• 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

社交媒体上关系形成中党派偏见的心理基础。

Psychological underpinnings of partisan bias in tie formation on social media.

作者信息

Mosleh Mohsen, Martel Cameron, Rand David G

机构信息

Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.

Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Gen. 2025 Feb;154(2):378-390. doi: 10.1037/xge0001662. Epub 2024 Oct 14.

DOI:10.1037/xge0001662
PMID:39404827
Abstract

Individuals preferentially reciprocate connections with copartisans versus counter-partisans online. However, the mechanisms underlying this partisan bias remain unclear. Do individuals simply prefer viewing politically congenial content, or do they additionally prefer socially connecting with copartisans? Is this driven by preference for in-party ties or distaste for out-party ties? In a Twitter (now called X) field experiment, we created bot accounts varying by partisanship and whether they identified as bots or humans. We randomly assigned Twitter users ( = 3,013) to be followed by one of these accounts. We found evidence for social motivation-users were much more likely to reciprocate links to copartisan relative to counter-partisan accounts when the accounts identified as humans versus bots. We also found evidence for both in-party preference and out-party dispreference-users were as likely to follow back copartisan accounts as they were unlikely to followback counter-partisan accounts, compared to politically neutral accounts. A follow-up survey experiment ( = 990) provides further evidence for distinct roles of issue polarization, out-party animosity, and in-party affinity in moderating follow-back decisions online. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

在网络上,人们更倾向于与志同道合者而非对立党派的人建立联系并进行互动。然而,这种党派偏见背后的机制仍不清楚。人们是仅仅更喜欢浏览政治立场相符的内容,还是除此之外还更喜欢与志同道合者建立社交联系呢?这是由对党内关系的偏好还是对党外关系的反感所驱动的呢?在一项针对推特(现称X)的实地实验中,我们创建了一些机器人账号,这些账号在党派归属以及是否表明自己是机器人或人类方面存在差异。我们随机分配推特用户(n = 3,013)被这些账号中的一个所关注。我们发现了社交动机的证据——当账号表明自己是人类而非机器人时,相较于对立党派的账号,用户更有可能与志同道合者的账号建立互动链接。我们还发现了党内偏好和党外反感的证据——与政治中立的账号相比,用户同样有可能回关志同道合者的账号,也同样不太可能回关对立党派的账号。一项后续的调查实验(n = 990)进一步证明了议题两极分化、党外敌意和党内亲和力在调节网络回关决策中所起的不同作用。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2025美国心理学会,保留所有权利)

相似文献

1
Psychological underpinnings of partisan bias in tie formation on social media.社交媒体上关系形成中党派偏见的心理基础。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2025 Feb;154(2):378-390. doi: 10.1037/xge0001662. Epub 2024 Oct 14.
2
Blocking of counter-partisan accounts drives political assortment on Twitter.屏蔽对立党派账户推动了推特上的政治分类。
PNAS Nexus. 2024 Apr 15;3(5):pgae161. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae161. eCollection 2024 May.
3
Shared partisanship dramatically increases social tie formation in a Twitter field experiment.在一个 Twitter 现场实验中,共同的党派立场显著增加了社会联系的形成。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Feb 16;118(7). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2022761118.
4
Not our kind of crowd! How partisan bias distorts perceptions of political bots on Twitter (now X).不是我们这类人!党派偏见如何扭曲在推特(现为X)上对政治机器人的认知。
Br J Soc Psychol. 2025 Apr;64(2):e12794. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12794. Epub 2024 Aug 29.
5
Racial Minorities Face Discrimination From Across the Political Spectrum When Seeking to Form Ties on Social Media: Evidence From a Field Experiment.少数族裔在社交媒体上寻求建立联系时面临来自政治光谱各方的歧视:来自现场实验的证据。
Psychol Sci. 2024 Nov;35(11):1278-1286. doi: 10.1177/09567976241274738. Epub 2024 Oct 7.
6
Promoting engagement with social fact-checks online: Investigating the roles of social connection and shared partisanship.促进在线社交事实核查的参与度:探究社会联系和党派认同的作用。
PLoS One. 2025 Mar 31;20(3):e0319336. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319336. eCollection 2025.
7
In-party love spreads more efficiently than out-party hate in online communities.党内之爱比党外之恨在网络社区中传播得更有效率。
Sci Rep. 2024 Jul 8;14(1):15700. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-65688-9.
8
Unequal treatment toward copartisans versus non-copartisans is reduced when partisanship can be falsified.当党派偏见可以被伪造时,对同党成员与非同党成员的不平等对待会减少。
PLoS One. 2021 Jan 27;16(1):e0244651. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244651. eCollection 2021.
9
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.
10
Of preferences and priors: Motivated reasoning in partisans' evaluations of scientific evidence.关于偏好与先验:党派人士对科学证据评估中的动机性推理。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2024 Nov;127(5):986-1011. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000417.

引用本文的文献

1
Tendencies toward triadic closure: Field experimental evidence.三元闭合倾向:实地实验证据。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Jul 8;122(27):e2404590122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2404590122. Epub 2025 Jun 30.
2
Promoting engagement with social fact-checks online: Investigating the roles of social connection and shared partisanship.促进在线社交事实核查的参与度:探究社会联系和党派认同的作用。
PLoS One. 2025 Mar 31;20(3):e0319336. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319336. eCollection 2025.
3
Blocking of counter-partisan accounts drives political assortment on Twitter.
屏蔽对立党派账户推动了推特上的政治分类。
PNAS Nexus. 2024 Apr 15;3(5):pgae161. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae161. eCollection 2024 May.