Unpacking uncivil society: Incivility and intolerance in the 2018 Irish abortion referendum discussions on Twitter

Berry, J. M., & Sobieraj, S. (2013). The outrage industry: Political opinion media and the new incivility. New York: Oxford University Press. BerryJ. M. SobierajS. 2013 The outrage industry: Political opinion media and the new incivility New York Oxford University Press Search in Google Scholar

Cameron, D., & Shaw, S. (2016). Gender, power and political speech: Women and language in the 2015 UK general election. London: Palgrave Macmillan. CameronD. ShawS. 2016 Gender, power and political speech: Women and language in the 2015 UK general election London Palgrave Macmillan 10.1057/978-1-137-58752-7 Search in Google Scholar

Coe, K., Kenski, K., & Rains, S. A. (2014). Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in newspaper website comments. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 658–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12104 CoeK. KenskiK. RainsS. A. 2014 Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in newspaper website comments Journal of Communication 64 4 658 679 https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12104 10.1111/jcom.12104 Search in Google Scholar

Committee on Standards in Public Life. (2017, December). Intimidation in public life. www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-committee-on-standards-in-public-life Committee on Standards in Public Life 2017 December Intimidation in public life www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-committee-on-standards-in-public-life Search in Google Scholar

Curtis, G. N. (2004). Logical fallacy: The Hitler card. Fallacy files. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnazium.html#Note1 CurtisG. N. 2004 Logical fallacy: The Hitler card Fallacy files http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnazium.html#Note1 Search in Google Scholar

Duggan, M. (2014, October 22). Online harassment. Pew Research Centre. https://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/ DugganM. 2014 October 22 Online harassment Pew Research Centre https://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/ Search in Google Scholar

Earner-Byrne, L., & Urquhart, D. (2019). The Irish abortion journey, 2019–2018. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03855-7 Earner-ByrneL. UrquhartD. 2019 The Irish abortion journey, 2019–2018 London Palgrave Macmillan https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03855-7 10.1007/978-3-030-03855-7 Search in Google Scholar

Glen, S. (2016). Phi coefficient (mean square contingency coefficient). Statistics how to. https://www.statisticshowto.com/phi-coefficient-mean-square-contingency-coefficient/ GlenS. 2016 Phi coefficient (mean square contingency coefficient) Statistics how to https://www.statisticshowto.com/phi-coefficient-mean-square-contingency-coefficient/ Search in Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1982). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behaviour. New York: Pantheon Books. GoffmanE. 1982 Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behaviour New York Pantheon Books Search in Google Scholar

Hern, A. (2018, May 8). Facebook to block foreign spending on Irish abortion vote ads. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/08/facebook-to-block-foreign-spending-on-irish-abortion-vote-ads-referendum HernA. 2018 May 8 Facebook to block foreign spending on Irish abortion vote ads The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/08/facebook-to-block-foreign-spending-on-irish-abortion-vote-ads-referendum Search in Google Scholar

Jamieson, K. H., Volinsky, A., Weitz, I., & Kenski, K. (2017). The political uses and abuses of civility and incivility. In K. Kenski, & Jamieson, K. H. (Eds), The Oxford handbook of political communication (pp.205–218). New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.001.0001 JamiesonK. H. VolinskyA. WeitzI. KenskiK. 2017 The political uses and abuses of civility and incivility In KenskiK. JamiesonK. H. (Eds), The Oxford handbook of political communication 205 218 New York Oxford University Press https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.001.0001 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

Joyce, M. (2013). Picking the best intercoder reliability statistic for your digital activism content analysis. http://www.bwgriffin.com/gsu/courses/edur9131/content/IntercoderReliabilityBlogPost.pdf JoyceM. 2013 Picking the best intercoder reliability statistic for your digital activism content analysis http://www.bwgriffin.com/gsu/courses/edur9131/content/IntercoderReliabilityBlogPost.pdf Search in Google Scholar

Kim, H., Jang, S. M., Kim, S. & Wan, A. (2018). Evaluating sampling methods for content analysis of Twitter data. Social Media + Society, 4(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118772836 KimH. JangS. M. KimS. WanA. 2018 Evaluating sampling methods for content analysis of Twitter data Social Media + Society 4 2 1 10 https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118772836 10.1177/2056305118772836 Search in Google Scholar

Krzyżanowski, M., & Ledin, P. (2017). Uncivility on the web: Populism in/and the borderline discourses of exclusion. Journal of Language and Politics, 16(4), 566–581. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.17028.krz KrzyżanowskiM. LedinP. 2017 Uncivility on the web: Populism in/and the borderline discourses of exclusion Journal of Language and Politics 16 4 566 581 https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.17028.krz 10.1075/jlp.17028.krz Search in Google Scholar

Le, G. M., Radcliffe, K., Lyles, C., Lyson, H. C., Wallace, B., Sawaya, G., Pasick, R., Centola, D., & Sarkar, U. (2019). Perceptions of cervical cancer prevention on Twitter uncovered by different sampling strategies. PloS one, 14(2), https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211931 LeG. M. RadcliffeK. LylesC. LysonH. C. WallaceB. SawayaG. PasickR. CentolaD. SarkarU. 2019 Perceptions of cervical cancer prevention on Twitter uncovered by different sampling strategies PloS one 14 2 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211931 10.1371/journal.pone.0211931 Search in Google Scholar

Littman, J. (2018). Ireland 8th Tweet Ids. [dataset]. Harvard Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/PYCLPE LittmanJ. 2018 Ireland 8th Tweet Ids [dataset]. Harvard Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/PYCLPE Search in Google Scholar

