automaticity, and interpreting social support from paralinguistic digital affordances in social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 385–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.087
12.
ChenG. M. (2015). Losing face on social media: Threats to positive face lead to an indirect effect on retaliatory aggression through negative affect. Communication Research, 42(6), 819–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650213510937
13.
ChengJ.Danescu-Niculescu-MizilC.LeskovecJ. (2014, June1–4). How community feedback shapes user behavior [Paper presentation]. Eighth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.
CialdiniR. B.TrostM. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In GilbertD. T.FiskeS. T.LindzeyG. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 151–192). McGraw-Hill.
16.
CorreaT.JeongS. H. (2011). Race and online content creation: Why minorities are actively participating in the Web. Information, Communication & Society, 14(5), 638–659. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2010.514355
17.
CrandallC. S.MillerJ. M.WhiteM. H. (2018). Changing norms following the 2016 US presidential election: The Trump effect on prejudice. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(2), 186–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617750735
18.
CrawfordK.GillespieT. (2016). What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint. New Media & Society, 18(3), 410–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814543163
19.
DavidsonT.WarmsleyD.MacyM.WeberI. (2017, May15–18). Automated hate speech detection and the problem of offensive language [Paper presentation]. 11th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
20.
DeutschM.GerardH. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629–636. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046408
21.
DiggleP. J.HeagertyP.LiangK.-Y.ZegerS. (2002). Analysis of longitudinal data (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
22.
DynelM. (2012). Swearing methodologically: The (im) politeness of expletives in anonymous commentaries on YouTube. Journal of English Studies, 10, 25–50.
23.
ErjavecK.KovačičM. P. (2012). “You don’t understand, This is a new war!” Analysis of hate speech in news web sites’ comments. Mass Communication and Society, 15(6), 899–920. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2011.619679
FisherR. A. (1915). Frequency distribution of the values of the correlation coefficient in samples from an indefinitely large population. Biometrika, 10(4), 507–521. https://doi.org/10.2307/2331838
26.
FreelonD. (2015). Discourse architecture, ideology, and democratic norms in online politicaldiscussion. New Media & Society, 17(5), 772–791. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813513259
27.
FreemanE. A.MoisenG. G. (2008). A comparison of the performance of threshold criteria for binary classification in terms of predicted prevalence and kappa. Ecological Modelling, 217(1), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.05.015
28.
GlynnC. J.HayesA. F.ShanahanJ. (1997). Perceived support for one’s opinions and willingness to speak out: A meta-analysis of survey studies on the “spiral of silence”. Public Opinion Quarterly, 61(3), 452–463. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2749581
29.
GlynnC. J.McLeodJ. M. (1984). Public opinion du Jour: An examination of the spiral of silence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48(4), 731–740. https://doi.org/10.1086/268879
30.
GolderS. A.DonathJ. (2004, September19–22). Social roles in electronic communities. [Paper presentation]. Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) Conference Internet Research 5.0, Brighton, England.
31.
Golf-PapezM.VeerE. (2017). Don’t feed the trolling: Rethinking how online trolling is being defined and combated. Journal of Marketing Management, 33(15–16), 1336–1354. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2017.1383298
32.
HammondC.Watson-NorteyN. K. L.Osei-MensahB. (2022). “Why aren’t you married? The same reason you are not dead, it’s not my time”: Social media use of hate speech on female celebrities in Ghana. Research Journal of Mass Communication and Information Technology, 8(1), 109031. https://doi.org/10.56201/rjmcit.v8.no1.2022.pg109.131
33.
HayesR. A.WesselmannE. D.CarrC. T. (2018). When nobody “likes” you: Perceived ostracism through paralinguistic digital affordances within social media. Social Media + Society, 4(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/205630511880030
34.
HerringS.Job-SluderK.SchecklerR.BarabS. (2002). Searching for safety online: Managing “Trolling” in a feminist forum. The Information Society, 18(5), 371–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240290108186
35.
HoggM. A. (2010). Influence and leadership. In FiskeS. T.GilbertD. T.LindzeyG. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 1166–1207). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy002031
36.
HongC.ChenZ.LiC. (2017). “Liking” and being “liked”: How are personality traits and demographics associated with giving and receiving “likes” on Facebook?Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 292–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.048
37.
