Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39353902›Full record

ArticleNature communications2024

Social identity correlates of social media engagement before and after the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Yara Kyrychenko, Tymofii Brik, Sander van der Linden, Jon Roozenbeek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Ingroup solidarity drives social media engagement after political crises.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    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.

Yara KyrychenkoDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. yk408@cam.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-0636-5046
Tymofii BrikKyiv School of Economics, Kyiv, Ukraine.ORCID 0000-0002-5542-1019
Sander van der LindenDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0269-1744
Jon RoozenbeekDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. jjr51@cam.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-8150-9305

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation) OPP1144
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the global presence of social media platforms, the reasons why people like and share content are still poorly understood. We investigate how group identity mentions and expressions of ingroup solidarity and outgroup hostility in posts correlate with engagement on Ukrainian social media (i.e., shares, likes, and other reactions) before and after the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. We use a dataset of 1.6 million posts from Ukrainian news source pages on Facebook and Twitter (currently X) and a geolocated sample of 149 thousand Ukrainian tweets. Before the 2022 Russian invasion, we observe that outgroup mentions in posts from news source pages are generally more strongly associated with engagement than negative, positive, and moral-emotional language. After the invasion, social identity mentions become less strongly associated with engagement. Moreover, post-invasion ingroup solidarity posts are strongly related to engagement, whereas posts expressing outgroup hostility show smaller associations. This is the case for both news and non-news social media data. Our correlational results suggest that signaling solidarity with one's ingroup online is associated with more engagement than negativity about outgroups during intense periods of intergroup conflicts, at least in the context of the Russian-Ukrainian war.

Indexed as

Social IdentificationSocial MediaHumansRussiaUkraine

Identifiers

PMID39353902
PMCPMC11445580

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.