Cited by 79Psychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentSocial Media and PoliticsEmotions and Moral Behavior

How effective is online outrage?

Open access
Brady, William J., Crockett, M.J.·2019·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

In today’s polarized political climate, it is important to consider how moral emotions like outrage can be harnessed for good. Spring et al. [ 1 Spring V. et al. The upside of outrage. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2018; 22: 1067-1069 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (32) Google Scholar ] thoughtfully examine the ‘upsides’ of moral outrage, suggesting it can create positive social consequences by catalyzing collective action. To illustrate this, they argue that sharing outrage on social media creates common knowledge and organizes collective behavior around important moral issues. We agree that moral outrage can have positive social consequences [ 2 Crockett M.J. Moral outrage in the digital age. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2017; 1: 769-771 Crossref PubMed Scopus (172) Google Scholar ], but suggest that online outrage has more downsides than upsides. In the context of social media, outrage may reduce the effectiveness of collective action and limit participation in the public square.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2018.11.004

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brady, W. J., & Crockett, M. J.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Crockett, M.J.
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-02
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
79-80
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2905840940
Cited by
79
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Funders
  • NSF (#1808868)
  • Democracy Fund (#R-201809-03031)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
Keywords
moral outrage, social media, collective action, political polarization, common knowledge, citizen participation, moral emotions
MeSH terms
Morals, Politics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review