社会临场感与大学生网络过激行为的关系：双自我意识的并行中介及性别的调节作用

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2024.02.04

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 基于线索过滤理论和双自我意识理论,通过线上发放问卷的方式对湖北、吉林、山东、浙江四个省份共六所综合和师范类高校的1625名大学生进行调查,以探讨社会临场感对网络过激行为的影响、作用机制以及性别差异。结果表明:(1)社会临场感能够显著正向预测大学生网络过激行为;(2)公我意识和私我意识在社会临场感和大学生网络过激行为之间起并行中介作用,公我意识起正向中介作用,私我意识起负向中介作用,且后者效应大于前者;(3)性别调节该并行中介模型中公我意识路径的前半与后半路径。具体而言,相较于女生,公我意识的正向中介作用对男生更强。本研究探讨了大学生社会临场感通过双自我意识对网络过激行为产生影响的作用机制及性别差异,揭示了私我意识的积极作用,基于去个性化效应的社会认同模型指出网络群体在其中的重要性,发现了男女网络过激行为水平存在差异的原因之一,为网络过激行为的干预提供了指导性建议。

关键词: 社会临场感, 网络过激行为, 公我意识, 私我意识, 大学生, 性别差异

Abstract: In order to explore the impacts of social presence on online flaming, its mechanism, and gender difference, the current study, based on cues-filtered-out theory and dual self-awareness perspective, investigated 1625 college students from six comprehensive and normal universities in Hubei, Jilin, Shandong and Zhejiang provinces by online questionnaire. The results showed that: (1) Social presence positively predicted online flaming; (2) Public self-awareness and private self-awareness played parallel mediating roles between social presence and online flaming, and the negative mediating effects of private self-awareness outweighed the positive mediating effects of public self-awareness; (3) The first and second stages of indirect path of public self-awareness were moderated by gender. Specifically, public self-awareness had a stronger positive indirect effect for males than females. The current research revealed the mechanism and gender difference of college students’ social presence through dual self-awareness on online flaming. Moreover, this study, according to social identity model of deindividuation effects, painted out the importance of online groups in the generation of online flaming, and also found one of the reasons for gender differences in the levels of online flaming. The current study provided guiding suggestions for the intervention.

Key words: social presence, online flaming, public self-awareness, private self-awareness, college student, gender difference

中图分类号:

B844

郭嘉程, 董柔纯, 许放, 徐旋, 牛更枫, 周宗奎. 社会临场感与大学生网络过激行为的关系：双自我意识的并行中介及性别的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(2): 176-186.

GUO Jiacheng, DONG Rouchun, XU Fang, XU Xuan, NIU Gengfeng, ZHOU Zongkui. The Relationship between Social Presence and College Students’ Online Flaming: The Parallel Mediating Roles of Dual Self-awareness and the Moderating Role of Gender[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2024, 40(2): 176-186.

