Digital disinformation and emotions: exploring the social risks of affective polarization
Abstract
Considerable interest has recently emerged among communication scholars around what has been called the ‘information disorder’, that is, a constellation of media genres that includes disinformation, misinformation, fake news, propaganda and hyperpartisan news. The rise in this type of information pollution is related to a crisis of public communication where the public sphere in many countries has become divided and challenged by social and political tensions. On the other hand, the digital space emerges as a socio-technological environment configured around platforms that condition emotional expression through their affordances, favoring the appearance of affective publics. Taking the above into account, this paper offers a conceptual framework for understanding the role played by emotions in our present ‘information disorder’ and the societal risks that arise from it. It examines how fake news strategically relies on emotionally provocative content to induce outrage and other strong feelings among users, which are then viralized on platforms. The paper concludes by presenting some lines of action for minimizing those risks from the point of view of media literacy.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The study excludes from its analysis the use of social networks and other social media, which since at least 2011 are a growing space for political information flow, participation and activism, no less loaded with emotionality and dramatism.
“este artículo excluye de su análisis el uso de redes sociales y otros medios de comunicación social, que, desde al menos 2011, son un espacio creciente para el flujo de información política, participación y activismo, no menos cargado de emocionalidad y dramatismo (Serrano-Puche, 2021).”
From Dieta mediática y polarización afectiva en un sistema mediático pluralista polarizado: un estudio longitudinal de España (2026) · cites this paper as Serrano-Puche, 2021
Cites
Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election
Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.31.2.211 · Cited by 6,767 · see citing works
The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States
Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N., & Westwood, S. J. (2019) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034 · Cited by 3,317 · see citing works
The like economy: Social buttons and the data-intensive web
Gerlitz, C., & Helmond, A. (2013) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444812472322 · Cited by 871 · see citing works
Moral Responsibility of Public Officials: The Problem of Many Hands
Thompson, D. F. (1980) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1954312 · Cited by 651 · see citing works
“Fake News” Is Not Simply False Information: A Concept Explication and Taxonomy of Online Content
Molina, M. D., Sundar, S. S., Le, T., & Lee, D. (2021) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764219878224 · Cited by 485 · see citing works
The Promises, Challenges, and Futures of Media Literacy
Bulger, M., & Davison, P. (2018) · Journal of Media Literacy Education · doi:10.23860/jmle-2018-10-1-1 · Cited by 428 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Although media literacy cannot be treated as a panacea (Bulger & Davison, 2018), it could minimize the risks that the phenomenon of disinformation brings with it, at the individual and societal level, as we will discuss later.”
BackgroundAll the news That’s fit to click: the economics of clickbait media
Munger, K. (2020) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2019.1687626 · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Waisbord, S. (2020) · REVISTA SAAP · doi:10.46468/rsaap.14.2.a1 · Cited by 93 · cited 3× · see citing works
“…activity from social and institutional agents that seeks to mislead and manipulate the public conversation, or the proliferation of information outlets in an increasingly fragmented digital sphere (Waisbord, 2020) – as a society, preserving a democratic and truly common public sphere is at stake.”
BackgroundInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cuéllar Rivero, R. (2024) · Revista Española de Ciencia Política · doi:10.21308/recp.64.07 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Cuéllar Rivero, R. (2026) · Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas · doi:10.5477/cis/reis.194.25-44
“…lugar, este ar-tículo excluye de su análisis el uso de redes sociales y otros medios de comunicación social, que, desde al menos 2011, son un es-pacio creciente para el flujo de información política, participación y activismo, no menos cargado de emocionalidad y dramatismo (Serrano-Puche, 2021).”
- Authors
- Serrano-Puche, J.
- Affiliations
- Universidad de Navarra (ES)
- Corresponding author
- Serrano-Puche, Javier
- Venue
- International Review of Sociology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-05-04
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 231-245
- ISSN
- 0390-6701 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-9273
- OpenAlex
- W3186442548
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 14.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Review of Sociology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Navarra
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
- Keywords
- online disinformation, emotions, affective polarization, information disorder, fake news, outrage, viralization, social networking sites, media affordances, affective publics, media literacy, societal risk
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