Problem
Research questions and friction points this paper is trying to address.
incels
Scientific Blackpill
misinformation
motivated reasoning
scientific legitimacy
Red Flags and Cherry Picking: Reading The Scientific Blackpill Wiki
🤖 AI Summary
This study investigates how incel communities selectively cite and distort scientific research to construct pseudoscientific legitimacy for their extremist ideology known as “The Blackpill.” Through systematic analysis of academic sources referenced on the Scientific Blackpill Wiki, combined with textual comparison and qualitative content analysis, the research evaluates the accuracy of citations and the coherence of argumentative logic. Findings indicate that while some references are genuine and accurately described, they are frequently decontextualized or overgeneralized to reinforce preexisting beliefs. This work elucidates the role of motivated reasoning in online radicalization processes and advances understanding of how extremist communities appropriate scientific discourse to legitimize ideological positions.
📝 Abstract
Incels are an online community of men who share a belief in extreme misogyny, the glorification of violence, and biological essentialism. They refer to their core ideology as "The Blackpill", a belief that physical attraction is the only path to romantic success and that women are only attracted to one very specific, hypermasculine archetype. This is not only a belief system; incels believe their ideology grounded in hard science. The research that incels use as evidence of their belief system is collected in an extensive online document, the Scientific Blackpill wiki page. In this research, we analyze the claims made on the wiki against the research cited to assess how the wiki authors are using or misusing science in support of their ideology. We find that the page largely cites legitimate science and describes it partly or mostly accurately. However, in discussing it, the results are often overgeneralized, stripped of context, or otherwise distorted to support the preexisting incel viewpoint. This echoes previous findings about motivated reasoning and borrowing scientific legitimacy in other misinformation and conspiracy-minded ideologies. We discuss the implications this has for understanding online radicalization and information quality.
Innovation
Methods, ideas, or system contributions that make the work stand out.
motivated reasoning
scientific legitimacy
online radicalization
misinformation
cherry picking
🔎 Similar Papers
No similar papers found.
