Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook

Overview of attention for article published in Science, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#26 of 39,151)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
91 news outlets
blogs
34 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
731 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
18 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
10 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor
video
1 video uploader

Readers on

mendeley
428 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook
Published in
Science, May 2015
DOI 10.1126/science.aaa1160
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eytan Bakshy, Solomon Messing, Lada Adamic, Lada A. Adamic, Bakshy, Eytan, Messing, Solomon, Adamic, Lada

Abstract

Exposure to news, opinion and civic information increasingly occurs through social media. How do these online networks influence exposure to perspectives that cut across ideological lines? Using de-identified data, we examined how 10.1 million U.S. Facebook users interact with socially shared news. We directly measured ideological homophily in friend networks, and examine the extent to which heterogeneous friends could potentially expose individuals to cross-cutting content. We then quantified the extent to which individuals encounter comparatively more or less diverse content while interacting via Facebook's algorithmically ranked News Feed, and further studied users' choices to click through to ideologically discordant content. Compared to algorithmic ranking, individuals' choices about what to consume had a stronger effect limiting exposure to cross-cutting content.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 731 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 428 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 26 6%
Germany 6 1%
United Kingdom 6 1%
Netherlands 6 1%
Spain 4 <1%
Japan 4 <1%
Brazil 4 <1%
Israel 3 <1%
Finland 3 <1%
Other 22 5%
Unknown 344 80%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 150 35%
Researcher 72 17%
Student > Master 57 13%
Student > Bachelor 43 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 27 6%
Other 79 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 140 33%
Computer Science 88 21%
Psychology 42 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 26 6%
Physics and Astronomy 21 5%
Other 111 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1575. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 March 2017.
All research outputs
#438
of 7,430,338 outputs
Outputs from Science
#26
of 39,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20
of 203,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#3
of 716 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,430,338 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 39,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 203,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 716 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.