<p>From <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/opinion/30zhuo.html">an article by the NY times</a>.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Trolling, defined as the act of posting inflammatory, derogatory or
  provocative messages in public forums, is a problem as old as the
  Internet itself, although its roots go much farther back. Even in the
  fourth century B.C., Plato touched upon the subject of anonymity and
  morality in his parable of the ring of Gyges.</p>
  
  <p>...</p>
  
  <p>Psychological research has proven again and again that anonymity
  increases unethical behavior. Road rage bubbles up in the relative
  anonymity of one’s car. And in the online world, which can offer total
  anonymity, the effect is even more pronounced. People — even ordinary,
  good people — often change their behavior in radical ways. There’s
  even a term for it: the <strong><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect">online disinhibition effect</a></strong>.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-01-19T23:35:32.730Z
This answer of course isn't scientific enough, so please don't feel obliged to up vote it. It is however a start. :)
Steven Jeuris
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-02-01T13:46:31.157Z
I realized (at least for me) that when it comes to the vehicle it's actually seems to dissociation - I see the other drivers on the road as *vehicles*, not people (in fact I make comments to myself using their make/model). And I feel exceedingly awkward when I have road rage towards "someone" and then I realize I know them personally. I'm not terribly familiar with this area of research, just my own empirical evidence and possibly subjective interpretations. YMMV
Wayne Werner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-01-19T23:34:04.543Z
2012-01-19T23:34:04.543Z
Steven Jeuris
<p>The article, <a href="http://cognitionandculture.net/blogs/olivier-morin/conversation-hackers/" rel="noreferrer">&quot;Conversation Hackers&quot;</a>, by the International Cognition &amp; Culture Institute describes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Trolls happen to possess to an extreme degree a motivation that is common to all humans: a motivation to argue. That motivation is specific to argumentation itself, and can be satisfied even when the usual goals of argumentation – convincing someone of thinking or doing something – have not been met at all. We readily argue with people we have no realistic hope of convincing. Trolls are special because 1) this motivation is very powerful in them and 2) they don't just seize occasions of satisfying it as they present themselves ; sometimes, they deliberately create these occasions, by setting up rigged conversations.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The article mentiones Sperber and Mercier's &quot;<a href="http://www.dan.sperber.fr/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/MercierSperberWhydohumansreason.pdf" rel="noreferrer">argumentative theory</a>&quot; of human reasoning, which is a fascinating paper in its own right.</p>
<h3>References</h3>
<ul>
<li>Mercier, H. and Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? arguments for
an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(02):57-74. <a href="http://www.dan.sperber.fr/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/MercierSperberWhydohumansreason.pdf" rel="noreferrer">FREE PDF</a></li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2012-02-01T11:06:28.297Z
2019-12-22T00:36:35.873Z
2020-06-17T09:55:31.633Z
Morendil
<p>Trolling is a complex subject now under serious study in science fields (e.g. sociology, psychology, social networking, etc.), but arguably it is not new behavior. Something like it has probably existed as long as humans have, even though the term &quot;trolling&quot; seems to originate in cyberspace. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolling#Origin_and_etymology" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia etymology</a> indicates it significantly predates cyberspace. Imagine comments or cartoons left on a public bulletin board, or even <em>graffiti</em> could be seen as a form/type of &quot;trolling&quot;. Anonymity/pseudonymity certainly relate to it (possibly increasing it), but of course it happens even with full identification.</p>
