Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Unpacking uncivil society Cover

Unpacking uncivil society

Nordicom Review
Volume 42 (2021): Issue s1 (March 2021)
By: Dayei Oh,  Suzanne Elayan,  Martin Sykora and  John Downey  
Open Access
|Mar 2021

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Number of sample tweets, April–June 2018Comments: The figure shows the distribution of the tweets (n = 2,949) during the data collection (13 April to 4 June). The number of overall participation had its peak on 25 May, the referendum voting day. A day before (24 May) and a day after the voting day (May 26) also had increased participations than other days. 44 per cent of the total tweets (n = 1,302) were made during these three days.
Number of sample tweets, April–June 2018Comments: The figure shows the distribution of the tweets (n = 2,949) during the data collection (13 April to 4 June). The number of overall participation had its peak on 25 May, the referendum voting day. A day before (24 May) and a day after the voting day (May 26) also had increased participations than other days. 44 per cent of the total tweets (n = 1,302) were made during these three days.

Figure 2

Number of incivil and intolerant tweets, April–June 2018Comments: The figure shows the distribution of the incivil (n = 413) and intolerant tweets (n = 138) during the data collection (13 April to 4 June). The number of incivil and intolerant tweets had their peaks on 25 May, the referendum voting day. A day before (24 May) and a day after the voting day (26 May) also had an increased number of incivility and intolerance than other days. 34 per cent of the incivil tweets (n = 141) and 30 per cent of intolerant tweets (n = 41) were made in these three days.
Number of incivil and intolerant tweets, April–June 2018Comments: The figure shows the distribution of the incivil (n = 413) and intolerant tweets (n = 138) during the data collection (13 April to 4 June). The number of incivil and intolerant tweets had their peaks on 25 May, the referendum voting day. A day before (24 May) and a day after the voting day (26 May) also had an increased number of incivility and intolerance than other days. 34 per cent of the incivil tweets (n = 141) and 30 per cent of intolerant tweets (n = 41) were made in these three days.

Distribution of gender and political position in the sample

Pro-choiceAnti-choiceUnidentifiable
Female (total = 1,122)912 (81% within gender, 41% within position)143 (13% within gender, 29% within position)67 (6% within gender, 31% within position)
Male (total = 742)528 (71% within gender, 24% within position)139 (19% within gender, 28% within position)75 (10% within gender, 35% within position)
Unidentifiable (total = 1,085)797 (74% within gender, 36% within position)214 (20% within gender, 43% within position)74 (7% within gender, 34% within position)
Total2,237496216
Chi-square (χ2)36.497***
Phi (φ).111

Prevalence of incivility and intolerance based on political positions of the users

IncivilityIntolerance
Pro-choice (n = 2,237)279 (13% within position, 68% within incivility)39 (2% within position, 28% within intolerance
Anti-choice (n = 496)112 (23 within position, 27% within incivility)99 (20% within position, 72% within intolerance)
Unidentifiable (n = 216)22 (10% within position, 5% within incivility)0 (0% within position, 0% within intolerance)
Total413138
Chi-square (χ2)37.269***313.463***
Phi (φ).112.326

Prevalence of incivility and intolerance based on gender of the users

IncivilityIntolerance
Female (n = 1,122)129 (12% within gender, 31% within incivility)37 (3% within gender, 27% within intolerance)
Male (n = 742)119 (16% within gender, 29% within incivility)39 (5% within gender, 28% within intolerance)
Unidentifiable (n = 1,085)165 (15% within gender, 40% within incivility)62 (6% within gender, 45% within intolerance)
Total413138
Chi-square (χ2)9.707**7.960*
Phi (φ).057.052

Crosstabulation of incivility and intolerance

TolerantIntolerantTotal
Civil2,447 (97% within incivility, 87% within intolerance)89 (4% within incivility, 65% within intolerance)2,536
Incivil364 (88% within incivility, 13% within intolerance)49 (12% within incivility, 36% within intolerance)413
Total2,811138
Chi-square (χ2)55.580***
Phi (φ).137
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2021-0009 | Journal eISSN: 2001-5119 | Journal ISSN: 1403-1108
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 103 - 118
Published on: Mar 3, 2021
Published by: University of Gothenburg Nordicom
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year
Keywords:
uncivil society,
incivility,
intolerance,
Twitter public sphere,
Irish abortion referendum
Related subjects:
Social sciences,
Communication science,
Public and political communication,
Mass communication

© 2021 Dayei Oh, Suzanne Elayan, Martin Sykora, John Downey, published by University of Gothenburg Nordicom
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 42 (2021): Issue s1 (March 2021)Next article