Cited by 216Opinion Dynamics and Social InfluenceIncome, Poverty, and InequalityElectoral Systems and Political Participation

Understanding Polarization: Meanings, Measures, and Model Evaluation

Bramson, Aaron, Grim, Patrick, Singer, Daniel J., Berger, William J., Sack, Graham, Fisher, Steven, Flocken, Carissa, Holman, Bennett·2017·Philosophy of Science

Abstract

Polarization is a topic of intense interest among social scientists, but there is significant disagreement regarding the character of the phenomenon and little understanding of underlying mechanics. A first problem, we argue, is that polarization appears in the literature as not one concept but many. In the first part of the article, we distinguish nine phenomena that may be considered polarization, with suggestions of appropriate measures for each. In the second part of the article, we apply this analysis to evaluate the types of polarization generated by the three major families of computational models proposing specific mechanisms of opinion polarization.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/688938

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Forman, 1900, The Life and Writings of Thomas Jefferson: Including All of His Important Utterances on Public Questions, Comp. from State Papers and from His Private Correspondence
  2. Abelson, 1964, Mathematical Models of the Distribution of Attitudes under Controversy, Contributions to Mathematical Psychology, 14, 1
  3. Epstein, 2007, Ethical and Legal Considerations in Mitigating Pandemic Disease: Workshop Summary; Forum on Microbial Threats
  4. Epstein, Joshua M. 2008. “Why Model?” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 11, no. 4.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bramson, A., Grim, P., Singer, D. J., Berger, W. J., Sack, G., Fisher, S., Flocken, C., & Holman, B.
Venue
Philosophy of Science
Published
2017-01
Volume
84
Issue
1
Pages
115-159
ISSN
  • 0031-8248 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-767X
OpenAlex
W2507159341
Cited by
216
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2
FWCI
2.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Philosophy of Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Keywords
opinion polarization, polarization measures, model evaluation, social polarization

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