» Articles » PMID: 31827834

Endogenetic Structure of Filter Bubble in Social Networks

Overview
Journal R Soc Open Sci
Specialty Science
Date 2019 Dec 13
PMID 31827834
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The filter bubble is an intermediate structure to provoke polarization and echo chambers in social networks, and it has become one of today's most urgent issues for social media. Previous studies usually equated filter bubbles with community structures and emphasized this exogenous isolation effect, but there is a lack of full discussion of the internal organization of filter bubbles. Here, we design an experiment for analysing filter bubbles taking advantage of social bots. We deployed 128 bots to Weibo (the largest microblogging network in China), and each bot consumed a specific topic (entertainment or sci-tech) and ran for at least two months. In total, we recorded about 1.3 million messages exposed to these bots and their social networks. By analysing the text received by the bots and motifs in their social networks, we found that a filter bubble is not only a dense community of users with the same preferences but also presents an endogenetic unidirectional star-like structure. The structure could spontaneously exclude non-preferred information and cause polarization. Moreover, our work proved that the felicitous use of artificial intelligence technology could provide a useful experimental approach that combines privacy protection and controllability in studying social media.

Citing Articles

Communication vs evidence: What hinders the outreach of science during an infodemic? A narrative review.

La Bella E, Allen C, Lirussi F Integr Med Res. 2021; 10(4):100731.

PMID: 34141575 PMC: 8185242. DOI: 10.1016/j.imr.2021.100731.

References
1.
Rand D, Arbesman S, Christakis N . Dynamic social networks promote cooperation in experiments with humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108(48):19193-8. PMC: 3228461. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1108243108. View

2.
Newman M . Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004; 101 Suppl 1:5200-5. PMC: 387296. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0307545100. View

3.
Loreau M, Hector A . Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments. Nature. 2001; 412(6842):72-6. DOI: 10.1038/35083573. View

4.
Dandekar P, Goel A, Lee D . Biased assimilation, homophily, and the dynamics of polarization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013; 110(15):5791-6. PMC: 3625335. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1217220110. View

5.
Centola D . The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science. 2010; 329(5996):1194-7. DOI: 10.1126/science.1185231. View