Trolls Will Probably Troll Whether Online or Offline

[Fanghawk]

Trolls Will Probably Troll Whether Online or Offline

A new study has found connections between trolling and Dark Tetrad personality traits, suggesting that online bullies are sadists in the real world as well.

Trolling and online bullying is a big problem for online communities, with <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/123615-Riot-Games-Seeks-Reform-for-League-of-Legends-Trolls>no real consensus on <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/104844-Man-Goes-to-Jail-for-Being-an-Internet-Troll>how to fix it. Part of the issue is figuring out what exactly makes someone start trolling. The most common belief is that trolls <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/121603-Science-Proves-That-Trolls-Ruin-Everything>are tied to online environments, where anonymity and a lack of social conventions frees people to behave in abhorrent ways. New studies, however, are suggesting a different theory: Trolls are sadists and psychopaths who just would keep on trolling if the internet was unexpectedly switched off tomorrow.

<a href=https://www.academia.edu/6016545/Trolls_just_want_to_have_fun>A new paper awaiting publication by Erin E. Buckels of the University of Manitoba conducted personality assessments of 418 visitors to Amazon's Mechanical Turk website. From the results, Buckels and her partners found a correlation between trolling behaviors and the <a href=http://pss.sagepub.com/content/24/11/2201>Dark Tetrad of personality. For those unfamiliar, the Dark Tetrad isn't a secret society of supervillains; it's a measure for the sadistic, psychopathic, and Machiavellian tendencies found with socially adverse individuals.

Here's where things get interesting: Not only did trolls make up a fairly small percentage of the participants, enjoyment of online activities bore no relation to sadistic tendencies. In other words, the internet may not create trolls after all, because trolls would be sadists in online and physical worlds. If that's true, then cyber-bulling is just an online manifestation of everyday dickishness, and couldn't be cured by removing anonymity from the internet. It would just take a new form, or be redirected back into the real world, leaving the non-troll majority to find another way of handling it.

Source: <a href=https://www.academia.edu/6016545/Trolls_just_want_to_have_fun>Academic.edu, via <a href=http://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2014/feb/25/internet-trolls-are-also-real-life-trolls>The Guardian

Permalink

 

[FalloutJack]

I have a question: Could we use similar means to finally get people off our backs about the violent video games? That is, could the proof of the pudding that is trollism in a person be used to point out that the violent people who ever played a game were violent themselve, thus ending such conundrums for all time? It would be nice.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

I have a question: Could we use similar means to finally get people off our backs about the violent video games? That is, could the proof of the pudding that is trollism in a person be used to point out that the violent people who ever played a game were violent themselve, thus ending such conundrums for all time? It would be nice.

You'll never end those conundrums because the prople perpetuating them are so set in their ways that no evidence short of an ammendment to the Bible by God would change their mind.

OT: I enjoy a light troll occasionally and as far as I know I am not any kind of sadist or sociopath. But I can see how that may be the case with people who don't know when to stop.

Captcha: "hard cheese". We put our faith in Blast.

 

[Barbas]

That's the only troll I've ever seen with two noses. It's also the only purple one.

People will likely band together in groups to get their kicks. This makes them easier to identify, though.

 

[Baresark]

That is the troll from Ernest Scared Stupid. Great movie when I was tiny. Best in the series, in my opinion. It helps that Halloween is my all time favorite non-holiday, holiday.

OT: I don't think anyone thought the internet "made" trolls. It's a well known place where you can get away with "Trolling" and bullying with zero repercussions. Which is not the case in real life. Of course the people who do it are messed up in the head, not fine and then they are transformed by broadband into a monster.

Also, I hate that term... "trolling". It's way way way too general of a term. I have been accused of trolling myself, simply because I disagree with someone. But this article and apparently this study treats trolling and bullying as the same thing.

 

[Yuuki]

I'm failing to see how trolling would even work in real life. They would just be called "pranks" or amount to harassment/assault with no way to hide.

Trolling is when someone attempts to provoke an emotional reaction from someone using merely words/images online...that's why it took off, because it's an easy thing to do for a big "reward".
It would never work in real life because 1) it's not the internet and 2) It would be impossible to troll people outside someone you can physically reach.

