Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42189837›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

How do recommender systems learn political opinions? A semi-synthetic step-by-step experiment.

Tim Faverjon, Jean-Philippe Cointet, Pedro Ramaciotti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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

3 authors.

Tim Faverjonmédialab Sciences Po, Paris, France.
Jean-Philippe Cointetmédialab Sciences Po, Paris, France.
Pedro Ramaciottimédialab Sciences Po, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3649-4503

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recommendations play a crucial role in shaping informational diets on social media, raising concerns regarding potential consequences such as political segregation. We take an algorithm explanability approach, as opposed to a description of recommendations, to show how recommenders inadvertently create geometrical representations of the ideological position of users with minimal and ubiquitous platform data, and how this impacts content diets. In comparison to work showing the existence of ideological structures in machine representations, we provide a step-by-step causal explanation of their formation. To achieve this, we compute synthetic recommendations with a model trained on real-world data from a panel of nearly 40 thousand X users and the contents they shared on the platform. We show that elementary recommendation principles trained on content dissemination data produce a spatial representation of the Left-Right positions of users in our panel in the recommender, which is also independent of other common attributes, such as age and gender. We explore the consequences of our findings by modifying these ideological representations in the recommender and analyzing the trade-off in resulting recommendations in terms of political leaning, diversity, and relevance of offered contents.

Indexed as

PoliticsSocial MediaAlgorithmsHumans

Identifiers

PMID42189837
PMCPMC13210316

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.