Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40421005›Full record

ArticlePNAS nexus2025

Online speech and communal conflict: Evidence from India.

Sebastian Schutte, Daniel Karell, Ryan Barrett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PNAS nexus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Sebastian SchuttePeace and Conflict Dynamics, Peace Research Institute Oslo, Hausmanns Gate 3, Oslo 0186, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0701-9647
Daniel KarellDepartment of Sociology, Yale University, 493 College Street, New Haven, CT 06511, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6709-6535
Ryan BarrettDepartment of Sociology, Yale University, 493 College Street, New Haven, CT 06511, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4151-8765

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How does online speech affect offline attacks? While a growing literature has examined this link in right-wing violence in the West, much less is known about its importance in the religiously divided societies of the Global South. Furthermore, existing research has overwhelmingly focused on negative externalities of social media, while paying comparatively little attention to their conciliatory effects. We advance the scholarship in both of these areas by analyzing 22.4 million posts from Koo, an Indian social media network popular among India's Hindu nationalists. We combine these data with information on attacks on religious minorities in India from 2020 through 2022. We find that the frequency of hashtags with a Hindu-chauvinist connotation are associated with increased attacks on Muslims and Christians. We also find that the frequency of hashtags alluding to the overcoming of religious divisions is associated with fewer attacks. These results survive a battery of robustness checks and supplemental tests. Additionally, the observed relationships disappear during exogenous Internet outages, consistent with the effect being driven by online speech. Importantly, since the content we study is not overtly aggressive and conveys values rather than factual claims, it does not classify as hate speech, misinformation, or disinformation. This suggests that the scholarly debate on what kinds of online speech influence offline harm has to be broadened and that censorship and fact-checking can fall short of addressing online speech's negative consequences in religiously divided societies.

Indexed as

communal conflictHindu nationalismIndiaKoosocial media

Identifiers

PMID40421005
PMCPMC12103975

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.