Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41946848›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Language model estimates indicate increased outgroup animosity among a sample of politicians, journalists, and partisan users on Twitter and Reddit.

Suyash Fulay, Deb Roy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Suyash FulayMassachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA. sfulay@mit.edu.
Deb RoyMassachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Using language models, we analyze a sample of 67 million tweets and 30 million Reddit comments from 2010 to 2023 from partisan users, journalists, and politicians. Our analysis focused on posts referencing at least one of 215 left- or right-leaning political entities, excluding those referencing entities on both sides. In this sample of posts, we found that estimates of outgroup animosity rose among partisan users, politicians, and journalists, with newer cohorts expressing higher levels of animosity than previous ones. Moreover, a small fraction of users is responsible for a disproportionate share of this negative content. We observe systematic differences in topic-level outgroup affect across political orientations: right-leaning users are twice as likely to exhibit outgroup animosity when discussing immigration, while left-leaning users show heightened outgroup animosity when discussing healthcare. On Twitter, U.S. politicians on the left exhibit more outgroup animosity than partisan users in our sample, but from 2017 to 2023, politicians on the right have experienced the sharpest rise in estimated outgroup animosity, surpassing journalists, media, and partisan users. On Reddit, a small number of communities account for a large share of polarizing rhetoric, with the rise and eventual ban of r/TheDonald significantly shaping trends in polarizing discourse among politically active right-leaning users.

Indexed as

JournalismLanguagePoliticsSocial MediaHumansSocial Group

Identifiers

PMID41946848
PMCPMC13219502

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.