A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
1–10 of 154 posts
Re: A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
#2"Overall, we found that warnings have no effect on affective responses to negative material nor on educational outcomes (i.e., comprehension). However, warnings reliably increase anticipatory affect. Findings on avoidance were mixed, suggesting either that warnings have no effect on engagement with material, or that they increase engagement with negative material under specific circumstances. Limitations and implications for policy and therapeutic practice are discussed."
The characteristics of the meta analysis were largely focused on the general public and attempts to limit anxiety in that domain. But I think they forgot an entire other application: NSFL warnings.
Whenever I see NSFL I ABSOLUTELY avoid clicking, I even stop reading, and that has greatly improved my peace of mind. Learned that the hard way during the early internet: I've accidentally seen way too many horrific things I wont even tangentially mention to last me 1000 liftimes. Sure there is an anticipatory impact, but NSFL works for me!
It seems like one message here is that more moderation is needed if anticipation has similar impact as the actual content.
Re: A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
#3So the reasons people are for this stuff are pretty uniformly incorrect and the reasons people are against this stuff are either also incorrect or possibly correct depending on the situation?
Re: A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
#4"Overall, we found that warnings have no effect on affective responses to negative material nor on educational outcomes (i.e., comprehension). However, warnings reliably increase anticipatory affect. Findings on avoidance were mixed, suggesting either that warnings have no effect on engagement with material, or that they increase engagement with negative material under specific circumstances. Limitations and implicat…
I imagine the things people consider NSFL depend on their personality and background. These studies seem like they'd be more illuminating if they looked at e.g. rape content warnings for rape survivors.
Effects on the rest of us matter as well, but shouldn't be considered the whole story.
Re: A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
#5Twitter thread about the work by the author: https://twitter.com/paytonjjones/status/1563950340944560128
Re: A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
#6"Overall, we found that warnings have no effect on affective responses to negative material nor on educational outcomes (i.e., comprehension). However, warnings reliably increase anticipatory affect. Findings on avoidance were mixed, suggesting either that warnings have no effect on engagement with material, or that they increase engagement with negative material under specific circumstances. Limitations and implicat…
Does NSFL mean "Not Safe For Life"? I wasn't familiar with this term before and have never seen content labeled with it.
Re: A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
#7"Overall, we found that warnings have no effect on affective responses to negative material nor on educational outcomes (i.e., comprehension). However, warnings reliably increase anticipatory affect. Findings on avoidance were mixed, suggesting either that warnings have no effect on engagement with material, or that they increase engagement with negative material under specific circumstances. Limitations and implicat…
Does NSFL mean "Not Safe For Life"? I wasn't familiar with this term before and have never seen content labeled with it.
Exactly. It differentiates e.g. gore from pornography.
Re: A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
#8What the heck is this?
The presumption of this article is that trigger warnings get you emotionally ready for an adverse subject, but I'm pretty sure that's not what they are for.
I figure most people often want warnings on their books/videos/etc "e.g. this is a live-leak of somebody dying" so they can avoid the material.
---
Per his twitter "Well, too bad for all y'all. Trigger warnings do not seem to encourage avoidance." ... Sounds kinda us-vs-them.
I'm 100% sure I do not click on videos on reddit that indicate they are videos of somebody dying. No amount of statistical papers will change that. I highly doubt I'm the only one.
Re: A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
#9"Overall, we found that warnings have no effect on affective responses to negative material nor on educational outcomes (i.e., comprehension). However, warnings reliably increase anticipatory affect. Findings on avoidance were mixed, suggesting either that warnings have no effect on engagement with material, or that they increase engagement with negative material under specific circumstances. Limitations and implicat…
Does NSFL mean "Not Safe For Life"? I wasn't familiar with this term before and have never seen content labeled with it.
[deleted]
Re: A meta-analysis of the effects of trigger warnings and content notes
#10What about stuff like movie and game ratings? What about things like restricting sexually explicit material to minors? Seems like a weird point to make. What I like about content warnings is that I can choose whether I want to engage with something that might upset me in a more granular fashion than “entire profile.” It’s not like I’d stop avoiding content if there were no CWs anywhere.