Consequences of Conflicts in Online Conversations

Abstract

Interpersonal conflicts occur frequently in both offline and online groups, with conditions for conflict especially ripe online. This research attempts to understand the consequences of online group conflict and reporting it to group administrators, both for the protagonists in the conflict and observers. If group conflict is aversive, then group members should reduce their group participation after observing conflict. Theories of imitation and behavioral mimicry suggest that even onlookers will exhibit more conflict and negative language after observing conflict conversations in their group. In contrast, theories of deterrence suggest that both the instigator of the conflict and onlookers will reduce their conflict and onlookers might even increase their engagement if conflicts are reported to group administrators. The current study uses de-identified and aggregated data from Facebook group conversations and Mahalanobis distance matching to test these ideas. Results are consistent with the hypothesis that conflict in group conversations reduces engagement within the group and increases the amount of conflict and the negativity of language users express in the group. However, inconsistent with deterrence theories, conflict and language negativity increase and group engagement decreases when conflict is reported to group administrators.