Societal Sorting as a Systemic Risk of Recommenders

Political scientists distinguish between polarization (loosely, people moving further apart along a single dimension) and sorting (an increase in the probabilistic dependence between multiple dimensions of individual difference). Among other harms, sorting can increase the risk of conflict escalation by reinforcing us-and-them group identities and reducing the prevalence of cross-cutting affiliations. In this paper, we (i) review normative arguments for high or low sortedness, (ii) summarize the mechanisms by which sortedness can change, and (iii) show that under a simple model of social media recommender-driven preference change, personalized engagement-based ranking creates a systematic tendency towards sorting, while ranking by diverse engagement (sometimes called “bridging-based ranking”) mitigates this tendency. We conclude by considering the implications for those conducting systemic risk assessments of very large online platforms under the EU Digital Services Act.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3640457.3688175
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.28

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Societal Sorting as a Systemic Risk of Recommenders

Carmine Ventre, Luke Thorburn, Maria Polukarov
1 citations
Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence
0.28
article

Societal Sorting as a Systemic Risk of Recommenders

Carmine Ventre, Luke Thorburn, Maria Polukarov
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Political scientists distinguish between polarization (loosely, people moving further apart along a single dimension) and sorting (an increase in the probabilistic dependence between multiple dimensions of individual difference). Among other harms, sorting can increase the risk of conflict escalation by reinforcing us-and-them group identities and reducing the prevalence of cross-cutting affiliations. In this paper, we (i) review normative arguments for high or low sortedness, (ii) summarize the mechanisms by which sortedness can change, and (iii) show that under a simple model of social media recommender-driven preference change, personalized engagement-based ranking creates a systematic tendency towards sorting, while ranking by diverse engagement (sometimes called “bridging-based ranking”) mitigates this tendency. We conclude by considering the implications for those conducting systemic risk assessments of very large online platforms under the EU Digital Services Act.

King's College London (GB)
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 44%
Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence
0.28
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Societal Sorting as a Systemic Risk of Recommenders — Carmine Ventre, Luke Thorburn, et al. · (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS