An article on Forbes reports that Twitter may help identify psychopaths.
Huh.
Interesting theory, and as the writer justifies this assertion, I see the logic to it. Apparently, Twitter brings out the worst in people – surely the past months have taught us that! — and I can’t help but ask myself the reasons.
Are we crankier (and meaner) when restricted to 140 characters? Less likely to filter our feelings or beliefs? Is it easier to regress to addled adolescence? Why is it that Twitter “wars” exist (online public arguments), whereas they don’t occur in quite the same way on Facebook?
Is it simpler to see the pathological (not to mention, narcissistic) behaviors on Twitter because we can find them more easily the way Twitter is structured?
Twitter Personality Study
According to the Forbes article, researchers sought to identify:
the “dark triad: psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism,”
It seems they came up with plenty; out of 2900 participants:
Of the 2,900, about 41 users were certifiable, i.e., rated high for all of the nasty traits. Everyone else fell in a spectrum. (We all have these traits, to a greater or lesser extent.)
And the validity of any such findings? Does social media grant special license to let loose our demons, thus seeming to exaggerate them? Is social media in the process of normalizing our bad behavior?
I Am Who I Am (Maybe)
Are you the same in social media interactions as you are in life? I can’t help but doubt it. At least, I suspect that many of us are “braver” or more outspoken behind a screen than we are face-to-face.
I am, and I’m not. While “what you see is what you get” is relatively true in my case, I don’t believe in “tell all” and I remain circumspect about many aspects of my life (naturally!). Like other writers I know, I have a seriously introverted side, despite my open verbal style.
These contradictions are commonplace.
So the way you perceive me on social media is a reflection of fragments of who I am, but not a fully fleshed out picture. Of course, this is also because I exercise judgment when it comes to anything I post or share.
So what about more extreme examples? What about all the haters and trolls who leave their trail of spite and anger on various sites, using anonymity in some instances and pseudonyms in others?
“If You Don’t Have Something Nice to Say…”
Remember the etiquette we were taught as children – that if you don’t have something nice to say, say nothing at all?
I try to exercise a reasonable ration of biting-my-tongue when it comes to communicating on the Internet – just as I would in person, not wanting to say something thoughtless. But thoughtlessness is increasingly the norm – so much so that we don’t even think about it any longer!
It seems we’re supposed to fill the air (Blogosphere, Twitterverse, etc.) with something – anything – and Clever With a Side of Nasty is fully acceptable. Of course, the Forbes article goes beyond what is now a “usual” dosage of callousness, cruelty, and counterproductivity. It deals in danger – potentially dangerous actions that may be preceded by words of warning that can be traced through social media messages.
Rules of the Game, Rules of Engagement
One of the aspects of Twitter that I enjoy immensely is its model of giving. It’s frequently self-promotional, yes. All social media is self-promotional these days, even the news (if you think about it).
But the extent to which many players on Twitter are happy to pay it forward, to share information, to understand that their value is in providing value to those who read their feeds, their blogs, their quotes, share their discoveries – it makes Twitter a rich experience (selectively) for some of us.
Or at least, richer than one might think at first glance.
Social Media Preferences?
Plainly, there are many uses for Twitter – revelatory of “the dark triad” or not. In fact, perhaps we should be grateful that this communication channel seems to bring out those darker instincts in some, so that we can identify them and steer clear.
On Twitter, I pick and choose capabilities what suit my purpose, I use Facebook as well (though less), and enjoy specialized online communities for more specialized dialog – about business, the arts, writing, parenting.
As for social media misbehavior, and Big Brother groups looking in on what isn’t private to uncover more than personality particulars, but genuine danger, what say you?
I certainly have mixed feelings. I don’t like Big Brother Watching. Then again, Twitter feeds are public, they leave a clear historical trail, we know potential employers Google us and check Facebook, and with the sort of unthinkable events that occur in society all too often – perhaps social media is fair game for those who purport to watch us in order to watch out for us.
- Your social media preferences?
- Your social media habits?
- Are you “meaner” online than you would be in person?
- Are you growing inured to “mean tweets” and shrug them off, or do you mean-tweet back?
You May Also Enjoy
I use Facebook – primarily as a way of seeing what my friends and family are up to, and I rarely actually post anything there – other than a link to my blog when I post. I have a Twitter account, although I don’t know why. I haven’t been back there since I set it up. Have enough to do with my time, I guess. As to how I treat people online? The same as I would treat them in person. I have to live with myself, and I could not do that comfortably if I was deliberately cruel or mean to someone, no matter what the circumstances or the location.
Forbes: What are some of the Twitter stylings of these undesirables? Curse words. Angry responses to other people, including swearing and use of the word “hate.” Using the word “we.” Using periods. Using filler words such as “blah” and “I mean” and “um.”
Oh, oh. I swear. I hate idiots. And I’m always saying “we in society… blah, blah, blah”. However, curiously enough I always write s**t or f**k. If Forbes is right, does that mean I’m a ps*ch*p*th?
