Society is often polarized by controversial issues, that split the population into groups of opposing views. When such issues emerge on social media, we often observe the creation of 'echo chambers', i.e., situations where like-minded people reinforce each other's opinion, but do not get exposed to the views of the opposing side. In this paper we study algorithmic techniques for bridging these chambers, and thus, reducing controversy. Specifically, we represent the discussion on a controversial issue with an endorsement graph, and cast our problem as an edge-recommendation problem on this graph. The goal of the recommendation is to reduce the controversy score of the graph, which is measured by a recently-developed metric based on random walks. At the same time, we take into account the acceptance probability of the recommended edge, which represents how likely the edge is to materialize in the endorsement graph. We propose a simple model based on a recently-developed user-level controversy score, that is competitive with state-of- the-art link-prediction algorithms. We thus aim at finding the edges that produce the largest reduction in the controversy score, in expectation. To solve this problem, we propose an efficient algorithm, which considers only a fraction of all the combinations of possible edges. Experimental results show that our algorithm is more efficient than a simple greedy heuristic, while producing comparable score reduction. Finally, a comparison with other state-of-the-art edge-addition algorithms shows that this problem is fundamentally different from what has been studied in the literature.
Graells- @cite_26 show that mere display of opposing-view content has negative emotional effect. To overcome this effect, they propose a visual interface for making recommendations from a diverse pool of users, where diversity is with respect to user stances on a topic. In contrast, @cite_21 show that not all users value diversity and that the way of presenting information (e.g., highlighting vs. ranking) makes a difference in the way users perceive information. In a different direction, Graells- @cite_6 propose to find intermediary topics'' (i.e., topics that may be of interest to both sides) by constructing a topic graph . They define intermediary topics to be those topics that have high betweenness centrality and topic diversity.
@cite_26 @cite_21 @cite_6
1571597797 2119758323 2294090774
ABSTRACT Social networks allow people to connect with each otherand have conversations on a wide variety of topics. How-ever, users tend to connect with like-minded people and readagreeable information, a behavior that leads to group polar-ization. Motivated by this scenario, we study how to takeadvantage of partial homophily to suggest agreeable contentto users authored by people with opposite views on sensitiveissues. We introduce a paradigm to present a data portraitof users, in which their characterizing topics are visualizedand their corresponding tweets are displayed using an or-ganic design. Among their tweets we inject recommendedtweets from other people considering their views on sensitiveissues in addition to topical relevance, indirectly motivatingconnections between dissimilar people. To evaluate our ap-proach, we present a case study on Twitter about a sensitivetopic in Chile, where we estimate user stances for regularpeople and nd intermediary topics. We then evaluated ourdesign in a user study. We found that recommending topi-cally relevant content from authors with opposite views in abaseline interface had a negative emotional e ect. We sawthat our organic visualization design reverts that e ect. Wealso observed signi cant individual di erences linked to eval-uation of recommendations. Our results suggest that organicvisualization may revert the negative e ects of providingpotentially sensitive content. Is a polarized society inevitable, where people choose to be exposed to only political news and commentary that reinforces their existing viewpoints? We examine the relationship between the numbers of supporting and challenging items in a collection of political opinion items and readers' satisfaction, and then evaluate whether simple presentation techniques such as highlighting agreeable items or showing them first can increase satisfaction when fewer agreeable items are present. We find individual differences: some people are diversity-seeking while others are challenge-averse. For challenge-averse readers, highlighting appears to make satisfaction with sets of mostly agreeable items more extreme, but does not increase satisfaction overall, and sorting agreeable content first appears to decrease satisfaction rather than increasing it. These findings have important implications for builders of websites that aggregate content reflecting different positions. In online social networks, people tend to connect with like-minded people and read agreeable information. Direct recommendation of challenging content has not worked well because users do not value diversity and avoid challenging content. In this poster, we investigate the possibility of an indirect approach by introducing intermediary topics, which are topics that are common to people having opposing views on sensitive issues, i.e., those issues that tend to divide people. Through a case study about a sensitive issue discussed in Twitter, we show that such intermediary topics exist, opening a path for future work in recommendation promoting diversity of content to be shared.