Literature DB >> 26243876

The search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of elections.

Robert Epstein1, Ronald E Robertson2.   

Abstract

Internet search rankings have a significant impact on consumer choices, mainly because users trust and choose higher-ranked results more than lower-ranked results. Given the apparent power of search rankings, we asked whether they could be manipulated to alter the preferences of undecided voters in democratic elections. Here we report the results of five relevant double-blind, randomized controlled experiments, using a total of 4,556 undecided voters representing diverse demographic characteristics of the voting populations of the United States and India. The fifth experiment is especially notable in that it was conducted with eligible voters throughout India in the midst of India's 2014 Lok Sabha elections just before the final votes were cast. The results of these experiments demonstrate that (i) biased search rankings can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20% or more, (ii) the shift can be much higher in some demographic groups, and (iii) search ranking bias can be masked so that people show no awareness of the manipulation. We call this type of influence, which might be applicable to a variety of attitudes and beliefs, the search engine manipulation effect. Given that many elections are won by small margins, our results suggest that a search engine company has the power to influence the results of a substantial number of elections with impunity. The impact of such manipulations would be especially large in countries dominated by a single search engine company.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Internet influence; digital bandwagon effect; search engine manipulation effect; search rankings; voter manipulation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26243876      PMCID: PMC4547273          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1419828112

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  7 in total

1.  The automated will: nonconscious activation and pursuit of behavioral goals.

Authors:  J A Bargh; P M Gollwitzer; A Lee-Chai; K Barndollar; R Trötschel
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2001-12

2.  OPINION CHANGE AS A FUNCTION OF THE COMMUNICATOR'S ATTRACTIVENESS AND DESIRE TO INFLUENCE.

Authors:  J MILLS; E ARONSON
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1965-02

3.  Forming impressions of personality.

Authors:  S E ASCH
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  1946-07

4.  Unconscious affective reactions to masked happy versus angry faces influence consumption behavior and judgments of value.

Authors:  Piotr Winkielman; Kent C Berridge; Julia L Wilbarger
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Bull       Date:  2005-01

5.  "Up Means Good": The Effect of Screen Position on Evaluative Ratings in Web Surveys.

Authors:  Roger Tourangeau; Mick P Couper; Frederick G Conrad
Journal:  Public Opin Q       Date:  2013

6.  A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization.

Authors:  Robert M Bond; Christopher J Fariss; Jason J Jones; Adam D I Kramer; Cameron Marlow; Jaime E Settle; James H Fowler
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-09-13       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Publication bias in psychology: a diagnosis based on the correlation between effect size and sample size.

Authors:  Anton Kühberger; Astrid Fritz; Thomas Scherndl
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total
  11 in total

1.  Society: Build digital democracy.

Authors:  Dirk Helbing; Evangelos Pournaras
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-11-05       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Optimal deployment of resources for maximizing impact in spreading processes.

Authors:  Andrey Y Lokhov; David Saad
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-09-12       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Citizens Versus the Internet: Confronting Digital Challenges With Cognitive Tools.

Authors:  Anastasia Kozyreva; Stephan Lewandowsky; Ralph Hertwig
Journal:  Psychol Sci Public Interest       Date:  2020-12

4.  The Answer Bot Effect (ABE): A powerful new form of influence made possible by intelligent personal assistants and search engines.

Authors:  Robert Epstein; Vivian Lee; Roger Mohr; Vanessa R Zankich
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 3.752

5.  The simple regularities in the dynamics of online news impact.

Authors:  Matúš Medo; Manuel S Mariani; Linyuan Lü
Journal:  J Comput Soc Sci       Date:  2021-09-12

6.  Collective navigation of complex networks: Participatory greedy routing.

Authors:  Kaj-Kolja Kleineberg; Dirk Helbing
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Age, gender, personality, ideological attitudes and individual differences in a person's news spectrum: how many and who might be prone to "filter bubbles" and "echo chambers" online?

Authors:  Cornelia Sindermann; Jon D Elhai; Morten Moshagen; Christian Montag
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2020-01-17

8.  Loading… loading… The influence of download time on information search.

Authors:  Alyssa C Smith; Brandon C W Ralph; Jeremy Marty-Dugas; Daniel Smilek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-06       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Modularity and composite diversity affect the collective gathering of information online.

Authors:  Niccolò Pescetelli; Alex Rutherford; Iyad Rahwan
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Online interest regarding violent attacks, gun control, and gun purchase: A causal analysis.

Authors:  Laura H Gunn; Enrique Ter Horst; Talar W Markossian; German Molina
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.