MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7119562472

Partisan Conflict on Social Media: Empirical Evidence and Policy Challenges

2025· article· en· W7119562472 on OpenAlexaff
Juan S. Morales, Anne Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyEmpirical evidenceVisibilityExploitPublic opinionModerationPublic policyGovernment (linguistics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social media exploits human biases, heightening the visibility and spread of negative, extreme, and divisive content Public opinion and norms are distorted by disproportionately active fringe voices while moderates are muted Politicians adapt to incentives, increasing incivility, moralization, and out-group demonization Preferences for content moderation differ by users’ ideology, complicating regulation and risking ideological bias in discourse Platforms alone may not be able to reverse a self-perpetuating spiral of divisiveness – education and policy thus play a crucial role

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.086
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.086
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207