The law of group polarization.
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?
Group polarization refers to the widely observed phenomenon that deliberative groups regularly and predictably shift toward more extreme views than pre-deliberation medians, indicated by the members' pre-deliberation tendencies.
“Group polarization refers to the widely observed phenomenon that deliberative groups regularly and predictably shift toward more extreme views than pre-deliberation medians, indicated by the members’ pre-deliberation tendencies (Friedkin, 1999; Sunstein, 2002).”
From Collaborative Irrationality, Akrasia, and Groupthink: Social Disruptions of Emotion Regulation (2017) · cites this paper as Sunstein, 2002
The main factors fostering group polarization and choice shift are social comparison, limited/unequally distributed or disproportionate pools of persuasive arguments, inequalities due to interpersonal influences, and ingroup/outgroup divides and other insulating factors yielding underexposure to views differing from already like-minded ingroup members.
“The main factors fostering group polarization and choice shift are: (i) a natural tendency toward social comparison among individuals, i.e., the disposition of members to adjust their positions to dominant or salient positions, in order not to stick out too much; (ii) the role of limited, unequally distributed or disproportionate pools of persuasive arguments at the group level, which may push”
From Collaborative Irrationality, Akrasia, and Groupthink: Social Disruptions of Emotion Regulation (2017) · cites this paper as Sunstein, 2002
According to group polarization theory, an echo chamber can act as a mechanism to reinforce an existing opinion within a group and move the entire group toward more extreme positions.
“According to group polarization theory (23), an echo chamber can act as a mechanism to reinforce an existing opinion within a group and, as a result, move the entire group toward more extreme positions.”
From The echo chamber effect on social media (2021) · cites this paper as [23]
Market incentives have shifted, raising the specter of acute echo chambers, including for those who may hold undemocratic attitudes.
“Consequently, market incentives have shifted, raising the specter of acute echo chambers, including for those who may hold undemocratic attitudes (Sunstein, 2002).”
From How to study democratic backsliding (2024) · cites this paper as Sunstein, 2002
Los usuarios de internet se han movido voluntariamente hacia rincones virtuales muy partidistas.
“Por tanto, la preocupación se encuentra en que nosotros, como usuarios de internet, de manera voluntaria nos hemos movido hacia rincones virtuales muy partidistas (Sunstein, 2002).”
From Homofilia, polarización afectiva y desinformación en Twitter. Caso de estudio sobre la crisis migratoria #Openarms (2021) · cites this paper as Sunstein, 2002
Las creencias se refuerzan y retroalimentan con pares, tendiéndose a los extremos.
“Las creencias se refuerzan y retroalimentan con pares, tendiéndose a los extremos (Sunstein, 2002).”
From Homofilia, polarización afectiva y desinformación en Twitter. Caso de estudio sobre la crisis migratoria #Openarms (2021) · cites this paper as Sunstein, 2002
Cites
Should the Tax Law Require Current Accrual of Interest On Derivative Financial Instruments?Preprint
Weisbach, D. A. (1999) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.198949 · Cited by 231 · see citing works
Orwell Versus Huxley: Economics, Technology, Privacy, and SatirePreprint
Posner, R. A. (1999) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.194572 · Cited by 225 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The echo chamber effect on social media
Cinelli, M., De Francisci Morales, G., Galeazzi, A., Quattrociocchi, W., & Starnini, M. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2023301118 · Cited by 2,092 · see citing works
SPERBER, D., CLÉMENT, F., HEINTZ, C., MASCARO, O., MERCIER, H., ORIGGI, G., & WILSON, D. (2010) · Mind & Language · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0017.2010.01394.x · Cited by 1,795 · see citing works
The echo chamber is overstated: the moderating effect of political interest and diverse media
Dubois, E., & Blank, G. (2018) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2018.1428656 · Cited by 1,055 · see citing works
Dynamic debates: an analysis of group polarization over time on Twitter
Yardi, S., & Boyd, D. (2010) · Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society · doi:10.1177/0270467610380011 · Cited by 625 · see citing works
Political Polarization on Twitter
Conover, M., Ratkiewicz, J., Francisco, M., Goncalves, B., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14126 · Cited by 626 · see citing works
Echo Chambers: Emotional Contagion and Group Polarization on Facebook
Del Vicario, M., Vivaldo, G., Bessi, A., Zollo, F., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep37825 · Cited by 576 · see citing works
Boutyline, A., & Willer, R. (2017) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12337 · Cited by 491 · 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
Network dynamics of social influence in the wisdom of crowds
Becker, J., Brackbill, D., & Centola, D. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1615978114 · Cited by 397 · see citing works
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
