Try this experiment with school-age children or teens. Ask them if they realize that the Internet isn't really a private space—and count how many of them roll their eyes. Most kids are very much aware that the Internet isn't, by and large, a private space. In fact, most teens have been hearing that message since elementary school. But despite being educated about these issues, many teens continue to engage in digital behaviors that imply that they really don't understand how public and permanent the Internet really is. This stark contradiction between knowledge and behavior can be baffling.
We're wrong to assume this is entirely a problem of being young and naïve. Consider U.S. Congressman Anthony Weiner who tweeted a lewd photo of himself to a woman who then disseminated it to the world. Weiner, an intelligent, well-educated adult, behaved as though his online actions were truly private. Why this enigma, and how does the ubiquitous use of cell phones contribute to it?
At the Massachusetts Aggression Reduction Center—an academic Center at Bridgewater State University—we study children and teens and how digital behaviors can lead to social problems. One of the more interesting avenues we are exploring involves the perceptual changes that happen when people use digital communication tools. What are some of these changes, and how might they affect what teens—and adults—say and do online?
Inward Focus and Trolling
When you're talking with a person who's right there with you, you're strongly drawn toward looking at that person's face. But when the person isn't in front of you, your focus can turn inward; the fact that there is another person in the conversation is somehow lost.
When people don't recognize that they're addressing another person, their behavior may change. This may be one reason for the phenomenon known as trolling (when users are deliberately malicious online toward people they don't know). Trolling isn't a behavior confined to a small, deeply disturbed minority. In a 2014 YouGov survey, 28 percent of respondents admitted that they engaged in trolling, with most trolls being male and most targets female (Gammon, 2014).
Online, sexual harassment against women is particularly common, with at least 25 percent of young women reportedly experiencing it at some point (Duggan, 2014). One recent example involved Alanah Pearce, a 21-year-old video game reviewer from Australia. Because trolling directed at women is so common, Pearce expected to receive some unpleasant commentary on her reviews. But many of the comments went beyond the usual weird, nasty, and often sexual messages to include extremely venomous and explicit rape threats (Bahadur, 2014). The standard advice regarding online threats is to ignore them, but Pearce decided to track down the trolls who were threatening her. She was astounded to discover that several of them were boys as young as 10 years old.
It's tempting to assume that these boys represented an emotionally disturbed minority until we recall that more than a fourth of respondents in the YouGov survey admitted to this behavior. If these boys had threatened Pearce in person, we would have concluded that something pathological was going on. But online, what were the boys' motivations? Was their intent to actually rape her?
Pearce looked through the boys' social media contacts to find their mothers. She then sent polite messages to let the mothers know what was happening, and at least one horrified mother made her son write Pearce an apology. Pearce wrote on her blog that she didn't believe the boy really wanted to rape her; it was more likely that he was trying to get her attention and show off for his friends.
This case illustrates perfectly the self-focus that happens in digital environments. On social media, users sometimes forget that a real, live, breathing recipient is on the other end of their grandiose messages.
Writer Lindy West's experience confirms this idea. After receiving cruel messages from someone pretending to be her recently deceased father, West wrote about the messages she'd been receiving. The next day, the man who'd been impersonating her father sent her a note of apology that said, "When you included it in your latest Jezebel article, it finally hit me. There is a living, breathing human being who is reading this … " (West, 2015).
Escalating Emotions
Self-focus isn't the only perceptual effect that comes with online communication. Another effect is the way emotions can escalate to a degree they probably would not when interacting in person. When someone is upset and posts information about that feeling, the person is committing to that position. It's out there, in writing, and others may ask about it or comment on it, sometimes for days on end.
In addition, the nature of back-and-forth digital discourse can trigger a perception effect known as priming. In this effect, if you read repeatedly about a feeling you're having, you're likely to begin experiencing that emotion more intensely.
I was able to replicate this in the laboratory fairly easily. I gave all subjects a scenario designed to be somewhat irritating, but not enraging. Then I randomly assigned subjects to receive either one or five text messages, each message commiserating with their irritation. Finally, I asked all subjects how irritated or angry they felt. The subjects who received one text message rated themselves, on average, a 2 out of a possible 10; but the subjects who received five text messages rated themselves an average of 5 out of 10. The only difference between the two groups was the number of times they read about their irritation.
Of course, kids typically aren't aware of the priming effect. They don't know that they're getting angrier because friends texted them sympathetically. They believe their anger is the result of the initial irritation. This feeds their tendency to blame their irritating peer, which can escalate a conflict.
False Sense of Privacy
But what does mobile technology have to do with these effects? Probably the perceptual issue that's most affected by mobile devices involves the sharing of private information. Many children and teens know how public the Internet is but still post private images and comments. What seems to be happening is that despite knowing that the Internet isn't private, users feel as though this particular photo or conversation is private.
One factor that seems to lead to this contradiction between knowledge and feeling may actually be users' physical environment. When I asked subjects who had regretted posting something very private where they were when they did the posting, 83 percent answered that they were in a private place—usually at home. Apparently, being in a physically private space can give you the feeling that what you're doing is relatively private—even when you realize, in another part of your mind, that it's probably not. There seems to be a tension between what we know and how we feel. In this case, a private feeling may trump actual knowledge.
This false sense of privacy also seems to be triggered, at least sometimes, by the use of mobile technology. If you are using a small mobile device—like a cell phone—the screen is so small that others can't easily see it, making exchanges on the device feel private. Imagine messaging or e-mailing someone a secret, such as a confession about a secret love affair. Which would feel more private—tapping out that message on your cell phone or typing it on a monitor in a bank of computers in the local public library? Consider both alternatives, and you'll see what I mean. The small screen feels private and confidential; the large screen feels public.
Opportunity for Impulsivity
Mobile devices aren't simply small; they're also portable and simple to use, which introduces the issue of impulsivity into the mix. In the recent past, posting a photo online was rarely an impulsive act. You would take a photo, go home several hours later, upload the photo to your computer, and then post it online. That process took several steps and—at least—several hours, during which you had ample opportunity for second thoughts about what you were putting online. But the mobile device revolution has eliminated this forced delay. You take the picture and post it immediately—no delay and little effort involved.
People who post inappropriate pictures may simply be impulsively going along with a group of friends. I asked subjects, "Which circumstances increase the odds that someone will do something mean, risky, or inappropriate online?" The top three answers were when they're in a group of people who are egging them on, when they're drinking or using drugs, and when they're angry or upset. The first two of these circumstances are likely to happen when children or teens are away from home, socializing with friends, and using their mobile device.
Getting Beyond Facts
Education about appropriate uses of digital technology has often focused on a few core concepts: that the Internet isn't private, that predators are an imminent danger, that sexting is a crime, and that you shouldn't post anything online you wouldn't say to someone's face. But simply telling kids these facts seems to fall short when we don't include the factors that make them feel and perceive things differently in digital environments.
It's not enough to say, if you wouldn't say it to their face, don't say it online; we need to educate children about why people might actually say things online that they typically would not say in person. Users today need to understand how using digital devices affects their perceptions and how those perceptual changes can be exaggerated with the ubiquitous use of mobile devices, especially cell phones. Knowing the cognitive and perceptual pitfalls ahead of time could help head off problematic social behaviors. Until education of children includes this type of understanding, we should expect our warnings to be only moderately successful.
