Skip to main content

‘If They Don’t Listen to Us, they Deserve It’: The Effect of External Efficacy and Anger on the Perceived Legitimacy of Hacking

Heering, Maria Sophia, Travaglino, Giovanni A., Abrams, Dominic, Goldsack, Emily (2020) ‘If They Don’t Listen to Us, they Deserve It’: The Effect of External Efficacy and Anger on the Perceived Legitimacy of Hacking. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 23 (6). pp. 863-881. ISSN 1368-4302. (doi:10.1177/1368430220937777) (KAR id:81609)

PDF Author's Accepted Manuscript
Language: English
Download (855kB) Preview
[thumbnail of If they don't listen to us they deserve it.pdf]
Preview
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.
Request an accessible format
XML Word Processing Document (DOCX) Author's Accepted Manuscript
Language: English

Restricted to Repository staff only
Contact us about this Publication
[thumbnail of Heeringetal_GPIR_Revised Article_May42020Final_fullarticle.docx]
PDF Publisher pdf
Language: English


Download (405kB) Preview
[thumbnail of 1368430220937777.pdf]
Preview
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.
Request an accessible format
Official URL
https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220937777

Abstract

We conducted two studies examining the factors underlying individuals’ legitimization of hackers (digital actors operating on the internet). Drawing on the social banditry framework, and research on political action, we focused on the mediating role of anger in the association between external political efficacy and perceived legitimization of hackers’ actions. Specifically, we manipulated whether the system was responsive to participants’ demands following unfair treatment in a university (Study 1) and in an online work platform (Study 2) context. In Study 1 (N = 259) British undergraduate students read about unfair ‘grading’ practices. They were then informed that the management was either willing (high external political efficacy) or unwilling (low external political efficacy) to investigate the matter. In Study 2 (N = 222), British participants were recruited via Prolific Academic and were presented with a scenario describing an unfair rejection of their work. They were then informed that the platform admin was either willing or not willing to investigate their case. Across studies, participants were informed that hackers had attacked the website. Supporting the social banditry framework, results indicated that individuals who perceive the system as unresponsive to their demands tended to legitimize hackers’ actions via stronger perceived anger against the system. Implications of the results, and future directions are discussed.

Item Type: Article
DOI/Identification number: 10.1177/1368430220937777
Uncontrolled keywords: hackers; external efficacy; anger; vicarious dissent; social banditry framework
Subjects: B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
H Social Sciences
J Political Science
Divisions: Divisions > Division of Human and Social Sciences > School of Psychology > Centre for the Studies of Group Processes
Depositing User: Giovanni Travaglino
Date Deposited: 08 Jun 2020 11:18 UTC
Last Modified: 16 Feb 2021 14:13 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/81609 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)
Travaglino, Giovanni A.: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4091-0634
Abrams, Dominic: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2113-4572
  • Depositors only (login required):

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year