HongJ.ParkH. S. (2011). User ratings and willingness to express opinions online. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 3(2), 2–15. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v3n2p2
38.
HsuehM.YogeeswaranK.MalinenS. (2015). “Leave your comment below”: Can biased online comments influence our own prejudicial attitudes and behaviors?Human Communication Research, 41(4), 557–576. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12059
39.
HubermanB. A.RomeroD. M.WuF. (2009). Crowdsourcing, attention and productivity. Journal of Information Science, 35(6), 758–765. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551509346786
40.
IvesA. R. (2015). For testing the significance of regression coefficients, go ahead and log-transform count data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 6(7), 828–835. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12386
JostP.ZiegeleM. (2022). How to get on top—The effect of rationality and incivility of user comments on their visibility in political online discussions on Facebook. Communication Research Reports, 39(4), 224–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2022.2120861
43.
KarapinR. (1999). The politics of immigration control in Britain and Germany: Subnational politicians and social movements. Comparative Politics, 31(4), 423–444. https://doi.org/10.2307/422238
44.
KleinO.SpearsR.ReicherS. (2007). Social identity performance: Extending the strategic side of SIDE. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(1), 28–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294588
45.
Knobloch-WesterwickS.SharmaN.HansenD. L.AlterS. (2005). Impact of popularity indications on readers’ selective exposure to online news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(3), 296–313. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4903_3
KsiazekT. B. (2015). Civil interactivity: How news organizations’ commenting policies explain civility and hostility in user comments. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59(4), 556–573. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2015.1093487
48.
LeeE. J.JangY. 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(6), 825–846. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210376189
49.
LeeS. M.ThomerA. K.LampeC. (2022). The use of negative interface cues to change perceptions of online retributive harassment [Paper presentation]. ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, New York, NY, United States.
50.
LevenduskyM. (2013). How partisan media polarize America. University of Chicago Press.
51.
LevineJ. M. (1980). Reaction to opinion deviance in small groups. In Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (pp. 187–231). Erlbaum.
52.
LiangK.-Y.ZegerS. L. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika, 73(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/73.1.13
53.
LongS. J.FreeseJ. (2006). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata. Stata Press.
54.
LutzS.SchneiderF. M. (2021). Is receiving dislikes in social media still better than being ignored? The effects of ostracism and rejection on need threat and coping responses online. Media Psychology, 24(6), 741–765. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2020.1799409
55.
MackieD. M.DevosT.SmithE. R. (2000). Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(4), 602–616. https://doi.org/10.10371/0022-3514.79.4.602
56.
McDevittM.KiousisS.Wahl-JorgensenK. (2003). Spiral of moderation: Opinion expression in computer-mediated discussion. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 15(4), 454–470.
57.
MoldenD. C.LucasG. M.GardnerW. L.DeanK.KnowlesM. L. (2009). Motivations for prevention or promotion following social exclusion: Being rejected versus being ignored. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 415–431. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012958
MuddimanA.StroudN. J. (2017). News values, cognitive biases, and partisan incivility in comment sections. Journal of Communication, 67(4), 586–609. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12312
60.
MungerK. (2017). Tweetment effects on the tweeted: Experimentally reducing racist harassment. Political Behavior, 39, 629–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-016-9373-5
61.
MutzD. C. (1994). The political effects of perceptions of mass opinion. Research in Micropolitics, 4, 143–167.
62.
MutzD. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge University Press.
63.
NaabT. K.HeinbachD.ZiegeleM.GrasbergerM.-T. (2020). Comments and credibility: How critical user comments decrease perceived news article credibility. Journalism Studies, 21(6), 783–801. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1724181
64.
NekmatE.GonzenbachW. J. (2013). Multiple opinion climates in online forums: Role of website source reference and within-forum opinion congruency. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 90(4), 736–756. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699013503162
Noelle-NeumannE. (1977). Turbulences in the climate of opinion: Methodological applications of the spiral of silence theory. Public Opinion Quarterly, 41(2), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1086/268371
69.
Noelle-NeumannE. (1993). The spiral of silence. Chicago University Press.