Milner, R. M., & Phillips, W. (2018, November 20). The Internet doesn’t need civility, it needs ethics. Motherboard. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/pa5gxn/the-internet-doesnt-need-civility-it-needs-ethics MilnerR. M. PhillipsW. 2018 November 20 The Internet doesn’t need civility, it needs ethics Motherboard https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/pa5gxn/the-internet-doesnt-need-civility-it-needs-ethics Search in Google Scholar

Muddiman, A. (2017). Personal and public levels of political incivility. International Journal of Communication, 11(21), 3182–3202. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/6137/2106 MuddimanA. 2017 Personal and public levels of political incivility International Journal of Communication 11 21 3182 3202 https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/6137/2106 Search in Google Scholar

Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. London: Sage. NeuendorfK. A. 2002 The content analysis guidebook London Sage Search in Google Scholar

Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2019). Cultural backlash: Trump, Brexit, and authoritarian populism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108595841 NorrisP. InglehartR. 2019 Cultural backlash: Trump, Brexit, and authoritarian populism Cambridge Cambridge University Press https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108595841 10.1017/9781108595841 Search in Google Scholar

Papacharissi, Z. (2004). Democracy online: Civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups. New media & society, 6(2), 259–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804041444 PapacharissiZ. 2004 Democracy online: Civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups New media & society 6 2 259 283 https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804041444 10.1177/1461444804041444 Search in Google Scholar

Rossini, P. (2019). Disentangling uncivil and intolerant discourse. In R. Boatright, D. Young, S. Sobieraj, & T. Shaffer (Eds), A crisis of civility? Contemporary research on civility, incivility, and political discourse (pp.142–157). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351051989 RossiniP. 2019 Disentangling uncivil and intolerant discourse In BoatrightR. YoungD. SobierajS. ShafferT. (Eds), A crisis of civility? Contemporary research on civility, incivility, and political discourse 142 157 New York Routledge https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351051989 10.4324/9781351051989 Search in Google Scholar

Roth, Y., & Harvey, D. (2018, June 26). How Twitter is fighting spam and malicious automation. Twitter blog official. https://blog.twitter.com/official/en_us/topics/company/2018/how-twitter-is-fighting-spam-and-malicious-automation.html RothY. HarveyD. 2018 June 26 How Twitter is fighting spam and malicious automation Twitter blog official https://blog.twitter.com/official/en_us/topics/company/2018/how-twitter-is-fighting-spam-and-malicious-automation.html Search in Google Scholar

Rowe, I. (2015). Civility 2.0: A comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion. Information, Communication & Society, 18(2), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.940365 RoweI. 2015 Civility 2.0: A comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion Information, Communication & Society 18 2 121 138 https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.940365 10.1080/1369118X.2014.940365 Search in Google Scholar

Ruzza, C. (2009). Populism and Euroscepticism: Towards uncivil society? Policy and Society, 28(1), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2009.02.007 RuzzaC. 2009 Populism and Euroscepticism: Towards uncivil society? Policy and Society 28 1 87 98 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2009.02.007 10.1016/j.polsoc.2009.02.007 Search in Google Scholar

Stryker, R., Conway, B. A., & Danielson, J. T. (2016). What is political incivility? Communication Monographs, 83(4), 535–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2016.1201207 StrykerR. ConwayB. A. DanielsonJ. T. 2016 What is political incivility? Communication Monographs 83 4 535 556 https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2016.1201207 10.1080/03637751.2016.1201207 Search in Google Scholar

Sweeney, J. (2018, April 4). The role of social media in the eighth amendment referendum. Digital Training Institute. https://digitaltraininginstitute.ie/role-of-social-media-eighth-amendment-referendum/ SweeneyJ. 2018 April 4 The role of social media in the eighth amendment referendum Digital Training Institute https://digitaltraininginstitute.ie/role-of-social-media-eighth-amendment-referendum/ Search in Google Scholar

Tait, A. (2016, August 15). Get in the sea: When is a death threat not a death threat? NewsStatesman. https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/social-media/2016/08/get-sea-when-death-threat-not-death-threat TaitA. 2016 August 15 Get in the sea: When is a death threat not a death threat? NewsStatesman https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/social-media/2016/08/get-sea-when-death-threat-not-death-threat Search in Google Scholar

Tracy, K. (2008). “Reasonable hostility”: Situation-appropriate face-attack. Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture, 4(2), 169–191. https://doi.org/10.1515/JPLR.2008.009 TracyK. 2008 “Reasonable hostility”: Situation-appropriate face-attack Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture 4 2 169 191 https://doi.org/10.1515/JPLR.2008.009 10.1515/JPLR.2008.009 Search in Google Scholar

Wojcik, S., & Hughes, A. (2019, April 24). Sizing up Twitter users. Pew Research Centre. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/04/24/sizing-up-twitter-users/ WojcikS. HughesA. 2019 April 24 Sizing up Twitter users Pew Research Centre https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/04/24/sizing-up-twitter-users/ Search in Google Scholar

Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198297556.001.0001 YoungI. M. 2000 Inclusion and democracy Oxford Oxford University Press https://doi.org/10.1093/0198297556.001.0001 10.1093/0198297556.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

Zerilli, L. (2014). Against civility: A feminist perspective. In A. Sarat (Ed). Civility, legality, and justice in America (pp. 107–131). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107479852 ZerilliL. 2014 Against civility: A feminist perspective In SaratA. (Ed) Civility, legality, and justice in America 107 131 Cambridge Cambridge University Press https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107479852 10.1017/CBO9781107479852.005 Search in Google Scholar