Skip to content
Back to the collection

How do social media feed algorithms affect attitudes and behavior in an election campaign?

Andrew M. Guess, Neil Malhotra, Jennifer Pan

Show all 29 authors

Pablo Barberá, Hunt Allcott, Taylor Brown, Adriana Crespo-Tenorio, Drew Dimmery, Deen Freelon, Matthew Gentzkow, Sandra González-Bailón, Edward Kennedy, Young Mie Kim, David Lazer, Devra Moehler, Brendan Nyhan, Carlos Velasco Rivera, Jaime Settle, Daniel Robert Thomas, Emily Thorson, Rebekah Tromble, Arjun Wilkins, Magdalena Wojcieszak, Beixian Xiong, Chad Kiewiet de Jonge, Annie Franco, Winter Mason, Natalie Jomini Stroud, Joshua A. Tucker

2023 · Science

Read the paper
HN score
0
Mentions
3
Readers
3
Months
3
What’s in a score?

From the abstract

We investigated the effects of Facebook’s and Instagram’s feed algorithms during the 2020 US election. We assigned a sample of consenting users to reverse-chronologically-ordered feeds instead of the default algorithms. Moving users out of algorithmic feeds substantially decreased the time they spent on the platforms and their activity. The chronological feed also affected exposure to content: The amount of political and untrustworthy content they saw increased on both platforms, the amount of content classified as uncivil or containing slur words they saw decreased on Facebook, and the amount of content from moderate friends and sources with ideologically mixed audiences they saw increased on Facebook. Despite these substantial changes in users’ on-platform experience, the chronological feed did not significantly alter levels of issue polarization, affective polarization, political knowledge, or other key attitudes during the 3-month study period.

Metadata: Crossref. Abstracts retain their original authors’ rights.

In the conversation

Original HN comments, with labels from simple text rules. A label describes the whole comment and may miss context or irony. Read the discussion to make up your own mind. About the labels

3 selected excerpts · 3 total mentions

dleeftink
Neutral mention · rule
> lots of people Depends, as all things. See for instance the Twitter (increased engagement) study [0] or the more recent Facebook study (little effect) [1]. For more recent investigations on user perceptions see [2] and [3]. [0]: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01972243.2023.2... [1]: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp9364 [2]: https://jsb.journals.ekb.eg/index.php/FAQ/journal/journal/ar... [3]: https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3687046
hn_acker
Neutral mention · rule
Tangent: There's a study that I can't access, but the abstract claims that during the 2020 election, chronological feeds exposed Facebook users to more "untrustworthy content", without necessarily having an effect on people's political knowledge or polarization [1]: > We investigated the effects of Facebook’s and Instagram’s feed algorithms during the 2020 US election. We assigned a sample of consenting users to reverse-chronologically-ordered feeds instead of the default algorithms. Moving users out of algorithmic feeds substantially decreased the time they spent on the platforms and their activity. The chronological feed also affected exposure to content: The amount of…
Read the full comment
political and untrustworthy content they saw increased on both platforms, the amount of content classified as uncivil or containing slur words they saw decreased on Facebook, and the amount of content from moderate friends and sources with ideologically mixed audiences they saw increased on Facebook. Despite these substantial changes in users’ on-platform experience, the chronological feed did not significantly alter levels of issue polarization, affective polarization, political knowledge, or other key attitudes during the 3-month study period. [1] https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp9364
zihotki
Neutral mention · rule
The letter (2024) to Science pointing to conflict of interest and critiquing methods and conclusions of "How do social media feed algorithms affect attitudes and behavior in an election campaign?" study published in 2023 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp9364#eletters... Disclaimer: I had to edit the title of submission slightly since original didn't fit into limits.

Keep following the thread.

More in Algorithms

More from the same topics.

2018arXiv

Talent vs Luck: the role of randomness in success and failure

A. Pluchino. A. E. Biondo, A. Rapisarda

The largely dominant meritocratic paradigm of highly competitive Western cultures is rooted on the belief that success is due mainly, if not exclusively, to personal qualities such as talent, intelligence, skills, efforts or risk taking.

16 mentions14 months
2.5HN score