Conflict in online discussions of science has the potential to polarize individuals’ perceptions of science, yet science communication scholarship has paid little attention to systematic study of how verbal attacks play out in online discussions of science. This study analyzes sarcasm and incivility in Twitter discussions of climate change during an extreme weather event (n = 4,094). We found instances of incivility and sarcasm were low overall. Incivility was used in association with political topics, and both incivility and sarcasm were used alongside skeptical perspectives of climate change and by those who mention right-leaning politics in their profiles.
AndersonA. A.BrossardD.ScheufeleD. A. (2010). The changing information environment for nanotechnology: Online audiences and content. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 12, 1083-1094. doi:10.1007/s11051-010-9860-2
4.
AndersonA. A.BrossardD.ScheufeleD. A.XenosM. A.LadwigP. (2014). The “Nasty Effect:” Online incivility and risk perceptions of emerging technologies: Crude comments and concern. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 373-387. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12009
5.
AndersonA. A.YeoS. K.BrossardD.ScheufeleD. A.XenosM. A. (2016). Toxic talk: How online incivility can undermine perceptions of media. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, edw022. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edw022
6.
AngouriJ.TseligaT. (2010). “You have no idea what you are talking about!” From e-disagreement to e-impoliteness in two online fora. Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture, 6, 57-82. doi:10.1515/jplr.2010.004
7.
AttardoS. (2000). Irony as relevant inappropriateness. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 793-826. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00070-3
AverbeckJ. M.HampleD. (2008). Ironic message production: How and why we produce ironic messages. Communication Monographs, 75, 396-410. doi:10.1080/03637750802512389
10.
BorahP. (2013). Interactions of news frames and incivility in the political blogosphere: Examining perceptual outcomes. Political Communication, 30, 456-473. doi:10.1080/10584609.2012.737426
11.
BorahP. (2014). Does it matter where you read the news story? Interaction of incivility and news frames in the political blogosphere. Communication Research, 41, 809-827. doi:10.1177/0093650212449353
12.
BorickC. P.RabeB. G. (2014). Weather or not? Examining the impact of meteorological conditions on public opinion regarding global warming. Weather, Climate, and Society, 6, 413-424. doi:10.1175/WCAS-D-13-00042.1
13.
BowersJ. W. (1964). Some correlates of language intensity. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 50, 415-420. doi:10.1080/00335636409382688
14.
BoxerD.Cortés-CondeF. (1997). From bonding to biting: Conversational joking and identity display. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 275-294. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00031-8
15.
BoykoffM. T.BoykoffJ. M. (2004). Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14, 125-136. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.001
16.
BrooksD. J.GeerJ. G. (2007). Beyond negativity: The effects of incivility on the electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 51, 1-16.
17.
BrossardD. (2013). New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 110(Suppl. 3), 14096-14101. doi:10.1073/pnas.1212744110
18.
CapstickS. B.PidgeonN. F. (2014). Public perception of cold weather events as evidence for and against climate change. Climatic Change, 122, 695-708. doi:10.1007/s10584-013-1003-1
19.
CicchirilloV.HmielowskiJ.HutchensM. (2015). The mainstreaming of verbally aggressive online political behaviors. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18, 253-259. doi:10.1089/cyber.2014.0355
20.
ClarkH. H.GerrigR. J. (1984). On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 113, 121-126.
CoeK.KenskiK.RainsS. A. (2014). Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in newspaper website comments: Incivility in newspaper website comments. Journal of Communication, 64, 658-679. doi:10.1111/jcom.12104
23.
CollinsL.NerlichB. (2014). Examining user comments for deliberative democracy: A corpus-driven analysis of the climate change debate online. Environmental Communication, 9, 189-207. doi:10.1080/17524032.2014.981560
24.
DalrympleK. E.YoungR.TullyM. (2016). “Facts, not fear”: Negotiating uncertainty on social media during the 2014 Ebola crisis. Science Communication, 38, 442-467. doi:10.1177/1075547016655546
25.
De KrakerJ.KuijsS.CörversR.OffermansA. (2014). Internet public opinion on climate change: A world views analysis of online reader comments. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 6, 19-33. doi:10.1108/IJCCSM-09-2013-0109
26.
EganP. J.MullinM. (2012). Turning personal experience into political attitudes: The effect of local weather on Americans’ perceptions about global warming. Journal of Politics, 74, 796-809. doi:10.1017/S0022381612000448
27.
