• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Greater Internet use is not associated with faster growth in political polarization among US demographic groups.互联网使用的增加与美国人口群体中政治分化的快速增长无关。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Oct 3;114(40):10612-10617. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1706588114. Epub 2017 Sep 19.
2
How minimizing conflicts could lead to polarization on social media: An agent-based model investigation.最小化冲突如何导致社交媒体的极化:基于代理的模型研究。
PLoS One. 2022 Jan 27;17(1):e0263184. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263184. eCollection 2022.
3
Assessing the Russian Internet Research Agency's impact on the political attitudes and behaviors of American Twitter users in late 2017.评估俄罗斯互联网研究机构在 2017 年末对美国 Twitter 用户政治态度和行为的影响。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jan 7;117(1):243-250. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1906420116. Epub 2019 Nov 25.
4
Quantifying social organization and political polarization in online platforms.量化在线平台中的社会组织与政治两极分化。
Nature. 2021 Dec;600(7888):264-268. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-04167-x. Epub 2021 Dec 1.
5
Individual differences in sharing false political information on social media: Deliberate and accidental sharing, motivations and positive schizotypy.社交媒体上分享虚假政治信息的个体差异:有意和无意分享、动机和积极的精神分裂特质。
PLoS One. 2024 Jun 26;19(6):e0304855. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304855. eCollection 2024.
6
Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2016 US election.2016 年美国大选中的不可信网站曝光。
Nat Hum Behav. 2020 May;4(5):472-480. doi: 10.1038/s41562-020-0833-x. Epub 2020 Mar 2.
7
Online and Social Media Data As an Imperfect Continuous Panel Survey.在线和社交媒体数据作为一种不完美的连续面板调查。
PLoS One. 2016 Jan 5;11(1):e0145406. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145406. eCollection 2016.
8
Effects of Internet use on college students' political efficacy.互联网使用对大学生政治效能感的影响。
Cyberpsychol Behav. 2006 Aug;9(4):415-22. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9.415.
9
Political polarization on support for government spending on environmental protection in the USA, 1974-2012.1974 - 2012年美国在支持政府环境保护支出方面的政治两极分化。
Soc Sci Res. 2014 Nov;48:251-60. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.06.008. Epub 2014 Jul 5.
10
Is Twitter a forum for disseminating research to health policy makers?推特是向卫生政策制定者传播研究成果的平台吗?
Ann Epidemiol. 2015 Dec;25(12):883-7. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2015.09.002. Epub 2015 Sep 14.

引用本文的文献

1
Charting multidimensional ideological polarization across demographic groups in the USA.描绘美国不同人口群体间的多维意识形态两极分化情况。
Nat Hum Behav. 2025 Jul 2. doi: 10.1038/s41562-025-02251-0.
2
Older adults are relatively more susceptible to impulsive social influence than young adults.与年轻人相比,老年人相对更容易受到冲动性社会影响。
Commun Psychol. 2024 Sep 23;2(1):87. doi: 10.1038/s44271-024-00134-0.
3
Inversions in US Presidential Elections: 1836-2016.美国总统选举中的反转:1836年至2016年
Am Econ J Appl Econ. 2022 Jan;14(1):327-357. doi: 10.1257/app.20200210.
4
Risk attitude and belief updating: theory and experiment.风险态度与信念更新:理论与实验
Front Psychol. 2023 Dec 21;14:1281296. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1281296. eCollection 2023.
5
Social media feedback and extreme opinion expression.社交媒体反馈和极端观点表达。
PLoS One. 2023 Nov 8;18(11):e0293805. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293805. eCollection 2023.
6
Quantifying ideological polarization on a network using generalized Euclidean distance.使用广义欧几里得距离量化网络上的意识形态极化。
Sci Adv. 2023 Mar;9(9):eabq2044. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abq2044. Epub 2023 Mar 1.
7
Troll and divide: the language of online polarization.挑拨离间:网络两极分化的语言。
PNAS Nexus. 2022 Mar 10;1(1):pgac019. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac019. eCollection 2022 Mar.
8
Expressive voting versus information avoidance: experimental evidence in the context of climate change mitigation.表达性投票与信息回避:减缓气候变化背景下的实验证据
Public Choice. 2023;194(1-2):45-74. doi: 10.1007/s11127-022-01016-x. Epub 2022 Dec 31.
9
Cognitive-motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts.社会交际背景下政治两极分化的认知动机机制。
Nat Rev Psychol. 2022;1(10):560-576. doi: 10.1038/s44159-022-00093-5. Epub 2022 Aug 1.
10
Social sampling and expressed attitudes: Authenticity preference and social extremeness aversion lead to social norm effects and polarization.社会抽样与表达态度:真实性偏好和社会极端厌恶导致社会规范效应和极化。
Psychol Rev. 2022 Jan;129(1):18-48. doi: 10.1037/rev0000342.

本文引用的文献

1
More Polarized but More Independent: Political Party Identification and Ideological Self-Categorization Among U.S. Adults, College Students, and Late Adolescents, 1970-2015.更加两极分化但更加独立:1970 - 2015年美国成年人、大学生和青少年晚期的政党认同与意识形态自我归类
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2016 Oct;42(10):1364-83. doi: 10.1177/0146167216660058. Epub 2016 Sep 7.

互联网使用的增加与美国人口群体中政治分化的快速增长无关。

Greater Internet use is not associated with faster growth in political polarization among US demographic groups.

机构信息

Department of Economics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305;

Department of Economics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.

出版信息

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Oct 3;114(40):10612-10617. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1706588114. Epub 2017 Sep 19.

DOI:10.1073/pnas.1706588114
PMID:28928150
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5635884/
Abstract

We combine eight previously proposed measures to construct an index of political polarization among US adults. We find that polarization has increased the most among the demographic groups least likely to use the Internet and social media. Our overall index and all but one of the individual measures show greater increases for those older than 65 than for those aged 18-39. A linear model estimated at the age-group level implies that the Internet explains a small share of the recent growth in polarization.

摘要

我们综合了之前提出的八项指标,构建了一个针对美国成年人的政治极化指数。我们发现,在最不可能使用互联网和社交媒体的人群中,极化程度的上升幅度最大。我们的总体指数和除一项之外的其他各项指标都显示,65 岁以上人群的增长幅度大于 18-39 岁人群。在年龄组层面上进行的线性模型估计表明,互联网只解释了近期极化现象增长的一小部分原因。