Summary Social Media: Risks &
Opportunities
Anouk de Groot
Inhoud
Lecture 2: Experiencing online aggression: perpetrators & victims........................................................2
Lecture 3: Witnessing online aggression: bystanders.............................................................................5
Lecture 4: Celebrity bashing.................................................................................................................10
Lecture 6: Online friendships and social connectedness......................................................................13
Lecture 7: Identity and self-presentation..............................................................................................16
Lecture 8: Online activism....................................................................................................................20
College 9: Guest lecture Netwerk Mediawijsheid.................................................................................22
Lecture 10: Privacy and social media....................................................................................................23
Lecture 11: Parental mediation.............................................................................................................26
,Lecture 2: Experiencing online aggression: perpetrators
& victims
Introduction to online aggression:
What is online aggression?
Online aggression = intentional harm, by use of electronic means
(Cyber)bullying = intentional act, carried out repeatedly over time, against victim who
cannot easily defend himself (power imbalance)
Who is perpetrator?
Dark triad: 3 dark personality traits
Narcissism: interested in yourself, how you should present yourself (online) take
advantage of others to achieve own goals
Machiavellianism: manipulative people, love power plan to manipulate people to
achieve own goals
Psychopathy: arrogant style, don’t take others emotions into account, very impulsive
Study 1: Dark triad study by Pabian at al. (2015)
Introduction
o Association between Dark Triad and cyber-aggression among adolescents
Method:
o Cross-sectional survey
Results: What can we learn from this model?
o Relationship between traits and cyber-
aggression
Machiavellianism: not significant
Narcissism: not significant
Psychopathy: significant more
psychopathy more risk in engaging in
cyber-aggression
o Relationship between facebook intensity on
cyber-aggression
More facebook use more cyber-aggression
Implications
o Personality traits are fairly stabilized in this age-group, so cyber-aggression
may be used as an indicator of psychopathy in adolescents
o prevention programs focused on training social perspective-taking skills
Limitations
o No investigation of sub-constructs of machiavellianism, narcissism or
psychopathy, or sadism as fourth trait
o Self-reporting: social desirable answering?
To consider
o Concrete implication difficult (hard to change personality traits)
o Focus on determinants of behavior that can be changed?
, Why do people perform this risk behavior and how can we prevent/intervene this risk
behavior?
Study 2: Theory of planned behavior study by Pabian & Vandebosch (2014)
Introduction
o Focus on proximal determinants of cyberbullying
o These are modifiable by interventions
o RQ: Is TPB a good framework for explaining
cyberbullying penetration?
o Which are underlying beliefs about attitude,
subjective norm and perceived control?
if you know that, you can change it
Attitudes: why are attitudes positive or
negative? Which are expected positive
and negative outcomes of cyberbullying?
Behavioral beliefs: the belief that cyberbullying has positive
outcomes, e.g. makes you popular
Subjective norm: which reference groups generate positive or negative
influence?
Adolescents behavior is influenced by what others
(friends/teachers) think
Normative beliefs: my friends accept bullying (injunctive norm),
or my friends bully others (descriptive norm)
Perceived behavioral control: what makes cyberbullying easy or
difficult to perform?
Control beliefs: easy to bully others via the internet anonymous
Results: What can we learn from this model?
o Relationship between intention and actual
behavior
Significant: higher intention 6
months later more behavior
o Relationship between attitude, subjective
norm, and behavioral norm on intention to
cyberbully
Attitude: significant: more positive
attitude more intention to behavior
Subjective norm: belief many people
around you accept and perform it higher intention to behavior
Perceived behavioral control: not significant: for everyone it is equally
as easy to perform so no differences
o Which beliefs form the attitude? Only significant ones are presented in the
model
Implications
o The theoretical model is applicable
o Evidence & importance of proximal determinants
o Importance of peers
Limitations
o R2 is very small: small part of model is explained
Opportunities
Anouk de Groot
Inhoud
Lecture 2: Experiencing online aggression: perpetrators & victims........................................................2
Lecture 3: Witnessing online aggression: bystanders.............................................................................5
Lecture 4: Celebrity bashing.................................................................................................................10
Lecture 6: Online friendships and social connectedness......................................................................13
Lecture 7: Identity and self-presentation..............................................................................................16
Lecture 8: Online activism....................................................................................................................20
College 9: Guest lecture Netwerk Mediawijsheid.................................................................................22
Lecture 10: Privacy and social media....................................................................................................23
Lecture 11: Parental mediation.............................................................................................................26
,Lecture 2: Experiencing online aggression: perpetrators
& victims
Introduction to online aggression:
What is online aggression?
Online aggression = intentional harm, by use of electronic means
(Cyber)bullying = intentional act, carried out repeatedly over time, against victim who
cannot easily defend himself (power imbalance)
Who is perpetrator?
Dark triad: 3 dark personality traits
Narcissism: interested in yourself, how you should present yourself (online) take
advantage of others to achieve own goals
Machiavellianism: manipulative people, love power plan to manipulate people to
achieve own goals
Psychopathy: arrogant style, don’t take others emotions into account, very impulsive
Study 1: Dark triad study by Pabian at al. (2015)
Introduction
o Association between Dark Triad and cyber-aggression among adolescents
Method:
o Cross-sectional survey
Results: What can we learn from this model?
o Relationship between traits and cyber-
aggression
Machiavellianism: not significant
Narcissism: not significant
Psychopathy: significant more
psychopathy more risk in engaging in
cyber-aggression
o Relationship between facebook intensity on
cyber-aggression
More facebook use more cyber-aggression
Implications
o Personality traits are fairly stabilized in this age-group, so cyber-aggression
may be used as an indicator of psychopathy in adolescents
o prevention programs focused on training social perspective-taking skills
Limitations
o No investigation of sub-constructs of machiavellianism, narcissism or
psychopathy, or sadism as fourth trait
o Self-reporting: social desirable answering?
To consider
o Concrete implication difficult (hard to change personality traits)
o Focus on determinants of behavior that can be changed?
, Why do people perform this risk behavior and how can we prevent/intervene this risk
behavior?
Study 2: Theory of planned behavior study by Pabian & Vandebosch (2014)
Introduction
o Focus on proximal determinants of cyberbullying
o These are modifiable by interventions
o RQ: Is TPB a good framework for explaining
cyberbullying penetration?
o Which are underlying beliefs about attitude,
subjective norm and perceived control?
if you know that, you can change it
Attitudes: why are attitudes positive or
negative? Which are expected positive
and negative outcomes of cyberbullying?
Behavioral beliefs: the belief that cyberbullying has positive
outcomes, e.g. makes you popular
Subjective norm: which reference groups generate positive or negative
influence?
Adolescents behavior is influenced by what others
(friends/teachers) think
Normative beliefs: my friends accept bullying (injunctive norm),
or my friends bully others (descriptive norm)
Perceived behavioral control: what makes cyberbullying easy or
difficult to perform?
Control beliefs: easy to bully others via the internet anonymous
Results: What can we learn from this model?
o Relationship between intention and actual
behavior
Significant: higher intention 6
months later more behavior
o Relationship between attitude, subjective
norm, and behavioral norm on intention to
cyberbully
Attitude: significant: more positive
attitude more intention to behavior
Subjective norm: belief many people
around you accept and perform it higher intention to behavior
Perceived behavioral control: not significant: for everyone it is equally
as easy to perform so no differences
o Which beliefs form the attitude? Only significant ones are presented in the
model
Implications
o The theoretical model is applicable
o Evidence & importance of proximal determinants
o Importance of peers
Limitations
o R2 is very small: small part of model is explained
