TY - JOUR
T1 - Analyzing polarization in social media
T2 - Method and application to tweets on 21 mass shootings
AU - Demszky, Dorottya
AU - Garg, Nikhil
AU - Voigt, Rob
AU - Zou, James
AU - Gentzkow, Matthew
AU - Shapiro, Jesse
AU - Jurafsky, Dan
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2019, The Authors. All rights reserved.
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2019/4/2
Y1 - 2019/4/2
N2 - We provide an NLP framework to uncover four linguistic dimensions of political polarization in social media: topic choice, framing, affect and illocutionary force. We quantify these aspects with existing lexical methods, and propose clustering of tweet embeddings as a means to identify salient topics for analysis across events; human evaluations show that our approach generates more cohesive topics than traditional LDA-based models. We apply our methods to study 4.4M tweets on 21 mass shootings. We provide evidence that the discussion of these events is highly polarized politically and that this polarization is primarily driven by partisan differences in framing rather than topic choice. We identify framing devices, such as grounding and the contrasting use of the terms “terrorist” and “crazy”, that contribute to polarization. Results pertaining to topic choice, affect and illocutionary force suggest that Republicans focus more on the shooter and event-specific facts (news) while Democrats focus more on the victims and call for policy changes. Our work contributes to a deeper understanding of the way group divisions manifest in language and to computational methods for studying them.
AB - We provide an NLP framework to uncover four linguistic dimensions of political polarization in social media: topic choice, framing, affect and illocutionary force. We quantify these aspects with existing lexical methods, and propose clustering of tweet embeddings as a means to identify salient topics for analysis across events; human evaluations show that our approach generates more cohesive topics than traditional LDA-based models. We apply our methods to study 4.4M tweets on 21 mass shootings. We provide evidence that the discussion of these events is highly polarized politically and that this polarization is primarily driven by partisan differences in framing rather than topic choice. We identify framing devices, such as grounding and the contrasting use of the terms “terrorist” and “crazy”, that contribute to polarization. Results pertaining to topic choice, affect and illocutionary force suggest that Republicans focus more on the shooter and event-specific facts (news) while Democrats focus more on the victims and call for policy changes. Our work contributes to a deeper understanding of the way group divisions manifest in language and to computational methods for studying them.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85093452984&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85093452984&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85093452984
JO - Free Radical Biology and Medicine
JF - Free Radical Biology and Medicine
SN - 0891-5849
ER -