Skip to Content

Register
Log-in
Search
- The Free Speech / Pro White Wiki
- Page Index
- User Index
- Global
- What's New
- Wiki Index

0.0
1
2
3
4
5

0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

Last modified by Ryan C on 2025/06/26 03:09

From 71.1 to 72.1 From 74.1 to 75.1

From version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 05:13

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

To version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 05:23

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

@@ -1788,3 +1788,166 @@
  {{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
++{{expand title="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict" expanded="false"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
++**Date of Publication:** *2021*
++**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
++**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
++**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
++**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies*
++
++---
++
++## **Key Statistics**
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict.
++   - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Anonymity and reduced social cues** in CMC increased hostility.
++   - **Echo chambers formed more frequently in algorithm-driven environments**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions.
++   - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**.
++
++---
++
++## **Findings**
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
++   - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Participants with **strong pre-existing biases became more polarized** after exposure to conflicting views.
++   - **Moderate users were more likely to disengage** from conflict-heavy discussions.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces.
++   - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content.
++
++---
++
++## **Critique and Observations**
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**.
++   - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Lacks **qualitative analysis of user motivations**.
++   - Focuses on **Western social media platforms**, missing global perspectives.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics.
++   - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**.
++
++---
++
++## **Relevance to Subproject**
++- Explores how **digital communication influences social division**.
++- Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**.
++- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.
++
++---
++
++## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
++1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**.
++2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**.
++3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**.
++
++---
++
++## **Summary of Research Study**
++This study examines **how online communication intensifies intergroup conflict**, using a dataset of **500,000+ social media interactions**. It highlights the role of **algorithmic filtering, anonymity, and selective exposure** in **increasing polarization and misinformation spread**. The findings emphasize the **need for policy interventions to mitigate digital conflict escalation**.
++
++---
++
++## **📄 Download Full Study**
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]
++
++{{/expand}}
++
++{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
++
++
++{{expand title="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion" expanded="false"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
++**Date of Publication:** *2019*
++**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
++**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
++**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
++**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion*
++
++---
++
++## **Key Statistics**
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**.
++   - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Video-based content was 2x more persuasive** than text-based content.
++   - Participants **under age 35 were more susceptible to political messaging shifts**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**.
++   - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**.
++
++---
++
++## **Findings**
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
++   - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Social media platforms had stronger persuasive effects** than news websites.
++   - Participants who engaged in **online discussions retained more political knowledge**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content.
++   - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**.
++
++---
++
++## **Critique and Observations**
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons.
++   - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Limited to **short-term persuasion effects**, without long-term follow-up.
++   - Does not explore **the role of misinformation in political persuasion**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions.
++   - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**.
++
++---
++
++## **Relevance to Subproject**
++- Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**.
++- Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**.
++- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.
++
++---
++
++## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
++1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**.
++2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**.
++3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**.
++
++---
++
++## **Summary of Research Study**
++This study analyzes **how digital media influences political persuasion**, using **12 experimental studies**. The findings show that **video and interactive content are the most persuasive**, while **younger users are more susceptible to political messaging shifts**. The research emphasizes the **power of digital platforms in shaping public opinion and engagement**.
++
++---
++
++## **📄 Download Full Study**
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]
++
++{{/expand}}
++
++{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
++