<p>Certainly cyberspace seems to possess aspects that can amplify the behavior. However, people sometimes just use the word &quot;troll&quot; as a derogatory epithet against people they merely don't like/disagree with, or e.g. those who are sarcastic with genuine but controversial views, so it can sometimes be really difficult to classify objectively. Somewhat like other terms such as &quot;stalker&quot;, &quot;sexual harassment&quot;, &quot;sexual offender&quot; etc., it's a &quot;hot button&quot; term with definition that can apparently shift significantly depending on context, and that carries high charge in cyberspace &amp; modern era. It also ties in with an increase in social awareness/sensitivity of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying" rel="nofollow noreferrer">bullying</a>. It also has connections to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossip" rel="nofollow noreferrer">gossip</a>.</p>
<p>Just ran across this new scientific paper (Feb. 2014) apparently getting major media coverage that states it's correlated with what is known as the so-called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_triad#Similar_concepts" rel="nofollow noreferrer">&quot;dark tetrad&quot;</a> of character features.</p>
<ul>
<li><p><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886914000324" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Trolls just want to have fun</a>. <em>Journal of Personality and Individual Differences,</em> Erin E. Buckels, Paul D. Trapnell, Delroy L. Paulhus:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In two online studies (total <span class="math-container">$N = 1215$</span>), respondents completed personality inventories and a survey of their Internet commenting styles. Overall, strong positive associations emerged among online commenting frequency, trolling enjoyment, and troll identity, pointing to a common construct underlying the measures. Both studies revealed similar patterns of relations between trolling and the Dark Tetrad of personality: trolling correlated positively with sadism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism, using both enjoyment ratings and identity scores. Of all personality measures, sadism showed the most robust associations with trolling and, importantly, the relationship was specific to trolling behavior. Enjoyment of other online activities, such as chatting and debating, was unrelated to sadism. Thus cyber-trolling appears to be an Internet manifestation of everyday sadism.</p>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-03-07T10:13:09.040Z
Dark tetrad huh! Hadn't heard of that version...cool! Interesting there's no relationship with narcissism mentioned...
Nick Stauner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-03-07T10:27:25.817Z
BTW, ["Trolls just want to have fun" is freely available online](http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/trolls-just-want-to-have-fun.pdf).
Nick Stauner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-03-07T16:48:11.340Z
yes from paper, the tetrad is: narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadistic personality. it adds sadism to the more standard triad (wikipedia article). "tetrad" is an apparently newer concept.
vzn
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-03-06T19:23:07.267Z
2014-03-07T10:26:39.940Z
2020-06-17T09:55:31.633Z
vzn
<p>There are a few references to the scientific literature on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29#Trolling.2C_identity.2C_and_anonymity">trolling in the wikipedia article</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Some psychologists have suggested that flaming would be caused by
  deindividuation or decreased self-evaluation: the anonymity of online
  postings would lead to disinhibition amongst individuals (Kiesler et al, 1984). Others
  have suggested that although flaming and trolling is often unpleasant,
  it may be a form of normative behavior that expresses the social
  identity of a certain user group (Lea et al, 1992; Postmes et al, 1998).</p>
</blockquote>

