Reactance to Uncivil Disagreement?: The Integral Effects of Disagreement, Incivility, and Social Endorsement
This study extends the psychological reactance theory by demonstrating that online political discussions, without explicit social influence attempts, can arouse psychological reactance by certain message features. Based on a 2 (stance: agreement vs. disagreement) × 2 (tone: civil vs. uncivil) × 2 (s...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of media psychology 2024-01, Vol.36 (1), p.15-26 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | This study extends the psychological reactance theory by demonstrating that online
political discussions, without explicit social influence attempts, can arouse psychological reactance by
certain message features. Based on a 2 (stance: agreement vs. disagreement) × 2 (tone:
civil vs. uncivil) × 2 (social endorsement: low vs. high) between-subjects online
experiment in the United States (N = 418), the present study found that both
disagreement and uncivil comments led to psychological reactance directly and indirectly via perceived threat
to freedom. Unexpectedly, uncivil disagreement had smaller effects on psychological reactance than civil
disagreement. In addition, although social endorsement cues did not show any independent effects on
psychological reactance, they were found to exacerbate the direct effect of uncivil disagreement on
psychological reactance. Overall, our study develops important theoretical connections between political
deliberation and psychological reactance literatures. It also yields practical implications for fostering an
inclusive and healthy environment for online political discussion. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1864-1105 2151-2388 |
DOI: | 10.1027/1864-1105/a000378 |