Partisan Blocking: Biased Responses to Shared Misinformation Contribute to Network Polarization on Social Media

Author:

Kaiser Johannes1ORCID,Vaccari Cristian123ORCID,Chadwick Andrew12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Online Civic Culture Centre (O3C), Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK

2. Department of Communication and Media, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK

3. Centre for Research in Communication and Culture (CRCC), Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK

Abstract

Abstract Researchers know little about how people respond to misinformation shared by their social media “friends.” Do responses scale up to distort the structure of online networks? We focus on an important yet under-researched response to misinformation—blocking or unfollowing a friend who shares it—and assess whether this is influenced by political similarity between friends. Using a representative sample of social media users (n = 968), we conducted two 2 × 2 between-subjects experiments focusing on two political issues and individuals’ political ideology as a quasi-factor. The first factor manipulated who shared the misinformation (politically similar vs. dissimilar friend); the second manipulated the misinformation’s plausibility (implausible vs. moderately plausible). Our findings, which replicated across political issues and levels of plausibility, reveal that social media users, particularly left-wing users, are more likely to block and unfollow politically dissimilar than similar friends who share misinformation. Partisan blocking contributes to network polarization on social media.

Funder

Swiss National Science Foundation

Loughborough University

Early Postdoc Mobility Fellowship

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics,Communication

Reference51 articles.

1. Social media and fake news in the 2016 election;Allcott;Journal of Economic Perspectives,2017

2. Why do so few people share fake news? It hurts their reputation;Altay;New Media & Society,2020

3. Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization;Bail;Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,2018

4. Social Media, Echo Chambers, and Political Polarization

5. False equivalence: Are liberals and conservatives in the United States equally biased?;Baron;Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science,2019

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