Anatomy of news consumption on Facebook
Schmidt, A. L., Zollo, F., Del Vicario, M., Bessi, A., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., Stanley, H. E., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1617052114 · Cited by 305 · see citing works
How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting
Törnberg, P. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2207159119 · Cited by 288 · see citing works
Mäs, M., & Flache, A. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0074516 · Cited by 226 · see citing works
How behavioural sciences can promote truth, autonomy and democratic discourse online
Lorenz-Spreen, P., Lewandowsky, S., Sunstein, C. R., & Hertwig, R. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-0889-7 · Cited by 223 · see citing works
Self-citationMeasuring and moderating opinion polarization in social networks
Matakos, A., Terzi, E., & Tsaparas, P. (2017) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-017-0527-9 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Reducing Controversy by Connecting Opposing Views
Garimella, K., De Francisci Morales, G., Gionis, A., & Mathioudakis, M. (2017) · Proceedings of the Tenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining · doi:10.1145/3018661.3018703 · Cited by 165 · see citing works
Culture and Identity‐Protective Cognition: Explaining the White‐Male Effect in Risk Perception
Kahan, D. M., Braman, D., Gastil, J., Slovic, P., & Mertz, C. K. (2007) · Journal of Empirical Legal Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1740-1461.2007.00097.x · Cited by 136 · see citing works
Selective exposure shapes the Facebook news diet
Cinelli, M., Brugnoli, E., Schmidt, A. L., Zollo, F., Quattrociocchi, W., & Scala, A. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0229129 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Me, My Echo Chamber, and I: Introspection on Social Media Polarization
Gillani, N., Yuan, A., Saveski, M., Vosoughi, S., & Roy, D. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference on World Wide Web - WWW '18 · doi:10.1145/3178876.3186130 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
‘Echo Chambers’: Partisan Facebook Groups during the 2014 Thai Election
Grömping, M. (2014) · Asia Pacific Media Educator · doi:10.1177/1326365x14539185 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
How to study democratic backsliding
Druckman, J. N. (2024) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12942 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Rogers, N., & Jones, J. J. (2021) · Journal of Social Computing · doi:10.23919/jsc.2021.0002 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Trust in online news: comparing social media and official media use by chinese citizens
Wang, Y., & Mark, G. (2013) · Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work · doi:10.1145/2441776.2441843 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Knowledge, Counter-Knowledge, Pseudo-Science in Populism
Eslen-Ziya, H. (2022) · Populism and Science in Europe · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-97535-7_2 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
North, S., Piwek, L., & Joinson, A. (2021) · Policy & Internet · doi:10.1002/poi3.247 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Castillo-de-Mesa, J., Méndez-Domínguez, P., Carbonero-Muñoz, D., & Gómez-Jacinto, L. (2021) · Redes. Revista hispana para el análisis de redes sociales · doi:10.5565/rev/redes.913 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Collaborative Irrationality, Akrasia, and Groupthink: Social Disruptions of Emotion Regulation
Szanto, T. (2017) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02002 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“Vital testimonio confirm󔦔: Polarización de fuentes y redes en el Caso Catrillanca en Twitter
Santos, M. L. B., Jaramillo Castro, O., & Aguirre, D. (2021) · Cuadernos.info · doi:10.7764/cdi.49.27509 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Atheism, Social Networks and Health: A Review and Theoretical Model
McCaffree, K. (2019) · Secularism and Nonreligion · doi:10.5334/snr.101 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Me, My Echo Chamber, and I: Introspection on Social Media Polarization
Gillani, N., Yuan, A., Saveski, M., Vosoughi, S., & Roy, D. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1803.01731 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sunstein, C. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Chicago (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sunstein, Cass R.
- ORCID
- Sunstein, Cass R.
- Venue
- Journal of Political Philosophy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-06
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 175-195
- ISSN
- 0963-8016 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9760
- OpenAlex
- W3125714960
- Cited by
- 1,371
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 57 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 85 · 2021: 102 · 2020: 100 · 2019: 112 · 2018: 111 · 2017: 61 · 2016: 61 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 54 · 2012: 52
- FWCI
- 239.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Political Philosophy (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- group polarization, group decision making, social choice, majority rule, minority rights
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
