IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jcsosc/v6y2023i2d10.1007_s42001-023-00227-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A high-dimensional approach to measuring online polarization

Author

Listed:
  • Samantha C. Phillips

    (Carnegie Mellon University)

  • Joshua Uyheng

    (Carnegie Mellon University)

  • Kathleen M. Carley

    (Carnegie Mellon University)

Abstract

Polarization, ideological and psychological distancing between groups, can cause dire societal fragmentation. Of chief concern is the role of social media in enhancing polarization through mechanisms like facilitating selective exposure to information. Researchers using user-generated content to measure polarization typically focus on direct communication, suggesting echo chamber-like communities indicate the most polarization. However, this operationalization does not account for other dimensions of intergroup conflict that have been associated with polarization. We address this limitation by introducing a high-dimensional network framework to evaluate polarization based on three dimensions: social, knowledge, and knowledge source. Following an extensive review of the psychological and social mechanisms of polarization, we specify five sufficient conditions for polarization to occur that can be evaluated using our approach. We analyze six existing network-based polarization metrics in our high-dimensional network framework through a virtual experiment and apply our proposed methodology to discussions around COVID-19 vaccines on Twitter. This work has implications for detecting polarization on social media using user-generated content, quantifying the effects of offline divides or de-polarization efforts online, and comparing community dynamics across contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Samantha C. Phillips & Joshua Uyheng & Kathleen M. Carley, 2023. "A high-dimensional approach to measuring online polarization," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 1147-1178, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:6:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s42001-023-00227-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s42001-023-00227-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42001-023-00227-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s42001-023-00227-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Esteban, Joan & Ray, Debraj, 1994. "On the Measurement of Polarization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(4), pages 819-851, July.
    2. Hirofumi Takesue, 2020. "From defection to ingroup favoritism to cooperation: simulation analysis of the social dilemma in dynamic networks," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 189-207, April.
    3. Anna Keuchenius & Petter Törnberg & Justus Uitermark, 2021. "Why it is important to consider negative ties when studying polarized debates: A signed network analysis of a Dutch cultural controversy on Twitter," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(8), pages 1-23, August.
    4. Federico Echenique & Roland G. Fryer, 2007. "A Measure of Segregation Based on Social Interactions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(2), pages 441-485.
    5. Ignacio-Jesús Serrano-Contreras & Javier García-Marín & Óscar G. Luengo, 2020. "Measuring Online Political Dialogue: Does Polarization Trigger More Deliberation?," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 63-72.
    6. Kazutoshi Sasahara & Wen Chen & Hao Peng & Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia & Alessandro Flammini & Filippo Menczer, 2021. "Social influence and unfollowing accelerate the emergence of echo chambers," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 381-402, May.
    7. Ignacio-Jesús Serrano-Contreras & Javier García-Marín & Óscar G. Luengo, 2020. "Measuring Online Political Dialogue: Does Polarization Trigger More Deliberation?," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 63-72.
    8. Babak Ravandi & Fatma Mili, 2019. "Coherence and polarization in complex networks," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 133-150, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hodler, Roland & Valsecchi, Michele & Vesperoni, Alberto, 2021. "Ethnic geography: Measurement and evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    2. Selman Erol & Camilo Garcia-Jimeno, 2024. "Civil Liberties and Social Structure," Working Paper Series WP 2024-05, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    3. Zenou, Yves & ,, 2014. "Local and Consistent Centrality Measures in Networks," CEPR Discussion Papers 10031, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Yoonseok Lee & Donggyun Shin, 2016. "Measuring Social Tension from Income Class Segregation," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 457-471, July.
    5. Jorge Alcalde-Unzu & Marc Vorsatz, 2013. "Measuring the cohesiveness of preferences: an axiomatic analysis," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(4), pages 965-988, October.
    6. Jayadev, Arjun & Reddy, Sanjay G., 2011. "Inequalities between Groups: Theory and Empirics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 159-173, February.
    7. Gordon Anderson, 2018. "Measuring Aspects of Mobility, Polarization and Convergence in the Absence of Cardinality: Indices Based Upon Transitional Typology," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 887-907, October.
    8. Leopoldo Fergusson & Carlos Molina, 2020. "Facebook Causes Protests," HiCN Working Papers 323, Households in Conflict Network.
    9. Scott Rozelle & Yiran Xia & Dimitris Friesen & Bronson Vanderjack & Nourya Cohen, 2020. "Moving Beyond Lewis: Employment and Wage Trends in China’s High- and Low-Skilled Industries and the Emergence of an Era of Polarization," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 62(4), pages 555-589, December.
    10. Klaus Desmet & Ignacio Ortuño-Ortín & Romain Wacziarg, 2009. "The political economy of ethnolinguistic cleavages," Working Papers 2009-17, Instituto Madrileño de Estudios Avanzados (IMDEA) Ciencias Sociales.
    11. Jo Thori Lind & Karl Moene, 2011. "Miserly Developments," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(9), pages 1332-1352, June.
    12. Tugce, Cuhadaroglu, 2013. "My Group Beats Your Group: Evaluating Non-Income Inequalities," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-49, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    13. Janus, Thorsten & Riera-Crichton, Daniel, 2015. "Economic shocks, civil war and ethnicity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 32-44.
    14. Teixidó-Figueras, J. & Duro, J.A., 2014. "Spatial Polarization of the Ecological Footprint Distribution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-106.
    15. Liu, Shen & Maharaj, Elizabeth Ann & Inder, Brett, 2014. "Polarization of forecast densities: A new approach to time series classification," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 345-361.
    16. Victor Ginsburgh & Shlomo Weber, 2020. "The Economics of Language," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(2), pages 348-404, June.
    17. Francesco Caselli & Wilbur John Coleman II, 2013. "On The Theory Of Ethnic Conflict," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11, pages 161-192, January.
    18. Chakravarty, Satya R. & Sarkar, Palash, 2022. "A synthesis of local and effective tax progressivity measurement," MPRA Paper 115180, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Alesina, Alberto & Devleeschauwer, Arnaud & Easterly, William & Kurlat, Sergio & Wacziarg, Romain, 2003. "Fractionalization," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 155-194, June.
    20. Joan Esteban & Laura Mayoral & Debraj Ray, 2012. "Ethnicity and Conflict: An Empirical Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1310-1342, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:6:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s42001-023-00227-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.