politscienceПолитическая наукаPolitical science1998-1775ИНИОН РАН10.31249/poln/2023.03.11politscience-969Research ArticleПЕРВАЯ СТЕПЕНЬАффект или идеология: влияние политической поляризации на восприятие интернет-троллингаAffect or ideology: the impact of political polarization on perceptions of internet trollingШилинаА. Н.ShilinaA. N.

Шилина Анна Николаевна, аналитик Института прикладных политических исследований, аспирант,

Москва

Shilina Anna,

Moscow.

ashilina@hse.ruНациональный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики»РоссияHSE UniversityRussian Federation20230709202303Лингвистические повороты в политических и социальных науках230251Copyright © Шилина А.Н., 20232023Шилина А.Н.Shilina A.N.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.politnauka.ru/jour/article/view/969

В фокусе исследования находятся два вида политической поляризации (аффективная и поляризация политических позиций), которые рассматриваются как факторы восприятия политического интернет-троллинга. Цель исследования – определить, какой из факторов сильнее влияет на восприятие оппозиционного и провластного троллинга. В ходе исследования был проведен опрос (N = 200) среди пользователей социальной сети «ВКонтакте». При составлении опроса использовался метод виньеток, который позволил создать примеры дискуссий с элементами троллинга. Виньетки были составлены с опорой на основные индикаторы троллинга: провокация (агрессия), высмеивание (сарказм), спам, маркирование и шаблонность. Зависимой переменной стал ответ респондентов, которые в ходе опроса решали, какой пример дискуссии относить к троллингу. Респондентам также задавались вопросы, которые позволили определить их политические представления и уровень воспринимаемой аффективной поляризации. На основе их ответов были получены две ключевые независимые переменные – дистанция между позицией респондента и тролля и средний уровень воспринимаемой аффективной поляризации. Влияние этих переменных на восприятие троллинга было изучено с помощью пробит-регрессии со смешанными эффектами. В результате мы определили, что с ростом дистанции между позицией респондента и тролля возрастает вероятность того, что участник опроса распознает троллинг. Другими словами, мы наблюдаем статистически значимый эффект полярности политических позиций на восприятие троллинга. Предположение о влиянии аффективной поляризации на ответы респондента не подтвердилось. Полученные результаты указывают на вторичность аффективных факторов в сравнении с политико-идеологическими.

The study focuses on two types of political polarization (affective and ideological), which are supposed to influence the perception of political Internet trolling. The purpose of this study is to identify the role of affective and ideological polarization in perception of opposition and pro-government trolling. The author conducted a survey (N = 200) among users of Russian social network VK. During survey we showed our respondents vignettes with examples of troll-inflated conversations. These vignettes were composed based on indicators of trolling: provocation (aggression), mockery (sarcasm), spam, usage of templates and identification with trolls by other users. The dependent variable was the answer of the respondents, who decided in the course of the survey which example of discussion to classify as trolling. Respondents were also asked some questions to determine their political perceptions and level of perceived affective polarization. Two key independent variables were derived from their responses – distance between trolls’ and respondents’ political positions and the average level of perceived affective polarization. The author used probit-regression to measure the effect of these independent variables on respondents’ answers. As the result, we observe a statistically significant effect of ideological polarization on the perception of trolling. Hypothesis about the influence of affective polarization on the respondents’ answers was not confirmed.

