Strategies for preventing and reversing polarized online discourse

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.18226v1
• Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2026 17:52:19 GMT
• Title: Strategies for preventing and reversing polarized online discourse
• Abstract summary: Political polarization poses a variety of challenges for modern democracies.<n>Finding ways to promote constructive discourse while maintaining free expression has proved a challenge for social media platforms.
• Score: 41.99844472131922
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Political polarization poses a variety of challenges for modern democracies. Entrenched disagreements on policy can prevent constructive discourse and compromise, and high levels of affective polarization threaten to undermine social cohesion and support for institutions. Finding ways to promote constructive discourse while maintaining free expression has proved a challenge for social media platforms, media outlets and policy makers alike. Here we develop a computational model -- based in psychology -- of online discourse and opinion dynamics under complex individual identities, which we use to assess the capacity of realistic interventions to prevent or reverse polarization. We show that changes to the range of acceptable opinions in a society -- i.e. the Overton window -- have a limited impact on polarization, and that attempts to ``optimize'' the Overton window can even trigger the onset of polarization. In contrast, interventions that shift attention towards under-discussed topics, or increase the costs of violating existing norms, are often effective at preventing polarization, but are less successful at reversing it. Most strikingly, increasing the salience of influential individuals, who model non-polarized discourse, can be highly effective at both preventing and reversing polarization. However we also find that once polarization has set in, even the most successful interventions result in latent extremism when identities are complex. Our work suggests that restricting speech by shrinking the range of acceptable discourse is an ineffective way to tackle polarization, whereas enforcement of existing norms, attention nudges and the presence of elites who model good behavior can be highly effective.

Related papers

• Measuring Social Media Polarization Using Large Language Models and Heuristic Rules [0.0]
  This study systematically analyze and quantify affective polarization in discussions on divisive topics such as climate change and gun control.<n>By combining AI-driven content annotation with domain-informed scoring, our framework offers a scalable and interpretable approach to measuring affective polarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-02T01:11:58Z)
• Unveiling Affective Polarization Trends in Parliamentary Proceedings [6.373171949526166]
  Using measures of Valence, Arousal and Dominance, we detect signals of emotional discourse.<n>We find that the emotional style of members of government differs from that of opposition members.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-04T20:13:43Z)
• Latent Topic Synthesis: Leveraging LLMs for Electoral Ad Analysis [51.95395936342771]
  We introduce an end-to-end framework for automatically generating an interpretable topic taxonomy from an unlabeled corpus.<n>We apply this framework to a large corpus of Meta political ads from the month ahead of the 2024 U.S. Presidential election.<n>Our approach uncovers latent discourse structures, synthesizes semantically rich topic labels, and annotates topics with moral framing dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T20:30:20Z)
• Emergence of human-like polarization among large language model agents [79.96817421756668]
  We simulate a networked system involving thousands of large language model agents, discovering their social interactions, result in human-like polarization.<n>Similarities between humans and LLM agents raise concerns about their capacity to amplify societal polarization, but also hold the potential to serve as a valuable testbed for identifying plausible strategies to mitigate polarization and its consequences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-09T11:45:05Z)
• In-Group Love, Out-Group Hate: A Framework to Measure Affective Polarization via Contentious Online Discussions [2.8963943201523796]
  We introduce a discrete choice model that captures decision-making within affectively polarized social networks.<n>We propose a statistical inference method estimate key parameters -- in-group love and out-group hate -- from social media data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-18T23:58:13Z)
• Demarked: A Strategy for Enhanced Abusive Speech Moderation through Counterspeech, Detoxification, and Message Management [71.99446449877038]
  We propose a more comprehensive approach called Demarcation scoring abusive speech based on four aspect -- (i) severity scale; (ii) presence of a target; (iii) context scale; (iv) legal scale. Our work aims to inform future strategies for effectively addressing abusive speech online.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T21:45:33Z)
• Rational Silence and False Polarization: How Viewpoint Organizations and Recommender Systems Distort the Expression of Public Opinion [4.419843514606336]
  We show how platforms impact what observers of online discourse come to believe about community views.<n>We show that signals from ideological organizations encourage an increase in rhetorical intensity, leading to the 'rational silence' of moderate users.<n>We identify practical strategies platforms can implement, such as reducing exposure to signals from ideological organizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-10T17:02:19Z)
• Mitigating Framing Bias with Polarity Minimization Loss [56.24404488440295]
  Framing bias plays a significant role in exacerbating political polarization by distorting the perception of actual events. We propose a new loss function that encourages the model to minimize the polarity difference between the polarized input articles to reduce framing bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T09:50:23Z)
• Fooling Polarization-based Vision using Locally Controllable Polarizing Projection [55.40484331029597]
  We warn the community of the vulnerability of polarization-based vision, which can be more serious than RGB-based vision. By adapting a commercial LCD projector, we achieve locally controllable polarizing projection, which is successfully utilized to fool state-of-the-art polarization-based vision algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-31T08:48:57Z)
• Perspective-taking to Reduce Affective Polarization on Social Media [11.379010432760241]
  We deploy a randomized field experiment through a browser extension to 1,611 participants on Twitter. We find that simply exposing participants to "outgroup" feeds enhances engagement, but not an understanding of why others hold their political views. framing the experience in familiar, empathic terms by prompting participants to recall a disagreement does not affect engagement, but does increase their ability to understand opposing views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-11T20:25:10Z)
• Designing Recommender Systems to Depolarize [0.32634122554913997]
  Polarization is implicated in the erosion of democracy and the progression to violence. While algorithm-driven social media does not seem to be a primary driver of polarization at the country level, it could be a useful intervention point in polarized societies. This paper examines algorithmic depolarization interventions with the goal of conflict transformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-11T03:23:42Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.