ArticleScientific reports2016
Echo Chambers: Emotional Contagion and Group Polarization on Facebook.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 103 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
103 citing papers in PubMed.
- Saturation of moral language predicts lower content engagement on social media.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- Factors Associated With Nurses' Self-Reported Susceptibility to Online Health Misinformation: Evidence From Greece.International nursing review · 2026Observational
- Stable Boundaries of Opinion Dynamics in Heterogeneous Spatial Complex Networks.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Affect-inducing cues in risk messages: impact on collective negative emotions during public health emergencies.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Consensus or conflict? Recommender systems as recursive exposure systems in the production of polarization.Frontiers in sociology · 2026Review
- The psychological motivation of users actively constructing information cocoons from the perspective of Adler's teleology: an empirical study based on a sample of Chinese university students.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Multifaceted polarization and information reliability in climate change discussions on social media platforms.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Sustainable textile wastewater remediation using nano zerovalent aluminum for organic removal and pathogen inactivation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Impact of Blame Attribution on Moral Contagion in Controversial Events.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Interbrain Synchrony Mitigates Extremism Within Echo Chambers.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Article
- How perceived coercion polarizes unvaccinated people: The mediating role of conspiracy beliefs.Journal of health psychology · 2025Article
- A primer on politicization, polarization, radicalization, and activation and their implications for democracy in times of rapid technological change.The British journal of social psychology · 2025Article
- Echo Chambers and Homophily in the Diffusion of Risk Information on Social Media: The Case of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs).Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Relative engagement with sources of climate misinformation is growing across social media platforms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- From Individual Expression to Group Polarization: A Study on Twitter's Emotional Diffusion Patterns in the German Election.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Unveiling the drivers of active participation in social media discourse.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluating the effect of viral posts on social media engagement.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Media choice and audience perceptions: Evidence from visual framing of immigration in news stories.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Neural mechanisms of cognitive conflict: processing COVID-19 vaccine misinformation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
43 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent findings showed that users on Facebook tend to select information that adhere to their system of beliefs and to form polarized groups - i.e., echo chambers. Such a tendency dominates information cascades and might affect public debates on social relevant issues. In this work we explore the structural evolution of communities of interest by accounting for users emotions and engagement. Focusing on the Facebook pages reporting on scientific and conspiracy content, we characterize the evolution of the size of the two communities by fitting daily resolution data with three growth models - i.e. the Gompertz model, the Logistic model, and the Log-logistic model. Although all the models appropriately describe the data structure, the Logistic one shows the best fit. Then, we explore the interplay between emotional state and engagement of users in the group dynamics. Our findings show that communities' emotional behavior is affected by the users' involvement inside the echo chamber. Indeed, to an higher involvement corresponds a more negative approach. Moreover, we observe that, on average, more active users show a faster shift towards the negativity than less active ones.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.