The MAD Model of Moral Contagion: The Role of Motivation, Attention, and Design in the Spread of Moralized Content Online

Abstract

<jats:p> With more than 3 billion users, online social networks represent an important venue for moral and political discourse and have been used to organize political revolutions, influence elections, and raise awareness of social issues. These examples rely on a common process to be effective: the ability to engage users and spread moralized content through online networks. Here, we review evidence that expressions of moral emotion play an important role in the spread of moralized content (a phenomenon we call moral contagion). Next, we propose a psychological model called the motivation, attention, and design (MAD) model to explain moral contagion. The MAD model posits that people have group-identity-based motivations to share moral-emotional content, that such content is especially likely to capture our attention, and that the design of social-media platforms amplifies our natural motivational and cognitive tendencies to spread such content. We review each component of the model (as well as interactions between components) and raise several novel, testable hypotheses that can spark progress on the scientific investigation of civic engagement and activism, political polarization, propaganda and disinformation, and other moralized behaviors in the digital age. </jats:p>

Identity concerns drive belief: The impact of partisan identity on the belief and dissemination of true and false news

“…As such, Studies 2 and 3 included a measure of willingness to share news on social media in addition to the main measure of belief in news. Sharing nes online might serve an important social function--signalling ideological and identity commitments to members of one's social community (Brady, Crockett, & Van Bavel, 2020). As such, the social concerns that drive belief might contribute to fake news contagion online.…”

“…If the news stories serve the purpose of fulfilling social needs, including signalling identity, then people should report a higher willingness to share news stories on social media to the extent that they believe in these news stories (see Brady et al, 2020). Therefore, we assessed the extent to which belief in fake news predicts willingness to share news on social media, and whether that effect was moderated by the political affiliation of participants and/or the type of stories.…”

“…Facebook, Twitter). Previous research has pointed to the role of moral emotions in the processing and online transmission of political information (Brady, Crockett, & Van Bavel, 2020;Vosoughi et al, 2018). The social justice literature has examined the role of moral outrage in shaping reactions to injustices or immoral acts and triggering punishment instincts (Carlsmith, Darley, & Robinson, 2002;Tetlock, Kristel, Elson, Green, & Lerner, 2000;van Prooijen, 2018).…”

Partisan differences in physical distancing are linked to health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…Furthermore, an estimated 81 million Americans reported arguing about politics with close friends and family after the 2016 election 11 , and 34 million hours of Thanksgiving dinner conversation may have been lost in 2016 due to partisan differences between hosts and guests 12 . Exacerbating these partisan differences, social media discourse has the potential to increase political polarization 13,14 , and slanted news outlets tangibly impact voting decisions 15 . In the current era of polarization, then, differences in partisan identity appear to influence a wide variety of social judgements and behaviours 16 .…”

The Psychology of Online Political Hostility: A Comprehensive, Cross-National Test of the Mismatch Hypothesis

“…Online environments are unique in creating large, public forums, where hostile messages may reach thousands including many strangers, could stay accessible perennially and may be promoted by algorithms tuned to generate interactions (Brady, Crockett, and Van Bavel 2020). In this perspective, online environments does not shape how people are motivated but shape what they can accomplish given a specific set of motivations.…”