Literature DB >> 30589291

An ideological asymmetry in the diffusion of moralized content on social media among political leaders.

William J Brady1, Julian A Wills1, Dominic Burkart1, John T Jost1, Jay J Van Bavel1.   

Abstract

Online social networks constitute a major platform for the exchange of moral and political ideas, and political elites increasingly rely on social media platforms to communicate directly with the public. However, little is known about the processes that render some political elites more influential than others when it comes to online communication. Here, we gauge influence of political elites on social media by examining how message factors (characteristics of the communication) interact with source factors (characteristics of elites) to impact the diffusion of elites' messages through Twitter. We analyzed messages (N = 286,255) sent from federal politicians (presidential candidates, members of the Senate and House of Representatives) in the year leading up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election-a period in which Democrats and Republicans sought to maximize their influence over potential voters. Across all types of elites, we found a "moral contagion" effect: elites' use of moral-emotional language was robustly associated with increases in message diffusion. We also discovered an ideological asymmetry: conservative elites gained greater diffusion when using moral-emotional language compared to liberal elites, even when accounting for extremity of ideology and other source cues. Specific moral emotion expressions related to moral outrage-namely, moral anger and disgust-were impactful for elites across the political spectrum, whereas moral emotion expression related to religion and patriotism were more impactful for conservative elites. These findings help inform the scientific understanding of political propaganda in the digital age, and the antecedents of political polarization in American politics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Year:  2018        PMID: 30589291     DOI: 10.1037/xge0000532

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  7 in total

1.  Conservative and liberal attitudes drive polarized neural responses to political content.

Authors:  Yuan Chang Leong; Janice Chen; Robb Willer; Jamil Zaki
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-10-20       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Visceral politics: a theoretical and empirical proof of concept.

Authors:  Manos Tsakiris; Neza Vehar; Raffaele Tucciarelli
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  A Psychology of Ideology: Unpacking the Psychological Structure of Ideological Thinking.

Authors:  Leor Zmigrod
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2022-03-01

4.  Most users do not follow political elites on Twitter; those who do show overwhelming preferences for ideological congruity.

Authors:  Magdalena Wojcieszak; Andreu Casas; Xudong Yu; Jonathan Nagler; Joshua A Tucker
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 14.957

Review 5.  Mathematical foundations of moral preferences.

Authors:  Valerio Capraro; Matjaž Perc
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 4.118

6.  Self-reported willingness to share political news articles in online surveys correlates with actual sharing on Twitter.

Authors:  Mohsen Mosleh; Gordon Pennycook; David G Rand
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Out-group animosity drives engagement on social media.

Authors:  Steve Rathje; Jay J Van Bavel; Sander van der Linden
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-06-29       Impact factor: 11.205

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.