Loading…

Sign up or log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar.

Session 1E [clear filter]
Tuesday, July 12
 

10:30

Session 1E: Social & Antisocial Behaviour
Location: PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326, 
Goldsmiths, University of London, Building 2
Campus Map 


Moderators
avatar for Donna Smith

Donna Smith

Professor, Ryerson University
Donna's research focus is on commitment-trust applied to B2B and B2C settings. She is studying social media campaigns initiated by retailers.

Tuesday July 12, 2016 10:30 - 12:00
PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326 Goldsmiths University, Building 2

10:31

Defining Courage: Examining Social Media & Traditional Media Response to Caitlyn Jenner’s ESPY Award
Location: PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326, 
Goldsmiths, University of London, Building 2
Campus Map 

Contributors:
  • Ann Pegoraro, Laurentian University, Canada
  • Marion Hambrick, University of Louisville, United States
Background: 

On March 15, 2015, Bruce Jenner completed a “facial-feminization surgery,” one of the last steps in the gender transition to Caitlyn Jenner (Bissinger, 2015). Prior to this transition, Jenner was arguably most famous for winning a gold medal for decathlon during the 1976 Summer Olympic Games and appearing with his family on the reality television show, Keeping Up with the Kardashians (Bissinger, 2015). Post-transition publicity included an exclusive interview conducted by Diane Sawyer for ABC’s 20/20, a Vanity Fair cover story, and a new reality television show, I Am Cait. Accompanying this media blitz, Jenner received the Arthur Ashe Courage Award during the ESPY Awards on ESPN (Bissinger, 2015). The award celebrates “individuals whose contributions transcend sports through courageous action,” and previous recipients include Muhammad Ali and Billie Jean King (Braxton, 2015). 

Objective: 

This research focused specifically on the traditional media and social media coverage occurring during and in response to Jenner’s receipt of the Arthur Ashe Courage Award at the 2015 ESPY Awards. The current study sought to analyze the top-down framing (Goffman, 1974) and bottom-up framing (Nisbett, 2010) processes in more detail. 

Methods: 

Framing allows media producers and consumers to present and better understand news events, respectively (Goffman, 1974). Pegoraro, Burch, Frederick, and Vincent (2014) noted the shift in news coverage, from news stories created and distributed solely by traditional and official media outlets to news produced and disseminated by individuals. In order to address the research purpose and questions, this study compared newspaper coverage of the ESPY Awards (Top-down framing) to social media comments (Bottom-up Framing) made on the Facebook pages of media outlets. To gather the top-down data, a LEXIS-NEXIS news search was conducted for news stories containing the following terms: “Caitlyn Jenner,” “ESPYs,” and “ESPY Awards.” Stories published within a 24-hour period during and after the event took place were collected, and their publication dates ranged from July 15, 2015 to July 16, 2015. A total of 700 stories were collected during this time period. The bottom-up sample was collected from the Facebook page of ESPN and its parent company ABC. Comments were gathered on the articles posted to that page as well as any comments posted directly to the pages that pertained to Jenner. This resulted in 26,221 comments for the sample. The researchers then utilized Leximancer, qualitative software to identify themes in both data sets. Then the researchers immersed themselves in the data to produce the final frames emerging from the data. 

Results: 

Preliminary results indicate four themes emerged from the traditional media news stories and comments made on the ABC and ESPN Facebook pages: (a) transgender conversation; (b) what constitutes courage; (c) ESPN and the ESPY Awards; and (d) Jenner’s personal life. Differences emerged in framing patterns between the two groups. Media outlets adopted a primarily positive stance in regards to Jenner, including her receipt of the award and her ability to use this platform to seek awareness and acceptance for transgender individuals. Direct quotes from Jenner were frequently included in these stories, giving a voice to Jenner and the transgender conversation. Conversely, SM users engaged in more negative conversations—against Jenner as a transgender individual and her receipt of the award, her perceived need for publicity and attention, the transgender movement and acceptance, and the ESPY Awards and ESPN’s publicity-seeking intentions. These individuals used Facebook comments to counter the more positive frames put forth by traditional media outlets, and instead favoured their personal negative frames and those espoused by likeminded individuals. 

