Source: Paper I, Psychology II, Florida International University
Tags: online rudeness, fake news, social media incivility, Facebook, groupthink, intergroup emotion, hate speech, political polarisation, fact-checking, content moderation
Difficulty: Introductory/Intermediate | Prerequisites: Basic familiarity with social psychology concepts (in-groups/out-groups, groupthink). No statistics background needed for this section.
This topic sits at the intersection of social psychology and digital communication. The paper examines how people react emotionally when others dismiss their shared news stories as "fake" on Facebook, and how the tone of that dismissal (rude vs. polite) shapes observers' impressions. It draws on research about groupthink, intergroup conflict, the spread of misinformation, and the psychological toll of hateful online speech. If you have covered attitude formation, social identity theory, or conformity in earlier units, this builds on those foundations.
When someone shares a news story on social media and commenters call it "fake news," the sharer's tone in response matters enormously. Rude responses make observers see the sharer as less likeable, less reasonable, and more hostile. Polite responses, whether the sharer agrees or disagrees with the criticism, produce much more favourable impressions. The paper also reviews how groupthink, intergroup emotions, and platform content-moderation efforts shape the broader fake-news landscape.
Fake news
Information presented as factual news that is fabricated, misleading, or unverifiable. In this paper's context, it also covers the act of labelling a story "fake" as a way of dismissing views one disagrees with.
In simple terms, "fake news" can mean the content itself is false, or it can be a rhetorical weapon people use to shut down stories that challenge their beliefs.
Groupthink
A psychological phenomenon in which members of a cohesive group prioritise consensus and in-group harmony over critical evaluation of information.
Think of it as the tendency for people in tight-knit online communities to reinforce each other's views and reject outside opinions without examining them.
Intergroup emotion
Emotions that arise not from personal experience alone, but from an individual's identification with a social group. When the group feels threatened, the individual feels threatened.
In simple terms, your anger at an online comment may have less to do with you personally and more to do with your loyalty to a political or social group.
Online incivility
Communication on digital platforms that violates norms of respectful discourse, ranging from mild rudeness to outright hate speech.
Think of it as any comment online that you would consider disrespectful if said to your face, including name-calling, mockery, and dismissiveness.
Content moderation / fact-check tags
Measures taken by social media platforms to flag or reduce the visibility of misleading content. Examples include "disputed" labels and "rated false" tags applied by independent fact-checkers.
In simple terms, these are the warning labels platforms put on posts to tell you the information might not be accurate.
In-group / out-group
In-group: the social group a person identifies with. Out-group: any group the person does not identify with. Conflict between these groups is a core driver of hostile online discourse.
Think of it as "us vs. them" dynamics playing out in comment sections.
Social media has become "an integral platform in the development of relationships among Internet users around the world" (Ismail, Shanmuganathan & Shaari, 2020).
The same connectivity that builds relationships also creates friction: people encounter ideologies different from their own and may reject them outright.
False rumours spread farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than true news (Barfar, 2019), largely because misinformation triggers stronger emotional responses and drives people to argue.
People are drawn to others who share their ideology, which reaffirms their own perceptions as valid and accurate.
Kim and Kim (2019) found that an individual's aroused emotions in an intergroup situation are tied to group identity, not just personal feelings.
The practical effect: people do not usually attack the individual they are arguing with online. They attack the ideas, values, and beliefs that person represents, because those beliefs threaten the in-group's consensus.
This pattern is especially visible in partisan political exchanges on social media (e.g. Republican vs. Democrat comment threads).
Labelling a story "fake news" is often less about the story's accuracy and more about the labeller's unwillingness to engage with an opposing viewpoint.
The label shuts down conversation: it dismisses both the content and the person who shared it.
Hateful and rude speech in comment sections is a downstream consequence. People who feel their group identity is threatened respond aggressively to defend the group's position.
Since the 2016 U.S. presidential election, platforms have introduced fact-check tags ("disputed," "rated false") to reduce belief in false stories (Clayton et al., 2019).
Trigger warnings and content flags aim to limit the reach of harmful content by warning users before they see it.
Malicious online comments can cause serious psychological distress and even contribute to suicide among victims (Kim, Bock & Kim, 2019), which is a key reason platforms invest in moderation.
The effectiveness of these tags varies: they reduce belief in flagged stories but can also create an "implied truth" effect for unflagged stories (Clayton et al., 2019).
