Students' participation in social networks' conflicts (based on the materials of a sociological study of Barnaul universities)

Akhmedova Angelina Rustamovna Assistant, Department of General Sociology and Conflictology, Altai State University 656049, Russia, Altai Krai, Barnaul, Dimitrova str., 66, office 520 axmedovaangelina@mail.ru Other publications by this author     Chukanova Tat'yana Viktorovna PhD in Sociology Associate Professor, Department of Social and Youth Policy, Altai State University 656011, Russia, Altai Krai, Barnaul, Dimitrova str., 66, office 515 chukanova@socio.asu.ru Other publications by this author     Vakker Polina Andreevna Lecturer, Department of Sociology and Conflictology, Altai State University 656011, Russia, Altai Krai, Barnaul, Dimitrova str., 66, office 520 vpa@mc.asu.ru Other publications by this author     Zheldakova Arina Vladimirovna Student, Department of Sociology and Conflictology, Altai State University 656049, Russia, Altai region, Barnaul, Dimitrova str., 66, room 520 arina.zheldakova@gmail.com Other publications by this author     Medvedeva Margarita Vyacheslavovna Student, Department of Sociology and Conflictology, Altai State University 656049, Russia, Altai region, Barnaul, Dimitrova str., 66, office 520 margaritochkamed@gmail.com Other publications by this author

Makamov Danil Kholmirodovich Student, Department of Sociology and Conflictology, Altai State University 656049, Russia, Altai Krai, Barnaul, Chervonnaya str., 5 migelion2020@gmail.com

Introduction

In the modern world, there is a significant number of collisions in the Internet space, which occur not only in personal communication online, but also on various social networks with a large number of participants. Almost any social network that supports the function of discussion, commenting on the information provided, allows you to observe a number of pre-conflict and conflict situations. Despite the fact that the space in which communication takes place is virtual, the consequences of conflicts in it can be more than real, both for an individual and for a number of participants. Conflict situations can have an impact on the daily life of opponents and collectively affect social processes in society.

Of particular interest is the study of students' participation in conflicts in social networks, as they are one of the most numerous user groups and represent a powerful potential for the development of society. This article describes the practices of Barnaul students' participation in conflicts in social networks.

Scientific elaboration of the problem

To begin with, let's consider the very concept of conflict in social networks. It is worth immediately making a reservation that at the moment there are no generally accepted definitions of this concept. In order to still determine its content, we will break it into two parts – "conflict" and "social network".

In her work "Socialization of youth in the context of social networks," Fokina E.S. writes that a social network is an interactive multi–user platform that is filled by the network participants themselves. ^[1] From here we can highlight the first feature of the social network – the fullness of its users.

Dmitrieva Yu.N. highlights some more features of the social network. Mandatory creation of a user profile, in which you need to specify as much information about yourself as possible (full name, place of birth, place of residence, date of birth, occupation, education, hobbies, etc.). ^[2] However, this is not a necessary criterion in all social networks. Users can come up with a "fake" first and last name, indicate a fake place of study and work, and so on. Thus, the user gets the opportunity of anonymity in the network. Danilova A.S. identifies two reasons for depersonalization of profiles in the social network. Firstly, there is less chance of being recognized, which means there is less chance of being held accountable for their words. Secondly, an impersonal profile is less susceptible to backlash and insults, because there is simply nothing to attract an empty account to mutual insults ^[3].

The function of adding "friends" of the user. Most of the "friends" are the user's real friends, relatives, work colleagues, classmates. ^[2] Yes, this is the case, but it all depends on the preferences of the person. Some users may add complete strangers as friends, pursuing various goals, not always noble.

The social network is a multi-user website with a wide range of opportunities for information exchange (the ability to upload photos, videos, music, create groups, communities, meetings, mark a location on a map, and much more). And the capabilities of such services are constantly expanding ^[2]. Yes, indeed, you can freely share your creativity online, create interest groups, organize meetings, and so on. And now let's look at it a little from the other side – users whose tastes and values are very, very diverse have gathered in one Internet space and express their opinions about various things.

Let's also consider the psychological features of communication in social networks, which Gulevich O.A. mentions in his work "Psychology of Communication". Firstly, this is increased verbal activity caused by the almost complete disappearance of communicative barriers of live communication. ^[4] And indeed, in a social network, the chance of technical, phonetic and spatio-temporal barriers is significantly lower than in real life.

