Bystanders’ perceptions on online hate speech: Investigating the effects of perpetrators’ justifications and the bystander’s role on bystanders’ attitude and prosocial intervention intentions

On social media, users are exposed to online hate speech (OHS), which is a type of speech that attacks a person or a group based on a group characteristic, e.g., gender identity or sexual orientation. Not every bystander evaluates OHS as offensive and/or feels the need to intervene, which can lead to the continuation of OHS and damaging consequences for victims. The goal of the present study was to understand attitudinal and behavioral components of bystanders’ perceptions on OHS by investigating content-related, contextual, and personal characteristics. More precisely, the effects of the presence or absence of online moral disengagement strategies or moral excuses in OHS messages (e.g., “I’m posting this because it doesn't hurt if I share my opinion online”) and the bystander’s role (pure bystander or vicarious victim) on bystanders’ attitudes and behaviors were tested, while controlling for previous experience with OHS and connectedness with the target group. To this aim, a repeated measures experiment (5x2x2 mixed design) was conducted among 633 adults aged 18–25. The results indicated no difference in bystanders’ perceived offensiveness of OHS and intention to intervene when exposed to OHS containing a moral excuse compared to OHS without. When bystanders were vicarious victims (being exposed to OHS targeting an individual with whom the bystander shares the targeted group characteristic), OHS was perceived as more offensive and bystanders had a higher intention to intervene with prosocial bystander behavior, compared to when bystanders did not share the group characteristic. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.