CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 169Social Media and PoliticsElectoral Systems and Political ParticipationOpinion Dynamics and Social Influence

“It could turn ugly”: Selective disclosure of attitudes in political discussion networks

Open access
Cowan, Sarah K., Baldassarri, Delia·2018·Social Networks
DOI 10.1016/j.socnet.2017.04.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socnet.2017.04.002

Cites

108 of 108 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Just how much partisan discrimination occurs generally is difficult to estimate, especially because people often put politics aside to maintain social relationships.

    “Just how much partisan discrimination occurs generally is difficult to estimate, especially given that people will often put politics aside to maintain their social relationships (Carlson & Settle, 2022;Cowan & Baldassarri, 2018).”

    From Measuring affective polarization: Matching concepts to measures (2026) · cites this paper as Cowan & Baldassarri, 2018

  • Selective disclosure could result in pluralistic ignorance because only certain political views are expressed, and disagreement is suppressed.

    “This could result in pluralistic ignorance (an exaggerated appearance of homogeneity) because only certain political views are expressed, and disagreement is suppressed233–236.”

    From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [233]

  • When contact is unavoidable, people engage in selective disclosure, withholding their attitudes from people with whom they expect to disagree.

    “When contact is unavoidable, people engage in selective disclosure232,233. That is, they simply withhold their attitudes from people with whom they expect to disagree.”

    From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [233]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 111 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Cowan, S. K., & Baldassarri, D.
Affiliations
New York University (US)
Corresponding author
Cowan, Sarah K.
ORCID
Venue
Social Networks
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-01
Volume
52
Pages
1-17
ISSN
0378-8733 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.socnet.2017.04.002
OpenAlex
W2623030500
Cited by
169
References
111
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 77 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 2
FWCI
13.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Social Networks (publishedVersion)
  • Archivio istituzionale della Ricerca - Bocconi (submittedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence
Keywords
selective disclosure, political attitudes, opinion exchange, social influence, political polarization, social homogeneity, conflict avoidance, political debate, democratic process

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review