GastrowM. (2015). Science and the social media in an African context: The case of the square kilometre array telescope. Science Communication, 37, 703-722.
28.
GervaisB. T. (2015). Incivility online: Affective and behavioral reactions to uncivil political posts in a web-based experiment. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 12, 167-185. doi:10.1080/19331681.2014.997416
29.
GervaisB. T. (2017). More than mimicry? The role of anger in uncivil reactions to elite political incivility. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 29, 384-405. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edw010
GrahamT.WrightS. (2015). A tale of two stories from “Below the Line” comment fields at the Guardian. International Journal of Press/Politics, 20, 317-338. doi:10.1177/1940161215581926
32.
HardyB. W.JamiesonK. H. (2016). Overcoming endpoint bias in climate change communication: The case of Arctic sea ice trends. Environmental Communication, 11, 205-217. doi:10.1080/17524032.2016.1241814
33.
HwangH.KimY.HuhC. U. (2014). Seeing is believing: Effects of uncivil online debate on political polarization and expectations of deliberation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 58, 621-633. doi:10.1080/08838151.2014.966365
34.
JaspalR.NerlichB.KoteykoN. (2012). Contesting science by appealing to its norms: Readers discuss climate science in theDaily Mail. Science Communication, 35, 383-410. doi:10.1177/1075547012459274
35.
JoiremanJ.Barnes TrueloveH.DuellB. (2010). Effect of outdoor temperature, heat primes and anchoring on belief in global warming. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 358-367. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.03.004
36.
JorgensenJ. (1996). The functions of sarcastic irony in speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 613-634. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(95)00067-4
37.
KahanD. (2012). Why we are poles apart on climate change. Nature, 488, 255-255.
38.
KaiserJ. (2017). Public spheres of skepticism: Climate skeptics’ online comments in the German networked public sphere. International Journal of Communication, 11, 22.
39.
KataA. (2012). Anti-vaccine activists, Web 2.0, and the postmodern paradigm—An overview of tactics and tropes used online by the anti-vaccination movement. Vaccine, 30, 3778-3789. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.11.112
40.
KoteykoN.JaspalR.NerlichB. (2013). Climate change and “climategate” in online reader comments: A mixed methods study. Geographical Journal, 179, 74-86. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00479.x
41.
KunnemanF.LiebrechtC.van MulkenM.van den BoschA. (2014). Signaling sarcasm: From hyperbole to hashtag. Information Processing & Management, 51, 500-509. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2014.07.006
42.
LazoJ. K.MorssR. E.DemuthJ. L. (2009). 300 billion served: Sources, perceptions, uses, and values of weather forecasts. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 90, 785-798.
43.
LeeH.PangN. (2014, September2-5). Responding to the haze: Information cues and incivility in the online small world. In Proceedings of ISIC, the Information Behaviour Conference. Leeds, England. Retrieved from http://www.informationr.net/ir/19-4/isic/isic04.html#.Vv73kGQrK2w
44.
LeiserowitzA.FeinbergG.HoweP.RosenthalS. (2013). Climate change in the American mind: A focus on California, Colorado, Ohio, and Texas. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.
45.
LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.Roser-RenoufC.FeinbergG.HoweP. (2013). Extreme weather and climate change in the American mind: April 2013. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.
46.
LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.Roser-RenoufC.RosenthalS.CutlerM. (2017a). Climate change in the American mind: May 2017. New Haven, CT.: Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.
47.
LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.Roser-RenoufC.RosenthalS.CutlerM. (2017b). Politics & global warming: May 2017. New Haven, CT: Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.
MaibachE.PlackyB. W.WitteJ.SeitterK.GardinerN.MyersT.. . .CullenH. (2016). TV meteorologists as local climate change educators. In Oxford research encyclopedia of climate science. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
50.
McCrightA. M.DunlapR. E. (2011). The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s view of global warming, 2001-2010. Sociological Quarterly, 52, 155-321. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x
51.
MondragonN. I.GildeMontesL.ValenciaJ. (2017). Ebola in the public sphere. Science Communication, 39(1), 101-124. doi:10.1177/1075547016688908
52.
MuresanS.Gonzalez-IbanezR.GhoshD.WacholderN. (2016). Identification of nonliteral language in social media: A case study on sarcasm. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67, 2725-2737. doi:10.1002/asi.23624
53.