参考文献

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002).Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 27-51.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York:Genera Learning Press.
Ben-Artzi, E. (2003). Factor structure of the private self-consciousness scale:Role of item wording.Journal of Personality Assessment, 81(3), 256-264.
Buchanan, T. (2015). Aggressive priming online:Facebook adverts can prime aggressive cognitions. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 323-330.
Buss, A. H. (1980).Self-consciousness and social anxiety. San Francisco:W. H. Freeman.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998).On the self-regulation of behavior. New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
Cho, D., & Kwon, K. H. (2015). The impacts of identity verification and disclosure of social cues on flaming in online user comments.Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 363-372.
Dearing, E., & Hamilton, L. C.(2010). V. contemporary advances and classic advice for analyzing mediating and moderating variables. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 71(3), 88-104.
Denegri-Knott, J. & Taylor, J. (2005). The labeling game:A conceptual exploration of deviance on the internet. Social Science Computer Review, 23(1), 93-107.
Diener, E. (1976). Effects of prior destructive behavior, anonymity, and group presence on deindividuation and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33(5), 497-507.
Donnerstein, E., Donnerstein, M., & Evans, R. (1972). Variables in inter-racial aggression:Anonymity expected retaliation and a riot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22(2), 236-245.
Duval, S., & Wicklund, R. A. (1972).A theory of objective self-awareness. New York, NY:Academic Press.
Falewicz, A., & Bak, W. (2016). Private vs. public self-consciousness and self-discrepancies.Current Issues in Personality Psychology, 4(1), 58-64.
Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F., & Buss, A. H. (1975). Public and private self-consciousness:Assessment and theory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43(4),522-527.
Gao, W., Liu, Z., & Li, J. (2017). How does social presence influence SNS addiction? A belongingness theory perspective.Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 347-355.
Geller, V., & Shaver, P. (1976). Cognitive consequences of self-awareness.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12(1), 99-108.
Gervais, W. M.., & Norenzayan, A. (2012). Like a camera in the sky? Thinking about god increases public self-awareness and socially desirable responding. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 298-302.
Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2), 147-166.
Haferkamp, N., Eimler, S. C., Papadakis, A., & Kruck, J. N. (2012). Men are from Mars, woman are from venus? Examing gender differences in self-presentation on social networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(2), 91-98.
Hassanein, K., & Head, M. M. (2007). Manipulating perceived social presence through the web interface and its impact on attitude towards online shopping.International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(8), 689-708.
Hayes, A. F. (2018).Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis:A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). New York, NY:Guilford Press.
Herring, S. C. (2000).Gender differences in CMC:Findings and implications. The Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Newsletter. Author Retrieved September 30, 2020, from http://cpsr.org/issues/womenintech/herring/
Hoffman, M. L. (1971). Identification and conscience development. Child Development, 42, 1071-1082.
Hooi, R., & Cho, H. (2013).The Virtual "Me" is the Actual Me:Self-Disclosure in Virtual Environment. In 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(pp.883-892).Wailea,HI,USA.
Hwang, J., Lee, H., Kim, K., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A. P. (2016). Cyber neutralisation and flaming. Behavior & Information Technology, 35(3), 210-224.
Jane, E. A. (2015). Flaming? What flaming? The pitfalls and potentials of researching online hostility.Ethics and Information Technology, 17, 65-87.