Secondly, the discontinuity, mosaic of communication; people involved in rapid communication, in the absence of visual and auditory information, commit short and egocentric communicative acts. ^[4] This can be observed by the example of correspondence of many users in personal chats. Most of the messages are very short and abrupt.

Thirdly, it is a specific etiquette of communication, a new language. ^[4] The ease of Internet communication leads to the fact that many rules of politeness are lost, the classic "good morning, good afternoon" are often missed, and the interlocutor immediately goes to the essence of what he wanted to communicate.

Fourth, it is the emotionality of communication: trying to make up for the lack of nonverbal communication, users often write messages that include emoji (words and icons denoting emotions); – emotional state during communication. The experience of "flow", which is distinguished by the following features: immersion in activity, change of the object of activity, a sense of pleasure, loss of a sense of time, a sense of control over the situation. ^[4] It is difficult to imagine that, given the above-mentioned features of social networks and the peculiarities of communication in them, such communication can do without conflicts.

Next, we define the concept of conflict as a whole. Well–known scientists Antsupov A.Ya. and Shipilov A.I. believe that conflict is the most acute way to resolve significant contradictions arising in the process of interaction, consisting in countering the subjects of the conflict and usually accompanied by negative emotions.^[5]

Kozyrev G.I., believes that conflict is an open confrontation, a clash of two or more subjects and participants of social interaction, the causes of which are incompatible needs, interests and values.^[6] According to Professor Y.G. Zaprudsky, a conflict is an explicit or hidden state of confrontation between objectively divergent interests, goals and trends in the development of social objects, a direct and indirect clash of social forces on the basis of opposition to the existing social order.^[7]

Analyzing these definitions, one can see that in each of them the conflict is a counteraction, a confrontation arising as a result of some (significant) contradictions.  As mentioned above, there are many potential contradictions among users of the social network – different tastes in art, creativity, looking at any news, and so on.

It is also necessary to define the type of conflict under consideration, namely the conflict in the social network. So, a conflict in a social network is an acute way of resolving significant contradictions that arise in the process of interaction in an interactive multi-user platform, which consists in countering the subjects of the conflict through virtual communication.

The conflict in the social network has a number of features due to the specifics of Internet communication and social networks. The first of them is the presence of physical distance between opponents. This leads to the fact that conflict interaction occurs mainly in verbal form, without escalating into a fight. The next feature is the acceleration of interaction time and the reduction of conflict time. To some extent, this makes conflicts in social networks less destructive for participants, minimizes psychological and moral damage.

At the moment, there is no generally accepted classification of conflicts in social networks. Some scientists, however, distinguish the following special types: cyberbullying and trolling. The need for their separate study is due to the fact that participation in them causes very serious damage to users of social networks.

Cyberbullying is a young subspecies of conflict that has not yet been fully studied and substantiated. Cyberbullying is relevant because no one with access to social networks can be immune from it. Grechkina A.A. in his article "Cyberbullying as a modern threat to the psychological health of the individual" notes the main feature of cyberbullying: the use of a wide range of Internet technologies and services, which are a distinctive feature of this type of conflict ^[8]. Bochaver A.A., Khlomov K.D. in the article "Cyberbullying: harassment in the space of modern technologies" they talk about such a feature of cyberbullying as anonymity: in cyberspace, the pursuer is anonymous, and the victim has no idea about his identity ^[9].

The very concept of "cyberbullying" literally translates as "Internet harassment", that is, harassment within the Internet space. However, despite the limited Internet space, this conflict can become the property of the whole world, unlike a conventional conflict, since in the modern world the Internet is the main resource for access to information.

The cyberbullying model is very simple: a victim and a stalker united by cyberspace. The goal of the pursuer is to exert psychological pressure on the victim, destabilizing her mental state. This goal can be achieved in several ways: insults directly related to the identity of the victim;  harassment, which is systematic in nature, is characterized by its duration and, as a rule, has a purposeful nature; the spread of rumors, false information, the purpose of which is to denigrate a person, discredit her; public disclosure of personal information compromising a person; an open threat of physical or sexual violence ^[10].