Ha ha. I like to think I don’t take advantage of being anonymous to do things I wouldn’t do in person. I like to be real… ah, pseudo-real… anonymously real? Oh s**t, now see what corner you got me to back myself into.
I’m reading. wb 🙂
My social media involvement is similar to Carol’s. Everyone on my personal Facebook page I know personally. I’ve been posting less there in lieu of giving my fan page more attention. My Twitter page gets updated when my fan page does and other than that I’ve yet to tackle it. I am active on my LinkedIn groups though. But here’s what I’ve noticed in terms of online etiquette. It seems to depend on what site you are commenting on. I find the commenters on HuffPost and AOL, for example, can become quite hostile. Yet those on this blog and other similar ones as listed in the blogroll here not so. I don’t think it’s just a gender difference. It could just be the larger the following the more varied the personalities. And on the help sites there’s lots of egos, mostly male, who are showing off what they know. Just some of my thoughts…good post. Thanks.
Thanks for stopping by Maryl. (Love your site!) As to those comments on Big Media, a good deal has to do with what is and isn’t moderated, and as you point out, the larger the site the more you’ll attract all sorts of (mean-spirited, vitriolic) comments. Yet some media, like the New York Times, moderates (and prevents) that sort of thing which, no doubt, requires $$ / resources, and a policy that insists on appropriate online behavior.
I blog and link posts to Facebook. I spend a lot of time blogging, both posting and interacting with other bloggers at their sites. I spend very little time on Facebook.
I’ve only been back to Twitter a few times since setting it up. I would like to take some time there learning a bit of navigational savvy as I’m sure it has its benefits.
I’m pretty much the same as my voice and conversations online as in person, except the same exclusion you mentioned, that of keeping some aspects and familial names off the pages. TMI. And protection of the innocent.
And no, there’s no meaner side to me. I don’t have those “mean bones.” there’s a difference, for sure, between mean and honest. Honest, I appreciate and learn from.
I like to believe there is a “Silent Majority” who don’t have those mean bones, Barb…
Maybe someone should write an etiquette book for social media. I am the same person in the online world as I am with people I interact with in the real world. Of course, I don’t share everything there is to know about me online (or with the people in my life offline – just my personality). Once in a while I say something insensitive or I can be a little too blunt – online and offline. This is never intentional, and if I am aware of it, I try to make amends.
I can’t appreciate hiding behind anonymity online to say or do things you wouldn’t otherwise say or do. Just as there are people in the real world who are mean-spirited, they make their way to the online world. Criminals, psychopaths, and bullies exist online and offline.
My preference for social media has been blogging, which I find interesting; because, as opposed to Facebook, I don’t know the bloggers I interact with except for in online relationships. I mostly use FB to link to my blog posts. I interact with friends and family on FB once in a while, just in the news feed of status updates. I set up a FB page for my blog (separate from my personal page), but I only used it a few times. I’m not sure if I will keep it or not. I never use Twitter.
We need a “Class with the Countess” for online etiquette!?! (I love it, Robin.) We do seem to have so many social media options, it can be a challenge to pick and choose. (Curious if you find that to be the case.)
As for Twitter, it’s great for writers – for listening / reading as well as connecting.
D. – I love a Bravo housewive’s reference 🙂
The social media options! Yes, there are so many that I do find it can be a challenge to choose. I often wonder how people manage to find time to interact with multiple social media sites and platforms.
I haven’t checked out Twitter in a while. It might be a good challenge for me. It would force me to self-edit to keep to their 140-character limit 🙂
It’s all about headlines & hashtags, Robin. But it’s actually an intriguing way to get various perspectives on subjects from people and organizations all over the world – quite quickly, when you get the hang of it. You have to filter out the noise, of course, but that’s true in everything.
Ah yes. The Housewives as cultural reference point. It’s the false eyelashes that do it for me… Your fave part, Robin?
I don’t read my Twitter feed much. Most of the interesting things I found being said were by people whose blogs I was already reading. So many posts, so little time. Facebook seemed fine to keep up with friends I’d lost touch with, but I couldn’t stand the rudeness. Not find the rudeness of comments there, the rudeness of the people who run Facebook–always changing the rules, always presuming, always invading privacy.
I use all of them, although I use Twitter mainly when I’m teaching as an example of how to use social media for strategic communication. While social media venues can and should be integrated, it’s easy to use them for different purposes. Facebook has long been a cesspool of indiscretion, but Twitter can result in equally caustic knee-jerk reactions…in a more concise manner! Although social media is designed to be transparent and facilitate communication, it’s too easy to present a false impression of yourself and life. Some people take liberties with the semi-anonyminity of it and find their fingers can type thoughts much faster than their brain can process them. 🙂 All in all I think there are fantastic uses for social media, but as with everything else, the temptation to abuse it will always be there.
I mainly use blogging and Facebook for my social media networking. I am on twitter, but my participation is limited. There are probably benefits of Twitter that I am missing, but with email, texting, phone calls and blogging I am burned out from using too much technology. Because of this information overload, I’ve stayed away from pinterest too.