innsikt - Rhetorical analysis social media - # Polarization in online group discussions

Rhetorical Strategies of Ethos and Pathos in Online Group Discussions: Corpora for Analyzing Polarization Issues in Social Media

Q: How do the patterns of ethos and pathos appeals differ across various online communities beyond the platforms studied here, such as forums, messaging apps, or alternative social media?

In examining the patterns of ethos and pathos appeals across different online communities, it is essential to consider the unique characteristics and dynamics of each platform. Forums, for instance, often have distinct subgroups with specific norms and values, leading to varying patterns of ethos and pathos appeals. Messaging apps, on the other hand, may facilitate more personal and direct interactions, potentially influencing the nature of persuasive strategies employed. In forums, where discussions are typically more structured and focused on specific topics, ethos appeals may be more prevalent as users establish credibility and authority within their respective communities. Pathos appeals could also be common in forums where emotional connections play a significant role in shaping opinions and fostering group cohesion. Messaging apps, known for their immediacy and intimacy, may see a higher frequency of pathos appeals as users aim to evoke emotional responses in real-time conversations. Ethos appeals in messaging apps could be subtler but still present, especially in one-on-one or small group interactions where personal credibility is crucial. Alternative social media platforms, such as niche interest networks or emerging platforms, may exhibit unique patterns of ethos and pathos appeals based on their user demographics, communication norms, and content focus. Understanding these variations can provide valuable insights into how persuasive strategies evolve in different online communities.

Q: What are the potential counter-arguments to the assumption that rhetorical appeals to ethos and pathos are the primary drivers of polarization in online discussions, and how could those be investigated using the corpora?

While ethos and pathos appeals play a significant role in shaping online discourse and polarization, it is essential to consider alternative factors that could also contribute to this phenomenon. One potential counter-argument is the influence of external events, such as political developments, social movements, or media coverage, which can amplify existing divisions and fuel polarization independent of rhetorical appeals. Moreover, the role of cognitive biases, confirmation bias, and echo chambers in online interactions cannot be overlooked. These psychological factors may reinforce existing beliefs and attitudes, leading to polarization even in the absence of explicit ethos and pathos appeals. Investigating the interplay between cognitive biases and rhetorical strategies in the corpora can provide insights into their combined impact on polarization. Additionally, the structural features of online platforms, algorithms, and moderation policies can shape the nature of discussions and contribute to polarization. The design of the platform, including the visibility of content, recommendation systems, and community guidelines, can influence the spread of persuasive appeals and the formation of polarized groups. Analyzing these structural elements alongside ethos and pathos appeals in the corpora can help disentangle their respective contributions to polarization.

Q: Given the prevalence of negative appeals observed in the corpora, how might the dynamics of polarization be influenced by the human tendency towards a "negativity bias" in information processing and decision-making?

The human tendency towards a "negativity bias," where negative information and emotions have a stronger impact than positive ones, can significantly influence the dynamics of polarization in online discussions. Negative appeals, whether through attacks on credibility (ethos) or evocation of negative emotions (pathos), may resonate more strongly with individuals, leading to heightened emotional responses and entrenched positions. In the context of online interactions, the negativity bias can amplify the effects of polarizing rhetoric, reinforcing existing biases and deepening divisions between opposing groups. Negative appeals may trigger defensive reactions, further solidifying group identities and increasing the likelihood of conflict and hostility in discussions. Understanding the interplay between negativity bias and rhetorical strategies in the corpora can shed light on how these dynamics contribute to polarization. By analyzing the prevalence and impact of negative appeals in relation to ethos and pathos, researchers can explore how cognitive tendencies shape online discourse and influence the escalation of polarization. Strategies to mitigate the effects of negativity bias, such as promoting constructive dialogue and emphasizing positive framing, may also be considered to address polarization in online communities.

Grunnleggende konsepter

Rhetorical appeals to ethos (character) and pathos (emotion) are key strategies employed by individuals in polarizing online discussions, which can be analyzed using large-scale corpora to understand communication patterns and dynamics leading to societal polarization.

Sammendrag

The paper introduces multi-topic and multi-platform corpora annotated with rhetorical appeals to ethos (character) and pathos (emotion) in online group discussions. The authors argue that these rhetorical strategies are crucial for understanding polarization in social media, complementing existing approaches focused on hate speech detection and sentiment analysis.

The corpora cover discussions on three polarizing topics (COVID-19 vaccines, climate change, and the 2016 US presidential election) across two social media platforms (Reddit and Twitter). The annotation scheme distinguishes between appeals to positive and negative ethos (support vs. attack) as well as positive and negative pathos.

The results show that appeals to pathos are more prevalent than appeals to ethos across the corpora, with negative appeals dominating in both cases. The authors also observe platform-dependent differences, with Reddit discussions exhibiting more ethotic supports and Twitter more positive pathos appeals. The corpora enable large-scale quantitative and qualitative analyses of polarizing communication patterns.

Tilpass sammendrag

Omskriv med AI

Generer sitater

Oversett kilde

Til et annet språk

Generer tankekart

fra kildeinnhold

Besøk kilde

arxiv.org

Statistikk

The corpora comprise a total of 15,588 sentences, with the number of sentences per corpus ranging from 2,488 (PI2) to 4,263 (PI5).
The corpora contain a total of 3,766 unique speakers as sources of the appeals, and 831 unique targets.

Sitater

"Growing polarisation in society caught the attention of the scientific community as well as news media, which devote special issues to this phenomenon."
"Existing methods seem insufficient to tackle the problem fully, thus, we propose to approach the problem by investigating rhetorical strategies employed by individuals in polarising discussions online."
"Appeals to ethos refer to the character of a speaker, that is, her/his credibility. Such references can be favourable or unfavourable, that is one's ethos can be supported or attacked by others, respectively."
"Pathos is the persuasive power of pathotic appeals lies in their ability to induce emotions in the hearers. Thus, it focuses on affective states of the hearer in contrast to a commonly employed perspective of a speaker and emotions expressed in text content."

Viktige innsikter hentet fra

Ethos and Pathos in Online Group Discussions

by Ewelina Gaje... klokken arxiv.org 04-09-2024

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2404.04889.pdf

Ethos and Pathos in Online Group Discussions

Dypere Spørsmål

How do the patterns of ethos and pathos appeals differ across various online communities beyond the platforms studied here, such as forums, messaging apps, or alternative social media?

In examining the patterns of ethos and pathos appeals across different online communities, it is essential to consider the unique characteristics and dynamics of each platform. Forums, for instance, often have distinct subgroups with specific norms and values, leading to varying patterns of ethos and pathos appeals. Messaging apps, on the other hand, may facilitate more personal and direct interactions, potentially influencing the nature of persuasive strategies employed.
In forums, where discussions are typically more structured and focused on specific topics, ethos appeals may be more prevalent as users establish credibility and authority within their respective communities. Pathos appeals could also be common in forums where emotional connections play a significant role in shaping opinions and fostering group cohesion.
Messaging apps, known for their immediacy and intimacy, may see a higher frequency of pathos appeals as users aim to evoke emotional responses in real-time conversations. Ethos appeals in messaging apps could be subtler but still present, especially in one-on-one or small group interactions where personal credibility is crucial.
Alternative social media platforms, such as niche interest networks or emerging platforms, may exhibit unique patterns of ethos and pathos appeals based on their user demographics, communication norms, and content focus. Understanding these variations can provide valuable insights into how persuasive strategies evolve in different online communities.

What are the potential counter-arguments to the assumption that rhetorical appeals to ethos and pathos are the primary drivers of polarization in online discussions, and how could those be investigated using the corpora?

While ethos and pathos appeals play a significant role in shaping online discourse and polarization, it is essential to consider alternative factors that could also contribute to this phenomenon. One potential counter-argument is the influence of external events, such as political developments, social movements, or media coverage, which can amplify existing divisions and fuel polarization independent of rhetorical appeals.
Moreover, the role of cognitive biases, confirmation bias, and echo chambers in online interactions cannot be overlooked. These psychological factors may reinforce existing beliefs and attitudes, leading to polarization even in the absence of explicit ethos and pathos appeals. Investigating the interplay between cognitive biases and rhetorical strategies in the corpora can provide insights into their combined impact on polarization.
Additionally, the structural features of online platforms, algorithms, and moderation policies can shape the nature of discussions and contribute to polarization. The design of the platform, including the visibility of content, recommendation systems, and community guidelines, can influence the spread of persuasive appeals and the formation of polarized groups. Analyzing these structural elements alongside ethos and pathos appeals in the corpora can help disentangle their respective contributions to polarization.

Given the prevalence of negative appeals observed in the corpora, how might the dynamics of polarization be influenced by the human tendency towards a "negativity bias" in information processing and decision-making?

The human tendency towards a "negativity bias," where negative information and emotions have a stronger impact than positive ones, can significantly influence the dynamics of polarization in online discussions. Negative appeals, whether through attacks on credibility (ethos) or evocation of negative emotions (pathos), may resonate more strongly with individuals, leading to heightened emotional responses and entrenched positions.
In the context of online interactions, the negativity bias can amplify the effects of polarizing rhetoric, reinforcing existing biases and deepening divisions between opposing groups. Negative appeals may trigger defensive reactions, further solidifying group identities and increasing the likelihood of conflict and hostility in discussions.
Understanding the interplay between negativity bias and rhetorical strategies in the corpora can shed light on how these dynamics contribute to polarization. By analyzing the prevalence and impact of negative appeals in relation to ethos and pathos, researchers can explore how cognitive tendencies shape online discourse and influence the escalation of polarization. Strategies to mitigate the effects of negativity bias, such as promoting constructive dialogue and emphasizing positive framing, may also be considered to address polarization in online communities.