Professor Norman Johnson, commenting on the propensity of Internet posters to flame one another, states: In addition to the problems of conflicting mental models often present in online discussions, the inherent lack of face-to-face communication online can encourage hostility. Without social context, users are often helpless to know the intentions of their counterparts. Thus, online conversations often involve a variety of assumptions and motives unique to each individual user. A mental model may be correct in structure and assumptions but, even so, the human mind-either individually or as a group consensus-is apt to draw the wrong implications for the future. The human mind is not adapted to understanding correctly the consequences implied by a mental model. And even when consensus is reached, the underlying assumptions may be fallacies that lead to laws and programs that fail. It is little wonder that compromise takes so long. Fundamental assumptions differ but are never brought into the open. Even when only a single topic is being discussed, each participant in a conversation employs a different mental model to interpret the subject. As debate shifts, so do the mental models. The human mind assembles a few relationships to fit the context of a discussion. Furthermore, within a single individual, mental models change with time, even during the flow of a single conversation. Mental models are fuzzy, incomplete, and imprecisely stated. Jacob Borders, in discussing participants' internal modeling of a discussion, says: These include deindividuation and reduced awareness of other people's feelings ( online disinhibition effect), conformance to perceived norms, miscommunication caused by the lack of social cues available in face-to-face communication, and anti-normative behavior. Social researchers have investigated flaming, coming up with several different theories about the phenomenon. The continual use of flaming within the online community can create a disruptive and negative experience for those involved and can lead to limited involvement and engagement within the original chat room and program. The individuals that create an environment of flaming and hostility, lead the readers to disengage with the offender and may potentially leave the message board and chat room. Their personal social norms, may be considered disrespectful to the reader that has different social norms, education and experience with what is and is not appropriate within virtual communities. The flamer may have limited social cues, emotional intelligence to adapt to others reactions and lack of awareness of how they are being perceived. The reader now has the perception that this "flamer" is difficult, rude and possibly a bully. By basing their conversations on text and not taking full accountability as the "flamer", they have a reduced self-awareness of others feelings, emotions and reactions based on the comments that they provide within the virtual community. Flaming by perpetrators within the online community is commonly received by messaging through text and rarely by face to face or video communication. Humphreys defines flaming as "the use of hostile language online, including swearing, insults and otherwise offensive language"etc. The pleasant commentaries within a chat room or message board can be limited by a "war of words" fight or "flaming" with the intent to seek out a negative reaction from the reader. Flame wars can have a lasting impact on some internet communities where even once a flame war has concluded a division or even dissolution may occur. While these behaviors may be typical or expected in certain types of forums, they can have dramatic, adverse effects in others. These users specialize in flaming and target specific aspects of a controversial conversation. Deliberate flaming is carried out by individuals known as flamers, which are specifically motivated to incite flaming. Lack of social cues, less accountability of face-to-face communications, textual mediation and deindividualization are also likely factors. Anonymity can lead to disinhibition, which results in the swearing, offensive, and hostile language characteristic of flaming. Flaming emerged from the anonymity that Internet forums provide cover for users to act more aggressively. This term should not be confused with the term trolling, which is the act of someone causing discord online or in person. ( November 2021)įlaming, also known as roasting, is the act of posting insults, often including profanity or other offensive language, on the internet. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |