The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reconceptualizing ‘flaming’ and other problematic messages
Abstract
Researchers examining ‘flaming’ - defined as hostile and aggressive interactions via text-based computer mediated-communication - have proposed theoretical frameworks to explain possible causes. However, precise conceptual and operational definitions of ‘flaming’ have yet to be established, which has implications for understanding this phenomenon. Consequently, we propose an interactional- normative framework that focuses on interpretations of messages from multiple perspectives in the situated and evolving context of appropriateness norms. This framework incorporates intentionality and individuals’ strategic choices in language use and channel selection. We discuss the implications of this framework for research on flaming and other problematic interactions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
BERGER, C. R., & CALABRESE, R. J. (1975) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x · Cited by 3,006
Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.10.1123 · Cited by 2,630
CHANNEL EXPANSION THEORY AND THE EXPERIENTIAL NATURE OF MEDIA RICHNESS PERCEPTIONS.
Carlson, J. R., & Zmud, R. W. (1999) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/257090 · Cited by 1,270
Panacea or Panopticon?: The Hidden Power in Computer-Mediated Communication
SPEARS, R., & LEA, M. (1994) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/009365094021004001 · Cited by 705
Deindividuation and antinormative behavior: a meta-analysis
Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.123.3.238 · Cited by 667 · cited 3×
“In fact, evidence suggests that CMC environments might actually serve to strengthen adherence to group norms and that de-individuating circumstances have little impact on behavior that is anti-normative according to social norms (Postmes and Spears, 1998; Postmes et al., 2000).”
Background
Cited by
Online and Uncivil? Patterns and Determinants of Incivility in Newspaper Website Comments
Coe, K., Kenski, K., & Rains, S. A. (2014) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/jcom.12104 · Cited by 964
Defining Cyberbullying: A Qualitative Research into the Perceptions of Youngsters
Vandebosch, H., & Van Cleemput, K. (2008) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0042 · Cited by 663
Cyberbullying among youngsters: profiles of bullies and victims
Vandebosch, H., & Van Cleemput, K. (2009) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444809341263 · Cited by 555
Changing Deliberative Norms on News Organizations' Facebook Sites
Stroud, N. J., Scacco, J. M., Muddiman, A., & Curry, A. L. (2015) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/jcc4.12104 · Cited by 276
Online Abuse of Feminists as An Emerging form of Violence Against Women and Girls
Lewis, R., Rowe, M., & Wiper, C. (2016) · British Journal of Criminology · doi:10.1093/bjc/azw073 · Cited by 195
Metadata
- Authors
- O’Sullivan, P. B., & Flanagin, A. J.
- Venue
- New Media & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2003-03
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 69-94
- ISSN
- 1461-4448 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7315
- OpenAlex
- W2092672023
- Cited by
- 303
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 6.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reconceptualizing ‘flaming’ and other problematic messages. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1461444803005001908
- The paper
- O’Sullivan, P. B., & Flanagin, A. J. (2003). Reconceptualizing ‘flaming’ and other problematic messages. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444803005001908
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