аффективная поляризацияполитические представленияинтернет-троллингполитические коммуникациивосприятие информациисоциальные медиаaffective polarizationpolitical viewsinternet trollingpolitical communicationsselective perceptionsocial mediaИсследование выполнено за счет гранта Российского научного фонда № 21-78-00079, https://rscf.ru/projects/21-78-00079/This research is supported by the Russian Science Foundation under grant No 21-78-00079, https://rscf.ru/projects/21-78-00079/ReferencesЛебедев А.Н. Феномен ценностно-аффективной поляризации российского общества // Ученые записки Института психологии РАН. – 2021. – Т. 1, № 2. – С. 3–17.Ball-Rokeach S.J. A theory of media power and a theory of media use: Different stories, questions, and ways of thinking. Mass communication and society. 1998, Vol. 1, N 1–2, P. 5–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.1998.9676398Мухарямова Л.М., Заляев А.Р., Шаммазова Е.Ю. Пандемия COVID-19 в российских массмедиа: политический контекст // Политическая лингвистика. – 2021. – Т. 85, № 1. – C. 72–80. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.26170/1999-2629_2021_01_06Bruner J.S., Goodman C.C. Value and need as organizing factors in perception. The journal of abnormal and social psychology. 1947, Vol. 42, N 1, P. 33–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0058484Стукал Д.К., Ахременко А.С., Петров А.П. Аффективная политическая поляризация и язык ненависти: созданы друг для друга? // Вестник РУДН. Серия: Политология. – 2022. – Т. 24, № 3. – С. 480–498. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1438-2022-24-3-480-498Clark T.S. Measuring Ideological Polarization on the United States Supreme Court. Political research quarterly. 2008, Vol. 62, N 1, P. 146–157. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27759852Стукал Д.К., Шилина А.Н. Отношение к власти как фактор восприятия политического троллинга в российских социальных медиа // Полис. Политические исследования. – 2022. – № 4. – С. 179–191. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.04.14Coffin T.E. Some conditions of suggestion and suggestibility: A study of certain attitudinal and situational factors influencing the process of suggestion. Psychological Monographs. 1941, Vol. 53, N 4, P. 1–125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093490Dalton R. Social modernization and the end of ideology debate: patterns of ideological polarization. Japanese journal of political science. 2006, Vol. 7, N 1, P. 1–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1468109905002045Dalton R. Social modernization and the end of ideology debate: patterns of ideological polarization. Japanese journal of political science. 2006, Vol. 7, N 1, P. 1–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1468109905002045Dlala I.O., Attiaoui D., Martin A., Yaghlane B.B. Trolls identification within an uncertain framework. arXiv preprint. 2015. Mode of access: https://arxiv.org/abs/1501.05272 (accessed: 19.01.2021).Dlala I.O., Attiaoui D., Martin A., Yaghlane B.B. Trolls identification within an uncertain framework. arXiv preprint. 2015. Mode of access: https://arxiv.org/abs/1501.05272 (accessed: 19.01.2021).Golovchenko Y., Buntain C., Eady G., Brown M.A., Tucker J.A. Cross-platform state propaganda: Russian trolls on twitter and YouTube during the 2016 US Presidential Election. The international journal of press/politics. 2020, Vol. 25, N 3, P. 357–389. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220912682Golovchenko Y., Buntain C., Eady G., Brown M.A., Tucker J.A. Cross-platform state propaganda: Russian trolls on twitter and YouTube during the 2016 US Presidential Election. The international journal of press/politics. 2020, Vol. 25, N 3, P. 357–389. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220912682Gunitsky S. Corrupting the cyber-commons: social media as a tool of autocratic stability. Perspectives on politics. 2015, Vol. 13, N 1, P. 42–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714003120Gunitsky S. Corrupting the cyber-commons: social media as a tool of autocratic stability. Perspectives on politics. 2015, Vol. 13, N 1, P. 42–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714003120Hartmann G.W. Immediate and remote goals as political motives. The Journal of abnormal and social psychology. 1938, Vol. 33, N 1, P. 86–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0062562Hartmann G.W. Immediate and remote goals as political motives. The Journal of abnormal and social psychology. 1938, Vol. 33, N 1, P. 86–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0062562Helbling M., Jungkunz S. Social divides in the age of globalization. West European politics. 2020, Vol. 43, N 6, P. 1187–1210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2019.1674578Helbling M., Jungkunz S. Social divides in the age of globalization. West European politics. 2020, Vol. 43, N 6, P. 1187–1210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2019.1674578Herring S. et al. Searching for safety online: Managing “trolling” in a feminist forum. The information society. 