Understanding gender differences in experiences and concerns surrounding online harms: A short report on a nationally representative survey of UK adults

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.00463v1
• Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 10:10:52 GMT
• Title: Understanding gender differences in experiences and concerns surrounding online harms: A short report on a nationally representative survey of UK adults
• Authors: Florence E. Enock, Francesca Stevens, Jonathan Bright, Miranda Cross, Pica Johansson, Judy Wajcman, Helen Z. Margetts
• Abstract summary: We present preliminary results from a large, nationally representative survey of UK adults. We ask about exposure to 15 specific harms, along with fears surrounding exposure and comfort engaging in certain online behaviours. We find that women are significantly more fearful of experiencing every type of harm that we asked about, and are significantly less comfortable partaking in several online behaviours.
• Score: 0.8567685792108676
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Online harms, such as hate speech, misinformation, harassment and self-harm promotion, continue to be widespread. While some work suggests that women are disproportionately affected by such harms, other studies find little evidence for gender differences in overall exposure. Here, we present preliminary results from a large, nationally representative survey of UK adults (N = 2000). We asked about exposure to 15 specific harms, along with fears surrounding exposure and comfort engaging in certain online behaviours. While men and women report seeing online harms to a roughly equal extent overall, we find that women are significantly more fearful of experiencing every type of harm that we asked about, and are significantly less comfortable partaking in several online behaviours. Strikingly, just 24% of women report being comfortable expressing political opinions online compared with almost 40% of men, with similar overall proportions for challenging certain content. Our work suggests that women may suffer an additional psychological burden in response to the proliferation of harmful online content, doing more 'safety work' to protect themselves. With much public discourse happening online, gender inequality in public voice is likely to be perpetuated if women feel too fearful to participate. Our results are important because to establish greater equality in society, we must take measures to ensure all members feel safe and able to participate in the online space.

Related papers

• Women are less comfortable expressing opinions online than men and report heightened fears for safety: Surveying gender differences in experiences of online harms [0.7916214711737172]
  Women are significantly more fearful of being targeted by harms overall. They report greater negative psychological impact as a result of particular experiences. Women report higher use of a range of safety tools and less comfort with several forms of online participation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T22:16:03Z)
• Invisible Women in Digital Diplomacy: A Multidimensional Framework for Online Gender Bias Against Women Ambassadors Worldwide [39.73063909189058]
  This paper offers the first global analysis of the treatment of women diplomats on social media. It focuses on three critical elements: gendered language, negativity in tweets directed at diplomats, and the visibility of women diplomats.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T13:39:58Z)
• Beyond Fish and Bicycles: Exploring the Varieties of Online Women's Ideological Spaces [12.429096784949952]
  We perform a large-scale, data-driven analysis of over 6M Reddit comments and submissions from 14 subreddits. We elicit a diverse taxonomy of online women's ideological spaces, ranging from the so-called Manosphere to Gender-Critical Feminism. We shed light on two platforms, ovarit.com and thepinkpill.co, where two toxic communities of online women's ideological spaces migrated after their ban on Reddit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-13T13:39:45Z)
• Detecting and Understanding Harmful Memes: A Survey [48.135415967633676]
  We offer a comprehensive survey with a focus on harmful memes. One interesting finding is that many types of harmful memes are not really studied, e.g., such featuring self-harm and extremism. Another observation is that memes can propagate globally through repackaging in different languages and that they can also be multilingual.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-09T13:43:27Z)
• #ContextMatters: Advantages and Limitations of Using Machine Learning to Support Women in Politics [0.15749416770494704]
  ParityBOT was deployed across elections in Canada, the United States and New Zealand. It was used to analyse and classify more than 12 million tweets directed at women candidates and counter toxic tweets with supportive ones. We examine the rate of false negatives, where ParityBOT failed to pick up on insults directed at specific high profile women.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-30T22:55:49Z)
• News consumption and social media regulations policy [70.31753171707005]
  We analyze two social media that enforced opposite moderation methods, Twitter and Gab, to assess the interplay between news consumption and content regulation. Our results show that the presence of moderation pursued by Twitter produces a significant reduction of questionable content. The lack of clear regulation on Gab results in the tendency of the user to engage with both types of content, showing a slight preference for the questionable ones which may account for a dissing/endorsement behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-07T19:26:32Z)
• Detecting Harmful Content On Online Platforms: What Platforms Need Vs. Where Research Efforts Go [44.774035806004214]
  harmful content on online platforms comes in many different forms including hate speech, offensive language, bullying and harassment, misinformation, spam, violence, graphic content, sexual abuse, self harm, and many other. Online platforms seek to moderate such content to limit societal harm, to comply with legislation, and to create a more inclusive environment for their users. There is currently a dichotomy between what types of harmful content online platforms seek to curb, and what research efforts there are to automatically detect such content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-27T08:01:10Z)
• Analyzing COVID-19 on Online Social Media: Trends, Sentiments and Emotions [44.92240076313168]
  We analyze the affective trajectories of the American people and the Chinese people based on Twitter and Weibo posts between January 20th, 2020 and May 11th 2020. By contrasting two very different countries, China and the Unites States, we reveal sharp differences in people's views on COVID-19 in different cultures. Our study provides a computational approach to unveiling public emotions and concerns on the pandemic in real-time, which would potentially help policy-makers better understand people's need and thus make optimal policy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-29T09:24:38Z)
• Women worry about family, men about the economy: Gender differences in emotional responses to COVID-19 [0.6675491069288519]
  We examine gender differences and the effect of document length on worries about the ongoing COVID-19 situation. Women worried more about their loved ones and severe health concerns while men were more occupied with effects on the economy and society.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-17T12:23:46Z)
• #MeToo on Campus: Studying College Sexual Assault at Scale Using Data Reported on Social Media [71.74529365205053]
  We analyze the influence of the # trend on a pool of college followers. The results show that the majority of topics embedded in those # tweets detail sexual harassment stories. There exists a significant correlation between the prevalence of this trend and official reports on several major geographical regions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-16T18:05:46Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.