Online hostility poses a growing societal challenge, yet quantitative evidence on how social media users respond to different kinds of hostility targeting different identities is limited, even though insights into bystander perceptions are detrimental to combat the online hate endemic. This online experiment ( N = 461) examines cognitive (perceived acceptability), affective (negative emotions), and behavioral (intervention intentions) responses to varyingly hostile comments (impolite vs uncivil vs intolerant) directed at a female science communicator with different ethnic (Black vs White) and LGBTQIA+ identity cues (heterosexual vs homosexual vs trans), thus shedding light on intersectional identities comprising social group affiliations with varying levels of marginalization. While intolerance triggered stronger emotional reactions than impoliteness and incivility (likely due to its discriminatory nature), participants were, somewhat paradoxically, more inclined to act (and advocated for more institutional action) against incivility. Furthermore, ethnic cues had a much stronger influence than LGBTQIA+ identity cues across response domains.

中文翻译：

---

Digital She-nanigans：社交媒体用户对针对具有边缘化身份的女性科学传播者的在线敌对行动的反应

在线敌意构成了日益严重的社会挑战，但关于社交媒体用户如何应对针对不同身份的不同类型的敌意的定量证据是有限的，尽管对旁观者看法的洞察不利于打击在线仇恨流行病。这个在线实验 （N = 461） 检查了对针对具有不同种族（黑人与白人）和 LGBTQIA+ 身份线索（异性恋 vs 同性恋 vs 跨性别）的女性科学传播者的不同敌对评论（不礼貌 vs 不文明 vs 不宽容）的认知（感知可接受性）、情感（负面情绪）和行为（干预意图）的反应，从而揭示了由具有不同边缘化程度的社会群体隶属关系组成的交叉身份。 虽然不宽容比不礼貌和不文明行为引发了更强烈的情绪反应（可能是由于其歧视性），但有点矛盾的是，参与者更倾向于采取行动（并倡导采取更多制度性行动）反对不文明行为。此外，在响应域中，种族线索的影响比 LGBTQIA+ 身份线索强得多。