디지털융복합연구 (Journal of Digital Convergence)

  • 제16권12호
  • /
  • Pages.197-206
  • /
  • 2018
  • /
  • 2713-6434(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2713-6442(eISSN)
한국디지털정책학회 (The Society of Digital Policy and Management)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

악성댓글 작성과 중재 의도에 대한 요인 연구

A study of factors on intention of intervention and posting malicious comments

  • 김한민 (성균관대학교 경영대학) ;
  • 박경보 (성균관대학교 경영대학)
  • 투고 : 2018.10.04
  • 심사 : 2018.12.20
  • 발행 : 2018.12.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

온라인 악성댓글에 대한 폐해는 지속적으로 증가하고 있다. 많은 선행 연구들은 악성댓글에 대한 중화가 핵심적인 선행 요인임을 확인해왔다. 중화는 이론적으로 일곱개의 다차원 개념으로 구성되어 있으며 일탈행위의 종류에 따라 중화요인의 유의성이 다르게 나타난다. 본 연구는 일탈행위 연구에서 다차원의 중화 기술 요인들을 실증한 것과는 다르게 악성 댓글 연구에서는 중화기술을 단일 차원으로 살펴보았다는 사실에 주목한다. 한편, 일탈행위에 대한 중재자의 역할은 일탈행위 억제에 기여할 수 있지만 악성댓글 연구에서의 중재 의도에 대한 연구는 상대적으로 부족한 상황이다. 상호보완적인 두 개의 연구로 구성된 본 연구는 악성댓글 작성의도와 중재 의도에 대한 관련 요인들을 발견하고자 하였다. 연구결과, 본 연구는 악성댓글 작성자가 비난자에 대한 비난과 책임의 부정 중화기술을 활용 한다는 것을 발견하였다. 또한, 상대방과의 정서적 공감이 악성댓글 중재 의도에 중요한 영향을 준다는 사실을 발견하였다.

The harmful effects of online malicious comments are continuously increasing. Many previous studies have confirmed that neutralization of malicious comments is a key predictor. Neutralization is theoretically composed of seven multidimensional concepts, and the significance of neutralization factors varies depending on the type of deviant behavior. This study focuses on the fact that the malicious comment researches have considered the neutralization techniques in a single dimension as opposed to demonstrating the multidimensional neutralization techniques in the deviant behavior research. On the other hand, the role of arbitrator in deviant behavior can contribute to restraining deviant behavior, but the research of intervention intention is relatively lacking in malicious comments research. This study, composed of two complementary studies, tried to find out the related factors of malicious comments and intervention intention. As a result of study, This study revealed that malicious commentator uses the neutralization techniques of condemn the condemners and denial of responsibility. In addition, we found that affective empathy has a significant effect on the intervention intention in malicious comments.

키워드

Table 1. The construct validity and reliability of study

DJTJBT_2018_v16n12_197_t0001.png 이미지

Table 2. The construct validity and reliability of study2

DJTJBT_2018_v16n12_197_t0002.png 이미지

Table 3. The results of study1 (Dependant variable:Malicious comments intention)

DJTJBT_2018_v16n12_197_t0003.png 이미지

Table 4. The results of study2 (Dependant variable: Intervention intension)

