The DOI matches its Crossref record; 133 of the 135 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.
A review and provocation: On polarization and platforms
Open accessAbstract
Scholars increasingly point to polarization as a central threat to democracy—and identify technology platforms as key contributors to polarization. In contrast, we argue that polarization can only be seen as a central threat to democracy if inequality is ignored. The central theoretical claim of this piece is that political identities map more or less onto social groups, and groups are, in turn, located in social structures. As such, scholars must analyze groups as they are embedded in relations of power to meaningfully evaluate the democratic consequences of polarization. Groups struggling for equality, such as the Black Lives Matter movement, often cause polarization because they threaten the extant power and status of dominant groups. To develop a shared theoretical lens around polarization and its relationship with inequality, we take up the case of research on the role of platforms in polarization, showing how scholarship routinely lacks analysis of inequality.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Estos cambios han generado preocupaciones sobre la calidad del discurso público, el incremento en la polarización y la exposición desigual de voces en el entorno digital (Kreiss & McGregor, 2024).”
From Twitter/X en la campaña presidencial de 2021 en Ecuador: interacciones digitales y su proyección en la polarización política de las siguientes campañas (2025) · cites this paper as Kreiss & McGregor, 2024
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Social psychology of intergroup relations
Austin, W. G., & Worchel, S. (1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,577
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 3,603
Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfs038 · Cited by 2,996
van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & de Waal, M. (2018) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190889760.001.0001 · Cited by 2,951
Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity
Mason, L. (2018) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226524689.001.0001 · Cited by 1,985 · cited 6×
“…science research, but a spate of recent work argues for understanding democracy primarily through identity-based frameworks (Achen and Bartels, 2016; Egan, 2020; Jardina, 2019; Kreiss et al., 2020; Kuo and Marwick, 2021; Lane et al., 2021; Mason, 2018; Reddi et al., 2021; Sides et al., 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialAchen, C. H., & Bartels, L. M. (2016) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781400882731 · Cited by 1,736
Political parties: organization and power
(1989) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-0563 · Cited by 1,715
The Partisan Sort: How Liberals Became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans
Levendusky, M. (2009) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226473673.001.0001 · Cited by 1,698
Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. B. (2002) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0602_01 · Cited by 1,696
Social Media and the Decision to Participate in Political Protest: Observations From Tahrir Square
Tüfekçi, Z., & Wilson, C. (2012) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01629.x · Cited by 1,660
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Gillespie T (2018) Custodians of the Internet. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Guess A, Nyhan B, Lyons B, et al. (2018) Avoiding the echo chamber about echo chambers. Knight Foundation 2: 1–25.
- Hanchard MG (2018) The Spectre of Race. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Klein E (2020) Why We’re Polarized. New York: Simon & Schuster.
- 10.18574/nyu/9781479833641.001.0001 · DOI
- Panda A Siddarth D Pal J (2020) COVID BLM and the polarization of US politicians on Twitter. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.03263 · arXiv
- Perry SL, Cobb RJ, Whitehead AL, et al. (2022) Divided by faith (in Christian America): Christian nationalism, race, and divergent perceptions of racial injustice. Social Forces 101(2): 913–942.
- 10.1017/CBO9780511490347 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Argyle, L. P., Bail, C. A., Busby, E. C., Gubler, J. R., Howe, T., Rytting, C., Sorensen, T., & Wingate, D. (2023) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2311627120 · Cited by 144
Disinformation on digital media platforms: A market-shaping approach
Ruiz, C. A. D. (2023) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448231207644 · Cited by 97
Brüggemann, M., & Meyer, H. (2023) · Communication Theory · doi:10.1093/ct/qtad012 · Cited by 60
Chan, M., & Yi, J. (2024) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2024.2325423 · Cited by 71
Esau, K., Choucair, T. D. S., Vilkins, S., Svegaard, S. F. K., Bruns, A., O’Connor-Farfan, K. S., & Lubicz-Zaorski, C. (2024) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2024.2413127 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Kreiss, D., & McGregor, S. C.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kreiss, Daniel
- Venue
- New Media & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2023-04-11
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 556-579
- ISSN
- 1461-4448 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7315
- OpenAlex
- W4365142069
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 135
- Citations by year
- 2026: 52 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 16
- FWCI
- 70.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- New Media & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Populism, Right-Wing Movements
- Keywords
- political polarization, social networking sites, inequality, democracy, political identity, social groups, power relations, Black Lives Matter, dominant groups
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
