Out-group animosity drives engagement on social media

Author:

Rathje SteveORCID,Van Bavel Jay J.ORCID,van der Linden SanderORCID

Abstract

There has been growing concern about the role social media plays in political polarization. We investigated whether out-group animosity was particularly successful at generating engagement on two of the largest social media platforms: Facebook and Twitter. Analyzing posts from news media accounts and US congressional members (n = 2,730,215), we found that posts about the political out-group were shared or retweeted about twice as often as posts about the in-group. Each individual term referring to the political out-group increased the odds of a social media post being shared by 67%. Out-group language consistently emerged as the strongest predictor of shares and retweets: the average effect size of out-group language was about 4.8 times as strong as that of negative affect language and about 6.7 times as strong as that of moral-emotional language—both established predictors of social media engagement. Language about the out-group was a very strong predictor of “angry” reactions (the most popular reactions across all datasets), and language about the in-group was a strong predictor of “love” reactions, reflecting in-group favoritism and out-group derogation. This out-group effect was not moderated by political orientation or social media platform, but stronger effects were found among political leaders than among news media accounts. In sum, out-group language is the strongest predictor of social media engagement across all relevant predictors measured, suggesting that social media may be creating perverse incentives for content expressing out-group animosity.

Funder

Gates Cambridge Trust

John Templeton Foundation

Publisher

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Reference70 articles.

1. J. Horwitz , D. Seetharaman , Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive. Wall Street Journal (2020). https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-division-top-executives-nixed-solutions-11590507499. Accessed 3 June 2020.

2. K. Wagner , Inside Twitter’s ambitious plan to clean up its platform. Vox (2019). https://www.vox.com/2019/3/8/18245536/exclusive-twitter-healthy-conversations-dunking-research-product-incentives. Accessed 3 June 2020.

3. D. Van Dijcke , A. L. Wright , Profiling insurrection: Characterizing collective action using mobile device data. SSRN [Preprint] (2021). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3776854 (Accessed 9 February 2021).

4. N. Persily , J. A. Tucker , Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, Prospects for Reform (Cambridge University Press, 2020).

5. C. R. Sunstein , Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media (Princeton University Press, 2018).

Cited by 226 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3