It's like people didn't even think things through lol, but I guess that's usually the case with knee-jerk reactions to them pesky modern internet gaming kids.

Further evidence to that report being bullshit is that I've trolled people (lightly) in games and forums, and my friends tell me that I'm not usually a sadistic psycho.

To quote a wise man:

 

[Phrozenflame500]

So what you're saying is, enjoying other people's frustration may be sadistic?

Wow, top-tier research right here.

Let's face it, deep inside we're all a little sadistic.

EDIT:

I did my master thesis on Internet Cultures - Anonymous, Furries and Bronies...

Credit where credit is due, this is a really interesting post and I'd be really interested in reading the full thesis if you get the chance..

 

[FalloutJack]

I have a question: Could we use similar means to finally get people off our backs about the violent video games? That is, could the proof of the pudding that is trollism in a person be used to point out that the violent people who ever played a game were violent themselve, thus ending such conundrums for all time? It would be nice.

You'll never end those conundrums because the prople perpetuating them are so set in their ways that no evidence short of an ammendment to the Bible by God would change their mind.

OT: I enjoy a light troll occasionally and as far as I know I am not any kind of sadist or sociopath. But I can see how that may be the case with people who don't know when to stop.

Captcha: "hard cheese". We put our faith in Blast.

All the captchas should be like that.

OT: Ah, so in short (Hah hah hah), they're the damn trolls, which is why it keeps up. Should've figured it. Trolls are, buy and large, not very bright...and neither are the people who link gaming with violence in those studies.

 

[Pyrian]

To quote a wise man:

More like "To quote a sadist under the delusion that he's a normal person", lol. Don't get me wrong, I love Penny Arcade, but I think I love it precisely because it's a bit... Offensive, sometimes.

 

[Archon]

While I agree with the paper's suggestion that trolls are manifesting the dark tetrad of personality traits, there is something singular about the internet that brings out such personality traits. "Virtual sociopathy" is a real phenomenon caused by the lack of empathic clues we normally get in face-to-face interaction.

 

[CriticalMiss]

To quote a wise man:

Spoiler: imghere

It probably would have been nicer to post an image without the name photoshopped out and the copyright marks removed, even if the topic at hand is not infact Unreal Tournament.

Spoiler: original jpeg

I'm curious as to how (and to some degree why) this is being reported on if the paper hasn't been published and peer reviewed yet. This is the first I've heard of academia.edu so maybe they do peer review stuff, in which case proceed! It's certainly interesting if it is true although I get the feeling that the anonymity and scope of the internet is more of a magnifier for sadistic tendencies, so some people who troll on the internet probably aren't psychopaths AFK they just play it up a bit online. But I'm no headologist.

Also Dark Tetrad sounds like the villain from a Tetris RPG.

 

[Fsyco]

Speaking as a sadistic troll, I can confirm that the so-called 'GIFT' has some truth to it. A seemingly-normal person might have deep sadistic tendencies, but might also find it difficult to express them in real life because that's frowned upon in society, and having someone yell at you for realsies is stressful. Being on the Internet removes the societal constraint, since there isn't another person physically there. Of course that's also why you get perfectly normal people acting like asshats, since nobody is around to actually ostracize them for their unchecked behavior.

It also might not be worth my time to be cruel to someone in real life. I got things to do. I spend my free time on the Internet, though, and so I can recreationally annoy people from the comfort of home.

 

[webkilla]

I did my master thesis on Internet Cultures - Anonymous, Furries and Bronies.

Especially with Anonymous, I found studies that showed that when in an online community where identity is never established via convential means (profiles, usernames) you establish identity through behavior.

Thus, when on 4chan they write that newbs can't triforce - this is almost meant a rite of passage: "You won't fit in here, until you've figured this riddle out... and we're not telling"

Similarly, 4chan - using /b/ as its bulwark, because that is the most well known 4chan board outside of 4chan - shields itself from outsiders by having a wall of profanity and gross adult content up at all times. Gore, porn, worse - its another trial to keep the weak and the uninitiated out.

