Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-m259h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-07T12:54:58.368Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sock Puppetry in Online Communication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2024

Grace Paterson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper concerns sock puppetry, a practice which involves an individual communicating under multiple pseudonymous identities in a manner that makes it seem as though these personas are distinct conversational participants. I provide a definition of sock puppetry that is more narrow than other definitions, allowing it to be distinguished from related phenomena. I then analyse some of the ways in which sock puppetry can interfere with social tools we use for establishing trust within an online community, evaluating a speaker's credibility, and generally deciding who and what to believe.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy , Volume 99 , Special Issue 3: The Philosophy of Online Communication , July 2024 , pp. 461 - 478
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Royal Institute of Philosophy

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alfano, Mark, ‘Virtues for Agents in Directed Social Networks’, Synthese, 199:3 (2021), 8423–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alfano, Mark and Sullivan, Emily, ‘Online Trust and Distrust’, in Hannon, Michael and Ridder, Jeroen de (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Political Epistemology (Abingdon: Routledge, 2021), 480–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barany, Michael J., ‘Impersonation and Personification in Mid-Twentieth Century Mathematics’, History of Science, 58:4 (2020), 417–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyd, Kenneth, ‘Trusting Scientific Experts in an Online World’, Synthese, 200:1 (2022), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chernow, Ron, Alexander Hamilton (London: Head of Zeus, 2016).Google Scholar
Greyson, Devon and Costello, Kaitlin L.: ‘“Emotional Strip-Mining”: Sympathy Sockpuppets in Online Communities’, New Media & Society, 25:12 (2021), 1–22.Google Scholar
Jones, Karen, ‘Trust as an Affective Attitude’, Ethics, 107:1 (1996), 4–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, Srijan, Cheng, Justin, Leskovec, Jure, and Subrahmanian, V.S., ‘An Army of Me: Sockpuppets in Online Discussion Communities’, in Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web (2017), 857–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawlor, Aideen and Kirakowski, Jurek, ‘Claiming Someone Else's Pain: A Grounded Theory Analysis of Online Community Participants Experiences of Munchausen by Internet’, Computers in Human Behavior, 74 (2017), 101–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, Timothy R., Encyclopaedia of Deception, volume 2 (London: Sage Publications, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, Miriam J. and Flanagin, Andrew J., ‘Credibility and Trust of Information in Online Environments: The Use of Cognitive Heuristics’, Journal of Pragmatics, 59 (2013), 210–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, Miriam J., Flanagin, Andrew J., and Medders, Ryan B, ‘Social and Heuristic Approaches to Credibility Evaluation Online’, Journal of Communication, 60:3 (2010), 413–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paterson, Grace, ‘Sincerely, Anonymous’, Thought: A Journal of Philosophy, 9:3 (2020), 167–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paterson, Grace, ‘Trusting on Another's Say-So’, Ergo, 8:43 (2022), 520–37.Google Scholar
Scott, Kate, Pragmatics Online (Abingdon: Routledge, 2022).CrossRefGoogle Scholar