Whenever I hear “Internet troll”, I always tend to imagine a forty-year-old-guy with a lot of pent-up anger, who hasn’t gotten much out of life and the only thing that makes him feel better is to anonymously leave nasty, hate-filled, offensive comments. Although my portrayal of internet trolls may be a little far-fetched, a couple studies suggest there may be some truth behind part of my broad assumption: the “makes him feel better” part. So I pose the question: do internet trolls actually stand behind their supposed position on a subject or do they post hateful comments to incite anger
from others in order to receive pleasure. In other words, are trolls sadistic?
I came across an article discussing two online studies, conducted by the same researchers and published in the same report, to explore the Dark Tetrad of personality (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism) among trolls.
The first study surveyed 418 people of an average age of 29 in the US, using five-point scales (strongly disagree–strongly agree), to assess sadistic tendencies including direct sadism (ie “I enjoy hurting people”) and vicarious sadism (i.e. “in video games, I like the realistic blood spurts”). Second, they assessed narcissism, Machiavellianism, and subclinical psychopathy (wide, but not entire range of psychopathic traits). Lastly, they were given a questionnaire on commenting behavior. There were also participants “who indicated that they did not spend any time posting comments and were labeled as ‘non-commenters’.”
The second study was divided into two groups, 188 Canadian psychology students with a median age of 21 and 609 US residents with the median age of 35, all given the first 2 surveys I described above. However, only a subset of the US residents completed the commenting behavior questionnaire and only the Canadian students complete a survey on the Big Five (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism).
The results, found by various analyses comparing and controlling the several different groups and the traits, were consistent with their hypotheses of the Dark Tetrad positively correlating with trolls. Of all the personality measures, including the Big Five, sadism was the most prominent among trolls. The report states that “the associations between sadism and (trolling assessment) were so strong that it might be said that online trolls are prototypical everyday sadists. Enjoyment of other online activities, such as chatting and debating, was unrelated to sadism.” “In the final analysis of Study 2, we found clear evidence that sadists tend to troll because they enjoy it.” “Both trolls and sadists feel sadistic glee at the distress of others. Sadists just want to have fun … and the Internet is their playground!”
Their findings are certainly disturbing, to say the least. As far as I could tell, the studies were well conducted with no outstanding flaws. However, to certify the study’s credibility, it could use a few improvements. For instance, giving the surveys and questionnaires in real life might conduce better results, because I think it’s hard to assume that all the people told the truth. Because this experiment was the first of its kind to explore the Dark Tetrad among trolls, other experiments should be done to try to replicate their findings to help rule out chance. Another addition to future experiments to help rule out chance would be to actually measure brain activity in the amygdala (area of the brain linked to strong emotion) like this experiment did to distinguish psychopaths from sadists.
An “everyday sadist” may be standing next to you in line waiting for coffee, but does that necessarily mean they exhibit sadistic behavior in everyday life, or do they only take on these sadistic personas in the Internet realm? Although it might be deemed unethical, an experiment to assess and rate people’s sadistic tendencies or behavior in their everyday lives could really help understand how frequently sadism occurs among sadistic Internet trolls outside of the Internet. It would require a large number of people, classified into different groups (for example: Internet trolls, sadistic Internet trolls, regular Internet users, irregular Internet users) unaware of the real purpose of the experiment, involved in some kind of simulated situation. Maybe the internet brings out the worst in people and these “everyday sadists” rely on anonymity, but I think it would be fascinating to compare the findings of the 2 studies I discussed and one similar to what I just suggested.
I think it’s an important field to explore, considering the concern of Internet bullying and some people’s reliance on Internet communication, rather than real-life communication. What do you think? Did those studies convince you enough for more experimental pursuance of Internet troll sadism?