Sure, to normal people such behavior looks horribly trollish

And indeed, another thing I found was that again - since the norm of how to identify yourself was not through visual or other adorned paraphernalia (usernames, arm-bands, uniforms, whatnot) then you had to do the deeds to prove that you were part of the collective. Thus online raids became a way to mark turf and demonstrate community hiarchy. Don't mess with us, or we'll flood your forum with epilepsy inducing GIFs, or gore, or worse... plus, being insular and having common foes is a great way to unite a community as well.

...and again, to normal people IRL that kind of behavior appears quite abhorent.

But the thing is: I found research - which correlated with my own hypothesis - that anonymous online communities, since they didn't function like RL off-line communities, function via different social paradigms. Thus, what is right IRL doesn't necesarily translate to the on-line world.

Curiously enough this helps explain a lot of things beside Anonymous. It explains why furries, bronies and quite a lot of other fandoms establish their own online customs, idioms and what have you. Especially with furries, where unlike bronies there is no true core definition of the concept due to the lack of being inspired by any one specific RL artifact, then this helps explain why furries can appear to endulge is such weird fantasies...

Because the answer is: Online, they can. Online they can pretend to 200 foot wolf-men who stomp through cities, godzilla style, then lick their paws clean afterwards... or all the other weird things they can indulge in.

However, another key thing I noted in my research: I found no examples of people who couldn't tell the difference between online and RL social paradigms. People, by and large, seem to know when to switch from "this is ok online" to "This is not OK IRL".

The only people I can imagine who might fail to do so - as OP's article seems to point at - would be those with various issues. This could be mental issues that generally interfere with their perfection of reality, it could be... well... sadists - but then I question the article, in the sense that it seems to indicate that ALL online trolls are sadists.

The thing to keep in mind is how the underlying issue on online trolls is approached. Do you approach it thinking "Normal people do not behave like this - what's wrong with these people", which presumes some kind of defect or deviance on a section of the normal people group which can be diagnosed and then maybe treated. Compare to "Some online communities exhibit behavior different than people IRL - what are the differences in these communities that cause such behavior", because that approached the issue more as an anthropological study.


I mean, its not like everyone on 4chan is a hacker on steroids either?

Just sayan

 

[Fsyco]

I did my master thesis on Internet Cultures - Anonymous, Furries and Bronies.

Especially with Anonymous, I found studies that showed that when in an online community where identity is never established via convential means (profiles, usernames) you establish identity through behavior.

Thus, when on 4chan they write that newbs can't triforce - this is almost meant a rite of passage: "You won't fit in here, until you've figured this riddle out... and we're not telling"

Similarly, 4chan - using /b/ as its bulwark, because that is the most well known 4chan board outside of 4chan - shields itself from outsiders by having a wall of profanity and gross adult content up at all times. Gore, porn, worse - its another trial to keep the weak and the uninitiated out.

Sure, to normal people such behavior looks horribly trollish

And indeed, another thing I found was that again - since the norm of how to identify yourself was not through visual or other adorned paraphernalia (usernames, arm-bands, uniforms, whatnot) then you had to do the deeds to prove that you were part of the collective. Thus online raids became a way to mark turf and demonstrate community hiarchy. Don't mess with us, or we'll flood your forum with epilepsy inducing GIFs, or gore, or worse... plus, being insular and having common foes is a great way to unite a community as well.

...and again, to normal people IRL that kind of behavior appears quite abhorent.

But the thing is: I found research - which correlated with my own hypothesis - that anonymous online communities, since they didn't function like RL off-line communities, function via different social paradigms. Thus, what is right IRL doesn't necesarily translate to the on-line world.

Curiously enough this helps explain a lot of things beside Anonymous. It explains why furries, bronies and quite a lot of other fandoms establish their own online customs, idioms and what have you. Especially with furries, where unlike bronies there is no true core definition of the concept due to the lack of being inspired by any one specific RL artifact, then this helps explain why furries can appear to endulge is such weird fantasies...

Because the answer is: Online, they can. Online they can pretend to 200 foot wolf-men who stomp through cities, godzilla style, then lick their paws clean afterwards... or all the other weird things they can indulge in.

