IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jcsosc/v8y2025i2d10.1007_s42001-025-00381-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A systematic review of echo chamber research: comparative analysis of conceptualizations, operationalizations, and varying outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • David Hartmann

    (Technische Universität Berlin
    Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society)

  • Sonja Mei Wang

    (University of Wuppertal)

  • Lena Pohlmann

    (Technische Universität Berlin
    Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society)

  • Bettina Berendt

    (Technische Universität Berlin
    Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society
    KU Leuven)

Abstract

This systematic review synthesizes research on echo chambers and filter bubbles to explore the reasons behind dissent regarding their existence, antecedents, and effects. It provides a taxonomy of conceptualizations and operationalizations, analyzing how measurement approaches and contextual factors influence outcomes. The review of 129 studies identifies variations in measurement approaches, as well as regional, political, cultural, and platform-specific biases, as key factors contributing to the lack of consensus. Studies based on homophily and computational social science methods often support the echo chamber hypothesis, while research on content exposure and broader media environments, such as surveys, tends to challenge it. Group behavior, cultural influences, instant messaging platforms, and short video platforms remain underexplored. The strong geographic focus on the United States further highlights the need for studies in multi-party systems and regions beyond the Global North. Future research should prioritize cross-platform studies, continuous algorithmic audits, and investigations into the causal links between polarization, fragmentation, and echo chambers to advance the field. This review also provides recommendations for using the EU’s Digital Services Act to enhance research in this area and conduct studies outside the US in multi-party systems. By addressing these gaps, this review contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of echo chambers, their measurement, and their societal impacts.

