Dynamics of Ideological Biases of Social Media Users (2309.15968v2)
Abstract: Humanity for centuries has perfected skills of interpersonal interactions and evolved patterns that enable people to detect lies and deceiving behavior of others in face-to-face settings. Unprecedented growth of people's access to mobile phones and social media raises an important question: How does this new technology influence people's interactions and support the use of traditional patterns? In this article, we answer this question for homophily-driven patterns in social media. In our previous studies, we found that, on a university campus, changes in student opinions were driven by the desire to hold popular opinions. Here, we demonstrate that the evolution of online platform-wide opinion groups is driven by the same desire. We focus on two social media: Twitter and Parler, on which we tracked the political biases of their users. On Parler, an initially stable group of Right-biased users evolved into a permanent Right-leaning echo chamber dominating weaker, transient groups of members with opposing political biases. In contrast, on Twitter, the initial presence of two large opposing bias groups led to the evolution of a bimodal bias distribution, with a high degree of polarization. We capture the movement of users from the initial to final bias groups during the tracking period. We also show that user choices are influenced by side-effects of homophily. Users entering the platform attempt to find a sufficiently large group whose members hold political biases within the range sufficiently close to their own. If successful, they stabilize their biases and become permanent members of the group. Otherwise, they leave the platform. We believe that the dynamics of users' behavior uncovered in this article create a foundation for technical solutions supporting social groups on social media and socially aware networks.
- H. Mondani and R Swedberg. What is a social pattern? Rethinking a central social science term. Theory Soc., 51, 2022.
- R. I. M. Dunbar. Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans. Behav Brain Sci, 16(4):681–694, 1993.
- D. Williams. Signalling, commitment, and strategic absurdities. Mind Lang., 37(5):1011–1029, 2022.
- S. Lee and M. Xenos. Social distraction? Social media use and political knowledge in two US Presidential elections. Comput. Hum. Behav., 90:18–25, 2019.
- Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Science, 363(6425):374–378, Jan 2019.
- Political polarization of news media and influencers on Twitter in the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections. Nat. Hum. Behav.), 2023.
- Cascade-based echo chamber detection. In Proc. 31st ACM Int. Conf. Inf.Knowl. Manag., pages 1511–1520, 2022.
- Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annu. Rev. Sociol., 27(1):415–444, 2001.
- Creation, evolution, and dissolution of social groups. Sci. Rep., 11(1):1–11, 2021.
- S. Tsugawa. A survey of social network analysis techniques and their applications to socially aware networking. IEICE Trans. Commun., E102.B, 02 2018.
- Ram Velichety. A cross-sectional and temporal analysis of information consumption on twitter. ICIS 2013 Proc. 2., 11 2013.
- Parler, backed by Mercer family, makes play for conservatives mad at Facebook, Twitter, 2020. Accessed on May 28, 2023.
- D. Cameron. Every deleted Parler post, many with users’ location data, has been archived, 2021. Accessed on May 28, 2023.
- Entropy measures of human communication dynamics. Sci. Rep., 8(15697), 2018.
- R. S. Nickerson. Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev Gen Psych, 2:175–220, 1998.
- Mohammed Shahid Modi (3 papers)
- James Flamino (13 papers)
- Boleslaw K. Szymanski (100 papers)