Exposure to Ideologically Diverse News and Opinion on Facebook.¶
Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to Ideologically Diverse News and Opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130-1132.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- False Consensus Effect
- Forecasting — individual point estimates are biased by self-anchored priors, and aggregation methods that do not correct for this inherit the bias. Online discourse — algorithmic and homophilic sampling amplifies the underlying tendency, so the perceived majority on one's timeline is a sample mistaken for the population.
This sourceDocuments homophilic and algorithmic filtering that skews one's feed toward like-minded content, so the perceived majority on a timeline is a non-representative sample.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
The abstract shows algorithmic ranking cut cross-cutting content in feeds by ~15%, backing the sampling-skew frame but not the perceived-majority conclusion.
“People encountered roughly 15% less cross-cutting content in news feeds due to algorithmic ranking and clicked through to 70% less of this cross-cutting content.”
- Forecasting — individual point estimates are biased by self-anchored priors, and aggregation methods that do not correct for this inherit the bias. Online discourse — algorithmic and homophilic sampling amplifies the underlying tendency, so the perceived majority on one's timeline is a sample mistaken for the population.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:d2c1de5f6dac · see in the full table