• 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

社交媒体标记系统中低容忍度反馈循环的潜在机制。

A potential mechanism for low tolerance feedback loops in social media flagging systems.

机构信息

IT University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2022 May 26;17(5):e0268270. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268270. eCollection 2022.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0268270
PMID:35617239
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9135209/
Abstract

Many people use social media as a primary information source, but their questionable reliability has pushed platforms to contain misinformation via crowdsourced flagging systems. Such systems, however, assume that users are impartial arbiters of truth. This assumption might be unwarranted, as users might be influenced by their own political biases and tolerance for opposing points of view, besides considering the truth value of a news item. In this paper we simulate a scenario in which users on one side of the polarity spectrum have different tolerance levels for the opinions of the other side. We create a model based on some assumptions about online news consumption, including echo chambers, selective exposure, and confirmation bias. A consequence of such a model is that news sources on the opposite side of the intolerant users attract more flags. We extend the base model in two ways: (i) by allowing news sources to find the path of least resistance that leads to a minimization of backlash, and (ii) by allowing users to change their tolerance level in response to a perceived lower tolerance from users on the other side of the spectrum. With these extensions, in the model we see that intolerance is attractive: news sources are nudged to move their polarity to the side of the intolerant users. Such a model does not support high-tolerance regimes: these regimes are out of equilibrium and will converge towards empirically-supported low-tolerance states under the assumption of partisan but rational users.

摘要

许多人将社交媒体作为主要信息来源,但由于其可靠性值得怀疑,各平台纷纷通过众包标记系统来遏制错误信息。然而,此类系统假设用户是公正的事实裁决者。这种假设可能并不合理,因为用户可能会受到自身政治偏见和对相反观点容忍度的影响,而不仅仅是考虑新闻内容的真实性。在本文中,我们模拟了一种场景,即处于极性光谱某一边缘的用户对另一方观点的容忍度存在差异。我们基于一些有关在线新闻消费的假设创建了一个模型,其中包括回音室、选择性暴露和确认偏差。此类模型的一个后果是,对不容忍用户的新闻来源会吸引更多的标记。我们通过两种方式扩展了基本模型:(i)允许新闻来源找到阻力最小的路径,从而最小化反弹;(ii)允许用户根据感知到的来自光谱另一端用户的更低容忍度来改变其容忍度。通过这些扩展,我们在模型中发现,不容忍是有吸引力的:新闻来源会被推动将其极性转移到不容忍用户的一侧。这种模型不支持高容忍度的情况:这些情况处于非平衡状态,如果假设用户是有党派意识但理性的,那么它们将根据经验支持低容忍度的状态收敛。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/e6a1dfac78fa/pone.0268270.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/8e1d1af2c3af/pone.0268270.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/8e7c3daf4777/pone.0268270.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/a9d260803d16/pone.0268270.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/f8a7fc7afaf1/pone.0268270.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/58873f2ca7d0/pone.0268270.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/e6a1dfac78fa/pone.0268270.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/8e1d1af2c3af/pone.0268270.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/8e7c3daf4777/pone.0268270.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/a9d260803d16/pone.0268270.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/f8a7fc7afaf1/pone.0268270.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/58873f2ca7d0/pone.0268270.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb7/9135209/e6a1dfac78fa/pone.0268270.g006.jpg

相似文献

1
A potential mechanism for low tolerance feedback loops in social media flagging systems.社交媒体标记系统中低容忍度反馈循环的潜在机制。
PLoS One. 2022 May 26;17(5):e0268270. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268270. eCollection 2022.
2
Distortions of political bias in crowdsourced misinformation flagging.众包错误信息标记中的政治偏见扭曲
J R Soc Interface. 2020 Jun;17(167):20200020. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2020.0020. Epub 2020 Jun 10.
3
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.
4
Sharing of misinformation is habitual, not just lazy or biased.错误信息的分享是习惯性的,不仅仅是因为懒惰或偏见。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023 Jan 24;120(4):e2216614120. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2216614120. Epub 2023 Jan 17.
5
Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality.利用众包新闻来源质量判断来打击社交媒体上的错误信息。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Feb 12;116(7):2521-2526. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1806781116. Epub 2019 Jan 28.
6
Neutral bots probe political bias on social media.中立机器人探测社交媒体上的政治偏见。
Nat Commun. 2021 Sep 22;12(1):5580. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-25738-6.
7
Depolarization of echo chambers by random dynamical nudge.通过随机动力学的轻推使回音室去极化。
Sci Rep. 2022 Jun 2;12(1):9234. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-12494-w.
8
COVID-19 and the 5G Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data.新冠疫情与5G阴谋论:基于推特数据的社交网络分析
J Med Internet Res. 2020 May 6;22(5):e19458. doi: 10.2196/19458.
9
Political audience diversity and news reliability in algorithmic ranking.算法排名中的政治受众多样性与新闻可靠性
Nat Hum Behav. 2022 Apr;6(4):495-505. doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01276-5. Epub 2022 Feb 3.
10
The Psychology of Fake News.假新闻的心理学。
Trends Cogn Sci. 2021 May;25(5):388-402. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2021.02.007. Epub 2021 Mar 15.

本文引用的文献

1
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.
2
The echo chamber effect on social media.社交媒体的回音室效应。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Mar 2;118(9). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2023301118.
3
Distortions of political bias in crowdsourced misinformation flagging.众包错误信息标记中的政治偏见扭曲
J R Soc Interface. 2020 Jun;17(167):20200020. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2020.0020. Epub 2020 Jun 10.
4
Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization.社交媒体上接触对立观点会加剧政治极化。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Sep 11;115(37):9216-9221. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1804840115. Epub 2018 Aug 28.
5
The spread of true and false news online.网络上真实和虚假新闻的传播。
Science. 2018 Mar 9;359(6380):1146-1151. doi: 10.1126/science.aap9559.
6
The science of fake news.假新闻的科学。
Science. 2018 Mar 9;359(6380):1094-1096. doi: 10.1126/science.aao2998. Epub 2018 Mar 8.
7
Is the voter model a model for voters?投票者模型是针对投票者的模型吗?
Phys Rev Lett. 2014 Apr 18;112(15):158701. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.158701.
8
The devil is in the details: abstract versus concrete construals of multiculturalism differentially impact intergroup relations.细节决定成败:多元文化主义的抽象与具体解释对群体间关系有着不同的影响。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2014 May;106(5):772-89. doi: 10.1037/a0035830. Epub 2014 Mar 10.
9
Reconstruing intolerance: abstract thinking reduces conservatives' prejudice against nonnormative groups.重构偏见:抽象思维减少保守派人士对非规范群体的偏见。
Psychol Sci. 2012 Jul 1;23(7):756-63. doi: 10.1177/0956797611433877. Epub 2012 May 31.
10
Coevolutionary network approach to cultural dynamics controlled by intolerance.由不容忍控制的文化动态的协同进化网络方法。
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2011 Dec;84(6 Pt 2):067101. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.84.067101. Epub 2011 Dec 5.