References: 

Bissinger, B. (2015, June 30). Caitlyn Jenner: The full story. Vanity Fair. Retrieved from 
http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/06/caitlyn-jenner-bruce-cover-annie-leibovitz 
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row. 
Nisbet, M. (2010). Knowledge into action: Framing the debates over climate change and poverty. In Paul D’Angelo & Jim Kuypers (Eds.), Doing frame analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 43-83). New York, NY: Routledge. 
Pegoraro, A., Burch, L. M., Frederick, E., & Vincent, C. (2014). I am not loving it: Examining the hijacking of #CheersToSochi. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 15, 163-183.  

Tuesday July 12, 2016 10:31 - 12:00
PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326 Goldsmiths University, Building 2

10:31

Meaner on mobile: Incivility and impoliteness in communicating online
Location: PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326, 
Goldsmiths, University of London, Building 2
Campus Map 

Contributors:
  • Jacob Groshek, Boston University, United States
  • Chelsea Cutino, Boston University, United States

This study explores the nature of how mobile social media may potentially be sharpening the tenor of communicating online. Specifically, randomized representative Twitter data was collected for several controversial issues and then examined to determine the extent to which mobile or web-based content tends more toward greater incivility and impoliteness. Additional analyses further model how certain dialogic features, such as explicitly mentioning other users and retweeting others’ posts positively relate to hostility in the discourse. Building on the basis of technological affordances and user negotiation in digitally mediated environments, this study contributes to a better understanding of how individuals express themselves on mobile devices as these rapidly are becoming normalized modes for communicating with one another online. 

Tuesday July 12, 2016 10:31 - 12:00
PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326 Goldsmiths University, Building 2

10:31

The Roles of Sensation Seeking and Gratifications Sought in Social Networking Apps Use and Attendant Sexual Behaviors
Location: PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326, 
Goldsmiths, University of London, Building 2
Campus Map 

Contributors:
  • Tien Ee Dominic Yeo, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong
  • Yu Leung Ng, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong
The rise of social networking mobile apps (e.g, Grindr, Jack’d) created specifically for men who have sex with men (MSM) has generated public health concerns and conflicting studies about the impact on risky sexual behaviors. This study seeks to gain a more precise understanding of why and how MSM are using social networking mobile apps, and informs the theoretical debate concerning the impact of social networking technology on sexual risk behaviors. A questionnaire survey was conducted, both online and offline, with young MSM app-users in Hong Kong to examine their apps use (frequency, history, and exposure of own face and body) and recent sexual partnering via apps (total sexual partners [TSP] and condomless sex partners [CSP]) in relation to gratifications sought and sexual sensation seeking. The results indicated that finding sexual partners was not a high priority for using MSM apps; surveillance, relationship, and diversion motives were more important while social motive shared similar importance. App-use frequency, sex motive, and sexual sensation seeking predicted more TSP while surveillance motive predicted fewer TSP. None of these variables, however, directly predicted CSP. Sexual sensation seeking in interaction with sex or diversion motive predicted both TSP and CSP. Despite lacking significant association with sex motive or sexual sensation seeking, app-use frequency was a stronger independent predictor of TSP. While frequent app use may facilitate more app-met sexual partners, this study found no evidence indicating that apps use promote riskier sexual behavior with those partners. 

Tuesday July 12, 2016 10:31 - 12:00
PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326 Goldsmiths University, Building 2

10:31

What role can digital technologies play as persuasive messages in preventing sexual violence against girls and women in public spaces (trains, metros, buses)?
Location: PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326, 
Goldsmiths, University of London, Building 2
Campus Map 

Contributor: Lukas Labacher, McGill University, Canada

Background: 

The rate of sexual assaults in dense metropolitan spaces in Canadian cities (with 100,000 inhabitants or more) has not declined since as far back as 1999 (Perreault, 2015). This continues to be a particular concern in and around public transportation systems, such as buses, trains, and metros (Gekoski et al., 2015). In the quest to integrate technology as an innovative approach to end sexual violence against girls and women, a number of mobile phone apps (Circle of 6), crowd-sourcing websites (Hollaback!), and geo-mapping platforms (HarassMap) have been developed to help girls and women call on close friends and family as support before or after impending sexual assaults occurred. But what about influencing strangers standing in public spaces, where there is an immediate opportunity to intervene, to interrupt violence perpetrated against girls and women before it happens?