<h3>References</h3>

<ul>
<li>Kiesler, S. , J. Siegel and T.W. McGuire (1984). "Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication". American Psychologist 39 (10): 1123–1134. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.39.10.1123. <a href="http://www.mendeley.com/research/social-psychological-aspects-computermediated-communication/#">LINK</a></li>
<li>Lea, M., T. O'Shea, P. Fung and R. Spears (1992). "'Flaming' in Computer-Mediated Communication: observation, explanations, implications". Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication: 89–112.</li>
<li>Postmes, T., Spears, R., &amp; Lea, M. (1998). "Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication". Communication Research (25): 689–715. <a href="http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/martin.lea/papers/1998-EJ%20Postmes%20Spears%20Lea%20Boundaries%20CR.pdf">FREE PDF</a></li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-02-01T03:35:31.970Z
2012-02-01T03:35:31.970Z
Jeromy Anglim
<p>For those new to the internet, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29">trolling</a> is an activity where one person intentionally tries to upset other members of the same community, presumably for entertainment. </p>

<p>This has been informally addressed in the media, normally positing that the anonymity of the internet gives rise to more extreme behaviors, </p>

<ul>
<li>but is that the explanation research supports? </li>
<li>And if it is, how does the process of enabling occur?</li>
<li>And more broadly, why do people derive pleasure from the anger of others within the same group?</li>
<li>Lastly, is this behavioral phenomenon unique to the internet era, or are there historical predecessors involving similar causal mechanisms?</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-11-14T17:42:15.080Z
An important distinction must be made between actual trolls and people who have something to say publicly about something they disagree with with, and who are labelled *trolls* by people who either don't understand their ideas or are against their ideas and accuse them of being trolls to prevent the real matter to be discussed. I believe that this second form is more common than the first.
WaterBearer
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-01-19T23:27:59.217Z
[Nonscientific answer](http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/)
Zelda
<abnormal-psychology><social-psychology><internet>
What is the psychology behind trolling?
zergylord
# What is the psychology behind trolling?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-01-19)

For those new to the internet, [trolling](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29) is an activity where one person intentionally tries to upset other members of the same community, presumably for entertainment.

This has been informally addressed in the media, normally positing that the anonymity of the internet gives rise to more extreme behaviors,

* but is that the explanation research supports?
* And if it is, how does the process of enabling occur?
* And more broadly, why do people derive pleasure from the anger of others within the same group?
* Lastly, is this behavioral phenomenon unique to the internet era, or are there historical predecessors involving similar causal mechanisms?

**Tags:** abnormal-psychology, social-psychology, internet

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: [Nonscientific answer](http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/)  
> **username_1**: An important distinction must be made between actual trolls and people who have something to say publicly about something they disagree with with, and who are labelled *trolls* by people who either don't understand their ideas or are against their ideas and accuse them of being trolls to prevent the real matter to be discussed. I believe that this second form is more common than the first.  

---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_8 on 2012-02-01. Score: 21 | Accepted answer

There are a few references to the scientific literature on [trolling in the wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29#Trolling.2C_identity.2C_and_anonymity)

> Some psychologists have suggested that flaming would be caused by
> deindividuation or decreased self-evaluation: the anonymity of online
> postings would lead to disinhibition amongst individuals (Kiesler et al, 1984). Others
> have suggested that although flaming and trolling is often unpleasant,
> it may be a form of normative behavior that expresses the social
> identity of a certain user group (Lea et al, 1992; Postmes et al, 1998).

### References

* Kiesler, S. , J. Siegel and T.W. McGuire (1984). "Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication". American Psychologist 39 (10): 1123–1134. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.39.10.1123. [LINK](http://www.mendeley.com/research/social-psychological-aspects-computermediated-communication/#)
* Lea, M., T. O'Shea, P. Fung and R. Spears (1992). "'Flaming' in Computer-Mediated Communication: observation, explanations, implications". Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication: 89–112.
* Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). "Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication". Communication Research (25): 689–715. [FREE PDF](http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/martin.lea/papers/1998-EJ%20Postmes%20Spears%20Lea%20Boundaries%20CR.pdf)


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2012-01-19. Score: 14

From [an article by the NY times](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/opinion/30zhuo.html).

> Trolling, defined as the act of posting inflammatory, derogatory or
> provocative messages in public forums, is a problem as old as the
> Internet itself, although its roots go much farther back. Even in the
> fourth century B.C., Plato touched upon the subject of anonymity and
> morality in his parable of the ring of Gyges.
>
> ...
>
> Psychological research has proven again and again that anonymity
> increases unethical behavior. Road rage bubbles up in the relative
> anonymity of one’s car. And in the online world, which can offer total
> anonymity, the effect is even more pronounced. People — even ordinary,
> good people — often change their behavior in radical ways. There’s
> even a term for it: the **[online disinhibition effect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect)**.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: This answer of course isn't scientific enough, so please don't feel obliged to up vote it. It is however a start. :)  
> **username_4**: I realized (at least for me) that when it comes to the vehicle it's actually seems to dissociation - I see the other drivers on the road as *vehicles*, not people (in fact I make comments to myself using their make/model). And I feel exceedingly awkward when I have road rage towards "someone" and then I realize I know them personally. I'm not terribly familiar with this area of research, just my own empirical evidence and possibly subjective interpretations. YMMV  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2012-02-01. Score: 11