2002, Vol. 18, N 5, P. 371–384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240290108186Herring S. et al. Searching for safety online: Managing “trolling” in a feminist forum. The information society. 2002, Vol. 18, N 5, P. 371–384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240290108186Hovland C.I., Lumsdaine A.A., Sheffield F.D. Experiments on mass communication. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton university press, 1949, 345 p.Hovland C.I., Lumsdaine A.A., Sheffield F.D. Experiments on mass communication. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton university press, 1949, 345 p.Huber J., Inglehart R. Expert interpretations of party space and party locations in 42 societies. Party politics. 1995, Vol. 1, N 1, P. 73–111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068895001001004Huber J., Inglehart R. Expert interpretations of party space and party locations in 42 societies. Party politics. 1995, Vol. 1, N 1, P. 73–111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068895001001004Iyengar S., Lelkes Y., Levendusky M., Malhotra N., Westwood S.J. The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual review of political science. 2019, Vol. 22, P. 129–146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci051117-073034Iyengar S., Lelkes Y., Levendusky M., Malhotra N., Westwood S.J. The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual review of political science. 2019, Vol. 22, P. 129–146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci051117-073034Iyengar S., Sood G., Lelkes Y. Affect, not ideology. A social identity perspective on polarization. Public opinion quarterly. 2012, Vol. 76, N 3, P. 405–431. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41684577Iyengar S., Sood G., Lelkes Y. Affect, not ideology. A social identity perspective on polarization. Public opinion quarterly. 2012, Vol. 76, N 3, P. 405–431. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41684577Keller F.B., Schoch D., Stier S., Yang J. Political astroturfing on Twitter: how to coordinate a disinformation campaign. Political communication. 2020, Vol. 37, N 2, P. 256–280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2019.1661888Keller F.B., Schoch D., Stier S., Yang J. Political astroturfing on Twitter: how to coordinate a disinformation campaign. Political communication. 2020, Vol. 37, N 2, P. 256–280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2019.1661888King G., Pan J., Roberts M.E. How the Chinese government fabricates social media posts for strategic distraction, not engaged argument. American political science review. 2017, Vol. 111, N 3, P. 484–501. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055417000144King G., Pan J., Roberts M.E. How the Chinese government fabricates social media posts for strategic distraction, not engaged argument. American political science review. 2017, Vol. 111, N 3, P. 484–501. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055417000144Koiranen I., Koivula A., Saarinen A., Keipi T. Ideological motives, digital divides, and political polarization: How do political party preference and values correspond with the political use of social media? Telematics and informatics. 2020, Vol. 46. Mode of access: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736585319308147 (accessed: 12.09.2022).Koiranen I., Koivula A., Saarinen A., Keipi T. Ideological motives, digital divides, and political polarization: How do political party preference and values correspond with the political use of social media? Telematics and informatics. 2020, Vol. 46. Mode of access: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736585319308147 (accessed: 12.09.2022).Kwon K.H., Cho D. Swearing effects on citizen-to-citizen commenting online: A large-scale exploration of political versus nonpolitical online news sites. Social science computer review. 2017, Vol. 35, N 1, P. 84–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439315602664Kwon K.H., Cho D. Swearing effects on citizen-to-citizen commenting online: A large-scale exploration of political versus nonpolitical online news sites. Social science computer review. 2017, Vol. 35, N 1, P. 84–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439315602664Lebedev A.N. The phenomenon of affective polarization of Russian society. Proceedings of the institute of psychology of Russian Academy of Sciences. 2021, Vol. 1, N 2, P. 3–17. (In Russ.)Lebedev A.N. The phenomenon of affective polarization of Russian society. Proceedings of the institute of psychology of Russian Academy of Sciences. 2021, Vol. 1, N 2, P. 3–17. (In Russ.)Linvill D.L. Boatwright B.C., Grant W.J., Warren P.L. “THE RUSSIANS ARE HACKING MY BRAIN!” investigating Russia's internet research agency twitter tactics during the 2016 United States presidential campaign. Computers in human behavior. 2019, Vol. 99, P. 292–300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.027Linvill D.L. Boatwright B.C., Grant W.J., Warren P.L. “THE RUSSIANS ARE HACKING MY BRAIN!” investigating Russia's internet research agency twitter tactics during the 2016 United States presidential campaign. Computers in human behavior. 