Maintenance or change? Examining the reinforcing spiral between social media news use and populist attitudes
Open accessAbstract
Citizens around the world increasingly express support for populism. Here, we apply the reinforcing spirals model to examine whether, and how, social media news use shapes populist attitudes over time. Specifically, we assess if using social media as a news source serves to maintain existing populist attitudes or facilitates a shift in attitudes to a more extreme position. A cross-sectional survey (N1 = 195) highlighted a positive correlation between social media news use and populist attitudes. A four-wave longitudinal survey (N2 = 386) further showed that this relationship reflects media and selection effects. Over a period of three months, more frequent social media news use predicted stronger populist attitudes at subsequent measuring points. In addition, higher levels of populist attitudes were related to more frequent social media news consumption in the following waves. However, the frequency of social media news use did not change over time and populist attitudes did not become stronger during the study period. Taken together, the findings indicate that social media news use contributed to the maintenance of populist attitudes at a stable level. There is no evidence to suggest social media news use predicted more extreme populist attitudes. We discuss these results with respect to the (potentially continued) rise of populism; we also critically reflect on the phenomenon of attitude polarization online.
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?
Digital platforms were observed to benefit populist parties more than they benefit established politicians.
“For example, digital platforms were observed to benefit populist parties more than they benefit established politicians131–134.”
From A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy (2022) · cites this paper as [134]
Cites
Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption
Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfw006 · Cited by 1,992 · see citing works
Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization
Bail, C. A., Argyle, L. P., Brown, T. W., Bumpus, J. P., Chen, H., Hunzaker, M. B. F., Lee, J., Mann, M., Merhout, F., & Volfovsky, A. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1804840115 · Cited by 1,863 · see citing works
Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks
Brady, W. J., Wills, J. A., Jost, J. T., Tucker, J. A., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1618923114 · Cited by 1,396 · cited 2× · see citing works
“There is also evidence to suggest that given its style – expressing fear and anger, presenting the future as bleak, and blaming the so-called elite for exploiting ‘the people’ – content by populist actors is particularly prone to ‘go viral’ on social media platforms (Brady et al., 2017; Oliver & Rahn, 2016).”
BackgroundGroup polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis.
Isenberg, D. J. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1141 · Cited by 1,044 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy
Lorenz-Spreen, P., Oswald, L., Lewandowsky, S., & Hertwig, R. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01460-1 · Cited by 348 · see citing works
Darius, P. (2022) · Social Network Analysis and Mining · doi:10.1007/s13278-022-00958-w · Cited by 22 · see citing works
- Authors
- Schumann, S., Thomas, F., Ehrke, F., Bertlich, T., & Dupont, J. C.
- Affiliations
- University College London (GB)
- University of Koblenz and Landau (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Schumann, Sandy
- Venue
- Information, Communication & Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-04-08
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 1934-1951
- ISSN
- 1369-118X (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4462
- OpenAlex
- W3154265340
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 10.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Information Communication & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- European Association for Social Psychology
- Forschungsinitiative Rheinland-Pfalz, Research focus Communication, Media and Politics
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Populism, Right-Wing Movements
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Keywords
- social media news use, populist attitudes, attitude change, media influence, selection effects, news consumption
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