nach oben

Social Network Analysis and Mining

Erschienen in:

01.12.2024 | Original Article

Invasiveness, Intrusiveness and Influence: three new metrics to measure communication between political digital echo chambers

verfasst von: Eglantina Kalluçi, Ridvan Peshkopia

Erschienen in: Social Network Analysis and Mining | Ausgabe 1/2024

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The contemporary debate about the place and role of political digital echo chambers (DPECs) in political communication relies more on assumptions, guess work, and speculations rather than empirical conclusions. Such shortcomings reflect the lack of empirical tools to measure the communication between echo chambers and the outside world. We try to overcome this deficiency by construing three graph-level metrics: Invasiveness, Intrusiveness and Influence, which try to capture the information dominance of a DPEC over another one, its strength of information source, and the penetration capability of one DPEC’s message into another DPEC’s space. We tested our metrics with simulated and real network data, and they seem to respond according to their design and our expectations. Test results on real network data showed that our metrics would be very useful in measuring the comparative strength of political mobilization in face of opposing forces that use the same social networks for political countermobilization.

Vorheriger Artikel Arabic sentiment analysis of Monkeypox using deep neural network and optimized hyperparameters of machine learning algorithms

Nächster Artikel Intellectual dark web, alt-lite and alt-right: Are they really that different? a multi-perspective analysis of the textual content produced by contrarians

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Abrams D, Wetherell M, Cochrane S, Hogg MA, Turner JC (1990) Knowing what to think by knowing who you are: self-categorization and the nature of norm formation, conformity and group polarization. Br J Soc Psychol 29(2):97–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1990.tb00892.xCrossRef

Adamic L, Glance N (2005) The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: divided they blog. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on link discovery, p 36–43. http://www.ramb.ethz.ch/CDstore/www2005-ws/workshop/wf10/AdamicGlanceBlogWWW.pdf

Allcott H, Gentzkow M (2017) Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. J Econ Perspect 31(2):211–236. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.211CrossRef

Arant R, Hanke K, Mittelstädt A, Pennington R, Umel A, Odağ Ö (2023) Media use and political engagement: cross-cultural approaches| the role of media use in political mobilization: a comparison of free and restrictive countries. Int J Commun 17:21

Ashok Swain (2016) Struggle against the state: social network and protest mobilization in India. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Struggle-Against-the-State-Social-Network-and-Protest-Mobilization-in-India/Swain/p/book/9781138268357

Benzi M, Estrada E, Klymko C (2013) Ranking hubs and authorities using matrix functions. Linear Algebra Appl 438(5):2447–2474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2012.10.022MathSciNetCrossRef

Blex C, Yasseri T (2020) Positive algorithmic bias cannot stop fragmentation in homophilic networks. J Math Sociol. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250X.2020.1818078CrossRef

Boutyline A, Willer R (2016) The social structure of political echo chambers: variation in ideological homophily in online networks: political echo chambers. Polit Psychol 38(3):551–569. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12337CrossRef

Boyd DM, Ellison NB (2007) Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. J Comput Med Commun 13(1):210–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.xCrossRef

Breurer A (2012) The role of social media in mobilizing political protest: evidence from the Tunisian revolution [German institute of development and sustainability (IDOS) discussion paper 10/2012]. https://www.idos-research.de/en/discussion-paper/article/the-role-of-social-media-in-mobilizing-political-protest-evidence-from-the-tunisian-revolution/

Bright J, Marchal N, Ganeshc B, Rudina S (2020) Echo chambers exist! (but they’re full of opposing views) [Unpublished manuscript]. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2001/2001.11461.pdf

Brugnoli E, Cinelli M, Quattrociocchi W, Scala A (2019) Recursive patterns in online echo chambers. Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56191-7CrossRef

Brundidge J (2010) Encountering “difference” in the contemporary public sphere: the contribution of the internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks. J Commun 60(4):680–700. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01509.xCrossRef

Bruns A, Highfield T (2016) Is Habermas on twitter? Social media and the public sphere. In: Bruns A, Enli G, Skogerbo E, Christensen C, Larsson AO (eds) The Routledge companion to social media and politics. Routledge, pp 56–73

Caers R, De Feyter T, De Couck M, Stough T, Vigna C, Du Bois C (2013) Facebook: a literature review. New Media Soc 15(6):982–1002. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813488061CrossRef

Cardoso G, Lapa T, Fátima BD (2016) People are the message? Social mobilization and social media in Brazil. Int J Commun 10:22

David M (2001) Metric vs metrics. The data school. https://dataschool.com/misrepresenting-data/metric-vs-metrics/

De la Cruz Cabrera O, Matar M, Reichel L (2019) Analysis of directed networks via the matrix exponential. J Comput Appl Math 355:182–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2019.01.015MathSciNetCrossRef

Druckman JN, Levendusky MS, McLain A (2018) No need to watch: how the effects of partisan media can spread via interpersonal discussions. Am J Polit Sci 62(1):99–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12325CrossRef

Dubois E, Minaeian S, Paquet-Labelle A, Beaudry S (2020) Who to trust on social media: how opinion leaders and seekers avoid disinformation and echo chambers. Soc Media + Soc. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120913993CrossRef

Estrada E, Rodríguez-Velázquez JA (2005) Subgraph centrality in complex networks. Phys Rev E 71(5):056103. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.71.056103MathSciNetCrossRef