DJTJBT_2018_v16n12_197_t0004.png 이미지

참고문헌

  1. P. B. Lowry, J. Zhang, C. Wang & M. Siponen. (2016). Why do adults engage in cyberbullying on social media? An integration of online disinhibition and deindividuation effects with the social structure and social learning model. Information Systems Research, 27(4), 962-986. DOI : 10.1287/isre.2016.0671
  2. Supreme prosecutor's office. (16, April 2015). The official blog of the supreme prosecutors' office. Official Blog of Supreme Prosecutors' Office. http://spogood.tistory.com/263
  3. J. Hwang, H. Lee, K. Kim, H. Zo & A. P. Ciganek. (2016). Cyber neutralisation and flaming. Behaviour & Information Technology, 35(3), 210-224. DOI : 10.1080/0144929X.2015.1135191
  4. S. S. Lee & J. S. Park. (2009). Neutralization and Its Effect on Internet Malicious Messages: Testing Three Theories of Delinquency. Korean Journal of Criminoloy, 21(2), 245-266.
  5. M. Siponen. A. Vance & R. Willison. (2012). New insights into the problem of software piracy: The effects of neutralization, shame, and moral beliefs. Information & Management, 49(7-8), 334-341. DOI : 10.1016/j.im.2012.06.004
  6. L. Lazuras. V. Barkoukis. D. Ourda & H. Tsorbatzoudis. (2013). A process model of cyberbullying in adolescence. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 881-887. DOI : 10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.015
  7. S. C. Caravita. P. Di Blasio & C. Salmivalli. (2009). Unique and interactive effects of empathy and social status on involvement in bullying. Social development, 18(1), 140-163. DOI : 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00465.x
  8. M. L. Ybarra & K. J. Mitchell. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors, and targets: A comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(7), 1308-1316. DOI : 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00328.x
  9. M. Alonzo & M. Aiken. (2004). Flaming in electronic communication. Decision Support Systems, 36, 205-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(02)00190-2
  10. D. Cho & K. H. Kwon. (2015). The impacts of identity verification and disclosure of social cues on flaming in online user comments. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 363-372. DOI : 10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.046
  11. T. H. Van Noorden. G. J. Haselager. A. H. Cillessen & W. M. Bukowski. (2015). Empathy and involvement in bullying in children and adolescents: A systematic review. Journal of youth and adolescence, 44(3), 637-657. DOI : 10.1007/s10964-014-0135-6
  12. G. M. Sykes & D. Matza. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American sociological review, 22(6), 664-670. DOI : 10.2307/2089195
  13. M. Siponen & A. Vance. (2010). Neutralization: New Insights into the Problem of Employee Information Systems Security Policy Violations, MIS Quarterly, 34(3), 487-502. DOI : 10.2307/25750688
  14. H. Copes. (2003). Streetlife and the rewards of auto theft. Deviant Behavior, 24(4), 309-332. DOI : 10.1080/713840224
  15. P. Cromwell & Q. Thurman. (2003). The devil made me do it: Use of neutralizations by shoplifters. Deviant Behavior, 24(6), 535-550. DOI : 10.1080/713840271
  16. A. N. Doane. M. Pearson & M. L. Kelley. (2014). Predictors of cyberbullying perpetration among college students: An application of the Theory of Reasoned Action. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 154-162. DOI : 10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.051
  17. I. Ajzen. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action control (pp. 11-39). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  18. D. Olweus. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Blackwell Publishers.
  19. A. N. Doane. M. L. Kelley, E. S. Chiang & M. A. Padilla. (2013). Development of the cyberbullying experiences survey. Emerging Adulthood, 1(3), 207-218. DOI : 10.1177/2167696813479584
  20. C. Salmivalli & M. Voeten. (2004). Connections between attitudes, group norms, and behaviour in bullying situations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28(3), 246-258. DOI : 10.1080/01650250344000488
  21. G. Steffgen. A. König. J. Pfetsch & A. Melzer. (2011). Are cyberbullies less empathic? Adolescents' cyberbullying behavior and empathic responsiveness. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(11), 643-648. DOI : 10.1089/cyber.2010.0445
  22. P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, J. Y. Lee & N. P. Podsakoff. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
  23. C. Fornell & D. F. Larcker. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing research, 18(3), 382-388. DOI : 10.2307/3150980
  24. J. J. Woo, E, M. Kwak & H. J. Lee. (2018). The convergence study of smartphone overuse on cyberbullying: Focusing on mediating effects of aggression. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 9(5), 61-67. https://doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2018.9.5.061
  25. W. H. Moon, M. J. Kown & Y. H. Kim. (2016). Converging Influence of Empathy and Prejudice against Mental Illness on Discriminatory Behavior toward the Mentally Illness Patients in the Nursing Students. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 7(6), 81-88. https://doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2016.7.6.081
  26. S. Y. Park. (2017). Convergence study on the influence of dental hygiene student supporting awareness in their empathy about elderly. Journal of Convergence for Information Technology, 7(5), 25-30. https://doi.org/10.22156/CS4SMB.2017.7.5.025