4.4 Article

Partisan Polarization Is the Primary Psychological Motivation behind Political Fake News Sharing on Twitter

期刊

AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW
卷 115, 期 3, 页码 999-1015

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0003055421000290

关键词

-

资金

  1. Aarhus University Research Foundation [AUFF-E-2016-9-22]
  2. Carlsberg Foundation [CF18-1108]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The sharing of fake news is motivated by political polarization rather than ignorance or laziness. Those who hate their political opponents are more likely to share fake news in order to attack and derogate them. This study indicates that psychological motivations play a significant role in the spread of fake news on social media.
The rise of fake news is a major concern in contemporary Western democracies. Yet, research on the psychological motivations behind the spread of political fake news on social media is surprisingly limited. Are citizens who share fake news ignorant and lazy? Are they fueled by sinister motives, seeking to disrupt the social status quo? Or do they seek to attack partisan opponents in an increasingly polarized political environment? This article is the first to test these competing hypotheses based on a careful mapping of psychological profiles of over 2,300 American Twitter users linked to behavioral sharing data and sentiment analyses of more than 500,000 news story headlines. The findings contradict the ignorance perspective but provide some support for the disruption perspective and strong support for the partisan polarization perspective. Thus, individuals who report hating their political opponents are the most likely to share political fake news and selectively share content that is useful for derogating these opponents. Overall, our findings show that fake news sharing is fueled by the same psychological motivations that drive other forms of partisan behavior, including sharing partisan news from traditional and credible news sources.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据