Political polarization? Don't blame the web, study says

September 19, 2017, Brown University
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

Despite the popular narrative that the web is to blame for rising political polarization, a study by a Brown University economist has found that recent growth in polarization is greatest for demographic groups in which individuals are least likely to use the internet and social media. This means that data does not support the claim that the internet is the most significant driver of partisanship.

"Our findings don't rule out that the has played some role in the recent rise in ," said Jesse M. Shapiro, study author and professor of economics at Brown. "But they cast doubt on some common narratives linking polarization to online news and ."

Shapiro coauthored the study out today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, "Greater Internet use is not associated with faster growth in among US ," with Levi Boxell and Matthew Gentzkow from Stanford University. The study expands on research that appeared as a working paper in March, and includes data for the 2016 presidential election.

The authors note that many studies and measures indicate that Americans have become increasingly polarized in recent years, and that numerous researchers and commentators attribute increased polarization in part to the rise of social media and the internet. A common concern among those researchers, Shapiro and his coauthors wrote, is the tendency for or social media circles to create "echo-chambers" of like-minded individuals who paint the opposition as perpetrators of outrages and close off opportunities for conversation.

To test the hypothesis that the web is a primary driver of rising polarization, Shapiro and his coauthors used data from the American National Election Study (ANES), a nationally representative, face-to-face survey of the voting-age population that has been conducted both pre- and post-election since 1948. The ANES collects data on Americans' social backgrounds, political predispositions, social and political values, perceptions and evaluations of groups and candidates, and other issues, according to the ICPSR, a data archive of research in the social and behavioral sciences where the studies are accessible.

The authors also utilized survey microdata on social media use from the Pew Research Center that covers the years 2005, 2008, 2011, 2012 and 2016, as well as from every presidential election year between 1996 and 2016.

Shapiro and his coauthors assessed whether demographic differences, in particular age, impacted trends in eight measures of political polarization, ranging from straight-ticket voting to partisan affect polarization—the tendency of people identifying as Republicans or Democrats to view opposing partisans negatively and co-partisans positively.

For all but one of the eight measures of polarization, the increase was larger for the older group than for the youngest group. This is important because age is a strong predictor of internet and social media use. Less than 40 percent of those 65 and older and less than 20 percent of those 75 and older reported that they obtained information about the 2016 presidential campaign online. In contrast, over 75 percent of 18 to 39-year-olds got information about the 2016 presidential election online.

Within the 65+ age group, partisan affect polarization, which the authors identify as an especially important measure, grew at three times the rate it did for those aged 18 to 39.

"We find that the groups least likely to use the internet experienced larger changes in polarization between 1996 and 2016 than the groups most likely to use the internet," the authors wrote.

"Under appropriate assumptions, these facts can be shown to imply a limited role for the Internet and social media in explaining the recent rise in measured political polarization," the authors wrote.

Any explanation identifying political polarization as an outgrowth of internet or social media use, Shapiro notes, would have to account for the rapid increase in partisanship among those with limited internet use and negligible use of social .

"I think the main culprits in explaining the rapid rise in polarization are probably to do with forces broader and deeper than the digitization of the news," Shapiro said.

Explore further: Political polarization? Don't blame the web, study says

More information: "Greater Internet use is not associated with faster growth in political polarization among US demographic groups," by Levi Boxell, Matthew Gentzkow, and Jesse M. Shapiro, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1706588114 , http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/09/18/1706588114.abstract

Related Stories

Political polarization? Don't blame the web, study says

March 21, 2017

A study by a Brown University economist has found that recent growth in political polarization is largest for demographic groups in which individuals are least likely to use the internet and social media—a finding that ...

American national election studies data available

April 7, 2017

With public responses on polarizing political issues, such as immigration and trade, the latest data from the American National Election Studies at the University of Michigan is now available.

Recommended for you

6 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

rderkis
3.4 / 5 (5) Sep 19, 2017
quote [q[Political polarization? Don't blame the web
Of course it is not the web's fault anymore than blaming the gun for gun violence.
Caliban
4.4 / 5 (7) Sep 19, 2017
One need look no further than Talk Radio, Televangelism, and FUXNews to understand what drives this polarization in older Americans.

I wonder how it is that these researchers were unable to find this link.
ddaye
5 / 5 (1) Sep 19, 2017
[qTalk Radio, Televangelism, and FUXNews to understand what drives
It's almost infinitely more than this. Televangelism is only a sliver of that religious environment, that includes franchises and chains of branded and special purpose churches, and there's also a large assortment of schools and colleges, also in mainstream universities professorships and professional schools that go into building and audience that's pre-polarized before a word of news or analysis is heard. Also a whole economy of print media, and an entire branch of music and other entertainment.
rderkis
2.3 / 5 (3) Sep 20, 2017
You know I had a boss who would constantly cut up Mother Teresa, even criticising her for not going to the hospital she founded when she was dying. Now I am not a catholic but I can recognize greatness when I see it in others. I know very few people who even worked in a soup kitchen let alone founded a hospital.
Just out of curiosity which one of you have helped the poor more than TODAY'S organized religions?
idjyit
3 / 5 (2) Sep 20, 2017
Society has always been this polarized, it's more a case of the great unwashed actually realising it.
If people got out and spoke to more people before the internet existed, they would have known it as well.
Nothing has changed except maybe more people are mistakenly of the belief that they are empowered/entitled to change the society they live in these days.
Organisations like the Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS, North Korea, Black Lives Matter, Antifa, The KKK, Left wing, Right Wing ... the list is endless and they have existed for a very long time.
People used to believe in the concept of "Act In the name of Peace", that outlook seems to be struggling these days, it only appears to exist in our MIlitary Organisations, probably because they are the only ones who truly understand what it means.
jloohunret
1 / 5 (1) Sep 21, 2017
This study is biased. "Despite the popular narrative that the web is to blame for rising political polarization ... data does not support the claim that the internet is the most significant driver of partisanship ... authors note that many studies and measures indicate that Americans have become increasingly polarized in recent years, and that numerous researchers and commentators attribute increased polarization in part to the rise of social media and the internet." To whoever wrote this, please RE-READ what you wrote. It is a contradiction. Please see the paper: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False by John P.A. Ioannidis highlighting biased data gathering and analysis only to support their thesis rather than what the real total data shows, the misuse of P-value statistical significant findings. Also see Null Hypothesis.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.