The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Breaking the Social Media Prism: How to Make Our Platforms Less Polarizing
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Thus, while more voices can be heard through social media, more extreme voices may be prioritized (Bail 2022) and propaganda can foster divisive content (Simchon et al. 2022), which might distort the information people consume.”
From Social Media and Morality. (2024) · cites this paper as Bail 2022
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
How social media shapes polarization
Van Bavel, J. J., Rathje, S., Harris, E., Robertson, C., & Sternisko, A. (2021) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2021.07.013 · Cited by 192
Van Bavel, J. J., Robertson, C. E., del Rosario, K., Rasmussen, J., & Rathje, S. (2024) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-022123-110258 · Cited by 121
Metadata
- Authors
- Bail, C.
- Venue
- Princeton University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Princeton University Press
- Published
- 2022-09-27
- OpenAlex
- W3142511650
- Cited by
- 181
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 36 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 50 · 2022: 30
- FWCI
- 30.29
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Princeton University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Media and Digital Communication
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Keywords
- social media, social networking sites, online communication, digital media
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
