ArticlePloS one2021
Modeling the emergence of affective polarization in the social media society.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metastability and Entropy Peaks in Antagonistic Multiplex Consensus Dynamics.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Others Like Me: How Issue-Position Groups Distort the Function of Morality by Manufacturing Consensus.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Article
- The evolving study of political polarization.Open research Europe · 2026Review
- Identity-scaffolded epistemologies: adopting non-normative beliefs online through collective information bias.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Application of the Three-Group Model to the 2024 US Elections.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Responsibilities of Medical Professionals Amidst Geopolitical Conflict.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- A theoretical framework for polarization as the gradual fragmentation of a divided society.Communications psychology · 2024Review
- The impact of family factors and digital technologies on mental health in university students.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- How social reinforcement learning can lead to metastable polarisation and the voter model.PloS one · 2024Article
- A Holistic Review of Cyber-Physical-Social Systems: New Directions and Opportunities.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Unanimity, Coexistence, and Rigidity: Three Sides of Polarization.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- 'You truly are the worst kind of racist!': Argumentation and polarization in online discussions around gender and radical-right populism.The British journal of social psychology · 2023Article
- Modeling opinion polarization on social media: Application to Covid-19 vaccination hesitancy in Italy.PloS one · 2023Article
- How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- A general framework to link theory and empirics in opinion formation models.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Editorial: The Computational Analysis of Cultural Conflicts.Frontiers in big data · 2022Article
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
Rising political polarization in recent decades has hampered and gridlocked policymaking, as well as weakened trust in democratic institutions. These developments have been linked to the idea that new media technology fosters extreme views and political conflict by facilitating self-segregation into "echo chambers" where opinions are isolated and reinforced. This opinion-centered picture has recently been challenged by an emerging political science literature on "affective polarization", which suggests that current polarization is better understood as driven by partisanship emerging as a strong social identity. Through this lens, politics has become a question of competing social groups rather than differences in policy position. Contrary to the opinion-centered view, this identity-centered perspective has not been subject to dynamical formal modeling, which generally permits hypotheses about micro-level explanations for macro-level phenomena to be systematically tested and explored. We here propose a formal model that links new information technology to affective polarization via social psychological mechanisms of social identity. Our results suggest that new information technology catalyzes affective polarization by lowering search and interaction costs, which shifts the balance between centrifugal and centripetal forces of social identity. We find that the macro-dynamics of social identity is characterized by two stable regimes on the societal level: one fluid regime, in which identities are weak and social connections heterogeneous, and one solid regime in which identities are strong and groups homogeneous. We also find evidence of hysteresis, meaning that a transition into a fragmented state is not readily reversed by again increasing those costs. This suggests that, due to systemic feedback effects, if polarization passes certain tipping points, we may experience run-away political polarization that is highly difficult to reverse.
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.