Jin,S., & Rhee, C. (2015). Optimal environment for flamers:Information overload and its effect on hostile behaviors.In Twenty-first Americas Conference on Information Systems(pp.1-14). Puerto Rico.
Jin, S., Rhee, C., & Jang, Y. (2019). Effects of information overload on hostile behaviors online. The Journal of Society for e-Business Studies, 24(2), 179-197.
Joinson, A. (1999). Social desirability, anonymity, and internet-based questionnaires.Behavior Research Methods Instruments & Computers, 31(3), 433-438.
Joinson, A.N. (2003). Understanding the psychology of Internet behaviour:Virtual worlds, real lives. Palgrave Macmillan.
Joinson, A.N. (2007). Chapter 4-Disinhibition and the Internet, In J. Gackenbach(Ed.), Psychology and the Internet (2nd ed., pp.75-92), Academic Press.
Lea, M., O'Shea, T., Fung, P., & Spears, R. (1992).'Flaming' in computer-mediated communication:Observations, explanations, implications. In M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 89-112). Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1991). Computer-mediated communication, de-individuation and group decision-making.International Journal of Man Machine Studies, 34(2), 283-301.
Lea, M., Spears, R., & de-Groot, D. (2001). Knowing me,knowing you:Anonymity effects on social identity processes within groups. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(5), 526-537.
Lee, E. J. (2007). Deindividuation effects on group polarization in Computer-Mediated communication:The role of group identification, public-self-awareness, and perceived argument quality. Journal of Communication, 57(2), 385-403.
Lee, J., & Jin, C. (2019). The relationship between self-concepts and flaming behavior:Polarity of the online comments.Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 97(19), 2518-2529.
Khalifa, M., & Shen, N. (2004). System design effects on social presence and telepresence in virtual communities. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Information Systems(pp. 547-558), Washington, DC.
Kiesler, S., Zubrow, D., Moses, A. M., & Geller, V. (1985). Affect in computer-meditated communication:An experiment in synchronous terminal-to-terminal discussion.Human Computer Interaction, 1(1), 77-104.
Kim, K. K., Lee, A. R., & Lee, U. K. (2019). Impact of anonymity on roles of personal and group identities in online communities. Information & Management, 56(1), 109-121.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self:Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.Psychological Review, 98(2), 224-253.
Matheson, K., & Zanna, M. P. (1988). The impact of computer-mediated communication on self-awareness.Computers in Human Behavior, 4, 221-233.
Moor, P. J., Heuvelman, A., & Verleur, R. (2010). Flaming on youtube.Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1536-1546.
Pinsonneault, A., & Heppel, N. (1997). Anonymity in group support systems research:New conceptualization and measure.Journal of Management Information Systems, 14(3), 89-108.
Richard, D. (2009).Typing politics:The role of blogs in American politics. New York:Oxford University Press.
Robert, P. D. (2000).Bowling alone:The collapse and revival of American Community. New York:Simon & Schuster.
Sah, Y. J., & Wei, P. (2015). Effects of visual and linguistic anthropomorphic cues on social perception, self-awareness, and information disclosure in a health website. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 392-401.
Scheier, M. F. (1976). Self-awareness, self-consciousness, and angry aggression.Journal of Personality, 44(4), 627-644.
Schneider, S. K., O'Donnell, L. & Smith, E. (2015). Trends in cyberbullying and school bullying victinization in a regional census of high school students, 2006-2012. Journal of School Health, 85, 611-620.
Schoo, L. A., Zandvoort, M.V., Biessels, G. J., Kappelle, L. J., & Postma, A. (2013). Insight in cognition:Self-awareness of performance across cognitive domains. Applied Neuropsychology Adult, 20(2), 95-102.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology oftelecommunications. Contemporary Sociology, 7(1), 32-33.
