IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/17210.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Online Political Debates

Author

Listed:
  • Tabellini, Guido
  • D'Amico, Leonardo

Abstract

We study how individuals comment on political news posted on Reddit’s main political forum during the 2016 US Presidential Election. We present two main findings. First, opposite partisan users comment on the same news sources, but on different news. Second, partisan users behave very differently from independents if the news is bad for a candidate. Compared to independents, partisan comments on bad news are less frequent on the own candidate, and more frequent on the opponent. The content of the comments also suggests that partisan users are less likely to accept bad news on their candidate, and more likely on the opponent. This behavior is consistent with motivated reasoning, and with the predictions of a model of rational inattention where the cost of attention depends on whether the news is pleasant or unpleasant.

Suggested Citation

  • Tabellini, Guido & D'Amico, Leonardo, 2022. "Online Political Debates," CEPR Discussion Papers 17210, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:17210
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP17210
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daron Acemoglu & Asuman Ozdaglar & James Siderius, 2021. "A Model of Online Misinformation," NBER Working Papers 28884, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Daron Acemoglu & Asuman Ozdaglar, 2011. "Opinion Dynamics and Learning in Social Networks," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 3-49, March.
    3. Edward L. Glaeser & Bryce A. Ward, 2006. "Myths and Realities of American Political Geography," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 119-144, Spring.
    4. Benjamin Golub & Matthew O. Jackson, 2012. "How Homophily Affects the Speed of Learning and Best-Response Dynamics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(3), pages 1287-1338.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marco Manacorda & Guido Tabellini & Andrea Tesei, 2022. "Mobile Internet and the Rise of Political Tribalism in Europe," Working Papers 941, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    2. Marco Manacorda & Guido Tabellini & Andrea Tesei, 2022. "Mobile Internet and the Rise of Communitarian Politics," CESifo Working Paper Series 9955, CESifo.
    3. Manacorda, Marco & Tabellini, Guido & Tesei, Andrea, 2022. "Mobile internet and the rise of political tribalism in Europe," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118001, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Marco Manacorda & Guido Tabellini & Andrea Tesei, 2022. "Mobile internet and the rise of political tribalism in Europe," CEP Discussion Papers dp1877, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Guy Aridor & Rafael Jiménez-Durán & Ro'ee Levy & Lena Song, 2024. "The Economics of Social Media," CESifo Working Paper Series 10934, CESifo.

    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. Andrea Galeotti & Benjamin Golub & Sanjeev Goyal & Rithvik Rao, 2021. "Discord and Harmony in Networks," Papers 2102.13309, arXiv.org.
    2. Tabasso, Nicole, 2019. "Diffusion of multiple information: On information resilience and the power of segregation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 219-240.
    3. Isabel Melguizo, 2019. "Homophily and the Persistence of Disagreement," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(619), pages 1400-1424.
    4. Fã–Rster, Manuel & Mauleon, Ana & Vannetelbosch, Vincent J., 2016. "Trust and manipulation in social networks," Network Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 216-243, June.
    5. Eger, Steffen, 2016. "Opinion dynamics and wisdom under out-group discrimination," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 97-107.
    6. Phillip Monin & Richard Bookstaber, 2017. "Information Flows, the Accuracy of Opinions, and Crashes in a Dynamic Network," Staff Discussion Papers 17-01, Office of Financial Research, US Department of the Treasury.
    7. Christos Mavridis & Nikolas Tsakas, 2021. "Social Capital, Communication Channels and Opinion Formation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(4), pages 635-678, May.
    8. , & ,, 2015. "Information diffusion in networks through social learning," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(3), September.
    9. Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Roberto Corrao & Giacomo Lanzani, 2020. "Robust Opinion Aggregation and its Dynamics," Working Papers 662, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    10. Muller, Eitan & Peres, Renana, 2019. "The effect of social networks structure on innovation performance: A review and directions for research," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 3-19.
    11. Sebastiano Della Lena, 2019. "Non-Bayesian Social Learning and the Spread of Misinformation in Networks," Working Papers 2019:09, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    12. Sandro Sousa & Vincenzo Nicosia, 2022. "Quantifying ethnic segregation in cities through random walks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    13. Nicole Tabasso, 2014. "Diffusion of Multiple Information," School of Economics Discussion Papers 0914, School of Economics, University of Surrey.
    14. Sergio Currarini & Carmen Marchiori & Alessandro Tavoni, 2016. "Network Economics and the Environment: Insights and Perspectives," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(1), pages 159-189, September.
    15. Buechel, Berno & Hellmann, Tim & Klößner, Stefan, 2015. "Opinion dynamics and wisdom under conformity," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 240-257.
    16. Simpson Zhang & Mihaela van der Schaar, 2018. "Reputational Dynamics in Financial Networks During a Crisis," Working Papers 18-03, Office of Financial Research, US Department of the Treasury.
    17. Allouch, Nizar, 2017. "The cost of segregation in (social) networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 329-342.
    18. Rusinowska, Agnieszka & Taalaibekova, Akylai, 2019. "Opinion formation and targeting when persuaders have extreme and centrist opinions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 9-27.
    19. Bernd (B.) Heidergott & Jia-Ping Huang & Ines (I.) Lindner, 2018. "Naive Learning in Social Networks with Random Communication," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 18-018/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    20. Kanu, Edmond Augustine & Henning, Christian H. C. A., 2019. "An assessment of land reform policy processes in Sierra Leone: A network based approach," Working Papers of Agricultural Policy WP2019-04, University of Kiel, Department of Agricultural Economics, Chair of Agricultural Policy.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cpr:ceprdp:17210. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.