         Next, consider the concept of trolling. According to R. A. Extramarital, "trolling" is a type of virtual communication with a violation of the ethics of network interaction, expressed in the form of manifestations of various forms of aggressive, bullying and abusive behavior. ^[11] Trolling can be called a real social phenomenon: "trolls are not born, they become trolls" as a result of the formation of deviant behavior in the process of education, improving the skills of aggressive and provocative cybercommunication. The subjects and objects of trolling are individuals or social groups, communication between which takes place in cyberspace.

The attitude to trolling on the web is ambiguous: some users speak extremely negatively about this, others advise to enjoy communicating with a network troll, and someone expresses methods of combating trolling. Trolling, however, can not only reduce mood, but also cause trauma to the psyche, deprive freedom of creativity and self-expression, as well as discredit a person in the eyes of others.

Next, let's look at the stages of the conflict in the social network. So, the conflicts under consideration include the same stages as real conflicts, namely the pre-conflict, the actual conflict and the post-conflict situation. 

The latent parts of the conflict (pre-conflict and post-conflict situation), however, have certain features in them due to the specifics of Internet communication. And the first of them is a certain reduction caused by the discontinuity and mosaic nature of Internet communication, as well as the absence of non–visual channels of perception. The second feature concerns the immediate post-conflict situation. In a conflict on a social network, the consequences, in the absence of close social relations, are less for the parties to the conflict, in the sense that these relations will not be able to deteriorate. However, due to the lack of information about each other, the participants in the conflict on the Internet can cause too serious damage to each other, not suspecting that the opponent may find it difficult to bear this or that act within the conflict.

Thus, we can say that conflicts in social networks have their own characteristics due to the specifics of social networks and Internet communication. The types of such conflicts are similar to the types of real conflicts, but such subspecies as cyberbullying and trolling deserve special attention due to their destructiveness for users. The stages of conflict in social networks are the same as in real conflicts, but they have a number of features.

Methodology and methods of research

Based on the understanding of conflict in social networks as an acute way to resolve significant contradictions, a methodology was developed and a sociological study was conducted among students of Barnaul, the purpose of which was to describe the practices of students' participation in conflicts in social networks. The study was implemented through a quantitative method of collecting information - a survey in the form of a questionnaire.

The general totality of the study was made up of students from Barnaul who are users of social networks. The study was conducted using a selective method. The sample totals 367 respondents. The sample size was determined by the capabilities of the researcher. A single-stage sampling was used, the selection unit was specific students. The type of sampling is targeted.

Research results

For the study, a questionnaire was developed containing the following blocks of questions: general characteristics of participation, sources of conflict, patterns of behavior in conflict, consequences of conflicts, subjective assessment of respondents regarding conflicts in social networks.

The first block of the questionnaire survey contained questions to find out which social networks students prefer, how often and for what they are used, as well as how often they become participants in conflicts in their spaces.

In order to find out which social networks and how often students prefer to use, they were asked the questions "Which social networks do you use most often?" and "How often do you use social media?". The study showed that students use Telegram most often (52.6%), Vkontakte is in second place in frequency (41.2%). This may be due to the fact that these social networks most meet the needs of users in communication and entertainment. Instagram is in last place (4.4%), and only 1.8% of respondents do not use social networks at all.

Among those who still use social networks, almost everyone does it every day (99.1%) and only a small part – 4-6 times a week (0.9%). This picture shows the very great popularity of social networks among students.

Fig. 1 Distribution of respondents' answers to the question "What do you most often use social networks for?" (as a percentage of the number of respondents)

Then, using the question "What do you most often use social networks for?", the following distribution was revealed: for communication – 50% of respondents, for leisure – 21.1%, for reading news and getting new information – 21.9% and 9% - for something else. This suggests that communication on the Internet has become one of the most popular ways of communication for students. It would be logical to assume that in this case, many of the respondents enter into conflicts in social networks during such communication, but the study showed a slightly different picture.

Table 1. Distribution of respondents' responses to the question "How often do you become a participant in a conflict in social networks?" (as a percentage of the number of respondents)

Distribution of answers to the question "How often do you become a participant in a conflict in social networks?" it showed that almost half (48.2%) of social network users do not participate in conflicts in them at all, 23.7% participate with a frequency of several times a year, 16.7% - no more than a couple of times a month, 5.3% - 1-2 times a week, 3.5% - no more than 3-4 times a week and only 2.6% almost every day. Thus, students do not often become participants in conflicts on social networks.