2019, Vol. 99, P. 292–300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.027Linvill D.L., Warren P.L. Troll factories: Manufacturing specialized disinformation on Twitter. Political communication. 2020, Vol. 37, N 4, P. 447–467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1718257Linvill D.L., Warren P.L. Troll factories: Manufacturing specialized disinformation on Twitter. Political communication. 2020, Vol. 37, N 4, P. 447–467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1718257Mukharyamova L.M, Zalyaev A.R., Shammazova E.Yu. COVID-19 pandemic in the Russian mass media: a political context. Political linguistics. 2021, Vol. 85, N 1, P. 72–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26170/1999-2629_2021_01_06 (In Russ.)Mukharyamova L.M, Zalyaev A.R., Shammazova E.Yu. COVID-19 pandemic in the Russian mass media: a political context. Political linguistics. 2021, Vol. 85, N 1, P. 72–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26170/1999-2629_2021_01_06 (In Russ.)Pearson G.D.H., Knobloch-Westerwick S. Is the confirmation bias bubble larger online? Pre-election confirmation bias in selective exposure to online versus print political information. Mass communication and society. 2019, Vol. 22, N 4, P. 466–486. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2019.1599956Pearson G.D.H., Knobloch-Westerwick S. Is the confirmation bias bubble larger online? Pre-election confirmation bias in selective exposure to online versus print political information. Mass communication and society. 2019, Vol. 22, N 4, P. 466–486. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2019.1599956Reiljan A. ‘Fear and loathing across party lines’(also) in Europe: Affective polarisation in European party systems. European journal of political research. 2020, Vol. 59, N 2, P. 376–396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12351Reiljan A. ‘Fear and loathing across party lines’(also) in Europe: Affective polarisation in European party systems. European journal of political research. 2020, Vol. 59, N 2, P. 376–396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12351Stukal D.K., Akhremenko A.S., Petrov A.P.C. Affective political polarization and hate speech: made for each other? RUDN journal of political science. 2022, Vol. 24, N 3, P. 480–498. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1438-2022-24-3-480-498 (In Russ.)Stukal D.K., Akhremenko A.S., Petrov A.P.C. Affective political polarization and hate speech: made for each other? RUDN journal of political science. 2022, Vol. 24, N 3, P. 480–498. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1438-2022-24-3-480-498 (In Russ.)Stukal D.K., Shilina A.N. Attitudes toward authorities as a factor of the political trolling perception on social media in Russia. Polis. Political studies. 2022, N 4, P. 179–191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.04.14 (In Russ.)Stukal D.K., Shilina A.N. Attitudes toward authorities as a factor of the political trolling perception on social media in Russia. Polis. Political studies. 2022, N 4, P. 179–191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.04.14 (In Russ.)Tajfel H. Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American. 1970, Vol. 223, N 5, P. 96–103. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24927662Tajfel H. Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American. 1970, Vol. 223, N 5, P. 96–103. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24927662Tappin B.M., McKay R.T. Moral polarization and out-party hostility in the US political context. Journal of social and political psychology. 2019, Vol. 7, N 1, P. 213–245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v7i1.1090Tappin B.M., McKay R.T. Moral polarization and out-party hostility in the US political context. Journal of social and political psychology. 2019, Vol. 7, N 1, P. 213–245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v7i1.1090Tomaiuolo M., Lombardo G., Mordonini M., Cagnoni S., Poggi A. A Survey on Troll Detection. Future internet. 2020, Vol. 12, N 2, P. 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/fi12020031Tomaiuolo M., Lombardo G., Mordonini M., Cagnoni S., Poggi A. A Survey on Troll Detection. Future internet. 2020, Vol. 12, N 2, P. 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/fi12020031Wagner M. Affective polarization in multiparty systems. Electoral studies. 2021, Vol. 69, P. 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2020.102199Wagner M. Affective polarization in multiparty systems. Electoral studies. 2021, Vol. 69, P. 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2020.102199Westwood S.J., Iyengar S., Walgrave S., Leonisio R., Miller L., Strijbis O. The tie that divides: Cross-national evidence of the primacy of partyism. European journal of political research. 2018, Vol. 57, N 2, P. 333–354. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12228Westwood S.J., Iyengar S., Walgrave S., Leonisio R., Miller L., Strijbis O. The tie that divides: Cross-national evidence of the primacy of partyism. European journal of political research. 2018, Vol. 57, N 2, P. 333–354. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12228

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.