Emerging Technologies

A new study has revealed why people share their political views online

politics views opions debate blog blogging vlogger twitter facebook social media platform web internet right wing left democrat republican libertarian green

Social media has become a popular platform for people to share their political opinions. Image: Unsplash/NeONBRAND

Nils Gustafsson
Senior Lecturer in Strategic Communication, Lund University
Annika Fredén
Senior Lecturer in Political Science, Karlstads University
Emma A. Renström
Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg
Hanna Bäck
Professor of Political Science, Lund University
Share:
Our Impact
What's the World Economic Forum doing to accelerate action on Emerging Technologies?
The Big Picture
Explore and monitor how Internet of Things is affecting economies, industries and global issues
A hand holding a looking glass by a lake
Crowdsource Innovation
Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale
Stay up to date:

Internet of Things

  • Social media has become a common place for users sharing their political thoughts and opinions.
  • A new Swedish study has revealed that lack of 'rejection sensitivity' was a common trait among those who share their views online.
  • People with a high fear of being rejected are less likely to share political content.

Wading into a political debate online can be a minefield. Search any comment section or thread on a social media site, and you’re likely to come across some pretty strong views. But that’s not necessarily just the nature of the debate. It could also reflect the kind of personalities that are drawn to online discussions of this kind.

Have you read?

In our research, we’ve found that people who don’t care about what others think are more likely to engage in politics on social media. This might have an effect on what they say online and contribute to the vitriolic tone that puts so many off engaging in public online conversations. It might also be decisive in selecting the political content that people come across in their feeds.

Coronavirus Covid-19 virus infection China Hubei Wuhan contagion spread economics dow jones S&P 500 stock market crash 1929 depression great recession
People who don’t care about what others think are more likely to engage in politics online. Image: New Media & Society

When social media first became popular in the 2000s, people thought it would enable a more diverse set of people to participate in the political debate. Anyone could post something. Anyone could see their words spread to millions of people’s news feeds.

But for many people, politics is a sensitive issue, and they care about their audience. On social media, the audience is invisible unless they react by commenting, liking or sharing. So even if you are interested in politics, the chances are that if you are sensitive to being socially rejected, you will stay away from posting, sharing or commenting on political issues unless you are sure that they are uncontroversial in your social network.

We, a group of scholars from political science, psychology, and communication studies, decided to study the personality traits of people who post political content on social media compared to those who do not. We measured several traits, but found one that was especially interesting: rejection sensitivity.

Rejection sensitivity is a well-established measurement in social psychology that measures social risk propensity. That means looking at how afraid you are that someone will reject you for something you have said or done by asking how you would react to a number of hypothetical situations. How you’d feel about being rejected by a close friend, walking up to a stranger at a party, and so on, are all part of a puzzle. From the answers to these questions, we can calculate a rejection sensitivity index for every individual. A low value indicates low sensitivity to rejection and vice versa.

We then studied the relationship between rejection sensitivity and political activity on social media in a unique survey, distributed to about 2,000 Swedish residents. We then interviewed 60 young Swedes in order to get a better understanding of why they either took part in political debate online or not.

The statistical analysis showed that even after controlling for age, education, gender and political interest, rejection sensitivity has a significant effect on engagement. Above all, individuals with a high fear of being rejected avoid sharing political content to their network.

For example: a 30-year-old man or woman with a university education and an interest in politics who has a high degree of rejection sensitivity is 40% less likely to share or post political content than someone with the same characteristics but with a low fear of being socially rejected.

Thick skin

Although we found that a substantial share of the respondents in the study – 37% – had been active in political debate on social media in one way or another, it was clear that the most active group had certain characteristics.

In the interviews, it was obvious that for many people, sensitive issues are best discussed in private settings. Face-to-face with a friend or a colleague, it’s easier to adjust something you have said if you realise you’ve caused offence or discomfort. On social media – at least under your own name – you always run the risk of being misunderstood, or silently condemned. And since you are known by the company you keep, even having a Facebook friend with controversial views might put you in a bad light.

Some people, however, simply don’t seem to care about whether anyone will be offended by what they say and will gladly share their views. As a result, the content that is actually posted and shared in social media feeds is to a higher degree produced by those with a low fear of being socially rejected.

Loading...

So what does this actually mean? This is still an open question. The only thing we know is that active people are not afraid of social sanctions. That doesn’t mean that they are excessively stubborn or one-sided. Nor does it mean that they are resistant to facts or harbour extreme views. It’s even possible that these people have an easier time keeping to the target issue. In fact, it may be better if more people were less afraid of being rejected, since such fear has been shown in previous research to lead people to adapt to more extreme attitudes and become increasingly willing to engage with more extreme groups.

However, it could also be the case that this personality bias leads to creating an even more polarised political environment with a confrontational tone that has the effect of scaring people away from political discussion online. As social media gradually becomes the most important source for political information, discussion and news for citizens, this will have major repercussions for democracies worldwide.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

Sign up for free

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Share:
World Economic Forum logo
Global Agenda

The Agenda Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

Subscribe today

You can unsubscribe at any time using the link in our emails. For more details, review our privacy policy.

Future of the internet: Why we need convergence and governance for sustained growth

Thomas Beckley and Ross Genovese

April 25, 2024

About Us

Events

Media

Partners & Members

  • Join Us

Language Editions

Privacy Policy & Terms of Service

© 2024 World Economic Forum