journal article·2021-12-14Open access

Measuring Polarization in Online Debates

Teresa Alsinet, Josep Argelich, Ramón Béjar, Santi Martínez

Applied Sciences· Volume 11· Issue 24

Abstract

Social networks can be a very successful tool to engage users to discuss relevant topics for society. However, there are also some dangers that are associated with them, such as the emergence of polarization in online discussions. Recently, there has been a growing interest to try to understand this phenomenon, as some consider that this can be harmful concerning the building of a healthy society in which citizens get used to polite discussions and even listening to opinions that may be different from theirs. In this work, we face the problem of defining a precise measure that can quantify in a meaningful way the level of polarization present in an online discussion. We focus on the Reddit social network, given that its primary focus is to foster discussions, in contrast to other social networks that have some other uses. Our measure is based on two different characteristics of an online discussion: the existence of a balanced bipartition of the users of the discussion, where one partition contains mainly users in agreement (regarding the topic of the discussion) and the other users in disagreement, and the degree of negativity of the sentiment of the interactions between these two groups of users. We discuss how different characteristics of the discussions affect the value of our polarization measure, and we finally perform an empirical evaluation over different sets of Reddit discussions about diverse classes of topics. Our results seem to indicate that our measure can capture differences in the polarization level of different discussions, which can be further understood when analyzing the values of the different factors used to define the measure.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Social Media and Politics · Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence · Complex Network Analysis Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

INSPIRES Research Center, University of Lleida, Jaume II, 69, 25001 Lleida, Spain

References (15)

Show source-provided references
1. Newton, C. (The Verge, 2020). How to think about polarization on Facebook, The Verge.
2. Horwitz, J., and Seetharaman, D. (The Wall Street Journal, 2020). Facebook Executives Shut Down Efforts to Make the Site Less Divisive, The Wall Street Journal.
3. Rosen, G. (2020, May 27). Facebook: Investments to Fight Polarization. Available online: https://about.fb.com/news/2020/05/investments-to-fight-polarization/.
4. Hagey, K., and Horwitz, J. (The Wall Street Journal, 2021). Facebook Tried to Make Its Platform a Healthier Place. It Got Angrier Instead, The Wall Street Journal.
5. Boxell, L., Gentzkow, M., and Shapiro, J.M. (2020). Cross-Country Trends in Affective Polarization, National Bureau of Economic Research.10.3386/w26669 ↗
6. Bessi, A., Zollo, F., Vicario, M.D., Puliga, M., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., Uzzi, B., and Quattrociocchi, W. (2016). Users Polarization on Facebook and Youtube. PLoS ONE, 11.10.1371/journal.pone.0159641 ↗
7. Echo chambers: Emotional contagion and group polarization on Facebook10.1038/srep37825 ↗
8. Choudhury, M.D., Chunara, R., Culotta, A., and Welles, B.F. (2020, January 8–11). Hyperpartisanship, Disinformation and Political Conversations on Twitter: The Brazilian Presidential Election of 2018. Proceedings of the Fourteenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, ICWSM 2020, Atlanta, GA, USA.
9. No echo in the chambers of political interactions on Reddit10.1038/s41598-021-81531-x ↗
10. The Spiral of Silence a Theory of Public Opinion
11. Under Surveillance: Examining Facebook’s Spiral of Silence Effects in the Wake of NSA Internet Monitoring
12. Huang, C., and Jurafsky, D. (2010, January 23–27). Support or Oppose? Classifying Positions in Online Debates from Reply Activities and Opinion Expressions. Proceedings of the COLING 2010, 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Beijing, China.
13. Measuring user relevance in online debates through an argumentative model10.1016/j.patrec.2020.02.008 ↗
14. Manning, C.D., Surdeanu, M., Bauer, J., Finkel, J., Bethard, S.J., and McClosky, D. (2014, January 22–27). The Stanford CoreNLP Natural Language Processing Toolkit. Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) System Demonstrations, Baltimore, MD, USA.10.3115/v1/P14-5010 ↗
15. Agrawal, R., Rajagopalan, S., Srikant, R., and Xu, Y. (2003, January 20–24). Mining newsgroups using networks arising from social behavior. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on World Wide Web, Budapest, Hungary.10.1145/775224.775227 ↗