M's Theory of Forum Dynamics

Be warned: this is probably going to get long. And yes, that is what I said to your mother last night. I've been doing a lot of psychology work so I figured I'd have a little fun and exercise my brain. Sorry guys (and gals), I'm not going to put a TL;DR. If you don't want to read the whole thing, please don't respond.


So, I have a theory that I've been building based on the time that I've spent on forums. I haven't spent as much time here as I have at several others, but my theory is this: people are bandwagon riders. I guess I should say, that's not a theory. That's a law. Look at riots for proof of that. Basic psychology.

But, on a forum, the dynamic is different. It's a very interesting psychological case study. Anonymity makes people act very differently than they would in real life. If you're participating in a group conversation in person, people are very likely to side with the majority or the first person to speak with authority. People are very malleable creatures. It blows my mind. But, in any case, on to my theory as to how this applies to forums.

The first part of my theory is this:
There is a negativity that surrounds most online communities (yes, even GC, although it's much better here than most places. couldn't be the weed... nah ). An excellent example is when someone posts a thread where they enter into conflict and either flee or deescalate the situation somehow. When they post the thread, people are very quick to condemn them for not standing up for themselves, even though often times it would have been very unintelligent to go on the offensive. Then, when you see a thread where someone lays the smack down on somebody else, you see everyone complain about how the poster relied on violence instead of taking a more passive tack.

This hypocrisy leads me to the second part of my theory:

People are quick to condemn on the internet because they can make themselves feel superior with little to no threat of retaliation. If you condemn someone for something they did/said in a face-to-face conversation, best case the person is going to defend themselves. Worst case, you end up fighting. Without that incentive to behave like decent human beings (anonymity rearing its' ugly, beautiful head), people are quick to appease themselves before others.

The third part ties us back into the bandwagon part. What I have noticed is this:

The first reply to a thread tends to dictate how 75%+ of the responders are going to reply. If the first reply was negative, people are thoughtless in how quickly they will jump on the hate train. If the first reply is positive, then everyone falls over themselves to compliment the original poster in more inventive, creative ways than the person before them. This leads me to the fourth part of my theory:

A forum, like any other social scene, is a competition. However, because anonymity is a factor, it can be a far more vicious competition than an exchange of words when face-to-face. Whether forum "success" is measured through rep, likes, # of posts, join date, whatever, people are always going to be competing. This is because it is human nature to compare yourself to others. It is also human nature to desire acceptance. Not just acceptance, but love. However, there is a finite amount of love that can be given. This is where I tie back into Theory #3. People are negative because they subconsciously assume that if another forum member is getting love, that is love they will not get. Therefore, they deprecate, decry, and denounce what they find even slightly objectionable.



I'll probably add more on to this later, but that's enough procrastination. If you were looking for some food for thought, I hope you enjoyed it. Back to psych!


///M