Someone Is Wrong on the Internet: Having Hard Conversations in Online Spaces

Video

DOI

People frequently turn to online spaces to debate ideas and discuss interpersonal issues, however these online interactions more often polarize people and damage relationships than their offline equivalencies. This raises the question: how does designs support or undermine users during online arguments? We conducted a three-phase study, including interviews, a survey, and a storyboard design evaluation with 257 total participants to learn about their experiences arguing online and how design shapes this experience. We found that participants want to have hard conversations online more often than they do today. Participants said that certain designs, like easily moving to a more private channel, make constructive arguments more feasible. Other features inhibit hard conversations, such as interfaces that hide comments. We then evaluated 12 novel user-driven designs to support constructive arguments, which revealed a common set of perceived benefits and risks. We contribute empirical data about users' current experiences arguing online and a set of design approaches--and their attendent risks and benefits--to support users in arguing well.