Online Relationships and Social Media Interaction in Youth Problem Gambling: A Four-Country Study

The objective of this study was to examine if belonging to online communities and social media identity bubbles predict youth problem gambling. An online survey was administered to 15–25-year-old participants in the United States (N = 1212), South Korea (N = 1192), Spain (N = 1212), and Finland (N = 1200). The survey measured two dimensions of online behavior: perceived sense of belonging to an online community and involvement in social media identity bubbles. Belonging to an online community was examined with a single item and involvement in social media identity bubbles was measured with the six-item Identity Bubble Reinforcement Scale. The South Oaks Gambling Screen was used to assess problem gambling. Statistical analyses utilized linear regression modeling. According to the analyses, strong sense of belonging to an online community was associated with higher problem gambling, but the association was observed mainly among those young individuals who were also involved in social media identity bubbles. For those youths who did not indicate identity bubble involvement, online relationships appeared to function as those offline. Some differences across the four countries were observed but overall, the results indicate that social media identity bubbles could partly explain the harmful influence that some online relations have on youth behavior

Barriers to participation in polarized online discussions about Covid-19 and the Russo-Ukrainian War

Even though social networking sites create a unique online public space for the exchange of opinions, only a small share of citizens participate in online discussions. Moreover, research has depicted current online discussions as highly uncivil, hostile, and polarized, and the number of heated discussions has escalated in the last two years because of health, social, and security crises. This study investigates the perceived barriers to participation in Facebook discussions, focusing on two topics: the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russo-Ukrainian War. It explores the role that the negativity of these online discussions has on participation. To investigate the perspectives of users and their personal experiences with online discussions in times of crisis, we apply a qualitative research method and interviews with participants. We collected and analyzed 50 semi-structured interviews with Czech Facebook users who participated in discussions during the spring of 2021 (i.e., Covid-19) and the spring of 2022 (i.e., Russo-Ukrainian War). The results show that, after initial mobilization at the beginning of the pandemic, the crisis reinforced several crucial barriers to participation in discussions due to the perceived persistence of polarization (e.g., the spread of disinformation, the bipolar character of discussions, negative perception of opponents), which subsequently spread to other areas and issues. The data also implies that these barriers tend to demobilize less active participants, those who do not have strong opinions, and participants who think the subject matter is not worth the heated exchange of opinions

Understanding dynamics of polarization via multiagent social simulation

It is widely recognized that the Web contributes to user polarization, and such polarization affects not just politics but also peoples’ stances about public health, such as vaccination. Understanding polarization in social networks is challenging because it depends not only on user attitudes but also their interactions and exposure to information. We adopt Social Judgment Theory to operationalize attitude shift and model user behavior based on empirical evidence from past studies. We design a social simulation to analyze how content sharing affects user satisfaction and polarization in a social network. We investigate the influence of varying tolerance in users and selectively exposing users to congenial views. We find that (1) higher user tolerance slows down polarization and leads to lower user satisfaction; (2) higher selective exposure leads to higher polarization and lower user reach; and (3) both higher tolerance and higher selective exposure lead to a more homophilic social network

Online Hate and Harmful Content : Cross-National Perspectives

Peer reviewe

The socio-political implications of social media participation and activism among young adults in Saudi Arabia.

In most democratic countries, citizens have access to several avenues to participate in and engage with political and social issues. However, in Saudi Arabia, there are only a few permissible forms of expressing opinions and venting frustrations. Therefore, unlike most democratic societies, where social media is primarily utilised to foster the traditional, offline means of exerting pressure on state agencies, social media is the principal platform for political participation and activism in Saudi Arabia. This thesis therefore aims to explore the political and social implications of social media participation and activism within an authoritarian environment. Although there is extensive scholarly agreement that social media has widened the scope of information, enhanced horizontal networks of communication, and expanded the space for freedom of expression, the nature of the socio-political context within an authoritarian environment can critically influence the way in which individuals engage with and participate in social and political issues online. Thus, the political potential of these platforms in a public sphere that is characterised as being extremely authoritarian, religious, and patriarchal requires further empirical investigations. This thesis also investigates, through a case study of the anti-male guardianship hashtag activism, how Saudi women have utilised Twitter’s ‘hashtag’ feature to promote their campaigns and fight for their rights. Based on 29 semi-structured interviews with activists and non-activists (aged between 20 and 35) and extensive fieldwork, this study will explore how Saudi young adults perceive the socio-political implications of social media for political participation and activism in Saudi Arabia. The literature pertaining to the political implications of social media is highly contradictory, with some studies emphasising its potential to serve as a space of autonomy and participation, while others emphasise its depoliticising nature. Making its own original contribution to this debate, my study shows how social media has played an unprecedented role in paving the way for Saudis to participate in socio-political issues, increase the level of transparency and accountability, expose wrongdoing, express opinions, and generate awareness. More critically, the findings introduce a model that demonstrates how the ‘socially connective function’ of social media can penetrate the dynamic of ‘ubiquitous preference falsification’ (characterising most societies living under authoritarian regimes) by encouraging the public disclosure of preferences. The findings also show how the anti-male guardianship hashtag activism functions as an ‘alternative space’ for geographically dispersed and affected women in Saudi Arabia to mobilise thousands of national and global opinions, frame male guardianship-related issues, and challenge the patriarchal and victim-blaming discourse dominating the Saudi public sphere. Finally, I argue that within an authoritarian context, social media can increase socio-political participation, but it does not essentially lead to the democratisation and pluralism of the online public sphere due to two critical reasons: the increasing adoption of sophisticated surveillance technologies by states and online trolls

