Suffering from Online disinhibition effect

[Vexen]

Are you suffering from the online disinhibition effect? Or have you encountered people who are?

 

Wikipedia :

"The online disinhibition effect is a loosening (or complete abandonment) of social restrictions and inhibitions that would otherwise be present in normal face-to-face interaction during interactions with others on the Internet. This effect is caused by many factors, including dissociative anonymity, invisibility, asynchronicity, solipsistic introjection, dissociative imagination, and minimization of authority."

 

Example of youtube quotes:

 

Thgerasd," after watching this video, I have come to the conclusion that you are still fat".

 

What's wrong with humans on the Internet?

 

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/internetlife/2007-07-30-cruel-web_N.htm

[StringJunky]

I imagine quite a few feel empowered, thinking their anonymity and physical separation from their targets gives them immunity from retribution.

[Ophiolite]

Shock, horror. Human communication varies in tenor and type depending upon context. What deep insights will the psychologists come up with next. [1]

 

1. For those who think this may be an example of the subject condition please note were I talking to you face to face I would convey my meaning with the aid of a disparaging tone, a selection of expletives and a readiness to share my home address, none of which are appropriate in the online milieu.

[Dekan]

I imagine quite a few feel empowered, thinking their anonymity and physical separation from their targets gives them immunity from retribution.

 

Yes - the Internet and Forums like these, have empowered the masses

 

The masses have got the opportunity - for almost the first time in History - to assail their superiors, just by typing on a keyboard.

I say "almost the first time", because there is a kind of historical precedent. Which was, obviously - the invention of the gun.

 

Equipped with a gun, a peasant could knock even the most valiant and superior Knight off his horse. Just by pulling a trigger.

 

Where will it lead?

[physica]

I think generally this is a good thing. Although there are clear dangers like people bullying others I think that the internet is one of the last defences for freedom of speech. Because no one knows my true name I am treated on the merit of what I actually say. I can speak openly about what I think about my job or a particular political movement without having my job threatened or people attacking my character in other aspects of my life. I think in this day and age there is a growing number of people who hide behind taking offence and attacking someones character as opposed to dealing with what's been said.

 

If you want to progress ideas and see what others think of them you can't do better than this forum. Appeal to authority isn't tolerated and it cannot be implied or enforced because we don't know each other. Personally I think that mainstream science should be conducted like this if we want to see progression increased.

[Acme]

Oh the horror!

Name That Ben

During the eighteenth century, it was common for writers and journalists to use pseudonyms, or false names, when they created newspaper articles and letters to the editor. Franklin used this convention extensively throughout his life, sometimes to express an idea that might have been considered slanderous or even illegal by the authorities; other times to present two sides of an issue, much like the point-counterpoint style of journalism used today.

 

When Franklin used a pseudonym, he often created an entire persona for the "writer." Sometimes he wrote as a woman, other times as a man, but always with a specific point of view. While all of his writings were focused and logical, many were also humorous, filled with wit and irony. Silence Dogood, Harry Meanwell, Alice Addertongue, Richard Saunders, and Timothy Turnstone were a few of the many pseudonyms Franklin used throughout his career. ...

[Vexen]

Everyone in this forum has an anonymous users name. So, I shouldn't expect anything fruitful from this discussion.

[physica]

Everyone in this forum has an anonymous users name. So, I shouldn't expect anything fruitful from this discussion.

 

I don't know what you're reading? People have given historical examples of famous productive people using anonymous names on this thread. People like me have also said why it's an advantage to have anonymous names as I gives us freedom of speech without the fear of being bullied in our personal lives. If you wanted a more specific discussion you should have a more specific opening. All you've done on this post is ask two very vague open questions. You haven't put forward your position or asked anyone to elaborate of their posts. What you should be saying is:

 

I shouldn't expect much from a discussion that I put no effort in and don't develop.

 

We are not mind readers. You have to put at least a little effort in your own thread if you want it to develop.

[davidivad]

if you are here to read this then got get some sunshine.

while feeling invulnerable, we find ourselves trapped by a new vulnerability...

addiction.

