Examining the Impact of Digital Jury Moderation on the Polarization of U.S. Political Communities on Social Media

Abstract The increased prevalence of misinformation and inflammatory rhetoric online has amplified polarization on social media platforms in the United States, propelling a feedback loop resulting in the erosion of democratic norms. We conducted a study assessing how a social media platform employing appointed moderators would impact the polarization of its users compared to a peer-based digital jury moderation system, which may be better able to harness community knowledge and cultural nuances while fostering a sense of inclusion and trust in the moderation process. Although our study did not observe a significant impact on the polarization of moderators or users, moderators on average viewed the system as just, legitimate and effective at reducing harmful content. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between user perceptions of the content they were shown from either system, indicating that implementing such a peer-based system has the benefit of providing users agency in platform governance without adversely impacting user experience.