Media and Psychological Polarization of Society: a Systematic Review of Interdisciplinary Foreign Research

The paper analyzes foreign studies of the relationship of modern media with various characteristics of the psychological polarization of social groups. The research method was a systematic review of the literature conducted on 187 relevant scientific publications covering the time period from 1990 to 2023. In the course of the work, the connection between traditional media and the Internet was described on the issues of studying the phenomenon of psychological polarization at the qualitative and quantitative levels. Three main chronological and thematic stages of the study of the problem were identified; The geographical and disciplinary affiliation of the authors of the research is established; the key concepts characterizing the subject of research are analyzed; theories and mechanisms explaining the phenomenon of polarization are presented. As a result of the study, it was shown: 1) the quantitative predominance in the literature of research results confirming the hypothesis of the connection of media with various aspects of polarization; 2) the revealed connection is characterized by the significant role of traditional media, the Internet and social networks in increasing polarization in society, rather than in their hypothetically possible depolarizing effect.

1. Harteveld E., Kokkonen A., Linde J., Dahlberg S. A tough trade-off? The asymmetrical impact of populist radical right inclusion on satisfaction with democracy and government. European Political Science Review, 2021. Vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 113—133. DOI:10.1017/S1755773920000387
2. Druckman J.N., Klar S., Krupnikov Y., Levendusky M., Ryan J.B. Affective polarization, local contexts and public opinion in America. Nature Human Behaviour, 2021. Vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 28—38. DOI:10.1038/s41562-020-01012-5
3. Akbulut-Gok I. Intergovernmental Networks in Peace Operations. Peace & Change: A Journal of Peace Research, 2020. Vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 569—601. DOI:10.1111/pech.12428
4. Asker D.B., Dinas E. Thinking Fast and Furious: Emotional Intensity and Opinion Polarization in Online Media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 2019. Vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 487—509. DOI:10.1093/poq/nfz042
5. Barberá P. How social media reduces mass political polarization [Electronic resource]. 2015 Annual Meeting & Exhibition. New York: APSA. New York, 2015. 46 p. URL: http://pablobarbera.com/static/barbera_polarization_APSA.pdf (Accessed 06.02.2025).
6. Beam M.A., Hutchens M.J., Hmielowski J.D. Facebook news and (de)polarization: Reinforcing spirals in the 2016 US election. Information, Communication and Society, 2018. Vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 940—958. DOI:10.1080/1369118X.2018.1444783
7. Boxell L., Gentzkow M., Shapiro J.M. Cross-Country Trends in Affective Polarization [Electronic resource]. NBER Working Paper, 2020, 61 p. URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3522318 (Accessed 07.02.2025).
8. Coutinho L.G. Political Polarization and the Impact of Internet and Social Media Use in Brazil [Electronic resource]. Maastricht: MERIT Working Papers или Maastricht Economic and social Research institute on Innovation and Technology, 2021. 33 p. URL: https://unu-merit.nl/publications/wppdf/2021/wp2021-032.pdf (Accessed 06.02.2025).
9. Buder J., Rabl L., Feiks M., Badermann M., Zurstiege G. Does negatively toned language use on social media lead to attitude polarization? Computers in Human Behavior, 2021. Vol. 116, article ID 106663. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106663
10. Dubois E., Blank G. The echo chamber is overstated: The moderating effect of political interest and diverse media. Information, Communication and Society, 2018. Vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 729—745. DOI:10.1080/1369118X.2018.1428656
11. Karlsen R., Steen-Johnsen K., Wollebak D., Enjolras B. Echo chamber and trench warfare dynamics in online debates. European Journal of Communication, 2017. Vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 257—273. DOI:10.1177/0267323117695734
12. Vicario M.D., Vivaldo G., Bessi A., Zollo F., Scala A., Caldarelli G., Quattrociocchi W. Echo Chambers: Emotional Contagion and Group Polarization on Facebook. Scientific Reports, 2016. Vol. 6, article ID 37825. 12 p. DOI:10.1038/srep37825
13. Zollo F., Novak P.K., Del Vicario M., Bessi A., Mozetič I., Scala A., Quattrociocchi W. Emotional dynamics in the age of misinformation. PloS one, 2015. Vol. 10(9), article ID e0138740. 22 p. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0138740
14. Esteve Del Valle M., Broersma M., Ponsioen A. Political Interaction Beyond Party Lines: Communication Ties and Party Polarization in Parliamentary Twitter Networks. Social Science Computer Review, 2021. Vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 736—755. DOI:10.1177/0894439320987569
15. Gruzd A., Roy J. Investigating political polarization on Twitter: A Canadian perspective. Policy and Internet, 2014. Vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 28—45. DOI:10.1002/1944-2866.POI354
16. Hmielowski J.D., Beam M.A., Hutchens M.J. Structural Changes in Media and Attitude Polarization: Examining the Contributions of TV News Before and After the Telecommunications Act of 1996. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2016. Vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 153—172. DOI:10.1093/ijpor/edv012
17. Garrett R.K., Gvirsman S.D., Johnson B.K., Tsfati Y., Neo R.L., Dal A. Implications of Pro- and Counter Attitudinal Information Exposure for Affective Polarization. Human Communication Research, 2014. Vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 309—332. DOI:10.1111/hcre.12028
18. Kaiser J., Vaccari C., Chadwick A. Partisan Blocking: Biased Responses to Shared Misinformation Contribute to Network Polarization on Social Media. Journal of Communication, 2022. Vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 214—240. DOI:10.1093/joc/jqac002
19. Kubin E., von Sikorski C. The role of (social) media in political polarization: A systematic review. Annals of the International Communication Association, 2021. Vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 188—206. DOI:10.1080/23808985.2021.1976070
20. Lee F.L.F., Liang H., Tang G.K.Y. Online Incivility, Cyberbalkanization, and the Dynamics of Opinion Polarization During and After a Mass Protest Event. International Journal of Communication, 2019. Vol. 13, pp. 4940—4959.
