From time to time, some social media users avoid content posted by specific people in their networks. Most research on such selective avoidance has focused on individual motivations and other psychological factors rather than on social network characteristics, and there is a need for a systematic analysis of the relationships between individuals’ social media networks and selective avoidance. This study fills that gap in the literature, drawing on theory about egocentric or personal publics. We test our predictions using data from three surveys of adults in the United States, collected just before each of the last three major national elections. Results are discussed in light of theory about the role of media technology in shaping political communication and scholarly discourse about how selective avoidance affects information flows.
ArnaboldiV.GuazziniA.PassarellaA. (2013). Egocentric online social networks: Analysis of key features and prediction of tie strength in Facebook. Computer Communications, 36(10-11), 1130–1144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2013.03.003
2.
BakshyE.MessingS.AdamicL. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160
3.
BarnidgeM. (2017). Exposure to political disagreement in social media versus face-to-face and anonymous online settings. Political Communication, 34(2), 302–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1235639
4.
BarnidgeM. (2018). Social affect and political disagreement on social media. Social Media+ Society, 4(3), 2056305118797721. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118797721
5.
BodeL. (2016). Pruning the news feed: Unfriending and unfollowing political content on social media. Research & Politics, 3(3), 2053168016661873. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168016661873
6.
BohnA.BuchtaC.HornikK.MairP. (2014). Making friends and communicating on Facebook: Implications for the access to social capital. Social Networks, 37, 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2013.11.003
7.
BrundidgeJ. (2010). Encountering “difference” in the contemporary public sphere: The contribution of the Internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks. Journal of Communication, 60(4), 680–700. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01509.x
De RuiterJ.WestonG.LyonS. M. (2011). Dunbar’s number: Group size and brain physiology in humans reexamined. American Anthropologist, 113(4), 557–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1433.2011.01369.x
EvelandW. P.Jr.HivelyM. H. (2009). Political discussion frequency, network size, and “heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. Journal of Communication, 59(2), 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x
13.
FischerC. S. (1982). To dwell among friends: Personal networks in town and city. University of Chicago Press.
14.
FishkinJ. S. (1991). Democracy and deliberation: New directions for democratic reform. Yale University Press.
15.
GonçalvesB.PerraN.VespignaniA. (2011). Modeling users’ activity on Twitter networks: Validation of Dunbar’s Number. PLoS One, 6(8), e22656. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022656
Groothuis-OudshoornK.Van BuurenS. (2011). Mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 45(3), 1–67. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i03
18.
HaenschenK. (2020). Self-reported versus digitally recorded: Measuring political activity on Facebook. Social Science Computer Review, 38(5), 567–583. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318813586
19.
HamptonK. N.LeeC. J.HerE. J. (2011). How new media affords network diversity: Direct and mediated access to social capital through participation in local social settings. New Media & Society, 13(7), 1031–1049. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810390342
20.
JohnN. A.Dvir-GvirsmanS. (2015). “I don't like you any more”: Facebook unfriending by Israelis during the Israel–Gaza conflict of 2014. Journal of Communication, 65(6), 953–974. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12188
JohnstonR.JonesK.ManleyD. (2018). Confounding and collinearity in regression analysis: A cautionary tale and an alternative procedure, illustrated by studies of British voting behaviour. Qual Quant, 52, 1957–1976. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0584-6
23.
KimY.HsuS. H.de ZúñigaH. G. (2013). Influence of social media use on discussion network heterogeneity and civic engagement: The moderating role of personality traits. Journal of Communication, 63(3), 498–516. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12034
24.
KimD. H.Jones-JangS. M.KenskiK. (2021). Unfriending and muting during elections: The antecedents and consequences of selective avoidance on social media. Mass Communication & Society.
25.
KingG.KeohaneR. O.VerbaS. (1994). Designing social inquiry. Princeton University Press.
26.
LaneD. S.LeeS. S.LiangF.KimD. H.ShenL.WeeksB. E.KwakN. (2019). Social media expression and the political self. Journal of Communication, 69(1), 49–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy064
McLeodJ. M.ScheufeleD. A.MoyP.HorowitzE. M.HolbertR. L.ZhangW., et al. (1999). Understanding deliberation: The effects of discussion networks on participation in a public forum. Communication Research, 26(6), 743-774. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365099026006005.
