There is a substantial body of research that helps explain why some people post argumentative, off-point, or critical comments online rather than producing original content. The behaviour is not random. It is linked to identity, status, effort, and the structure of social media platforms.
One important concept is the online disinhibition effect. People behave differently online because they feel less constrained by social norms and immediate consequences. They are more likely to be blunt, critical, or argumentative than they would be in face-to-face conversation. This happens because online communication reduces social cues such as tone of voice, facial expression, and immediate feedback from others. As a result, people may write things they would never say in person (Suler, 2004).
Another useful concept is impression management. Social media is a public space in which people perform identity in front of an audience. Correcting someone, criticising an argument, or appearing sceptical can be a way of signalling intelligence or expertise to others who are reading the exchange. The comment is therefore often aimed at the audience rather than at the original poster. In this sense, social media interaction is often performative rather than conversational (Goffman, 1959).
There is also research showing that commenting and reacting require far less effort than creating original material. Producing thoughtful content requires time, reflection, and the risk of criticism. Commenting on someone else’s work allows participation without that effort or risk. This is sometimes described as low-effort participation in online communities (van Dijck, 2013). People can feel involved and visible without having to produce anything substantial.
Social media platforms themselves also encourage disagreement and argument because controversial or emotionally charged content generates more engagement. Engagement increases visibility, which benefits the platform. As a result, algorithms tend to promote content that produces strong reactions, including disagreement and criticism (Tufekci, 2015).
Finally, there is a cognitive explanation. People often read quickly and respond to a single word or idea rather than to the overall argument. Psychologists call this heuristic processing, where people rely on quick mental shortcuts rather than careful analysis. This often leads to misunderstandings and off-point responses (Kahneman, 2011).
Taken together, research suggests that off-point or argumentative comments online are often driven by identity performance, low effort participation, reduced social restraint, and platform design rather than by careful engagement with the original idea. In other words, the behaviour often tells us more about the online environment and human social behaviour than about the topic being discussed.
References
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor Books. ISBN 9780385094022.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. ISBN 9780374275631.
Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 321–326. https://doi.org/10.1089/1094931041291295
Tufekci, Z. (2015). Algorithmic harms beyond Facebook and Google: Emergent challenges of computational agency. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13(2), 203–218.
van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199970772.