Analyzing the first set of questions, we can draw the following conclusions. Firstly, most students use social networks quite often and mostly do it for communication. Despite the fact that students actively communicate on social networks, almost half of them do not have conflicts, and if they do, it is very rare.

Further questions of the questionnaire were aimed at identifying the sources of conflicts in social networks.

Fig. 2 Distribution of respondents' answers to the question "With whom do you most often come into conflict?" (as a percentage of the number of respondents)

The distribution of answers to the question "With whom do you most often come into conflict?" is as follows: the majority of respondents (67.8%) conflict with strangers, a fifth – with friends, 5.1% - with relatives and 6.8% - with colleagues or classmates.  This situation is not surprising, because many people with different views and preferences interact with each other on social networks, which cannot but lead to conflicts.

Further, it was revealed in which part of the social network conflicts most often begin, in which the respondents participate. Most of them originate in comments in groups (61%), a little more than a third – in personal messages (37.3%) and only 1.7% - in posts on the wall of a specific profile. This, again, can be explained by the fact that users with different views on the published news interact in groups, which leads to clashes.

Fig. 3 Distribution of respondents' responses to the question "Have you become a victim of trolling?" (as a percentage of the number of respondents)

Important in the study was the determination of whether users became victims of trolling. The following results were obtained: the majority of respondents (40.7%) did not fall for the tricks of the troll, almost the same part came across several times, 16.9% find it difficult to answer this question and only 5.1% fell victim to the troll often. The results of the answer to this question could be influenced by a vague definition of what can be considered trolling.

Based on the results of this block of the question, the following conclusions are made. Firstly, students most often conflict on social networks with strangers and in community comments. Secondly, a third of students became victims of trolls, but not so often.

The next set of questions was aimed at determining the patterns of behavior in conflicts in social networks that respondents adhere to. To identify the duration of conflicts and the method of confrontation, the questions were asked "How long does a conflict usually last in social networks?" and "By what means does the confrontation occur?".

Table 2. Distribution of respondents' responses to the question "How long does a conflict in social networks usually last?" (as a percentage of the number of respondents)

According to the distribution of answers to these questions, the following can be said: most conflicts last no more than a couple of hours (39%), a little less – a few minutes (32.2%), about a quarter – no more than a day (22%) and only 6.8% - a few days or more. Such results indicate the transience of most conflicts in social networks.

Further, it was revealed by which the confrontation in the conflict in the social network takes place. The results are as follows: the vast majority of respondents conflict through verbal debates (84.7%) and insults (57.6%) and only 10.2% - through personal meetings. Indeed, the Internet greatly restricts the set of possible ways of confrontation in a conflict, and debates become the main one.

Table 3. Distribution of respondents' answers to the question "Do you try to avoid aggravation of conflicts?" (as a percentage of the number of respondents)

The following two questions allowed us to determine which part of the respondents prefers to avoid aggravation of the conflict, and which, on the contrary, provokes the other to conflict. According to the results of the responses, it turned out that the majority of respondents are trying to avoid aggravation of the conflict (47.5%), almost a third are more eager for this than not, and 20.4% in total do not strive or rather do not strive for it. This distribution indicates a very peaceful mood of those respondents who, for some reason, become involved in conflicts in social networks.

The distribution of answers to the question "How often do you try to provoke another person into a conflict?" allowed us to find out that the majority of respondents do not try to provoke another person into a conflict, slightly less than half do it sometimes and only 3.4% do it almost always or always. This once again confirms the "peaceful mood" of the conflicting in social networks.

Based on the results of this block, it can be concluded that most conflicts in social networks are short-lived and occur through verbal debates. It can also be noted that most students try to avoid aggravating the conflict and do not provoke others to it.

Another set of questions was aimed at determining what consequences conflicts in social networks can have. The first of them made it possible to identify whether conflicts in social networks flowed into conflicts in real life. It turned out that the majority of respondents did not notice the flow of Internet conflict into conflict in real life (62.7%), about a third sometimes had this (30.5%) and only 6.8% had it very often. Such results allow us to conclude that often the conflict arising in a social network is limited to it, which is mostly good for its participants.

