ArticlePloS one2019
Algorithmic bias amplifies opinion fragmentation and polarization: A bounded confidence model.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Testing the impact of fallacies and contrarian claims in climate change misinformation.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Article
- Echo chamber formation sharpened by priority users.iScience · 2024Article
- Success-driven opinion formation determines social tensions.iScience · 2024Article
- Shaping opinions in social networks with shadow banning.PloS one · 2024Article
- Mass media impact on opinion evolution in biased digital environments: a bounded confidence model.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Voter-like Dynamics with Conflicting Preferences on Modular Networks.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Collective patterns and stable misunderstandings in networks striving for consensus without a common value system.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The Networked Context of COVID-19 Misinformation: Informational Homogeneity on YouTube at the Beginning of the Pandemic.Online social networks and media · 2021Article
- Interdisciplinary Lessons Learned While Researching Fake News.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Article
- Epistemic spillovers: Learning others' political views reduces the ability to assess and use their expertise in nonpolitical domains.Cognition · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The flow of information reaching us via the online media platforms is optimized not by the information content or relevance but by popularity and proximity to the target. This is typically performed in order to maximise platform usage. As a side effect, this introduces an algorithmic bias that is believed to enhance fragmentation and polarization of the societal debate. To study this phenomenon, we modify the well-known continuous opinion dynamics model of bounded confidence in order to account for the algorithmic bias and investigate its consequences. In the simplest version of the original model the pairs of discussion participants are chosen at random and their opinions get closer to each other if they are within a fixed tolerance level. We modify the selection rule of the discussion partners: there is an enhanced probability to choose individuals whose opinions are already close to each other, thus mimicking the behavior of online media which suggest interaction with similar peers. As a result we observe: a) an increased tendency towards opinion fragmentation, which emerges also in conditions where the original model would predict consensus, b) increased polarisation of opinions and c) a dramatic slowing down of the speed at which the convergence at the asymptotic state is reached, which makes the system highly unstable. Fragmentation and polarization are augmented by a fragmented initial population.
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.