ArticleScientific reports2025
Affective homophily as the dominant organizing principle in online conflict discourse networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study develops a diagnostic framework using a Graph Attention Network (GATv2) to uncover the organizing principles of online conflict networks. By modeling link prediction and rigorously comparing GATv2 against multiple baselines, we validate its superior performance and interpretability. Our analysis delivers a "computational verdict": the model learns to overwhelmingly prioritize affective homophily while systematically discounting users' structural prestige. Probing the learned embeddings reveals that emotion is the dominant dimension of this homophily, a phenomenon we term "emotional fortresses." Critically, by analyzing the model's prediction failures, we identify a novel class of "emergent brokers" who bridge emotional divides through low centrality and affective neutrality. Finally, applying the framework to non-conflict domains empirically establishes the theory's boundary conditions. This research provides a new theoretical lens and methodological tool for understanding network dynamics in polarized environments.
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.