The article, ["Conversation Hackers"](http://cognitionandculture.net/blogs/olivier-morin/conversation-hackers/), by the International Cognition & Culture Institute describes:

> Trolls happen to possess to an extreme degree a motivation that is common to all humans: a motivation to argue. That motivation is specific to argumentation itself, and can be satisfied even when the usual goals of argumentation – convincing someone of thinking or doing something – have not been met at all. We readily argue with people we have no realistic hope of convincing. Trolls are special because 1) this motivation is very powerful in them and 2) they don't just seize occasions of satisfying it as they present themselves ; sometimes, they deliberately create these occasions, by setting up rigged conversations.

The article mentiones Sperber and Mercier's "[argumentative theory](http://www.dan.sperber.fr/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/MercierSperberWhydohumansreason.pdf)" of human reasoning, which is a fascinating paper in its own right.

### References

* Mercier, H. and Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? arguments for
  an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(02):57-74. [FREE PDF](http://www.dan.sperber.fr/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/MercierSperberWhydohumansreason.pdf)


---

### Answer by username_6 on 2014-03-06. Score: 4

Trolling is a complex subject now under serious study in science fields (e.g. sociology, psychology, social networking, etc.), but arguably it is not new behavior. Something like it has probably existed as long as humans have, even though the term "trolling" seems to originate in cyberspace. [Wikipedia etymology](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolling#Origin_and_etymology) indicates it significantly predates cyberspace. Imagine comments or cartoons left on a public bulletin board, or even *graffiti* could be seen as a form/type of "trolling". Anonymity/pseudonymity certainly relate to it (possibly increasing it), but of course it happens even with full identification.

Certainly cyberspace seems to possess aspects that can amplify the behavior. However, people sometimes just use the word "troll" as a derogatory epithet against people they merely don't like/disagree with, or e.g. those who are sarcastic with genuine but controversial views, so it can sometimes be really difficult to classify objectively. Somewhat like other terms such as "stalker", "sexual harassment", "sexual offender" etc., it's a "hot button" term with definition that can apparently shift significantly depending on context, and that carries high charge in cyberspace & modern era. It also ties in with an increase in social awareness/sensitivity of [bullying](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying). It also has connections to [gossip](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossip).

Just ran across this new scientific paper (Feb. 2014) apparently getting major media coverage that states it's correlated with what is known as the so-called ["dark tetrad"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_triad#Similar_concepts) of character features.

* [Trolls just want to have fun](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886914000324). *Journal of Personality and Individual Differences,* Erin E. Buckels, Paul D. Trapnell, Delroy L. Paulhus:

  > In two online studies (total $N = 1215$), respondents completed personality inventories and a survey of their Internet commenting styles. Overall, strong positive associations emerged among online commenting frequency, trolling enjoyment, and troll identity, pointing to a common construct underlying the measures. Both studies revealed similar patterns of relations between trolling and the Dark Tetrad of personality: trolling correlated positively with sadism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism, using both enjoyment ratings and identity scores. Of all personality measures, sadism showed the most robust associations with trolling and, importantly, the relationship was specific to trolling behavior. Enjoyment of other online activities, such as chatting and debating, was unrelated to sadism. Thus cyber-trolling appears to be an Internet manifestation of everyday sadism.

> **Comments:**
> **username_7**: Dark tetrad huh! Hadn't heard of that version...cool! Interesting there's no relationship with narcissism mentioned...  
> **username_7**: BTW, ["Trolls just want to have fun" is freely available online](http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/trolls-just-want-to-have-fun.pdf).  
> **username_6**: yes from paper, the tetrad is: narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadistic personality. it adds sadism to the more standard triad (wikipedia article). "tetrad" is an apparently newer concept.  

---