Flaxman S, Goel S, Rao JM (2016) Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opin Q 80(S1):298–320. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006CrossRef

Fuchs C (2015) Mídias sociais e a esfera pública [Social Media and the Public Sphere]. Contracampo: Braz J Commun, 34(3):6–77. http://periodicos.uff.br/contracampo/article/view/17552/pdf_1

Gallier J (2011) Discrete mathematics. SpringerCrossRef

Garimella K, Morales GDF, Gionis A, Mathioudakis M (2018) Political discourse on social media: echo chambers, gatekeepers, and the price of bipartisanship. In: WWW ’18: proceedings of the 2018 world wide web conference, p 913–922. https://doi.org/10.1145/3178876.3186139

Garrett RK (2009) Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: reframing the selective exposure debate. J Commun 59(4):676–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01452.xCrossRef

Gruzd A, Roy J (2014) Investigating political polarization on twitter: a Canadian perspective. Policy Internet 6(1):28–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/1944-2866.POI354CrossRef

Guess A, Lyons B, Nyhan B, Reifler J (2018) Avoiding the echo chamber about echo chambers: why selective exposure to like-minded political news is less prevalent than you think (No. 133). Knight foundation. https://kf-site-production.s3.amazonaws.com/media_elements/files/000/000/133/original/Topos_KF_White-Paper_Nyhan_V1.pdf

Harnad S (2009) Multiple metrics required to measure research performance. Nature 457(7231):785–785. https://doi.org/10.1038/457785aCrossRef

Himelboim I, Smith MA, Rainie L, Shneiderman B, Espina C (2017) Classifying twitter topic-networks using social network analysis. Soc Media + Soc 3(1):2056305117691545. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117691545CrossRef

Katz E, Lazarsfeld P, Roper E (2017) Personal influence: the part played by people in the flow of mass communications. Routledge, New YorkCrossRef

Ksiazek TB, Malthouse EC, Webster JG (2010) News-seekers and avoiders: exploring patterns of total news consumption across media and the relationship to civic participation. J Broadcast Electron Media 54(4):551–568. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2010.519808CrossRef

Lorenz-Spreen P, Oswald L, Lewandowsky S, Hertwig R (2023) A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy. Nat Hum Behav 7(1):1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01460-1CrossRef

McKeon RT, Gitomer DH (2019) Social media, political mobilization, and high-stakes testing. Front Educ. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00055CrossRef

McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM (2001) Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Ann Rev Sociol 27:415–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415CrossRef

Nguyen CT (2018) Escape the echo chamber [Online magazine]. Aeon.Co. https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult

Nikolov D, Oliveira DFM, Flammini A, Menczer F (2015) Measuring online social bubbles. Peer J Comput Sci 1:e38. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.38CrossRef

Papacharissi Z (2008) The virtual sphere 2.0: the internet, the public sphere and beyond. In: Chadwick A, Howard PN (eds) Routledge handbook of internet politics. Routledge, pp 230–245

Prior M (2007) Post-broadcast democracy: how media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. Cambridge University Press

Recuero R, Zago G, Soares F (2019) Using social network analysis and social capital to identify user roles on polarized political conversations on twitter. Soc Media Soc 5(2):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119848745CrossRef

Sunstein C (2001) Echo chambers: Bush v. Gore impeachment, and beyond. Princeton University Press

Sunstein C (2018) Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press

Turcotte J, York C, Irving J, Scholl RM, Pingree RJ (2015) News recommendations from social media opinion leaders: effects on media trust and information seeking. J Comput Mediat Commun 20(5):520–535. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12127CrossRef

Watson IR (2013) Digital natives or digital tribes universal? J Educ Res 1(2):104–112

Weidmann NB, Rød EG (2019) The internet and political protest in autocracies. Oxford University PressCrossRef

Wilson RE, Gosling SD, Graham LT (2012) A review of facebook research in the social sciences. Perspect Psychol Sci 7(3):203–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612442904CrossRef

Wojcieszak ME, Mutz DC (2009) Online groups and political discourse: do online discussion spaces facilitate exposure to political disagreement? J Commun 59(1):40–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01403.xCrossRef

Wollebæk D, Karlsen R, Steen-Johnsen K, Enjolras B (2019) Anger, fear, and echo chambers: the emotional basis for online behavior. Soc Media + Soc 5(2):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119829859CrossRef

Zhang Y, Leung L (2012) A review of social networking service (SNS) research in communication journals from 2006 to 2011. New Media Soc 17(7):1007–1024. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813520477CrossRef

Titel: Invasiveness, Intrusiveness and Influence: three new metrics to measure communication between political digital echo chambers
verfasst von: Eglantina Kalluçi
Ridvan Peshkopia
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2024
Verlag: Springer Vienna
Erschienen in: Social Network Analysis and Mining / Ausgabe 1/2024
Print ISSN: 1869-5450
Elektronische ISSN: 1869-5469
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-023-01186-6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2024

Mining association between different emotion classes present in users posts of social media

Interlayer co-similarity matrices for link prediction in multiplex networks

Multilingual, monolingual and mono-dialectal transfer learning for Moroccan Arabic sentiment classification

Classifying informative tweets using feature enhanced pre-trained language model

Text classification models for personality disorders identification

Construction of a training dataset for a sentiment analysis model of dairy products tweets in Brazil

Premium Partner