The Impact of Anonymity in Online Communities

The scale of participation on social news sites has challenged community managers, leaving them unable to detect and remove all inappropriate content by hand. Automated insult and profanity detection systems have helped, but have failed to address the problem of why this content is contributed in the first place. That is, what implications do interface design choices have on the content being generated? One such design choice is whether or not a site allows anonymous comments. What impact does allowing anonymity have on the quality or quantity of participation on a site? This case study analyses the impact of anonymity on a technology social news site, TechCrunch.com. TechCrunch is ideal for this study in that it underwent a shift from allowing anonymous comments (using the Disqus commenting platform) to disallowing them (using the Facebook commenting platform) in March of 2011. We compare the quality of anonymous and real identity comments through measures of reading level, relevance to the target article, negativity and presence of swear words and anger words. We couple this qualitative analysis with a quantitative analysis of the change in participation to give a complete picture of the impact of anonymity in this online community, with the end goal of informing design on similar social news sites.

[1]  G. Charness,et al.  What's in a Name? Anonymity and Social Distance in Dictator and Ultimatum Games , 2003 .

[2]  Brian D. Davison,et al.  Detection of Harassment on Web 2.0 , 2009 .

[3]  R. Hartnett,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF VARYING DEGREES OF ANONYMITY ON RESPONSES TO DIFFERENT TYPES OF PSYCHOLOGICAL QUESTIONNAIRES , 1967 .

[4]  Russell Spears,et al.  How social is Internet communication? A reappraisal of bandwidth and anonymity effects. , 2002 .

[5]  Henry Lieberman,et al.  Modeling the Detection of Textual Cyberbullying , 2011, The Social Mobile Web.

[6]  Christopher M. Hoadley,et al.  Anonymity options and professional participation in an online community of practice , 2005, CSCL.

[7]  Andrea Chester,et al.  Online Teaching: Encouraging Collaboration through Anonymity , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[8]  Chin-Laung Lei,et al.  A Collusion-Resistant Automation Scheme for Social Moderation Systems , 2009, 2009 6th IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference.

[9]  Patricia Wallace.  The Psychology of the Internet , 1999 .

[10]  Alessandro Acquisti,et al.  Empirical analysis of online anonymity and user behaviors: the impact of real name policy , 2012, 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[11]  Elizabeth F. Churchill,et al.  Profanity use in online communities , 2012, CHI.

[12]  Adam Joinson,et al.  Social desirability, anonymity, and internet-based questionnaires , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[13]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  Anger and flaming in computer-mediated negotiation among strangers , 2009, Decis. Support Syst..

[14]  R. Flesch.  A new readability yardstick. , 1948, The Journal of applied psychology.

[15]  Qing Li.  Cyberbullying in Schools , 2006 .

[16]  Hua Qian,et al.  Anonymity and Self-Disclosure on Weblogs , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[17]  Bill Reader.  Free Press vs. Free Speech? The Rhetoric of “Civility” in Regard to Anonymous Online Comments , 2012 .

[18]  Kimberly M. Christopherson.  The positive and negative implications of anonymity in Internet social interactions: "On the Internet, Nobody Knows You're a Dog" , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[19]  Danah Boyd.  The politics of "real names" , 2012, CACM.

[20]  Elizabeth F. Churchill,et al.  Automatic identification of personal insults on social news sites , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..