These concepts apply directly to how social media companies design their moderation tools. Understanding that rude dismissals (rather than mere disagreement) drive the strongest negative reactions helps explain why platforms focus on tone-based detection alongside factual accuracy checks. The findings also matter for anyone managing a public-facing brand or community page: how you respond to critics shapes how bystanders perceive you, regardless of whether the criticism is fair.
Students often think "fake news" refers only to fabricated content. In the context of this paper, it also functions as a dismissal tactic used against stories people simply disagree with.
Students sometimes assume that online rudeness is always directed at the person. The literature here emphasises that attacks are more often directed at the ideas and group identity the person represents.
It is tempting to think that fact-check labels solve the misinformation problem. Clayton et al. (2019) found that while labels reduce belief in flagged stories, they can inadvertently increase trust in unflagged stories (the "implied truth" effect).
Students may conflate groupthink with peer pressure. Groupthink is about consensus-seeking within a cohesive group; peer pressure is broader and does not require group cohesion.
⚠️ Be able to distinguish between the "fake news" label as a description of false content and as a rhetorical dismissal tactic. Exam questions may test whether you understand both uses.
⚠️ Know the relationship between intergroup emotion and online incivility. Kim and Kim (2019) is a key citation: emotions in intergroup conflict are tied to group identity, not individual temperament.
⚠️ Understand the "implied truth" effect of fact-check tags (Clayton et al., 2019): flagging some stories as false can make unflagged stories seem more credible by default.
⚠️ Be prepared to explain why false rumours spread more quickly than true news (Barfar, 2019) and link that to emotional arousal.
True or False: False rumours tend to spread more slowly than true news on social media. (False, they spread faster.)
Fill in the blank: The tendency for cohesive groups to prioritise consensus over critical evaluation is called ________. (Groupthink)
True or False: Online attacks during political disagreements are usually directed at the individual's personal character rather than their group's beliefs. (False, they tend to target ideas, values, and group identity.)
Fill in the blank: Social media platforms use ________ tags such as "disputed" or "rated false" to reduce belief in misleading stories. (Fact-check)
True or False: Fact-check labels only reduce trust in flagged stories and have no effect on unflagged content. (False, they can create an "implied truth" effect for unflagged stories.)
Q: According to Barfar (2019), why do false rumours spread more broadly than true news on social media?
A: False rumours are more likely to incite emotional responses from people trying to either disprove or prove the accuracy of the information. That emotional engagement drives more sharing, commenting, and overall reach.
Q: How does groupthink contribute to hateful speech on social media platforms?
A: People seek out others who share their ideology, which reaffirms their views as valid. When they encounter opposing viewpoints, the group dynamic triggers defensive and hostile responses toward the out-group, because the opposing view threatens the in-group's consensus.
Q: What is the difference between attacking a person and attacking their group identity in online discourse?
A: Kim and Kim (2019) found that online hostility during political disagreements is typically directed at the ideas, values, and beliefs the person represents (their group identity) rather than at the person's individual character.
Q: What are the limitations of fact-check tags as a tool for combating misinformation?
A: While fact-check tags ("disputed," "rated false") reduce belief in the specific stories they flag, they can also create an "implied truth" effect: unflagged stories seem more credible by comparison, even if they have not been checked (Clayton et al., 2019).
Q: Explain how the "fake news" label can function as both a factual claim and a rhetorical tactic.
A: As a factual claim, "fake news" identifies content that is fabricated or misleading. As a rhetorical tactic, it is used to dismiss any story that conflicts with the speaker's agenda, regardless of the story's accuracy. The paper notes that people often label content "fake" simply because it challenges their existing beliefs.
This material connects to social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner): the in-group/out-group dynamics driving online hostility are a direct application of how people categorise themselves and others. It also links to persuasion and attitude change: the fake-news label is a form of source derogation, a strategy studied in persuasion research. If your course covers media psychology or political psychology, the discussion of platform moderation and partisan polarisation feeds directly into those units.
online rudeness, Facebook incivility, fake news psychology, social media hate speech, groupthink social media, intergroup emotion theory, political polarisation online, content moderation psychology, fact-check tags effectiveness, implied truth effect, online disinformation, social identity threat, out-group hostility, digital communication conflict, misinformation spread, echo chambers, confirmation bias online, trolling psychology, PSY 2020 FIU