Suggested Citation

  • David Hartmann & Sonja Mei Wang & Lena Pohlmann & Bettina Berendt, 2025. "A systematic review of echo chamber research: comparative analysis of conceptualizations, operationalizations, and varying outcomes," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 1-59, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:8:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s42001-025-00381-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s42001-025-00381-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42001-025-00381-z
    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/s42001-025-00381-z?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. Whittaker, Joe & Looney, Seán & Reed, Alastair & Votta, Fabio, 2021. "Recommender systems and the amplification of extremist content," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 10(2), pages 1-29.
    2. Marco Bastos & Dan Mercea & Andrea Baronchelli, 2018. "The geographic embedding of online echo chambers: Evidence from the Brexit campaign," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, November.
    3. Mohsen Mosleh & Gordon Pennycook & Antonio A. Arechar & David G. Rand, 2021. "Cognitive reflection correlates with behavior on Twitter," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Ana L. Schmidt & Antonio Peruzzi & Antonio Scala & Matteo Cinelli & Peter Pomerantsev & Anne Applebaum & Sophia Gaston & Nicole Fusi & Zachary Peterson & Giuseppe Severgnini & Andrea F. Cesco & Davide, 2020. "Measuring social response to different journalistic techniques on Facebook," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-7, December.
    5. Matteo Cinelli & Emanuele Brugnoli & Ana Lucia Schmidt & Fabiana Zollo & Walter Quattrociocchi & Antonio Scala, 2020. "Selective exposure shapes the Facebook news diet," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, March.
    6. Lorien Jasny & Joseph Waggle & Dana R. Fisher, 2015. "An empirical examination of echo chambers in US climate policy networks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 782-786, August.
    7. Fabiana Zollo & Petra Kralj Novak & Michela Del Vicario & Alessandro Bessi & Igor Mozetič & Antonio Scala & Guido Caldarelli & Walter Quattrociocchi, 2015. "Emotional Dynamics in the Age of Misinformation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Lorien Jasny & Joseph Waggle & Dana R. Fisher, 2015. "Correction: Corrigendum: An empirical examination of echo chambers in US climate policy networks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(11), pages 1020-1020, November.
    9. Pere Masip & Jaume Suau & Carlos Ruiz-Caballero, 2020. "Incidental Exposure to Non-Like-Minded News through Social Media: Opposing Voices in Echo-Chambers’ News Feeds," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 53-62.
    10. Tristan J B Cann & Iain S Weaver & Hywel T P Williams, 2021. "Ideological biases in social sharing of online information about climate change," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-25, April.
    11. Ana L. Schmidt & Antonio Peruzzi & Antonio Scala & Matteo Cinelli & Peter Pomerantsev & Anne Applebaum & Sophia Gaston & Nicole Fusi & Zachary Peterson & Giuseppe Severgnini & Andrea F. Cesco & Davide, 2020. "Correction: Measuring social response to different journalistic techniques on Facebook," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-1, December.
    12. Philipp Lorenz-Spreen & Lisa Oswald & Stephan Lewandowsky & Ralph Hertwig, 2023. "A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 74-101, January.
    13. Gregory Eady & Jonathan Nagler & Andy Guess & Jan Zilinsky & Joshua A. Tucker, 2019. "How Many People Live in Political Bubbles on Social Media? Evidence From Linked Survey and Twitter Data," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    14. James Flamino & Alessandro Galeazzi & Stuart Feldman & Michael W. Macy & Brendan Cross & Zhenkun Zhou & Matteo Serafino & Alexandre Bovet & Hernán A. Makse & Boleslaw K. Szymanski, 2023. "Political polarization of news media and influencers on Twitter in the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(6), pages 904-916, June.
    15. Camille Roth & Antoine Mazières & Telmo Menezes, 2020. "Tubes and bubbles topological confinement of YouTube recommendations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, April.
    16. Dimitar Nikolov & Mounia Lalmas & Alessandro Flammini & Filippo Menczer, 2019. "Quantifying Biases in Online Information Exposure," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 70(3), pages 218-229, March.
    17. Pere Masip & Jaume Suau & Carlos Ruiz-Caballero, 2020. "Incidental Exposure to Non-Like-Minded News through Social Media: Opposing Voices in Echo-Chambers’ News Feeds," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 53-62.
    18. Wieringa, Maranke & van Geenen, Daniela & Schäfer, Mirko Tobias & Gorzeman, Ludo, 2018. "Political topic-communities and their framing practices in the Dutch Twittersphere," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 7(2), pages 1-16.
    19. repec:plo:pone00:0138237 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Silva, Bruno Castanho & Proksch, Sven-Oliver, 2021. "Fake It ‘Til You Make It: A Natural Experiment to Identify European Politicians’ Benefit from Twitter Bots," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(1), pages 316-322, February.
    21. Brendan Nyhan & Jaime Settle & Emily Thorson & Magdalena Wojcieszak & Pablo Barberá & Annie Y. Chen & Hunt Allcott & Taylor Brown & Adriana Crespo-Tenorio & Drew Dimmery & Deen Freelon & Matthew Gentz, 2023. "Like-minded sources on Facebook are prevalent but not polarizing," Nature, Nature, vol. 620(7972), pages 137-144, August.
    22. Abhishek Samantray & Paolo Pin, 2019. "Credibility of climate change denial in social media," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    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. Max Falkenberg & Fabiana Zollo & Walter Quattrociocchi & Jürgen Pfeffer & Andrea Baronchelli, 2024. "Patterns of partisan toxicity and engagement reveal the common structure of online political communication across countries," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Richard Thomas Watson & Kirk Plangger & Leyland Pitt & Amrit Tiwana, 2023. "A Theory of Information Compression: When Judgments Are Costly," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1089-1108, September.
    3. Barbosa de Andrade Aragão, Rafaela & Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Burns, Georgette Leah & Ross, Helen & Biggs, Duan, 2024. "‘Greenlash’ and reactionary stakeholders in environmental governance: An analysis of soy farmers against zero deforestation in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    4. Jianshan Sun & Jian Song & Yuanchun Jiang & Yezheng Liu & Jun Li, 2022. "Prick the filter bubble: A novel cross domain recommendation model with adaptive diversity regularization," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 101-121, March.
    5. Raghvendra Mall & Mridul Nagpal & Joni Salminen & Hind Almerekhi & Soon-gyo Jung & Bernard J. Jansen, 2024. "Politics on YouTube: Detecting Online Group Polarization Based on News Videos’ Comments," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, May.
    6. Mark C. J. Stoddart & Yixi Yang, 2023. "What are the roles of regional and local climate governance discourse and actors? Mediated climate change policy networks in Atlantic Canada," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(6), pages 1144-1168, November.
    7. Phelps, Jacob & Zabala, Aiora & Daeli, Willy & Carmenta, Rachel, 2021. "Experts and resource users split over solutions to peatland fires," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    8. Falkenberg, Max & Cinelli, Matteo & Galeazzi, Alessandro & Bail, Christopher A. & Benito, Rosa & Bruns, Axel & Gruzd, Anatoliy & Lazer, David & Lee, Jae K. & McCoy, Jennifer, 2025. "Towards global equity in political polarization research," OSF Preprints 3wzfq_v1, Center for Open Science.
    9. Katharina Momsen & Markus Ohndorf, 2023. "Expressive voting versus information avoidance: experimental evidence in the context of climate change mitigation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 194(1), pages 45-74, January.
    10. Kozitsin, Ivan V., 2024. "Optimal control in opinion dynamics models: diversity of influence mechanisms and complex influence hierarchies," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    11. Momsen, Katharina & Ohndorf, Markus, 2022. "Information avoidance, selective exposure, and fake (?) news: Theory and experimental evidence on green consumption," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    12. Robert Epstein & Alex Flores, 2024. "The Video Manipulation Effect (VME): A quantification of the possible impact that the ordering of YouTube videos might have on opinions and voting preferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(11), pages 1-25, November.
    13. Mochon, Daniel & Schwartz, Janet, 2024. "The confrontation effect: When users engage more with ideology-inconsistent content online," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    14. Guohui Song & Yongbin Wang, 2021. "Mainstream Value Information Push Strategy on Chinese Aggregation News Platform: Evolution, Modelling and Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Gabriele Ranco & Darko Aleksovski & Guido Caldarelli & Miha Grčar & Igor Mozetič, 2015. "The Effects of Twitter Sentiment on Stock Price Returns," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-21, September.
    16. Lisa Oswald, 2024. "More than news! Mapping the deliberative potential of a political online ecosystem with digital trace data," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    17. Valeria Burdea & Jonathan Woon, 2023. "Getting it Right: Communication, Voting, and Collective Truth Finding," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 443, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    18. Saumya Bhadani & Shun Yamaya & Alessandro Flammini & Filippo Menczer & Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia & Brendan Nyhan, 2022. "Political audience diversity and news reliability in algorithmic ranking," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(4), pages 495-505, April.
    19. Pierluigi Conzo & Andrea Gallice & Juan S. Morales & Margaret Samahita & Laura K. Taylor, 2021. "Can Hearts Change Minds? Social media Endorsements and Policy Preferences," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 641, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    20. George C Galster, 2024. "How digitalisation influences neighbourhood change," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(16), pages 3028-3049, December.

    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:8:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s42001-025-00381-z. 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.