Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 245 posts

Re: Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

#161

Post by bee_rider »

elric wrote: post #152
crazygringo wrote: post #15

> "Despite minor differences between individual surveys, the data consistently show that the average number of close friendships rose from 2.2 in 2000 to 4.1 in 2024," says Hofer. If true, this is an astonishing social transformation, because it goes against everything we here about the loneliness epidemic getting worse . Or have people redefined what they consider to be "close friends"? Or are people actually genuin…

> Or have people redefined what they consider to be "close friends"? I suspect that you've hit the nail on the head. It would also be interesting to see numbers on churn. How long do these many close friendships last? Do they last longer than before? Or, more likely, less long?

I think longer is… possible, at least? The internet has allowed me to keep in touch with friends from elementary school. I’m, unfortunately, approaching 40 more quickly than I’d like, so these are around 30 year friendships.

Although, I’ve also got some college friends that I’d consider close. So that’s more like 15 years. Also online mostly at this point.

Re: Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

#162

Post by mikeiz404 »

procaryote wrote: post #155

Instinctively this seems like it could be a common cause Social Media getting big → larger perceived friend groups Social Media getting big → more polarisation rather than the larger friend groups → more polarisation causality hypothesised in the article

Yea or also:

    Social Media getting big → larger perceived friend groups

    Social Media getting big OR
    screen time increasing OR
    phones preferencing more limited forms of communication OR
    … → more polarization
Maybe I missed it but it would have been helpful to know which confounds had been ruled out.

It could be due to a change in the PEW polling or the polling questions staying the same but the definition of terms shifting over time which caused the perceived increase in polarization. Or even the researchers’ definition of polarization which was stated as an increase in people stably identifying as either liberal or conservative. It is worth noting the article did say the PEW polling is supposed to be a stable source of data.

Re: Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

#164

Post by mikeiz404 »

mgh2 wrote: post #147
flave wrote: post #144

> And this increase happened suddenly, between 2008 and 2010 Occam’s Razor tells me that it’s almost certainly linked to the near-total failure of the economic system (and the very slow recovery outside specific US cities).

It is obviously social media: more connections does not equally mean social interactions - people substituted costly and hard in-person for cheap and easy online interactions, with AI optimization fueling the polarization.

> It is obviously social media

I get why social media could possibly be the cause but what makes you so certain it is the cause or the largest contributing factor?

Re: Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

#165

Post by lynx97 »

watwut wrote: post #76
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> usually close friends are limited to people that share the same values and ideas as you That stirkes me as myopic. My closest friends--the ones I trust with all my secrets, with whom have have practically no secrets, the ones I'd hide if it came to that or risk my life to save--are all over the place values and ideas-wise. It's what makes their company fun. It's also what makes their advice useful, because they'll…

If you are far right, I have to keep secrets from you. For safety. And no, someone actively wanting to limit my freedom and safety because their ideology is that women must be limited cant be trusted. They cant be trusted in calling me on my shit, because what they perceive as shit is my self interest and my core values.

Same for "far left", those can't be trusted either.

However, what strikes me as interesting: Do you actually destinguish between right and far right? Because I have a feeling, many people don't. Why do I think that? I recently read on Planet Debian: "Conservatives tend to be criminals". That sentences struck me as the core of the problem. People seem to fail to see the difference between a person with conservative values, and outright "Nazis". There is a clear difference, but some politically active people seem to fail to see that.

Re: Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

#166

Post by motoxpro »

People talked for a long time about filter bubbles. I think we are realizing that it was actually GOOD to be in a filter bubble (neighborhood, school, a few close friends, etc.)

It is not that people have wildly different views all of a sudden, it is that being exposed to views we used to be protected against is really unpleasant.

"The world isn't so bad" -> "The world is very bad"

Re: Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

#167

Post by movpasd »

crazygringo wrote: post #15

> "Despite minor differences between individual surveys, the data consistently show that the average number of close friendships rose from 2.2 in 2000 to 4.1 in 2024," says Hofer. If true, this is an astonishing social transformation, because it goes against everything we here about the loneliness epidemic getting worse . Or have people redefined what they consider to be "close friends"? Or are people actually genuin…

It may be a combination of both: the fact it is easier to stay in touch makes it more difficult to let go of friendships. But this may make those friendships feel less meaningful and therefore increase loneliness.

Re: Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

#168

Post by mzajc »

mikeiz404 wrote: post #163

Anyone know where to find the paper? The DOI in the article is being reported as invalid. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2517530122

It's not listed on pnas.org either: https://www.pnas.org/action/doSearch?ContribRaw=Thurner%2C+S...

Perhaps the article is yet to be published.

Re: Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

#169

Post by phrotoma »

lukebechtel wrote: post #33

I favor the theory that polarization is due to decreasing attention spans, effectively preventing us from appropriately considering nuance. Related: https://open.substack.com/pub/josephheath/p/populism-fast-an...

On top of that, text based communication for short attention spans is both brief and dehumanized, encouraging "dunking" behaviour. Hard to empathize with folks who have differing views when the discourse can broadly be described as "lol got'em!".

Re: Study finds growing social circles may fuel polarization

#170

Post by api »

riazrizvi wrote: post #34
crazygringo wrote: post #15

> "Despite minor differences between individual surveys, the data consistently show that the average number of close friendships rose from 2.2 in 2000 to 4.1 in 2024," says Hofer. If true, this is an astonishing social transformation, because it goes against everything we here about the loneliness epidemic getting worse . Or have people redefined what they consider to be "close friends"? Or are people actually genuin…

Personally, I find modern technology makes it easier to maintain them. 25 years ago my friendships around the world would have been relegated to 'penpalships' because of the cost of long distance calls and the lack of face time. Loneliness is a big topic now due to the pandemic, and the lingering trends from stay/work-at-home mandates.

You’re right that the net can be used that way but I’m not sure everyone does.

Also the loneliness epidemic has been growing worse since the 1990s. There’s a well known book about it called Bowling Alone. COVID made it worse of course but it didn’t start the trend.

Post reply on HN