Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39285221›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Negative online news articles are shared more to social media.

Joe Watson, Sander van der Linden, Michael Watson, David Stillwell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The cultural ecology of social media.Evolutionary human sciences · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Joe WatsonPsychometrics Centre, Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. j.watson@jbs.cam.ac.uk.
Sander van der LindenDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Michael WatsonDepartment of Informatics, King's College London, London, UK.
David StillwellPsychometrics Centre, Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prior research demonstrates that news-related social media posts using negative language are re-posted more, rewarding users who produce negative content. We investigate whether negative material from external news sites is also introduced to social media through more user posts, offering comparable incentives for journalists to adopt a negative tone. Data from four US and UK news sites (95,282 articles) and two social media platforms (579,182,075 posts on Facebook and Twitter, now X) show social media users are 1.91 times more likely to share links to negative news articles. The impact of negativity varies by news site and social media platform and, for political articles, is moderated by topic focus, with users showing a greater inclination to share negative articles referring to opposing political groups. Additionally, negativity amplifies news dissemination on social media to a greater extent when accounting for the re-sharing of user posts containing article links. These findings suggest a higher prevalence of negatively toned articles on Facebook and Twitter compared to online news sites. Further, should journalists respond to the incentives created by the heightened sharing of negative articles to social media platforms, this could even increase negative news exposure for those who do not use social media.

Indexed as

Social MediaHumansInformation DisseminationInternetMass MediaUnited KingdomUnited StatesNegativity biasOnline newsSocial media

Identifiers

PMID39285221
PMCPMC11405697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.