Bystanders’ collective responses set the norm against hate speech
Abstract Hate speech incidents often occur in social settings, from public transport to football stadiums. To counteract a prevailing passive attitude towards them, governmental authorities, sociologists, and philosophers stress bystanders’ responsibility to oppose or block hate speech. Here, across...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer Nature
2024-02-01
|
| Series: | Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02761-8 |
| _version_ | 1827328201207054336 |
|---|---|
| author | Jimena Zapata Justin Sulik Clemens von Wulffen Ophelia Deroy |
| author_facet | Jimena Zapata Justin Sulik Clemens von Wulffen Ophelia Deroy |
| author_sort | Jimena Zapata |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Hate speech incidents often occur in social settings, from public transport to football stadiums. To counteract a prevailing passive attitude towards them, governmental authorities, sociologists, and philosophers stress bystanders’ responsibility to oppose or block hate speech. Here, across two online experiments with UK participants using custom visual vignettes, we provide empirical evidence that bystanders’ expression of opposition can affect how harmful these incidents are perceived, but only as part of a collective response: one expressed by a majority of bystanders present. Experiment 1 (N = 329) shows that the silence or intervention of three bystanders affects the harm caused by hate speech, but one bystander does not. Experiment 2 (N = 269) shows this is not simply a matter of numbers but rather one of norms: only unanimous opposition reduces the public perception of the damage created by the incident. Based on our results, we advance an empirical norm account: group responses to hate speech modulate its harm by indicating either a permissive or a disapproving social norm. Our account and results, showing the need to consider responses to hate speech at a collective level, have direct implications for social psychology, the philosophy of language and public policies. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T15:14:33Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-eb17f39476a4486986549c319ca5829b |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2662-9992 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T15:14:33Z |
| publishDate | 2024-02-01 |
| publisher | Springer Nature |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| spelling | doaj.art-eb17f39476a4486986549c319ca5829b2024-03-05T18:01:09ZengSpringer NatureHumanities & Social Sciences Communications2662-99922024-02-0111111310.1057/s41599-024-02761-8Bystanders’ collective responses set the norm against hate speechJimena Zapata0Justin Sulik1Clemens von Wulffen2Ophelia Deroy3Faculty of Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and Religious Studies Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenCognition, Values & Behaviour Lab, Faculty of Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and Religious Studies Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of OxfordFaculty of Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and Religious Studies Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenAbstract Hate speech incidents often occur in social settings, from public transport to football stadiums. To counteract a prevailing passive attitude towards them, governmental authorities, sociologists, and philosophers stress bystanders’ responsibility to oppose or block hate speech. Here, across two online experiments with UK participants using custom visual vignettes, we provide empirical evidence that bystanders’ expression of opposition can affect how harmful these incidents are perceived, but only as part of a collective response: one expressed by a majority of bystanders present. Experiment 1 (N = 329) shows that the silence or intervention of three bystanders affects the harm caused by hate speech, but one bystander does not. Experiment 2 (N = 269) shows this is not simply a matter of numbers but rather one of norms: only unanimous opposition reduces the public perception of the damage created by the incident. Based on our results, we advance an empirical norm account: group responses to hate speech modulate its harm by indicating either a permissive or a disapproving social norm. Our account and results, showing the need to consider responses to hate speech at a collective level, have direct implications for social psychology, the philosophy of language and public policies.https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02761-8 |
| spellingShingle | Jimena Zapata Justin Sulik Clemens von Wulffen Ophelia Deroy Bystanders’ collective responses set the norm against hate speech Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| title | Bystanders’ collective responses set the norm against hate speech |
| title_full | Bystanders’ collective responses set the norm against hate speech |
| title_fullStr | Bystanders’ collective responses set the norm against hate speech |
| title_full_unstemmed | Bystanders’ collective responses set the norm against hate speech |
| title_short | Bystanders’ collective responses set the norm against hate speech |
| title_sort | bystanders collective responses set the norm against hate speech |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02761-8 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jimenazapata bystanderscollectiveresponsessetthenormagainsthatespeech AT justinsulik bystanderscollectiveresponsessetthenormagainsthatespeech AT clemensvonwulffen bystanderscollectiveresponsessetthenormagainsthatespeech AT opheliaderoy bystanderscollectiveresponsessetthenormagainsthatespeech |