Sohn, S., Chung, H. C., & Park, N. (2019). Private self-awareness and aggression in computer-mediated communication:Abusive user comments on online news articles.International Journal of Human-computer Interaction, 35(13), 1160-1169.
Sun, S., Fan, X., & Du, J. (2016). Cyberbullying perpetration:A meta-analysis of gender differences.International Journal of Internet Science, 11(1), 62-81.
Sveningsson Elm, M. (2007). Doing and undoing gender in a Swedish Internet community. In M. Sveningsson Elm & J.Sunden(Eds). Cyberfeminism in Northern lights. Gender and digital media in a Nordic context (pp. 104-129). Cambridge:Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Udris, R. (2016). Psychological and social factors as predictors of online and offline deviant behavior among Japanese adolescents. Deviant Behavior, 38(7), 792-809.
Wagenknecht, T., Teubner, T., & Weinhardt, C. (2018). A janus-faced matter-the role of user anonymity for communication persuasiveness in online discussions. Information & Management, 55(8), 1024-1037.
Wang, X., Lei, L., Liu, D., & Hu, H. (2016). Moderating effects of moral reasoning and gender on the relation between moral disengagement and cyberbullying in adolescents.Personality and Individual Differences, 98, 244-249.
Wong, R. Y. M., Cheung, C. M. K. & Xiao, B. (2018). Does gender matter in cyberbullying perpetration? An empirical investigation.Computers in Human Behavior, 79, 247-257.
Zhou, Y., Zheng, W., & Gao, X. (2019). The relationship between the big five and cyberbullying among college students:The mediating effect of moral disengagement. Current Psychology, 38, 1162-1173.
Zimbardo, P. G. (1969). The human choice:Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse and chaos. In W. J. Arnold & D. Levine (Eds.), Nebraska synposium on motivation (pp.237-307). Lincoln, NE:University of Nebraska Press.
Zimbardo, P. G., Ebbesen, E. B., & Maslach, C. (1977).Influencing attitudes and changing behavior:An introduction to method, theory, and applications of social control and personal power. Addison-Wesly.
褚晓伟. (2017). 环境风险因素与网络欺负:性别和特质攻击的调节作用(硕士学位论文). 华中师范大学, 武汉.
丁倩, 张永欣, 周宗奎. (2020). 相对剥夺感与大学生网络过激行为:自我损耗的中介作用及性别差异.心理发展与教育, 36(2), 200-207.
丁子恩, 刘勤学. (2020). 大学生网络交往与网络利他行为的关系:自尊与公我意识的作用. 心理发展与教育, 36(2), 175-183.
段东园, 张学民, 魏柳青, 周义斌, 刘畅. (2014). 暴力媒体接触程度对攻击行为的影响——规范信念和移情的作用. 心理发展与教育, 30(2), 185-192.
胡阳, 范翠英. (2013). 青少年网络欺负行为研究述评与展望. 中国特殊教育, 5, 84-88.
姜永志, 王超群. (2021). 社交网站使用对青少年网络利他行为的影响:有调节的中介模型.中国临床心理学杂志, 29(4), 824-828.
兰玉娟,佐斌. (2009). 去个性化效应的社会认同模型. 心理科学进展, 17(2), 467-472.
李冬梅. (2008). 青少年网络偏差行为的时政与理论研究(博士学位论文).首都师范大学,北京.
李冬梅, 雷雳, 邹泓. (2008). 青少年网上偏差行为的特点与研究展望. 中国临床心理学杂志, 16(1), 95-97.
刘丽, 李扬. (2016). 大学生网络社会支持、自尊和网络欺负之间的关系. 心理技术与应用, 4(6), 349-355+364.
罗伏生, 张珊明, 沈丹, 罗匡. (2011). 大学生网络偏差行为与人格特征及应对方式的关系. 中国临床心理学杂志, 19(4), 492-493.
罗昕. (2008). 网络舆论暴力的形成机制探究. 当代传播, 4, 78-80.
马晓辉, 雷雳. (2010). 青少年网络道德与其网络偏差行为的关系. 心理学报, 42(10), 988-997.
牛更枫, 周宗奎, 孙晓军, 范翠英. (2015). 网络匿名性和同伴网络偏差行为对大学生网络偏差行为的影响:自我控制的调节作用. 中国特殊教育, 11, 73-78.
彭贤, 马素红, 李秀明. (2006). 大学生认知风格的性别差异. 中国健康心理学杂志, 14(3), 299-301.
秦璇, 陈曦. (2021). 偶像失格、群体非理性和道德恐慌:粉丝群体互相攻击中的举报策略与诱因. 新闻记者, 10, 52-66.
腾艳杨. (2013). 社会临场感研究综述. 现代教育技术, 23(3), 66-72.
王辰, 陈刚, 刘跃宁, 牛更枫, 殷华敏. (2020). 社会排斥对网络偏差行为的影响:自我控制的中介作用和道德同一性的调节作用. 心理发展与教育, 36(2), 208-215.
温忠麟, 叶宝娟. (2014). 中介效应分析:方法和模型发展. 心理科学进展, 22(5), 731-745.
谢莹, 李纯青, 高鹏, 刘艺. (2019). 直播营销中社会临场感对线上从众消费的影响及作用机理研究——行为与神经生理视角. 心理科学, 27(6), 990-1004.
徐瑞青. (1994). 国外社会心理学中自我意识理论的发展. 中国人民大学学报, 6, 72-74.
杨洸. (2016). 社会化媒体舆论的极化和共识——以"广州区伯嫖娼"之新浪微博数据为例. 新闻与传播研究, 23(2), 66-79
杨继平, 王兴超, 高玲. (2015). 道德推脱对大学生网络偏差行为的影响:道德认同的调节作用. 心理发展与教育, 31(3), 311-318.
杨中芳, 林升栋. (2012). 中庸实践思维体系构念图的建构效度研究. 社会学研究, 27(4), 167-186.
闫海潮. (2021). 论网络空间中社会主义核心价值观的培育. 理论月刊, 7, 29-34.
张中科, 马亮. (2017). 社会资本和社会临场感视角下微信口碑影响力研究. 中国市场, 1, 24-27.
张瑾涛. (2020). 新媒体时代国内女性主义发展中的问题研究——以社会化媒体平台中女性主义污名化现象为例. 科技传播, 12(21), 75-79.
张立彬, 翟清剑, 卢冶, 王科理. (2010). 网络技术发展及其对互动交流的影响探析. 情报科学, 28(2), 190-197.
周峰, 田梦琦. (2015). 图形化用户界面图标的发展趋势探究. 设计, 17, 140-141.
周浩, 龙立荣. (2004). 共同方法偏差的统计检验与控制方法. 心理科学进展, 12(6), 942-950.
周宗奎, 刘勤学. (2016). 网络心理学:行为的重构. 中国社会科学评价, 3, 55-67.
邹吉林, 王美芳, 曹仁艳, 闫秀梅. (2009). 性别发展的生物学取向研究述评. 心理科学进展, 17(5), 973-982.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

