The benign online disinhibition effect: Could situational factors induce self-disclosure and prosocial behaviors?

By Noam Lapidot-Lefler, Azy Barak. 2015

102 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The current study, which focuses on the benign effects of disinhibition, was designed as a continuation of an earlier study conducted on the toxic effects of online disinhibition (Lapidot-Lefler & Barak, 2012). Using a factorial design, the study examined the effects of three online situational factors—anonymity, invisibility, and lack of eye contact—on inducing self-disclosure and prosocial behaviors as expressions of benign online disinhibition. Random pairs of adult strangers (n = 144) discussed a dilemma and were required to reach a joint solution using online chat. Self-disclosure and prosocial behavior effects were measured using participants’ self-reports, expert judges’ ratings of chat transcripts, and textual analyses of the conversations. Results suggested that the interaction between anonymity and invisibility had a significant effect on the revealing of emotions. Lack of eye contact, the interaction between anonymity and invisibility and the interaction between lack of eye contact and invisibility had a significant effect on the inducement of first-person words. The interaction between anonymity, invisibility and lack of eye contact had significant effects on the total self-disclosure score, yet no significant effects were found for prosocial behaviors. A discussion of the findings with regard to previous research on toxic online disinhibition suggests that different factors play a role in the inducement of benign vs. toxic online disinhibition effects. More research is required to substantiate current findings and determine the nature of the contribution of each situational factor.

Subfields: Literature and Literary Theory, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c1e6723bd3853b9e4a5490513e5113c326df0f11

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Literature and Literary Theory

  1. Nicholas David Bowman
  2. Kim Bartel Sheehan
  3. Alan K. Goodboy

In Social Psychology

  1. Nicholas David Bowman
  2. Kim Bartel Sheehan
  3. Alan K. Goodboy

In Sociology and Political Science

  1. Nicholas David Bowman
  2. Kim Bartel Sheehan
  3. Alan K. Goodboy
  4. T. Araujo
  5. Hyosun Kim
  6. Ronald D. Fricker Jr.
  7. Matthias Schonlau

Citations in the corpus