[Vexen]

I don't know what you're reading? People have given historical examples of famous productive people using anonymous names on this thread. People like me have also said why it's an advantage to have anonymous names as I gives us freedom of speech without the fear of being bullied in our personal lives. If you wanted a more specific discussion you should have a more specific opening. All you've done on this post is ask two very vague open questions. You haven't put forward your position or asked anyone to elaborate of their posts. What you should be saying is:

 

I shouldn't expect much from a discussion that I put no effort in and don't develop.

 

We are not mind readers. You have to put at least a little effort in your own thread if you want it to develop.

 

I have articulated my question properly.

 

I'm sure you people must have come across this sort of behaviour. Does it not fascinate anyone?

[Acme]

if you are here to read this then got get some sunshine.

while feeling invulnerable, we find ourselves trapped by a new vulnerability...

addiction.

So too if you were here to write it. (Addiction is not new.)

I have articulated my question properly.

 

I'm sure you people must have come across this sort of behaviour. Does it not fascinate anyone?

If nothing else I came across 'this sort of behavior' when I read you post. Not fascinating, no. Mildly interesting, perhaps. Pseudonyms and anonymity are not new. Edited December 15, 2014 by Acme

[Ophiolite]

I have articulated my question properly.

Off-topic, but I routinely point out to members that it is not their right to decide if they have articulated a question properly. It is the right of the reader. You may feel such an off-topic intervention is rude. However, I find the presumption that you can decide on the quality of your questions to be rude. I don't think you intend it that way, so this is an FYI.

[Endy0816]

If nothing else I came across 'this sort of behavior' when I read you post. Not fascinating, no. Mildly interesting, perhaps. Pseudonyms and anonymity are not new.

 

This is very true. The back and forth in letters submitted to old science journals reads much like a forum does today.

[MonDie]

There are factors beyond anonymity:

 

This effect is caused by many factors, including dissociative anonymity, invisibility, asynchronicity, solipsistic introjection, dissociative imagination, and minimization of authority."

 

I have experience this effect despite not being anonymous. I think Richard Dawkins has too.

[Vexen]

Okay, I probably didn't articulate my question correctly (apologies to everyone). I'm new to forum life.

 

I'm not saying anything about the positive or negative impacts of anonymity. I want to know what the opinion of an anonymous person reflects.

 

I was hoping people would discuss whether your online opinion is a true representation of who you are. If I'm blatantly rude, racist and bigotry on the Internet but I don't remotely mimic this in my "real" life, which of the two represents me most accurately? Is this some sort of personality dissonance?

 

Side Question:

What do we think about the ability of text to correctly convey emotions?

Edited December 21, 2014 by Vexen

[imatfaal]

,...

Side Question:

What do we think about the ability of text to correctly convey emotions?

 

Depends on how much time you spend writing the text and the skill you have. I think Shakespeare, Jane Austen, JD Sallinger, Toni Morrison et al are pretty much proof that emotion can be conveyed in writing. The question is just how close to their mastery that the membership, you, and I can approach.

[Vexen]

Depends on how much time you spend writing the text and the skill you have. I think Shakespeare, Jane Austen, JD Sallinger, Toni Morrison et al are pretty much proof that emotion can be conveyed in writing. The question is just how close to their mastery that the membership, you, and I can approach.

Honestly, I feel like you wrote your reply in know-it-all manner. As if your opinion is dominant over most people. I feel like you conveyed a smug emotion.

 

What does my text convey about my disposition?

[Acme]

...

I was hoping people would discuss whether your online opinion is a true representation of who you are. ...

Who else would it represent?

 

 

Side Question:

What do we think about the ability of text to correctly convey emotions?

It is dependent on the ability of the writer and the ability of the reader.

 

Honestly, I feel like you wrote your reply in know-it-all manner. As if your opinion is dominant over most people. I feel like you conveyed a smug emotion.

 

What does my text convey about my disposition?

It conveys that you are argumentative with a dash of Galilean complex.