Characterizing Disagreement in Online Political Talk: Examining Incivility and Opinion Expression on News Websites and Facebook in Brazil

This paper examines the ways people engage in political conversation triggered by exposure to political news in two different informal platforms in Brazil: Facebook and news websites. We analyze the extent to which disagreement is associated to discursive traits that are commonly associated with deliberative behavior, such as directly engaging with others, and trying to justify one’s views, and negative traits, such as incivility. The contributions of this paper can be summarized as follows. First, this paper emphasizes the importance of looking beyond a single platform and a single topic to understand political discussion online. Second, we demonstrate that online disagreement is positively associated with both deliberative traits, such as justified opinion expression, and non-deliberative traits, such as incivility, and argue that the latter is not enough to dismiss the value of political talk. We also demonstrate that the topic of a news story is relevant both to drive political conversation and to spark political disagreement: controversies involving celebrities and stories covering international affairs are more likely to drive heterogeneous conversations than more conventional political topics (e.g. government, policy), even though these are the topics that tend to attract more political talk. Finally, this study contributes to fill an important gap in the literature, looking beyond the US and Western European contexts by examining political talk in Brazil, the fourth largest digital market in the world

Social media battle for attention: opinion dynamics on competing networks

In the age of information abundance, attention is a coveted resource. Social media platforms vigorously compete for users' engagement, influencing the evolution of their opinions on a variety of topics. With recommendation algorithms often accused of creating "filter bubbles", where like-minded individuals interact predominantly with one another, it's crucial to understand the consequences of this unregulated attention market. To address this, we present a model of opinion dynamics on a multiplex network. Each layer of the network represents a distinct social media platform, each with its unique characteristics. Users, as nodes in this network, share their opinions across platforms and decide how much time to allocate in each platform depending on its perceived quality. Our model reveals two key findings. i) When examining two platforms - one with a neutral recommendation algorithm and another with a homophily-based algorithm - we uncover that even if users spend the majority of their time on the neutral platform, opinion polarization can persist. ii) By allowing users to dynamically allocate their social energy across platforms in accordance to their homophilic preferences, a further segregation of individuals emerges. While network fragmentation is usually associated with "echo chambers", the emergent multi-platform segregation leads to an increase in users' satisfaction without the undesired increase in polarization. These results underscore the significance of acknowledging how individuals gather information from a multitude of sources. Furthermore, they emphasize that policy interventions on a single social media platform may yield limited impact.Comment: 13 pages, 7 figure

Public Discourse in the Russian Blogosphere: Mapping RuNet Politics and Mobilization

We analyzed Russian blogs to discover networks of discussion around politics and public affairs. Beginning with an initial set of over five million blogs, we used social network analysis to identify a highly active ‘Discussion Core’ of over 11,000. These were clustered according to long term patterns of citations within posts, and the resulting segmentation characterized through both automated and human content analysis. Key findings include: * Unlike their counterparts in the US and elsewhere, Russian bloggers prefer platforms that combine features typical of blogs with features of social network services (SNSs) like Facebook. Russian blogging is dominated by a handful of these “SNS hybrids.” * While the larger Russian blogosphere is highly divided according to platform, there is a central Discussion Core that contains the majority of political and public affairs discourse. This core is comprised mainly, though not exclusively, of blogs on the LiveJournal platform

Online Hate and Harmful Content

Over the past few decades, various types of hate material have caused increasing concern. Today, the scope of hate is wider than ever, as easy and often-anonymous access to an enormous amount of online content has opened the Internet up to both use and abuse. By providing possibilities for inexpensive and instantaneous access without ties to geographic location or a user identification system, the Internet has permitted hate groups and individuals espousing hate to transmit their ideas to a worldwide audience. Online Hate and Harmful Content focuses on the role of potentially harmful online content, particularly among young people. This focus is explored through two approaches: firstly, the commonality of online hate through cross-national survey statistics. This includes a discussion of the various implications of online hate for young people in terms of, for example, subjective wellbeing, trust, self-image and social relationships. Secondly, the book examines theoretical frameworks from the fields of sociology, social psychology and criminology that are useful for understanding online behaviour and online victimisation. Limitations of past theory are assessed and complemented with a novel theoretical model linking past work to the online environment as it exists today. An important and timely volume in this ever-changing digital age, this book is suitable for graduates and undergraduates interested in the fields of Internet and new media studies, social psychology and criminology. The analyses and findings of the book are also particularly relevant to practitioners and policy-makers working in the areas of Internet regulation, crime prevention, child protection and social work/youth work

Online Relationships and Social Media Interaction in Youth Problem Gambling: A Four-Country Study

The objective of this study was to examine if belonging to online communities and social media identity bubbles predict youth problem gambling. An online survey was administered to 15–25-year-old participants in the United States (N = 1212), South Korea (N = 1192), Spain (N = 1212), and Finland (N = 1200). The survey measured two dimensions of online behavior: perceived sense of belonging to an online community and involvement in social media identity bubbles. Belonging to an online community was examined with a single item and involvement in social media identity bubbles was measured with the six-item Identity Bubble Reinforcement Scale. The South Oaks Gambling Screen was used to assess problem gambling. Statistical analyses utilized linear regression modeling. According to the analyses, strong sense of belonging to an online community was associated with higher problem gambling, but the association was observed mainly among those young individuals who were also involved in social media identity bubbles. For those youths who did not indicate identity bubble involvement, online relationships appeared to function as those offline. Some differences across the four countries were observed but overall, the results indicate that social media identity bubbles could partly explain the harmful influence that some online relations have on youth behavior.</p