4.7 Article

Sharing unwanted sexual experiences online: A cross-platform analysis of disclosures before, during and after the #MeToo movement

期刊

COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR
卷 144, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2023.107724

关键词

MeToo; Social media; Online disclosure; Sexual violence; Victim; Twitter; Facebook

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Online disclosure of sexual violence victimisation is a new phenomenon. This study compares disclosures across platforms over two years, finding differences in timing, information shared, and content. The exclusive focus on Twitter and viral movements gives a biased picture, while a cross-platform analysis allows for more universal statements about online disclosures of sexual victimisation in terms of content and context.
Online disclosure of sexual violence victimisation is a relatively new phenomenon. While prior research has mainly relied on analysis of Twitter data from the #MeToo period, this study compares such disclosures across platforms over two years. Using machine learning, 2927 disclosures were identified for quantitative content analysis and multiple correspondence analysis. Online platforms differed in timing of the posts, information shared, information density, co-occurrence of information and the length of the disclosure message. Most dis-closures were found on the platform Twitter, and during the #MeToo movement. These posts differ from dis-closures on other platforms and outside the viral movement. Regarding the content, across all platforms and periods, clustering was found around offender-oriented information, making the offender an explicit part of the experience. This study shows that an exclusive focus on online disclosures on Twitter and during viral move-ments gives a biased and incomplete picture of what online disclosure of sexual victimisation entails. Our cross-platform analysis over time allows for more universal statements about the content and context of online dis-closures of sexual victimisation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据