Anonymous communication has been a fundamental part of online interactions since the advent of chat rooms and discussion boards in the early days of the internet.
Recent studies suggest that this anonymity may have negative effects on user behavior when it comes to interacting with marginalized communities. In particular, research suggests that anonymous users are less likely to show empathy towards others, leading to increased instances of cyberbullying, harassment, and hate speech. This essay will explore how anonymity affects user moral decision-making and empathetic capacities when interacting with marginalized communities, using various examples to illustrate the findings.
The first example is the "trolley problem." In this thought experiment, participants were presented with a dilemma where they had to decide whether to push a trolley onto a track to save five people from being hit by another trolley, but at the cost of killing one person. When given the choice between pushing the trolley or doing nothing, the majority of participants chose to do so, showing their willingness to sacrifice one life for the sake of saving several others.
When asked if they would be willing to make the same decision if their identity was known, most respondents changed their minds. The results suggest that anonymity can lead to a decrease in empathy and a reduced willingness to act morally.
In a similar study, participants were shown a video of a man suffering from a disability who was struggling to walk up a flight of stairs. They were then asked to provide feedback on his situation, either as themselves or through an online avatar. Those interacting as themselves showed more sympathy than those who used an avatar, indicating that anonymity can reduce empathy towards individuals from marginalized groups.
The researchers found that participants who felt guilty about not helping the disabled man showed less empathy after using an avatar than when they interacted as themselves.
Another study examined the effects of anonymity on cyberbullying behavior. Participants were divided into two groups: one group interacted anonymously while the other did not. They were then instructed to write insults directed at someone else. Those who interacted anonymously wrote harsher messages, suggesting that anonymity can increase aggression and negative behavior. This finding has implications for how we approach online interactions with marginalized communities, where anonymity may exacerbate existing problems.
Research suggests that anonymous users are more likely to engage in hate speech against members of marginalized groups. One study looked at comments made on news articles about LGBTQ+ issues, finding that anonymous users were more likely to use hateful language than those who used their real names. Another study analyzed Twitter conversations around transgender rights, finding that anonymity increased the likelihood of transphobic content being posted. These findings suggest that anonymity can create a safe space for prejudice and discrimination to flourish.
Anonymity appears to have significant effects on user moral decision-making and empathetic capacities when it comes to interacting with marginalized communities. By reducing accountability and increasing perceived safety, anonymity can lead to reduced sympathy, aggressive behavior, and even outright hate speech. As such, policies should be implemented to limit or eliminate anonymity in online environments in order to promote positive interactions between all users, regardless of background or identity.
How does anonymity in online environments affect the moral decision-making and empathetic capacities of users interacting with marginalized communities?
Anonymity has been shown to influence how people behave on social media platforms by decreasing their inhibitions and increasing their propensity for expressing negative sentiments towards others (Bergman et al. , 2018). In online interactions with marginalized communities, this can lead to the expression of harmful attitudes and beliefs that could be detrimental to individuals who are already experiencing discrimination and stigma.