Anger on the Internet: The Perceived Value of Rant-Sites

Whether through social networking Web sites, or online discussion forums, people use the Internet to express their anger on a variety of topics. Online news sources routinely allow for public comments, often providing a venue for reader anger. Likewise, there are entire Web sites, called rant-sites, dedicated to allowing people to vent. Interestingly, despite how common cyber-ranting has become, we know very little about the expression of anger over the Internet. The current study provides an initial look at the way in which people express their anger on a particular type of Web site, known as a rant-site.

Rant-sites are Web sites that provide people with a forum to rant about whatever they would like. Visitors can post anonymous stories about someone or something that angers them. Such Web sites have become quite common with more than 20 examples surfacing through a Google search. Some provide a forum for rants on general topics (e.g., www.justrage.com), whereas others are designed for rants on specific types of topics (e.g., providing service providers a place to vent about customers). In addition to being common, they are also quite popular. Just one of these sites, www.justrage.com has more than 6,500 rants posted with more than 90,000 comments.

Despite their popularity, however, there is no published research exploring why people visit these Web sites or choose to vent their anger in this way. In fact, there is almost no research on how people express their anger on the Internet, regardless of the venue. This is not surprising as such research is difficult to conduct. Those who choose to visit and post on such Web sites seem to value their anonymity in a way that makes them unlikely to participate in studies about their Internet behavior. However, despite the difficulty, the scarcity of research is unfortunate as anger expressed online likely leads to damaged relationships and other sorts of interpersonal problems.

In addition to how little is known about interpersonal problems stemming from Internet ager, little is known about the immediate emotional impact of reading or writing rants. While there is a considerable literature base on the emotional impact of writing,¹ very little of this has focused on the emotion of anger. Additionally, the literature on writing and emotion has focused almost exclusively on the expressive writing paradigm,² which is a formalized treatment intervention. Consequently, these studies might not apply to the type of writing people do on rant-sites, which is void of any structure and about venting rather than trying to work through emotional problems.

The idea that venting helps people deal with their anger is not a new one. Catharsis has long been thought of as a treatment for problematic anger.^3,4 In fact, most rant-sites promote the idea of venting as a healthy approach to anger reduction. However, as noted by Olatunji et al. in an extensive review of the literature, catharsis has little benefit.⁴ In fact, most research suggests that the cathartic expression of anger does harm over the long term.^3,4

Much is unknown regarding how and why people communicate their anger over the Internet and, specifically, what value rant-sites hold to the people who visit them. The current project seeks to address the limited research on cyber-ranting. In study 1, we survey those people who frequent such Web sites and in study 2, we explore the emotional responses participants have to reading and writing rants.

The current project provides an initial look at how people express their anger online and the emotional impact of such expressions. Findings from study one revealed, from the perspective of rant-site visitors, the perceived benefit of reading and posting rants. Study two identified the immediate emotional impact of reading and writing rants.

One finding that is of particular interest is that in study one, participants who posted rants unanimously indicated that that they felt calm or relaxed after ranting. This seems to run contrary to the research on catharsis,^3,4 which finds that venting anger tends to make people angrier. However, as pointed out by Olatuni and colleagues, even though catharsis is associated with increases in anger in the long term, it is common for people to feel relaxed immediately after venting.⁴ This helps explain why participants feel that venting their anger is worthwhile, as they are immediately reinforced with feelings of calmness and relaxation.

Olatunji et al. also argue though, that there are long-term consequences to frequently venting anger.⁴ Specifically, and contrary to catharsis theory, frequent venting leads to subsequent increases in anger rather than decreases. Consistent with this, study one found that those who frequent rant-sites have significantly higher trait anger scores than the norm and express their anger in more maladaptive ways than the norm. Likewise, they experienced frequent anger consequences, averaging almost one physical fight per month and more than two verbal fights per month. Finally, approximately a third of the participants believed they had an anger problem and almost half of them had been told they have an anger problem.

Results from study two show the emotional impact of reading and writing rants. Contrary to the experiences reported by rant-site users in study one, participants in study two became less happy and sadder after reading the rants. After writing rants, they became less happy and angrier. However, when looking specifically at those participants who chose to have their rants posted on the Web site, it is found that they did not see the same decrease in happiness while posting that others did. Similarly, those participants who indicated they would go back to the Web site on their own saw a substantial increase in happiness while reading the rants, whereas others saw a decrease in happiness. This suggests that there is an entertainment value in the Web site for some participants, which makes them more likely to return.

Taken together, the results from both studies suggest that reading and writing online rants are likely unhealthy practices as those who do them often are angrier and have more maladaptive expressions styles than others. Likewise, reading and writing online rants are associated with negative shifts in mood for the vast majority of people. The causes of these shifts in mood could not be identified from the current study, but it is likely rooted in the content of the rants they read or write.

Similarly, what is still unknown is why some people find rant-sites entertaining, while others do not. Given that profanity is common on these sites and that the rants sometimes include explicit threats toward people, it is not surprising that many people find them offensive. However, it would be interesting to explore the characteristics that might predict who finds such sites entertaining. Likewise, future research should explore what role anonymity plays with regard to posting. The majority of participants in study one (67 percent) indicated they would still post even if it was not anonymous. However, in a review of the literature on Internet anonymity, Christopherson argues that anonymity does influence how people communicate online so it is reasonable to assume that rant-site posters would change their behavior if they had to provide their name or Email address.⁸

A significant limitation of the current project is the small sample size in study one. Regrettably, those who post anonymously online appear to be particularly reluctant to participate in research and recruiting such participants, even with an incentive, was difficult. Due to the small sample size, results should be interpreted with caution and future researchers should identify other mechanisms for encouraging participation among rant-site users. However, the results still serve as an important first step in understanding Internet anger, a phenomenon we know very little about.

A limitation of study two is that participants were not regular rant-site visitors, bringing into question the generalizability of the findings. Given that such a study could not practically be conducted with regular rant-site visitors, this limitation is one that may need to be tolerated to conduct research in this area. This concern about generalizability is quelled somewhat by the finding that ∼40 percent of participants were considering going back to the Web site on their own now that they know of it.

While the scope of the current project is somewhat limited given its focus on a particular type of Web site, the results likely generalize to other similar types of online venues (e.g., social networking Web sites, media discussion forums, blogs). In many ways, rant-sites mimic these environments as writers can post their ideas, others can respond, etc. Thus, it is reasonable to believe that ranting in these other venues may lead to similar sort of problems.