However, another key thing I noted in my research: I found no examples of people who couldn't tell the difference between online and RL social paradigms. People, by and large, seem to know when to switch from "this is ok online" to "This is not OK IRL".

The only people I can imagine who might fail to do so - as OP's article seems to point at - would be those with various issues. This could be mental issues that generally interfere with their perfection of reality, it could be... well... sadists - but then I question the article, in the sense that it seems to indicate that ALL online trolls are sadists.

The thing to keep in mind is how the underlying issue on online trolls is approached. Do you approach it thinking "Normal people do not behave like this - what's wrong with these people", which presumes some kind of defect or deviance on a section of the normal people group which can be diagnosed and then maybe treated. Compare to "Some online communities exhibit behavior different than people IRL - what are the differences in these communities that cause such behavior", because that approached the issue more as an anthropological study.


I mean, its not like everyone on 4chan is a hacker on steroids either?

Just sayan

You know, I wish we had more people like you. Like, every thread gets a magic button where we can call in an expert who has studied the relevant field to give their informed opinion.

That explanation actually makes alot of sense. Is there somewhere where we could read said thesis?

 

[webkilla]

Webkilla's huge wall of wisdom and text

You know, I wish we had more people like you. Like, every thread gets a magic button where we can call in an expert who has studied the relevant field to give their informed opinion.

That explanation actually makes alot of sense. Is there somewhere where we could read said thesis?

I should upload it somewhere...

My thesis was mainly about explaining how things like Anonymous, Furries and bronies organize - or rather, how they don't - and yet maintain online coherence as a kind of community, or at least something that from the outside looks like one.

This is also why "Anonymous" as a single monolithic persona of 4chan works so well - because... they're all anonymous, and can address everyone else there with just that name.

But what I wrote sums up most of the relevant bits that pertain to this discussion. The rest is mainly explaining what Anonymous, furries and bronies are - and explaining how the research I've cited is relevant to the points I'm making

...I'll probably upload it tomorrow if yall still want. Its almost 2:30 in the morning here right now.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

I think of trolls this way: there are no trolls. Most people who label themselves or are labeled as trolls by others are in fact just idiots who didn't think before typing. Such as how this comic illustrates:

http://whynne.deviantart.com/art/Comic-Trolls-98357844

Now, the people the study illustrates are essentially sociopaths. They have no conscience and thus are baffled as to why people get pissed at them for riling them up. The difference is if they tried that crap in the real world they'd get reprimanded for it. Big time. It's why the net is a perfect place for sadists to convene

 

[Fsyco]

I think of trolls this way: there are no trolls. Most people who label themselves or are labeled as trolls by others are in fact just idiots who didn't think before typing. Such as how this comic illustrates:

http://whynne.deviantart.com/art/Comic-Trolls-98357844

Now, the people the study illustrates are essentially sociopaths. They have no conscience and thus are baffled as to why people get pissed at them for riling them up. The difference is if they tried that crap in the real world they'd get reprimanded for it. Big time. It's why the net is a perfect place for sadists to convene

That comic is about a specific type of troll on forums. Also I should probably point out that being a sadist doesn't necessarily make you a psychopath. Getting your jollies off on power over others doesn't exclusively involve hurting people. It also goes the other way; I know exactly why someone is upset when I rile them up, but I do it anyway because I don't like them.

 

[Fsyco]

Actually it's not just annonymity, it's annonymity + not being within range of face punching or nut kicking. People are totallydifferent when they think they won't be caught and be won't be punished. When technology invents a way to deliver swift kicks to the nutz via the internet, or punches to the boobs... then trolls will shut up. Get to work scientists.!

Just because something is 'common sense/knowledge' doesn't necessarily mean its true, or that it doesn't warrant further study. I want to say that its called Hindsight bias, but I don't think that's the right word. They might have found something everyone already thought, but they could have found that most people actually have sadistic tendencies. Or that all trolls are really space aliens or something.

 

[Darks63]

Anyone else disappointed that the Dark Tetrad test isnt takeble online or at least there isnt a link in the OP?