Fig. 4 Distribution of respondents' responses to the question "What emotions do you experience after the end of the conflict?" (as a percentage of the number of respondents)

The next question allowed us to determine what emotions respondents experience after the conflict ends in social networks. You can see that most of them experience irritation and anger (45.8%), about a third do not experience any emotions (33.9%) and a little less – joy and satisfaction (30.5%). Fright and panic are felt by 18.6% of respondents.  It can be concluded that the majority of participants in conflicts in social networks do not receive pleasant emotions from them.

The study also included a question aimed at determining whether the attitude of respondents to social networks has changed after participating in conflicts on their territory. It was revealed that for the majority it has not changed (84.7%) and only 15.3% has changed for the worse. Such results may indicate that conflicts are not a sufficient reason to change attitudes towards such a familiar and popular thing among students as social networks.

This block of questions suggests that most of the conflicts in social networks remain within the social network itself. Such conflicts often cause irritation and anger among participants, but this does not change their attitude to social networks.

The final set of questions was aimed at identifying the respondents' subjective assessment of conflicts in social networks. The first question allowed us to find out whether students see the relationship between the level of anonymity of a person and the level of his conflict in social networks.

The majority of respondents (83.3%) believe that the higher the anonymity, the higher the conflict; 15.8% believe that anonymity and conflict are not related; only 0.9% see an inverse relationship between the level of anonymity and conflict. Indeed, when a person is sure that his opponent does not know his true identity, he can behave more conflictively, feeling his impunity.

The following question "By what signs can you determine that you have entered into a conflict?" has such a distribution of answers: 93% note negative emotions from interaction, 46.5% - the use of obscene expressions by the interlocutor and 23.7% - increased activity of the interlocutor. Thus, the main marker of entering into conflict for the majority of respondents is precisely the emotions arising from communication.

Table 4. Distribution of respondents' responses to the question "What distinguishes a conflict in social networks from a real conflict?" (as a percentage of the number of respondents)

The final question was aimed at identifying the differences between the conflict in social networks and the real conflict. The following answers were received to the question "What distinguishes a conflict in social networks from a real conflict?": 73.7% of respondents noted the presence of physical distance, 57.9% - anonymity, 47.4% - the absence of non-visual perception channels and 37.7% - acceleration of interaction time and reduction of conflict time. Thus, the most important feature of conflicts in social networks for students is the presence of physical distance, and it is difficult to disagree with this. Such a factor as the distance between the interlocutors greatly affects the course of the conflict.

Analyzing the answers of this block, we can say that most students see a connection between the level of anonymity and conflict in social networks, determine the beginning of a conflict by negative emotions from interaction and consider the presence of physical distance to be the main feature of the described conflicts.

Conclusions

Based on the analysis of data on the main indicators characterizing the practice of students' participation in conflicts in social networks, the following conclusions were made.

Firstly, the vast majority of students use social networks every day, but only half of them have participated or are involved in conflicts on their territory. For those who are still involved in such conflicts, this happens quite rarely.

Secondly, students most often conflict on social networks with strangers and in community comments. The clash of people with different views can often lead to conflicts.

Thirdly, trolling is still one of the important problems of social networks. A significant part of the (interviewed) students became victims of trolls.

Fourth, most of the conflicts in social networks in which students participate are short-lived and occur through verbal debates. This is primarily due to the fact that the Internet is very limiting the set of possible ways to confront a conflict.

Fifth, most students choose a more "peaceful" strategy of behavior: they try to avoid aggravating conflicts in social networks and do not provoke others to them.

Sixth, the irritation and anger that most students feel after a conflict in social networks does not change their attitude to social networks themselves.

Seventh, many students determine the beginning of a conflict in a social network by negative emotions from interaction and consider the presence of physical distance to be the main feature of the described conflicts.

            I would also like to note that there are very, very few studies of conflicts in social networks at the moment, which is due to the relatively recent emergence of the Internet and in particular social networks. However, such studies are necessary, because they will reduce the level of conflict in social networks, as well as minimize or completely eliminate such phenomena as cyberbullying and trolling. In any case, users of social networks, and not only students, should be careful when using the Internet and do everything to protect their safety.