[1]	王玉龙, 赵婧斐, 蔺秀云. 家庭风险因素对青少年自伤的累积效应及其性别差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(2): 240-247.
[2]	樊香麟, 崔英锦. 客体化身体意识与女大学生限制性饮食行为的关系：外貌负面评价恐惧和社会文化压力的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 122-131.
[3]	张慧如, 张伟达, 傅王倩, 邓敏, 彭苏浩, 李玉. 孤独感对创造性倾向的影响：无聊倾向和焦虑情绪的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 132-141.
[4]	邹盛奇, 伍新春. 父母冲突与青少年同伴依恋的关系:亲子依恋的中介作用及性别差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(6): 798-807.
[5]	何安明, 张钰睿, 惠秋平. 大学生感恩与社会幸福感的关系:手机冷落行为的中介作用和负性生活事件的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(4): 505-512.
[6]	赵纤, 王志航, 王东方, 袁言云, 尹霞云, 黎志华. 贫困家庭儿童在青少年早期的亲社会行为发展轨迹:性别及父母教养方式异质性的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 323-332.
[7]	杜秀芳, 武玉玺, 徐政, 袁晓倩, 陈功香. 金钱启动与道德认同对大学生道德伪善的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 342-349.
[8]	喻昊雪, 李卉, 王福兴. 大学生公正世界信念与学业倦怠的关系:应对方式与无聊倾向的链式中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 391-401.
[9]	曾子豪, 彭丽仪, 詹林, 刘双金, 欧阳晓优, 丁道群, 黎志华, 胡义秋, 方晓义. 儿童期受虐对大学生抑郁症状的影响:主观幸福感的中介和基因的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(2): 276-285.
[10]	曹瑞琳, 梅松丽, 梁磊磊, 李传恩, 张莹. 感恩与大学生网络成瘾的关系:核心自我评价和生命意义感的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(2): 286-294.
[11]	陈子循, 李金文, 王雨萌, 刘霞. 累积环境风险与大学生自伤的关系:情绪调节策略的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(1): 109-120.
[12]	郑爽, 刘红瑞, 李静, 席雨, 姚梅林. 主动性人格与大学生创业准备行为的关系:创业意向的中介效应与创业社会支持的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(6): 813-821.
[13]	王浩, 俞国良. 大学生依恋焦虑与抑郁的关系:恋爱中关系攻击和关系质量的序列中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(6): 879-885.
[14]	朱黎君, 杨强, 叶宝娟, 陈智楠, 张丽. 自然联结对大学生抑郁的影响:有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(6): 886-893.
[15]	张宝生, 李鑫, 李新野, 张庆普. 主观规范对大学生志愿者志愿工作投入的影响机制研究——一个链式双重中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(5): 658-666.