70.
Noelle-NeumannE. (1995). Public opinion and rationality. In GlasserT. L.SalmonC. T. (Eds.), Public opinion and the communication of consent. Guilford Press.
71.
OktenA. (2022). On commemorating Hrant Dink: Affective nationalism, hate speech, and digital news media users. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769902210939
72.
OshaganH. (1996). Reference group influence on opinion expression. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8(4), 335–354. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/8.4.335
PangN.HoS. S.ZhangA. M.KoJ. S.LowW.TanK. S. (2016). Can spiral of silence and civility predict click speech on Facebook?Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 898–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.066
75.
PeterC.RossmannC.KeylingT. (2014). Exemplification 2.0. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 26(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000103
76.
Porten-CheéP.EildersC. (2020). The effects of likes on public opinion perception and personal opinion. Communications, 45(2), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2019-2030
77.
PostmesT.SpearsR. (1998). Deindividuation and antinormative behavior: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123(3), 238–259.
78.
PriceV.AllenS. (1990). Opinion spirals, silent and otherwise: Applying small-group research to public opinion phenomena. Communication Research, 17(3), 369–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365090017003005
RainsS. A.KenskiK.CoeK.HarwoodJ. (2017). Incivility and political identity on the Internet: Intergroup factors as predictors of incivility in discussions of news online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(4), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12191
81.
RauP.-L. P.GaoQ.DingY. (2008). Relationship between the level of intimacy and lurking in online social network services. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2757–2770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.04.001
82.
ReaderB. (2012). Free press vs. free speech? The rhetoric of “civility” in regard to anonymous online comments. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(3), 495–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699012447923
83.
ReichS.SchneiderF. M.HelingL. (2018). Zero likes—Symbolic interactions and need satisfaction online. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 97–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.043
84.
ReichelmannA.HawdonJ.CostelloM.RyanJ.BlayaC.LlorentV.OksanenA.RäsänenP.ZychI. (2021). Hate knows no boundaries: Online hate in six nations. Deviant Behavior, 42(9), 1100–1111. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2020.1722337
85.
RuffC. C.FehrE. (2014). The neurobiology of rewards and values in social decision making. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(8), 549–562.
86.
SagemanM. (2011). Leaderless jihad: Terror networks in the twenty-first century. University of Pennsylvania Press.
87.
SherrickB.HoeweJ. (2018). The effect of explicit online comment moderation on three spiral of silence outcomes. New Media & Society, 20(2), 453–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816662477
88.
SkinnerB. F. (1953). Some contributions of an experimental analysis of behavior to psychology as a whole. American Psychologist, 8(2), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054118
89.
SmithR.MorganJ.MonksC. (2017). Students’ perceptions of the effect of social media ostracism on wellbeing. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.041
90.
SpearsR.LeaM.LeeS. (1990). De-individuation and group polarization in computer-mediated communication. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29(2), 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1990.tb00893.x
91.
StephensR.DowberH.BarrieA.AlmeidaS.AtkinsK. (2023). Effect of swearing on strength: Disinhibition as a potential mediator. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 76(2), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218221082657
92.
StroudN. J.ScaccoJ. M.MuddimanA.CurryA. L. (2015). Changing deliberative norms on news organizations’ Facebook sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2), 188–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12104
93.
SunN.RauP. P.-L.MaL. (2014). Understanding lurkers in online communities: A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 38, 110–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.022
94.
SunsteinC. R. (2009). Going to extremes: How like minds unite and divide. Oxford University Press.
TormalaZ. L.RuckerD. D. (2007). Attitude certainty: A review of past findings and emerging perspectives. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1(1), 469–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00025.x
97.
ValkenburgP. M.PeterJ.SchoutenA. P. (2006). Friend networking sites and their relationship to adolescents’ well-being and social self-esteem. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(5), 584–590. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.584
98.
WuW.WeaverD. (1997). On-line democracy or on-line demagoguery? Public opinion “polls” on the Internet. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 2(4), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1081180X97002004006
99.
Wu-OuyangB.HuY. (2025). Internet freedom and social media’s political consequences: Political nationalism and authoritarian orientation among six Asian societies. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990241313183
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.
