skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: 'Walking Into a Fire Hoping You Don't Catch': Strategies and Designs to Facilitate Cross-Partisan Online Discussions
While cross-partisan conversations are central to a vibrant deliberative democracy, these conversations are hard to have, especially amidst unprecedented levels of partisan animosity we observe today. We report on a qualitative study of 17 US residents who engage with outpartisans on Reddit to understand what they look for in these interactions, and the strategies they adopt. We find that users have multiple, sometimes contradictory expectations of these conversations, ranging from deliberative discussions to entertainment and banter. In aiming to foster 'good' cross-partisan discussions, users make strategic choices on which subreddits to participate in, who to engage with and how to talk to outpartisans, often establishing common ground, complimenting, and remaining dispassionate in their interactions. Further, contrary to offline settings where knowing more about outpartisan interlocutors help manage disagreements, on Reddit, users look to actively learn as little as possible about them for fear that such information may bias their interactions. However, through design probes, we find that users are actually open to knowing certain kinds of information about their interlocutors, such as non-political subreddits that they both participate in, and to having that information made visible to their interlocutors. However, making other information visible, such as the other subreddits that they participate in or their past comments, though potentially humanizing, raises concerns around privacy and misuse of that information for personal attacks especially among women and minority groups. Finally, we identify important challenges and opportunities in designing to improve online cross-partisan interactions in today's hyper-polarized environment.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1717688
PAR ID:
10381141
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Volume:
5
Issue:
CSCW2
ISSN:
2573-0142
Page Range / eLocation ID:
1 to 30
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; (, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media)
    The disruptive offline mobilization of participants in online conspiracy theory (CT) discussions has highlighted the importance of understanding how online users may form radicalized conspiracy beliefs. While prior work researched the factors leading up to joining online CT discussions and provided theories of how conspiracy beliefs form, we have little understanding of how conspiracy radicalization evolves after users join CT discussion communities. In this paper, we provide the empirical modeling of various radicalization phases in online CT discussion participants.To unpack how conspiracy engagement is related to radicalization, we first characterize the users' journey through CT discussions via conspiracy engagement pathways. Specifically, by studying 36K Reddit users through their 169M contributions, we uncover four distinct pathways of conspiracy engagement: steady high, increasing, decreasing, and steady low.We further model three successive stages of radicalization guided by prior theoretical works.Specific sub-populations of users, namely those on steady high and increasing conspiracy engagement pathways, progress successively through various radicalization stages. In contrast, users on the decreasing engagement pathway show distinct behavior: they limit their CT discussions to specialized topics, participate in diverse discussion groups, and show reduced conformity with conspiracy subreddits. By examining users who disengage from online CT discussions, this paper provides promising insights about conspiracy recovery process. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; (, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media)
    Social media has been at the center of discussions about political polarization in the United States. However, scholars are actively debating both the scale of political polarization online, and how important online polarization is to the offline world. One question at the center of this debate is what interactions across parties look like online, and in particular 1) whether increasing the number of such interactions is likely to increase or reduce polarization, and 2) what technological affordances may make it more likely that these cross-party interactions benefit, rather than detract from, existing political challenges. The present work aims to provide insights into the latter; that is, we focus on providing a better understanding of how a set of 400,000 partisan users on a particular social media platform, Twitter, used the platform's affordances to interact within and across parties in a large dataset of tweets about COVID in 2021. Our findings suggest that Republican use of cross-party interaction were both more potent and potentially more strategic during COVID, that cross-party interaction was driven heavily by a small set of users and conversations, and that there exist non-obvious indirect pathways to cross-party exposure when different modes of interaction are chained together (especially retweets of quotes). These findings have implications beyond Twitter, we believe, in understanding how affordances of platforms can help to shape partisan exposure and interaction. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; (, Proceedings of the Fifteenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media)
    Budak, Ceren; Cha, Meeyoung; Quercia, Daniele; Xie, Lexing (Ed.)
    Research on online political communication has primarily focused on content in explicitly political spaces. In this work, we set out to determine the amount of political talk missed using this approach. Focusing on Reddit, we estimate that nearly half of all political talk takes place in subreddits that host political content less than 25% of the time. In other words, cumulatively, political talk in non-political spaces is abundant. We further examine the nature of political talk and show that political conversations are less toxic in non-political subreddits. Indeed, the average toxicity of political comments replying to a out-partisan in non-political subreddits is less than even the toxicity of co-partisan replies in explicitly political subreddits. 
    more » « less
  4. ; (, Proceedings of the Fifteenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media)
    Budak, Ceren; Cha, Meeyoung; Quercia, Daniele; Xie, Lexing (Ed.)
    We present the first large-scale measurement study of cross-partisan discussions between liberals and conservatives on YouTube, based on a dataset of 274,241 political videos from 973 channels of US partisan media and 134M comments from 9.3M users over eight months in 2020. Contrary to a simple narrative of echo chambers, we find a surprising amount of cross-talk: most users with at least 10 comments posted at least once on both left-leaning and right-leaning YouTube channels. Cross-talk, however, was not symmetric. Based on the user leaning predicted by a hierarchical attention model, we find that conservatives were much more likely to comment on left-leaning videos than liberals on right-leaning videos. Secondly, YouTube's comment sorting algorithm made cross-partisan comments modestly less visible; for example, comments from conservatives made up 26.3% of all comments on left-leaning videos but just over 20% of the comments were in the top 20 positions. Lastly, using Perspective API's toxicity score as a measure of quality, we find that conservatives were not significantly more toxic than liberals when users directly commented on the content of videos. However, when users replied to comments from other users, we find that cross-partisan replies were more toxic than co-partisan replies on both left-leaning and right-leaning videos, with cross-partisan replies being especially toxic on the replier's home turf. 
    more » « less
  5. ; (, Twelfth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media)
    Online communities play a crucial role in disseminating conspiracy theories. New theories often emerge in the aftermath of catastrophic events. Despite evidence of their widespread appeal, surprisingly little is known about who participates in these event-specific conspiratorial discussions or how do these discussions evolve over time. We study r/conspiracy, an active Reddit community of more than 200,000 users dedicated to conspiratorial discussions. By focusing on four tragic events and 10 years of discussions, we find three distinct user cohorts: joiners, who never participated in Reddit but joined r/conspiracy only after the event; converts who were active Reddit users but joined r/conspiracy only after the event; and veterans, who are longstanding r/conspiracy members. While joiners and converts have a shorter lifespan in the community in comparison to the veterans, joiners are more active during their shorter tenure, becoming increasingly engaged over time. Finally, to investigate how these events affect users’ conspiratorial discussions, we adopted a causal inference approach to analyze user comments around the time of the events. We find that discussions happening after the event exhibit signs of emotional shock, increased language complexity, and simultaneous expressions of certainty and doubtfulness. Our work provides insight on how online communities may detect new conspiracy theories that emerge ensuing dramatic events, and in the process stop them before they spread. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email