Measuring Political Polarization: Twitter shows the two sides of Venezuela

We say that a population is perfectly polarized when divided in two groups of the same size and opposite opinions. In this paper, we propose a methodology to study and measure the emergence of polarization from social interactions. We begin by proposing a model to estimate opinions in which a minority of influential individuals propagate their opinions through a social network. The result of the model is an opinion probability density function. Next, we propose an index to quantify the extent to which the resulting distribution is polarized. Finally, we apply the proposed methodology to a Twitter conversation about the late Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, finding a good agreement between our results and offline data. Hence, we show that our methodology can detect different degrees of polarization, depending on the structure of the network.

[1]  Matthew O. Jackson,et al.  Naïve Learning in Social Networks and the Wisdom of Crowds , 2010 .

[2]  Claire Cardie,et al.  A Measure of Polarization on Social Media Networks Based on Community Boundaries , 2013, ICWSM.

[3]  A. J. Morales,et al.  Characterizing and modeling an electoral campaign in the context of Twitter: 2011 Spanish Presidential Election as a case study , 2012, Chaos.

[4]  Asuman E. Ozdaglar,et al.  Opinion Fluctuations and Disagreement in Social Networks , 2010, Math. Oper. Res..

[5]  D. Isenberg Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. , 1986 .

[6]  Danah Boyd,et al.  Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter , 2010, 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[7]  M. Hogg,et al.  Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. , 1989 .

[8]  S. Ellner,et al.  Venezuelan politics in the Chávez era : class, polarization, and conflict , 2003 .

[9]  Abhishek Mathur,et al.  Efficient system-wide coordination in noisy environments. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  A. Gelman,et al.  Partisans without Constraint: Political Polarization and Trends in American Public Opinion. , 2008, AJS; American journal of sociology.

[11]  Daxton R. Stewart,et al.  When Retweets Attack , 2013 .

[12]  J. Weibull,et al.  Political polarization , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  David Lee,et al.  Biased assimilation, homophily, and the dynamics of polarization , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  Jacob Ratkiewicz,et al.  Political Polarization on Twitter , 2011, ICWSM.

[15]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Who says what to whom on twitter , 2011, WWW.

[16]  Noah E. Friedkin,et al.  Social influence and opinions , 1990 .

[17]  S. Levin,et al.  The dynamics of political polarization , 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[18]  D. Krackhardt A Plunge into Networks , 2009, Science.

[19]  I. J. Benczik,et al.  Lack of consensus in social systems , 2007, 0709.4042.

[20]  Jihie Kim,et al.  Role of Sentiment in Message Propagation: Reply vs. Retweet Behavior in Political Communication , 2012, 2012 International Conference on Social Informatics.

[21]  P. Clifford,et al.  A model for spatial conflict , 1973 .

[22]  Krzysztof Suchecki,et al.  Voter model dynamics in complex networks: Role of dimensionality, disorder, and degree distribution. , 2005, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[23]  Alfredo J. Morales,et al.  Users structure and behavior on an online social network during a political protest , 2012 .

[24]  Shou-De Lin,et al.  Exploiting endorsement information and social influence for item recommendation , 2011, SIGIR.

[25]  R. Burt The Social Capital of Opinion Leaders , 1999 .

[26]  U. Krause A DISCRETE NONLINEAR AND NON–AUTONOMOUS MODEL OF CONSENSUS FORMATION , 2007 .

[27]  Diederik W. van Liere,et al.  How far does a tweet travel?: Information brokers in the twitterverse , 2010, MSM '10.

[28]  C. Sunstein The Law of Group Polarization , 1999, How Change Happens.

[29]  S. Redner,et al.  On the role of zealotry in the voter model , 2007 .

[30]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  How Bad is Forming Your Own Opinion? , 2011, 2011 IEEE 52nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[31]  Robert Huckfeldt,et al.  The Social Communication of Political Expertise , 2001 .

[32]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Collective Response of Human Populations to Large-Scale Emergencies , 2011, PloS one.

[33]  J. C. Losada,et al.  Multiple leaders on a multilayer social media , 2015 .

[34]  M. Mobilia Does a single zealot affect an infinite group of voters? , 2003, Physical review letters.

[35]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[36]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  The Structure and Function of Complex Networks , 2003, SIAM Rev..

[37]  M. Degroot Reaching a Consensus , 1974 .

[38]  R. Holley,et al.  Ergodic Theorems for Weakly Interacting Infinite Systems and the Voter Model , 1975 .

[39]  Stephen Dann,et al.  Twitter content classification , 2010, First Monday.

[40]  Joao Antonio Pereira,et al.  Linked: The new science of networks , 2002 .

[41]  M. Newman,et al.  Mixing patterns in networks. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[42]  Ingmar Weber,et al.  Predicting ideological friends and foes in Twitter conflicts , 2014, WWW.

[43]  Dietmar Plenz,et al.  powerlaw: A Python Package for Analysis of Heavy-Tailed Distributions , 2013, PloS one.

[44]  A. Downs An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy , 1957, Journal of Political Economy.

[45]  Patrick J. F. Groenen,et al.  Modern Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications , 2003 .

[46]  Larry Diamond,et al.  Three Paradoxes of Democracy , 2008 .

[47]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: divided they blog , 2005, LinkKDD '05.

[48]  Asuman E. Ozdaglar,et al.  Opinion Dynamics and Learning in Social Networks , 2010, Dyn. Games Appl..

[49]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Patterns of temporal variation in online media , 2011, WSDM '11.