Sat 23 Mar, 2013 01:00 pm
What do you think? Not that ranting happens here.
[(HealthDay News) -- It's so tempting. You read something on a website about a button-pushing issue that makes you mad and you've got to respond. Before you know it, you're verbally sparring with a stranger. But you may want to think twice before jumping into the fray.
While you might like getting your point of view off your chest, over the long term your rants may be making you less happy and more angry, suggest two new studies by a single research team.
The first study showed that while visitors to common "rant" websites reported feeling more relaxed immediately after posting a comment, overall they tend to experience more anger in general and can express their frustration in maladaptive ways.
The second study found that both reading other people's rants and writing your own are associated with negative mood shifts. The research was published online in the journal Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking.
I agree....I think getting angry can become a habit.
This Internet realm of being able to say, in some places, anything you like without there being consequences seems to me to be a new thing upon the earth, at least being able to say so MUCH and reach so many is new. It seems to unleash the very worst of all of us sometimes and some of us always.
Well - I guess you made that point! (x3)
While i have no objection to the conclusions (although we know nothing about the methodology used), i question conclusions based on speculation. How many people are really angry when they post? I see plenty of people here, for example, who seem to really enjoy pushing other people's buttons. I had one person here sneer at me by alleging that i'm the "biggest" baiter of trolls here--and this was from someone who seems to spend half of more of his time here baiting people.
Part of the problem i have here is that we cannot know if the person we are taling to is angry. It is a popular--and childishly silly--rhetorical trick to allege that one's interlocutor is angry. The suggestion is that that person is responding with emotionalism, rather than reason. But i see people hauling out that hoary old chestnut when their contentions have been challenged and, rather than defend them, they allege that the critic is angry, and effectively are using the charge to avoid answering the criticism.
While i agree that it is likely not good for us to get angry about things we read online, i do not agree that people can be assumed to be angry here. We haven't enough information. We can't hear people's voices, we can't see their expressions or their "body language" and we cannot reasonably judge their tone of voice and other cues to their demeanor. By all mean, avoid getting angry about what goes on online. At the same time, don't jump to conclusions about other people's responses when you just don't have a basis for doing so.