MoreyA. C.EvelandW. P.HutchensM. J. (2012). The “who” matters: Types of interpersonal relationships and avoidance of political disagreement. Political Communication, 29(1), 86–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2011.641070
33.
MutzD. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge University Press.
34.
NaabT. K.KarnowskiV.SchlützD. (2019). Reporting mobile social media use: How survey and experience sampling measures differ. Communication Methods and Measures, 13(2), 126–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2018.1555799
35.
NeubaumG.CargninoM.WinterS.Dvir-GvirsmanS. (2021). “You’re still worth it”: The moral and relational context of politically motivated unfriending decisions in online networks. PLoS One, 16(1), e0243049. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243049
36.
NoelH.NyhanB. (2011). The “unfriending” problem: The consequences of homophily in friendship retention for causal estimates of social influence. Social Networks, 33(3), 211–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2011.05.003
37.
PariserE. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin.
38.
PeacockC. (2019). (Not) talking politics: Motivations and strategies for avoiding the expression of political opinions. Western Journal of Communication, 83(5), 581–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2019.1597157
39.
PeacockC. (2021). Diversity, disagreement, and expression across liberal, conservative, and mixed groups. Communication Studies, 72(1), 7–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2020.1819843
40.
RainieH.WellmanB. (2012). Networked: The new social operating system. Mit Press.
41.
RojasH. (2015). Egocentric publics and perceptions of the worlds around us. In Gil de ZúñigaH. (Ed.), New technologies and civic engagement: New agendas in communication (pp. 93–102). Routledge.
42.
ScheufeleD. A.HardyB. W.BrossardD.Waismel-ManorI. S.NisbetE. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56, 728–753. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00317.x
43.
ShahD. V.ChoJ.EvelandW. P.Jr.KwakN. (2005). Information and expression in a digital age: Modeling Internet effects on civic participation. Communication Research, 32(5), 531–565. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650205279209
44.
ShahD. V.ChoJ.NahS.GotliebM. R.HwangH.LeeN. J.McLeodD. M. (2007). Campaign ads, online messaging, and participation: Extending the communication mediation model. Journal of Communication, 57(4), 676–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00363.x
45.
SkoricM. M.ZhuQ.Koc-MichalskaK.BoulianneS.BimberB. (2021). Selective avoidance on social media: A comparative study of Western democracies. Social Science Computer Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393211005468.
46.
SkoricM. M.ZhuQ.LinJ. H. T. (2018). What predicts selective avoidance on social media? A study of political unfriending in Hong Kong and Taiwan. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(8), 1097–1115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218764251
47.
SongH. (2015). Uncovering the structural underpinnings of political discussion networks: Evidence from an exponential random graph model. Journal of Communication, 65(1), 146–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12140
48.
StierS.BreuerJ.SiegersP.ThorsonK. (2020). Integrating survey data and digital trace data: Key issues in developing and emerging field. Social Science Computer Review, 38(5), 503–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319843669
SuJ.KamathK.SharmaA.UganderJ.GoelS. (2020, May). An experimental study of structural diversity in social networks. In Proceedings of the international AAAI conference on web and social media (Vol. 14, pp. 661–670).
51.
ThorsonK.CotterK.MedeirosM.PakC. (2021). Algorithmic inference, political interest, and exposure to news and politics on Facebook. Information, Communication & Society, 24(2), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1642934
52.
WellmanB. (1979). The community question: The intimate networks of East Yorkers. American Journal of Sociology, 84(5), 1201–1231. https://doi.org/10.1086/226906
53.
WellsC.CramerK. J.WagnerM. W.AlvarezG.FriedlandL. A.ShahD. V.FranklinC. (2017). When we stop talking politics: The maintenance and closing of conversation in contentious times. Journal of Communication, 67(1), 131–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12280
54.
YangJ.BarnidgeM.RojasH. (2017). The politics of “unfriending”: User filtration in response to political disagreement on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.079
55.
ZhuQ.SkoricM. M. (2021). Political implications of disconnection on social media: A study of politically motivated unfriending. New Media & Society.
56.
ZhuQ.SkoricM.ShenF. (2017). I shield myself from thee: Selective avoidance on social media during political protests. Political Communication, 34(1), 112–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1222471
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
