Correction to: Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-54925-w, published online 01 March 2024

In the original version of the Article, Figure 4 was a duplication of Figure 3. The original Figures 3 and 4 and accompanying legends appear below.

The original Article has been corrected.

Figure 3
figure 3

Measuring the association of toxicity of early comments with the fear in later comments. (a) Illustration of the problem setting. N comments in chronological order for a given video are divided into early and later halves, separated by k. Then, the average fear of comments in the comment range is predicted by the variables noted in Model 4 and Model 5, respectively, and the coefficients are obtained. (b) Forest plots showing the coefficients of average toxicity of comments and highly liked comments across window size \(k=\{\mathrm{10,20,30,40,50}\}\). Both are positive regardless of k, but only the mean toxicity of highly liked comments is largely significant. The average toxicity of highly liked comments has a high coefficient compared to the average toxicity of all comments (1.3 times higher in the average value in the five windows).

Full size image
Figure 4
figure 4

Measuring the association of the fear of early comments with the toxicity in later comments. (a) Illustration of the problem set. N comments in chronological order for a given video are divided into early and later halves, separated by k. Then, the mean fear in comments in the comment range is inferred by the variables noted in Model 6 and Model 7, respectively, and the coefficients are obtained. (b) Forest plots showing the coefficients of the fear in comments and the fear in highly liked comments, for \(k=\{\mathrm{10,20,30,40,50}\}\). Only the coefficients for fear in highly liked comments are largely significant (3 out of 5 cases).

Full size image