The comments under a social media post or an online news article can give us the impression that public opinion leans one way or the other. But the authors of a new study say online comments are anything but representative. — Photo: Sebastian Gollnow/dpa
DRESDEN: Anyone using social media has likely long perceived that some people are not only prolific commentators but that debates on arenas such as X and Reddit often end up dominated by a handful of such keyboard warriors.
A team of researchers from Germany's Max Planck Institute for Human Development and Dresden University of Technology, as well as Stanford University in the US have found this more or less to be the case in a series of test groups they set up on Reddit in an effort to better understand why some people are more vocal online than others.
"Discussions are often dominated by a small group of active users, while the majority remain silent," the researchers said, claiming that the "imbalance" of views on show can in turn "distort perceptions of public opinion" and "fuel polarisation."
The "power users" tended to take over discussions, while habitual "lurkers" kept their heads down when it came to exchanges they felt were "toxic, disrespectful or polarised," the team reported, after having 600 volunteers join groups in which views were shared on 20 political topics.
The more "heated" the environment, the more likely it appeared the "active minority" was inclined to weigh in, according to the findings, published in December.
Such participants "tended to be male, highly interested in politics, and to describe themselves as likely to comment online," the researchers said.
And while the passive scrollers could be incentivised to say more, such interventions did little to undermine the dominance of the serial posters, even if participation was broadened.
The researchers said that appeals such as "please stay respectful" appeared to fall on deaf ears.
The study is a warning to anyone who takes comments on social media or under an online news article as reflecting public opinion, as anyone assuming so "will often be sorely mistaken," according to the researchers.
And while it is not possible to "just press a button to achieve more participation," according to Max Planck’s Lisa Oswald, there are potential measures that could help broaden things out beyond the usual noisy few – and in turn see social media become "more realistic" in reflecting public opinion.
Clear and consistently enforced rules against "toxicity" could be worth pushing for, the team suggested, as could "nonmonetary rewards for first-time and high-quality contributions."
The study did not include the issue of bots and troll farms posting fake comments on social media, a phenomenon that has led to doubts over how representative online debate is in reality. – dpa
