A Psychological and Empirical Investigation of the Online Echo Chamber Phenomenon Dissertation Zur Erreichung Des Grades “Dr
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A Psychological and Empirical Investigation of the Online Echo Chamber Phenomenon Dissertation zur Erreichung des Grades “Dr. phil.” Vorgelegt an der Universität Passau Von Robert Luzsa Erstgutachterin: Prof. Dr. Susanne Mayr Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Detlef Urhahne Bearbeiter: Robert Luzsa [email protected] und [email protected] Königstr. 13 94113 Tiefenbach Passau, den 04.06.2019 Preface This dissertation is made up of three research papers that have either been already published in scientific journals or whose submission is in preparation, accompanied by introductory and summary texts. The papers are: Chapter 2: Luzsa, R. & Mayr, S. (2019). Links between users' online social network homogeneity, ambiguity tolerance, and estimated public support for own opinions. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 22(5), 235- 239. Chapter 3: Luzsa, R. & Mayr, S. (submission in preparation). False Consensus in the Echo Chamber: Experimental Exposure to Favorably Biased Social Media News Feeds Leads to Higher Perceived Public Support for Own Opinions. Chapter 4: Luzsa, R. (submission in preparation). Intergroup Bias in Online Echo Chambers: Evidence from Word Frequency Analysis of Attitudinally Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Reddit Groups. Due to copyright reasons, original texts of the initially submitted pre-review versions are used. Therefore, chapters 2 through 4 are not identical to the final published articles and are not suitable for citing (e.g. the title of the paper in chapter 2 was shortened during peer-review). Moreover, the papers have been or will be submitted to different journals with different manuscript guidelines. Therefore, inconsistencies in formatting, layout and bibliographical citation style occur. For the same reason, figures and tables are not numbered continuously across chapters. As copyright allows only unaltered submitted papers to be used, these inconsistences could not be eliminated. Also, in chapter 4, trailing zero for p-values are given as demanded by the journal intended for publication. 2 Acknowledgements I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Susanne Mayr and Prof. Dr. Detlef Urhahne for their scientific support and supervision of this doctoral thesis. I also want to thank my current and former colleagues (especially Dr. Malte Möller and Stephanie Schmitt-Rüth) for many interesting and beneficial discussions, and my friends and family for their support. 3 Abstract In the public debate it is often assumed that communication in so-called “Echo Chambers” - online structures in which like-minded people share mostly messages that confirm their mutual, shared attitudes - can lead to negative outcomes such as increased societal polarization between groups holding opposing beliefs. This thesis aimed to examine this assumption from a psychological perspective and substantiate it empirically. First, based on existing research and psychological theories, a working definition of Echo Chambers was formulated, that highlights two key factors: Selective Exposure to attitudinally congruent messages and communication in homogeneous networks. Then, three studies were conducted to test links between these factors and two individual-level outcomes that are associated to subjects’ actual behavior: Their False Consensus, that is, how strongly subjects perceive the public in agreement with their own attitudes, and their Intergroup Bias, which reflects to which degree subjects’ identify as members of an in- group that is in conflict with negatively perceived out-groups. The studies employed questionnaire-based, experimental, as well as real-word data driven approaches. Overall, they confirm that exposure to Echo Chamber-like online structures can indeed lead to a more favorably distorted perception of public opinions and to more signs of Intergroup Bias in subjects’ communicational style. Thus, the thesis provides first psychologically founded empirical evidence for effects of online Echo Chamber exposure on behavior- related individual-level outcomes. The results can serve as a basis for further research as well as for the discussion of possible strategies to counter negative effects of online Echo Chambers. 4 Table of contents Preface .............................................................................................................................. 2 Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... 3 Abstract ............................................................................................................................. 4 Table of contents .............................................................................................................. 5 1. Introduction: A psychological perspective on online Echo Chambers ........................ 6 1.1. Background and motivation ...................................................................................... 6 1.2. Theoretical framework .............................................................................................. 8 1.2.1. Echo Chambers and selective exposure............................................................... 8 1.2.2. Echo Chambers and network homogeneity ....................................................... 11 1.2.3. A working definition of Echo Chambers ........................................................... 12 1.3. Individual-level outcomes affected by Echo Chambers .......................................... 13 1.3.1. False Consensus ................................................................................................. 14 1.3.2. Intergroup Bias .................................................................................................. 15 1.3.3. Effects via central and peripheral route ............................................................. 18 2. Overview of studies .................................................................................................... 21 2.1. Overview of study one ............................................................................................. 21 2.2. Overview of study two ............................................................................................ 23 2.3. Overview of study three .......................................................................................... 27 3. Study one: Network homogeneity and False Consensus ............................................ 30 4. Study two: Selective exposure and False Consensus ................................................. 49 5. Study three: Intergroup Bias in Echo Chamber message texts ................................... 95 6. Conclusions and general discussion ......................................................................... 118 6.1. Summary and interpretation .................................................................................. 118 6.2. Methodological considerations and future directions ............................................ 121 6.3. Practical implications ............................................................................................ 127 References .................................................................................................................... 130 Versicherung (gem. §4 Abs. 3 Satz 1 Nr. 5 PromO): ................................................... 147 5 1. Introduction: A psychological perspective on online Echo Chambers 1.1. Background and motivation Over the last decade there has been a drastic change in how public and science evaluate the impact of online social media on the individual and society: In the early 2010s, the opportunities for connecting with others and free sharing of information that services like Facebook (founded in 2004) and Twitter (founded in 2006) offered were often regarded quite positively. For example, after wide-spread citizen protests in the Arab world (“Arab Spring”, 2011-2012), news outlets (e.g. Kassim, 2012) as well as research (e.g. Hussain & Howard, 2012; Lotan et al., 2011) often emphasized how Facebook and Twitter allowed for the uncensored spread of democratic ideas under repressive regimes and how they helped activists to communicate and organize. Social media thus appeared as tools of empowerment and social change (Ali, 2011). Governments' attempts to influence network providers to limit users' freedom of communication and information were criticized as censorship (Youmans & York, 2012). More recently, this positive notion gave way to a more critical view: With headlines like "How Social Media Echo Chambers Drown Out the Voices in the Middle" (Mosley, 2018) or "Your Filter Bubble is Destroying Democracy" (El-Bermawy, 2015), popular media warn that Internet and social media may influence public opinion formation and lead to increased societal polarization and strengthening of extremist positions. At the core of this criticism, which is also voiced by researchers (e.g. Grömping, 2014; Williams, McMurray, Kurz, & Lambert, 2015), are the two closely related concepts of “Echo Chambers” and “Filter Bubbles”. Both terms share the assumption that Internet and social 6 media facilitate selectivity in information consumption, making it easy for subjects to surround themselves with like-minded others and with congruent information that support their own views, while keeping away deviant, incongruent opinions. Existing research mostly examines whether users of social media websites really exhibit a tendency to preferably connect with like-minded others and consume and share congruent information