Reducing controversy by connecting opposing views

19Citations
Citations of this article
64Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Controversial issues often split the population into groups with 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 reduce controversy. Specifically, we represent discussions as graphs, and cast our objective as an edge-recommendation problem. The goal of the recommendation is to reduce the controversy score of the graph, measured by a recently-developed metric based on random walks. At the same time, we take into account the acceptance probability of the recommended edges, which represent the probability that the recommended edges materialize in the graph.

References Powered by Scopus

The law of group polarization

882Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Group Polarization. A Critical Review and Meta-Analysis

771Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Echo chambers online?: Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users

718Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Fighting False Information from Propagation Process: A Survey

20Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Fairness in rankings and recommenders

15Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Network polarization, filter bubbles, and echo chambers: an annotated review of measures and reduction methods

15Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Garimella, K., De Francisci Morales, G., Gionis, A., & Mathioudakis, M. (2018). Reducing controversy by connecting opposing views. In IJCAI International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 2018-July, pp. 5249–5253). International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2018/731

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 25

69%

Professor / Associate Prof. 8

22%

Researcher 2

6%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Computer Science 24

67%

Social Sciences 5

14%

Psychology 4

11%

Business, Management and Accounting 3

8%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free