O’NeillS.WilliamsH. T. P.KurzT.WiersmaB.BoykoffM. (2015). Dominant frames in legacy and social media coverage of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. Nature Climate Change, 5, 380-385. doi:10.1038/nclimate2535
54.
PapacharissiZ. (2004). Democracy online: Civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups. New Media & Society, 6, 259-283. doi:10.1177/1461444804041444
55.
PhillipsW. (2011). Meet the trolls. Index on Censorship, 40, 68-76. doi:10.1177/0306422011409641
56.
Porten-CheéP.EildersC. (2015). Spiral of silence online: How online communication affects opinion climate perception and opinion expression regarding the climate change debate. Studies in Communication Sciences, 15, 143-150. doi:10.1016/j.scoms.2015.03.002
57.
PorterA. J.HellstenI. (2014). Investigating participatory dynamics through social media using a multideterminant “frame” approach: The case of climategate on YouTube. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 1024-1041. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12065
RiloffE.QadirA.SurveP.De SilvaL.GilbertN.HuangR. (2013, October18-21). Sarcasm as contrast between a positive sentiment and negative situation. In EMNLP (pp. 704-714). Seattle, WA. Retrieved from http://www.cs.utah.edu/~alnds/papers/sarcasm_2013.pdf
60.
RoweI. (2015). Civility 2.0: A comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion. Information, Communication & Society, 18, 121-138. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2014.940365
61.
ShaoW. (2015). Are actual weather and perceived weather the same? Understanding perceptions of local weather and their effects on risk perceptions of global warming. Journal of Risk Research, 19, 722-742. doi:10.1080/13669877.2014.1003956
SpenceA.PoortingaW.ButlerC.PidgeonN. F. (2011). Perceptions of climate change and willingness to save energy related to flood experience. Nature Climate Change, 1, 46-49. doi:10.1038/nclimate1059
64.
SuL. Y.-F.AkinH.BrossardD.ScheufeleD. A.XenosM. A. (2015). Science news consumption patterns and their implications for public understanding of science. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92, 597-616. doi:10.1177/1077699015586415
65.
SuL. Y.-F.CacciatoreM.LiangX.BrossardD.ScheufeleD.XenosM. A. (2016). Analyzing public sentiments online: Combining human- and computer-based content analysis. Information, Communication & Society, 20, 406-427. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2016.1182197
66.
SuttonJ.LeagueC.SellnowT. L.SellnowD. D. (2015). Terse messaging and public health in the midst of natural disasters: The case of the boulder floods. Health Communication, 30, 135-143. doi:10.1080/10410236.2014.974124
67.
SuttonJ.SpiroE. S.JohnsonB.FitzhughS.GibsonB.ButtsC. T. (2014). Warning tweets: Serial transmission of messages during the warning phase of a disaster event. Information, Communication & Society, 17, 765-787. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2013.862561
68.
UldamJ.AskaniusT. (2013). Online civic cultures: Debating climate change activism on YouTube. International Journal of Communication, 7, 1185-1204.
69.
VeltriG. A.AtanasovaD. (2015). Climate change on Twitter: Content, media ecology and information sharing behaviour. Public Understanding of Science, 26, 721-737. doi:10.1177/0963662515613702
70.
WhalenJ. M.PexmanP. M.GillA. J. (2009). “Should be fun—not!” Incidence and marking of nonliteral language in e-mail. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 28(3), 263-280. doi:10.1177/0261927X09335253
71.
WhitmarshL. (2011). Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change: Dimensions, determinants and change over time. Global Environmental Change, 21, 690-700. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.01.016
72.
WilliamsH. T. P.McMurrayJ. R.KurzT.Hugo LambertF. (2015). Network analysis reveals open forums and echo chambers in social media discussions of climate change. Global Environmental Change, 32, 126-138. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.03.006
73.
ZappavignaM. (2012). Discourse of Twitter and social media: How we use language to create affiliation on the Web (1st ed.). London, England: Bloomsbury Academic.
74.
ZhaoX.MaibachE.GandyJ.WitteJ.CullenH.KlingerB.. . .PyleA. (2013). Climate change education through TV weathercasts: Results of a field experiment. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 95, 117-130. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00144.1
75.
ZiegeleM.JostP. B. (2016). Not funny? The effects of factual versus sarcastic journalistic responses to uncivil user comments. Communication Research. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0093650216671854
