Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
184 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

All Polarized but Still Different: a Multi-factorial Metric to Discriminate between Polarization Behaviors on Social Media (2312.04603v1)

Published 7 Dec 2023 in cs.SI and physics.soc-ph

Abstract: Online polarization has attracted the attention of researchers for many years. Its effects on society are a cause for concern, and the design of personalized depolarization strategies appears to be a key solution. Such strategies should rely on a fine and accurate measurement, and a clear understanding of polarization behaviors. However, the literature still lacks ways to characterize them finely. We propose GRAIL, the first individual polarization metric, relying on multiple factors. GRAIL assesses these factors through entropy and is based on an adaptable Generalized Additive Model. We evaluate the proposed metric on a Twitter dataset related to the highly controversial debate about the COVID-19 vaccine. Experiments confirm the ability of GRAIL to discriminate between polarization behaviors. To go further, we provide a finer characterization and explanation of the identified behaviors through an innovative evaluation framework.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (41)
  1. Network propaganda: Manipulation, disinformation, and radicalization in American politics. Oxford University Press, 2018.
  2. Moonsun Choi. A concept analysis of digital citizenship for democratic citizenship education in the internet age. Theory & research in social education, 44(4):565–607, 2016.
  3. Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature. Political polarization, and political disinformation: a review of the scientific literature (March 19, 2018), 2018.
  4. Emily Kubin and Christian von Sikorski. The role of (social) media in political polarization: a systematic review. Annals of the International Communication Association, 45(3):188–206, 2021.
  5. Jonathan Stray. Designing recommender systems to depolarize. First Monday, 27, 2021.
  6. Markus Prior. Media and political polarization. Annual Review of Political Science, 16:101–127, 2013.
  7. Exposure diversity as a design principle for recommender systems. Information, Communication & Society, 21(2):191–207, 2018.
  8. A metric for filter bubble measurement in recommender algorithms considering the news domain. Applied Soft Computing, 97:106771, 2020.
  9. Benefits of diverse news recommendations for democracy: A user study. Digital Journalism, pages 1–21, 2022.
  10. Diversity in news recommendations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.09495, 2020.
  11. Being diverse is not enough: Rethinking diversity evaluation to meet challenges of news recommender systems. In Fairness in User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (FairUMAP 2022), 2022.
  12. Quantifying controversy on social media. ACM Transactions on Social Computing, 1(1):1–27, 2018.
  13. A measure of polarization on social media networks based on community boundaries. In Proceedings of the international AAAI conference on web and social media, volume 7, pages 215–224, 2013.
  14. Measuring political polarization: Twitter shows the two sides of venezuela. Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 25(3):033114, 2015.
  15. Extracting significant signal of news consumption from social networks: the case of twitter in italian political elections. Palgrave Communications, 5(1):1–16, 2019.
  16. News sharing on twitter reveals emergent fragmentation of media agenda and persistent polarization. EPJ Data Science, 11(1):48, 2022.
  17. The triple-filter bubble: Using agent-based modelling to test a meta-theoretical framework for the emergence of filter bubbles and echo chambers. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(1):129–149, 2019.
  18. Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(10):560–576, 2022.
  19. The drivers of online polarization: fitting models to data. Information Sciences, page 119152, 2023.
  20. An organizational form framework to measure and interpret online polarization. Information, Communication & Society, pages 1–33, 2023.
  21. A Multi-Factorial Analysis of Polarization on Social Media. In UMAP’23, Limassol, Cyprus, June 2023.
  22. Opinion dynamics: models, extensions and external effects. In Participatory sensing, opinions and collective awareness, pages 363–401. Springer, 2017.
  23. Modeling echo chambers and polarization dynamics in social networks. Physical Review Letters, 124(4):048301, 2020.
  24. Modeling of the public opinion polarization process with the considerations of individual heterogeneity and dynamic conformity. Mathematics, 7(10):917, 2019.
  25. Political polarization in online news consumption. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, volume 15, pages 152–162, 2021.
  26. What are filter bubbles really? a review of the conceptual and empirical work. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 30th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization, pages 274–279, 2022.
  27. Eli Pariser. The filter bubble: How the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. Penguin, 2011.
  28. Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(37):9216–9221, 2018.
  29. Personalizing recommendation diversity based on user personality. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 28(3):237–276, 2018.
  30. How social media shapes polarization. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(11):913–916, 2021.
  31. Political polarization on twitter. In Proceedings of the international aaai conference on web and social media, volume 5, pages 89–96, 2011.
  32. Mark EJ Newman. Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 103(23):8577–8582, 2006.
  33. Polarization of the vaccination debate on facebook. Vaccine, 36(25):3606–3612, 2018.
  34. Cass R Sunstein. The law of group polarization. University of Chicago Law School, John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper, (91), 1999.
  35. Claude Elwood Shannon. A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell system technical journal, 27(3):379–423, 1948.
  36. Trevor J Hastie. Generalized additive models. In Statistical models in S, pages 249–307. Routledge, 2017.
  37. Measuring polarization in twitter enabled in online political conversation: The case of 2016 us presidential election. In 2017 IEEE international conference on information reuse and integration (IRI), pages 607–613. IEEE, 2017.
  38. Finding community structure in very large networks. Physical review E, 70(6):066111, 2004.
  39. The global k-means clustering algorithm. Pattern Recognition, pages 451–461, 2003.
  40. A cluster separation measure. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, (2):224–227, 1979.
  41. Peter J. Rousseeuw. Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of computational and applied mathematics, pages 53–65, 1987.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now