Echo Chamber Effects in the Climate Change Blogosphere

Eck, Christel W. van; Mulder, Bob C.; Linden, Sander van der

doi:10.1080/17524032.2020.1861048

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our study also contributes to the literature on modern climate change skepticism (Brüggemann et al, 2020;Edwards, 2013;Elgesem et al, 2015;Kaiser & Puschmann, 2017;Lewandowsky et al, 2019;Lewandowsky, Oberauer, & Gignac, 2013;van Eck et al, 2020;Walter et al, 2018-02;Williams et al, 2015) and mechanisms of online polarization (Bail et al, 2018;Nordbrandt, 2020;Sunstein, 2002Sunstein, , 2018. Most previous studies focus on the detection and description of polarized networks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 55%

“…While many researchers in the field of such climate change 'echo chambers' (Sunstein, 2002) identify patterns of polarization but refrain from giving clear recommendations on how to prevent or mitigate them (Brüggemann, Elgesem, Bienzeisler, Gertz, & Walter, 2020;Elgesem, Steskal, & Diakopoulos, 2015;Kaiser & Puschmann, 2017), current work has started to propose interventions that promote engagement with cross cutting views and opinions as a way of undermining this type of ideological enclave (Edwards, 2013;Nordbrandt, 2020;van Eck, Mulder, & van der Linden, 2020;Walter, Brüggemann, & Engesser, 2018-02;Williams et al, 2015). However, more recent research in other contexts has suggested that such exposure may backfire (Bail et al, 2018;Paluck, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How do climate change skeptics engage with opposing views? Understanding mechanisms of social identity and cognitive dissonance in an online forum

Oswald,

Bright

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does engagement with opposing views help break down ideological 'echo chambers'; or does it backfire and reinforce them? This question remains critical as academics, policymakers and activists grapple with the question of how to regulate political discussion on social media. In this study, we contribute to the debate by examining the impact of opposing views within a major climate change skeptic online community on 'Reddit'. A large sample of posts (N = 3000) was manually coded as either dissonant or consonant which allowed the automated classification of the full dataset of more than 50,000 posts, with codes inferred from linked websites. We find that ideologically dissonant submissions act as a stimulant to activity in the community: they received more attention (comments) than consonant submissions, even though they received lower scores through up-voting and down-voting. Users who engaged with dissonant submissions were also more likely to return to the forum. Consistent with identity theory, confrontation with opposing views triggered activity in the forum, particularly among users that are highly engaged with the community. In light of the findings, theory of social identity and echo chambers is discussed and enhanced.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 55%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do climate change skeptics engage with opposing views? Understanding mechanisms of social identity and cognitive dissonance in an online forum

Oswald,

Bright

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies find that digital networks do tend towards homophily (Landoli et al 2021), but they hardly constitute closed off echo chambers (Barberá 2020) and sometimes even foster intergroup contact (van Eck et al 2021;Walter et al 2017;Yarchi et al 2020). Cross-cutting interactions with opposing groups exist particularly in political discourses and between politicallyinterested users (An et al 2019;Wu and Resnick 2021).…”

Section: The Role Of Journalism and Digital Media Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

When debates break apart: Discursive polarization as multi-dimensional divergence emerging in and through communication

Brüggemann¹,

Meyer²

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Polarization’ is a common diagnosis of the state of contemporary societies. Yet, few stud-ies theorize or systematically analyze how polarization evolves in media content. To guide future empirical studies, we introduce a public sphere perspective on polarization. Discur-sive Polarization, defined as divergence emerging in public communication, may disrupt the public sphere if left untamed. Its analysis should combine the study of ideological polar-ization (increasing disagreement about issues) and affective polarization (growing disaffec-tion between groups) as evolving in communication. Both processes may be measured in media content. We propose a framework combining the study of journalism and digital communication networks, looking (1) at content and (2) at networked interactions regarding both political issues and social identity formation. Exploring how the public sphere is dis-rupted in the process of Discursive Polarization may help us to understand the wider social phenomenon of polarization: before societies break apart, debates break apart.

show abstract

“…Most studies of polarisation in social media debates on climate change focus on the conflict between those that accept and those that deny anthropogenic climate change (Tandoc and Eng, 2017). Studies have shown that the blogosphere is an arena for a highly polarised discussion on this issue (Author, 2015; Brüggemann et al 2020; van Eck 2021). Twitter networks related to climate change are also found to be characterised by homophily; yet there are also mixed-attitude communities that tend to host fewer extreme views (Williams et al 2015; Tyagi et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polarisation or just differences in opinion: How and why Facebook users disagree about Greta Thunberg

Elgesem

Brüggemann

2022

European Journal of Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To what extent was Greta Thunberg a ‘polarizing figure’ on Facebook, in the period when she received the most extensive media attention? The paper analyses seven months of discussion concerning Thunberg and her message of intergenerational climate justice, using all relevant posts on public Facebook pages in Germany, Sweden, and the UK. We find that there are many similarities in the attitudes expressed and topics discussed on Facebook in the three countries; however, there are also some striking differences in the levels of polarisation. This comparative study provides evidence that the level of polarisation around these topics on Facebook is very low in Sweden and the UK, but high in Germany. In Germany, a group of political actors stand out as particularly polarising, and, in contrast to the other two countries, the topic of intergeneration justice, the core of Thunberg’s message, is almost absent from the German Facebook discourse. The study shows that Thunberg was not in general a polarising figure in the three European countries and that neither the affordances offered by the platform nor features of her person, message, or activism explain the observed polarisation around Thunberg on Facebook.

show abstract

Echo Chamber Effects in the Climate Change Blogosphere

Cited by 15 publications

References 19 publications

How do climate change skeptics engage with opposing views? Understanding mechanisms of social identity and cognitive dissonance in an online forum

How do climate change skeptics engage with opposing views? Understanding mechanisms of social identity and cognitive dissonance in an online forum

When debates break apart: Discursive polarization as multi-dimensional divergence emerging in and through communication

Polarisation or just differences in opinion: How and why Facebook users disagree about Greta Thunberg

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About