21. Lee J., Choi Y. Effects of network heterogeneity on social media on opinion polarization among South Koreans: Focusing on fear and political orientation. International Communication Gazette, 2020. Vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 119—139. DOI:10.1177/1748048518820499
22. Levy R. Social Media, News Consumption, and Polarization: Evidence from a Field Experiment. American Economic Review, 2021. Vol. 111, no. 3, pp. 831—870. DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3653388
23. Lujambio O. Diversify the Accounts You Follow: The Effects of Social Media on Political Polarization in Mexico [Electronic resource]. SSRN, 2023. 83 p. URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4487784 (Accessed 06.02.2025).
24. McPherson M., Smith-Lovin L., Cook J.M. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 2001. Vol. 27, pp. 415—444. DOI:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
25. Melki M., Pickering A. Ideological Polarization and the Media. Economics Letters, 2014. Vol. 125, no. 1, pp. 36—39. DOI:10.1016/j.econlet.2014.08.008
26. Muhlberger P. Political values, political attitudes, and attitude polarization in internet political discussion: Political transformation or politics as usual? Communications, 2003. Vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 107—133. DOI:10.1515/comm.2003.009
27. Pariser E. The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. New York: Penguin Press, 2011. 294 p.
28. Osmundsen M., Bor A., Vahlstrup P.B., Bechmann A., Petersen M.B. Partisan Polarization Is the Primary Psychological Motivation behind Political Fake News Sharing on Twitter. American Political Science Review, 2021. Vol. 115, no. 3, pp. 999—1015. DOI:10.1017/S0003055421000290
29. Jiang J., Chen E., Yan S., Lerman K., Ferrara E. Political polarization drives online conversations about COVID‐19 in the United States. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2020. Vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 200—211. DOI:10.1002/hbe2.202
30. Garimella K., Smith T., Weiss R., West R. Political Polarization in Online News Consumption. In Fifteenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (June 7—10, online). Palo Alto: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Press, 2021. Vol. 15, pp. 152—162. DOI:10.1609/icwsm.v15i1.18049
31. Conover M.D., Ratkiewicz J., Francisco M.R., Gonçalves B., Menczer F., Flammini A. Political Polarization on Twitter. Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media: Barcelona, July 17—21 2011. 2011. Vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 89—96. DOI:10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14126
32. Prior M. Media and Political Polarization. Annual Review of Political Science, 2013. Vol. 16, pp. 101—127. DOI:10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135242
33. Rader E., Gray R. Understanding user beliefs about algorithmic curation in the Facebook news feed. Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems: Seoul, April 18—23 2015. New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 2015, pp. 173—182. DOI:10.1145/2702123.2702174
34. Armstrong R., Hall B.J., Doyle J., Waters E. Scoping the scope’ of a Cochrane review. Journal of Public Health, 2011. Vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 147—150. DOI:10.1093/pubmed/fdr015
35. Sia C.L., Tan B.C.Y., Wei K.K. Group Polarization and Computer-Mediated Communication: Effects of Communication Cues, Social Presence, and Anonymity. Information Systems Research, 2002. Vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 70—90. DOI:10.1287/isre.13.1.70.92
36. Spears R., Lea M., Lee S. De‐individuation and group polarization in computer‐mediated communication. British Journal of Social Psychology, 1990. Vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 121—134. DOI:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1990.tb00893.x
37. Suhay E., Bello-Pardo E., Maurer B. The Polarizing Effects of Online Partisan Criticism: Evidence from Two Experiments. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 2017. Vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 95—115. DOI:10.1177/1940161217740697
38. Suler J. The Online Disinhibition Effect. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 2004. Vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 321—326. DOI:10.1089/1094931041291295
39. Iyengar S., Lelkes Y., Levendusky M., Malhotra N., Westwood S. The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States. Annual Review of Political Science, 2019. Vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 129—146. DOI:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034
40. Törnberg P. How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting. National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Washington: National Academy of Sciences, 2022. Vol. 119, no. 42, article ID e2207159119. 11 p. DOI:10.1073/pnas.2207159119
41. Wagner M. Affective polarization in multiparty systems. Electoral Studies, 2021. Vol. 69, article ID 102199. 43 p. DOI:10.1016/j.electstud.2020.102199
42. Wang D., Qian Y. Echo Chamber Effect in Rumor Rebuttal Discussions About COVID-19 in China: Social Media Content and Network Analysis Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2021. Vol. 23, no. 3, article ID e27009. 19 p. DOI:10.2196/27009
43. Wardle C., Derakhshan H. Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2017. 109 p.