Objective and Methods: 

A three-month doctoral candidacy exam review was conducted on the title question, with a number of sub-questions explored: 1 – What theories exist informing research on nonviolent prosocial helping behaviours? 2 – What technologies (mobile phones & LCD screens) are currently being used to address sexual violence? 3 – What methods exist to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of these technologies? A second month-long review adds an examination on social work theory, practice, and policy, and on the intersectionalities between gender, identity, and the realities of victimization affecting women as well as men.

Results:

Theories explaining the Bystander Effect (Latané & Darley, 1970) and the Diffusion of Responsibility (Darley & Latané, 1968) show that people do intervene, particularly when situations are recognized as an emergency, prove to be dangerous, and fewer people are present (Fischer et al, 2011). Empathy training is not entirely effective (Schewe & O’Donohue, 1993). Persuasive technology researchers would be wise to focus less on influencing prosocial attitudes and favor showing helping behaviours exhibited in similar situations (Fabiano et al. 2003). Recognizing the value of digital technologies to support social work policy and practice is controversial (Sapey, 1997) but is growing (Goldkind & Wolf, 2015).

Future Work: 

Mass Interpersonal Persuasion (Fogg, 2008) models offer innovative solutions for designing persuasive messages in and around public transport spaces. Including pre-and post effectiveness evaluations (Gekoski et al., 2015) and men’s voices in future program and policy evolutions (Birchall, Edstrom, & Shahrokh, 2016) is the next step in this important work in improving on the efficacy (Glasgow, 2003) of bystander intervention surveys (Banyard, 2008). Future doctoral work will explore the use of visual arts-based research methodologies for social change, policy development (De Lange, Mitchell, & Moletsane, 2015), and creating networks of supportive relationships (Bock, 2012) at the local as well as international level.

References:

Banyard, V. L. (2008). Measurement and correlates of prosocial bystander behavior: The case of interpersonal violence. Violence and Victims23(1), 83–97.

Birchall, J., Edstrom, J., & Shahrokh, T. (2016). Reframing men and boys in policy for gender equality. Retrieved from ~opendocs.ids.ac.uk/ 123456789/9709/FINAL%20DESIGNED%20VERSION.pdf

Bock J. G. (2012). The technology of nonviolence: Social media and violence prevention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Darley, J. M., & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383.

De Lange, N., Mitchell, C., & Moletsane, R. (2015). Girl-led strategies to address campus safety: Creating action briefs for dialogue with policy makers. Agenda29(3), 118–127.

Fabiano, P. M., Perkins, H. W., Berkowitz, A., Linkenbach, J., & Stark, C. (2003). Engaging men as social justice allies in ending violence against women: Evidence for a social norms approach. Journal of American College Health52(3), 105–112.

Fischer, P., Krueger, J. I., Greitemeyer, T., Vogrincic, C., Kastenmüller, A., Frey, D., ... & Kainbacher, M. (2011). The bystander-effect: a meta-analytic review on bystander intervention in dangerous and non-dangerous emergencies. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 517–537.

Fogg, B. J. (2008). Mass interpersonal persuasion: An early view of a new phenomenon. In Persuasive Technology (pp. 23–34). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Gekoski, A., Gray, J. M., Horvath, M. A. H., Edwards, S., Emirali, A. & Adler, J. R. (2015). ‘What Works’ in Reducing Sexual Harassment and Sexual Offences on Public Transport Nationally and Internationally: A Rapid Evidence Assessment. London, UK.

Glasgow, R. E., Lichtenstein, E., & Marcus, A. C. (2003). Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. American Journal of Public Health93(8), 1261–1267.

Goldkind, L., & Wolf, L. (2015). A digital environment approach: Four technologies that will disrupt social work practice. Social Work60(1), 85–87.

Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help? New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Croft.

Perreault, S. (2015). Criminal victimization in Canada, 2014. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Catalogue no. 85-002-X ISSN 1209–6393. Retrieved from statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2015001/article/14241-eng.pdf

Sapey, B. (1997). Social work tomorrow: Towards a critical understanding of technology in social work. British Journal of Social Work27(6), 803–814.

Schewe, P., & O’Donohue, W. (1993). Rape prevention: Methodological problems and new directions. Clinical Psychology Review, 13, 667–682.



Tuesday July 12, 2016 10:31 - 12:00
PSH (Professor Stuart Hall Building) - 326 Goldsmiths University, Building 2