Researcher profile

Michele Starnini

Michele Starnini contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

7 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Emergence of polarized ideological opinions in multidimensional topic spaces

Opinion polarization is on the rise, causing concerns for the openness of public debates. Additionally, extreme opinions on different topics often show significant correlations. The dynamics leading to these polarized ideological opinions pose a challenge: How can such correlations emerge, without assuming them a priori in the individual preferences or in a preexisting social structure? Here we propose a simple model that qualitatively reproduces ideological opinion states found in survey data, even between rather unrelated, but sufficiently controversial, topics. Inspired by skew coordinate systems recently proposed in natural language processing models, we solidify these intuitions in a formalism of opinions unfolding in a multidimensional space where topics form a non-orthogonal basis. Opinions evolve according to the social interactions among the agents, which are ruled by homophily: two agents sharing similar opinions are more likely to interact. The model features phase transitions between a global consensus, opinion polarization, and ideological states. Interestingly, the ideological phase emerges by relaxing the assumption of an orthogonal basis of the topic space, i.e. if topics thematically overlap. Furthermore, we analytically and numerically show that these transitions are driven by the controversialness of the topics discussed, the more controversial the topics, the more likely are opinion to be correlated. Our findings shed light upon the mechanisms driving the emergence of ideology in the formation of opinions.

preprint2021arXiv

No Echo in the Chambers of Political Interactions on Reddit

Echo chambers in online social networks, whereby users' beliefs are reinforced by interactions with like-minded peers and insulation from others' points of view, have been decried as a cause of political polarization. Here, we investigate their role in the debate around the 2016 US elections on Reddit, a fundamental platform for the success of Donald Trump. We identify Trump vs Clinton supporters and reconstruct their political interaction network. We observe a preference for cross-cutting political interactions between the two communities rather than within-group interactions, thus contradicting the echo chamber narrative. Furthermore, these interactions are asymmetrical: Clinton supporters are particularly eager to answer comments by Trump supporters. Beside asymmetric heterophily, users show assortative behavior for activity, and disassortative, asymmetric behavior for popularity. Our findings are tested against a null model of random interactions, by using two different approaches: a network rewiring which preserves the activity of nodes, and a logit regression which takes into account possible confounding factors. Finally, we explore possible socio-demographic implications. Users show a tendency for geographical homophily and a small positive correlation between cross-interactions and voter abstention. Our findings shed light on public opinion formation on social media, calling for a better understanding of the social dynamics at play in this context.

preprint2020arXiv

Collective response to the media coverage of COVID-19 Pandemic on Reddit and Wikipedia

The exposure and consumption of information during epidemic outbreaks may alter risk perception, trigger behavioural changes, and ultimately affect the evolution of the disease. It is thus of the uttermost importance to map information dissemination by mainstream media outlets and public response. However, our understanding of this exposure-response dynamic during COVID-19 pandemic is still limited. In this paper, we provide a characterization of media coverage and online collective attention to COVID-19 pandemic in four countries: Italy, United Kingdom, United States, and Canada. For this purpose, we collect an heterogeneous dataset including 227,768 online news articles and 13,448 Youtube videos published by mainstream media, 107,898 users posts and 3,829,309 comments on the social media platform Reddit, and 278,456,892 views to COVID-19 related Wikipedia pages. Our results show that public attention, quantified as users activity on Reddit and active searches on Wikipedia pages, is mainly driven by media coverage and declines rapidly, while news exposure and COVID-19 incidence remain high. Furthermore, by using an unsupervised, dynamical topic modeling approach, we show that while the attention dedicated to different topics by media and online users are in good accordance, interesting deviations emerge in their temporal patterns. Overall, our findings offer an additional key to interpret public perception/response to the current global health emergency and raise questions about the effects of attention saturation on collective awareness, risk perception and thus on tendencies towards behavioural changes.

preprint2020arXiv

Echo Chambers on Social Media: A comparative analysis

Recent studies have shown that online users tend to select information adhering to their system of beliefs, ignore information that does not, and join groups - i.e., echo chambers - around a shared narrative. Although a quantitative methodology for their identification is still missing, the phenomenon of echo chambers is widely debated both at scientific and political level. To shed light on this issue, we introduce an operational definition of echo chambers and perform a massive comparative analysis on more than 1B pieces of contents produced by 1M users on four social media platforms: Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and Gab. We infer the leaning of users about controversial topics - ranging from vaccines to abortion - and reconstruct their interaction networks by analyzing different features, such as shared links domain, followed pages, follower relationship and commented posts. Our method quantifies the existence of echo-chambers along two main dimensions: homophily in the interaction networks and bias in the information diffusion toward likely-minded peers. We find peculiar differences across social media. Indeed, while Facebook and Twitter present clear-cut echo chambers in all the observed dataset, Reddit and Gab do not. Finally, we test the role of the social media platform on news consumption by comparing Reddit and Facebook. Again, we find support for the hypothesis that platforms implementing news feed algorithms like Facebook may elicit the emergence of echo-chambers.

preprint2020arXiv

Falling into the Echo Chamber: the Italian Vaccination Debate on Twitter

The reappearance of measles in the US and Europe, a disease considered eliminated in early 2000s, has been accompanied by a growing debate on the merits of vaccination on social media. In this study we examine the extent to which the vaccination debate on Twitter is conductive to potential outreach to the vaccination hesitant. We focus on Italy, one of the countries most affected by the latest measles outbreaks. We discover that the vaccination skeptics, as well as the advocates, reside in their own distinct "echo chambers". The structure of these communities differs as well, with skeptics arranged in a tightly connected cluster, and advocates organizing themselves around few authoritative hubs. At the center of these echo chambers we find the ardent supporters, for which we build highly accurate network- and content-based classifiers (attaining 95% cross-validated accuracy). Insights of this study provide several avenues for potential future interventions, including network-guided targeting, accounting for the political context, and monitoring of alternative sources of information.

preprint2020arXiv

Modeling echo chambers and polarization dynamics in social networks

Echo chambers and opinion polarization recently quantified in several sociopolitical contexts and across different social media, raise concerns on their potential impact on the spread of misinformation and on openness of debates. Despite increasing efforts, the dynamics leading to the emergence of these phenomena stay unclear. We propose a model that introduces the dynamics of radicalization, as a reinforcing mechanism driving the evolution to extreme opinions from moderate initial conditions. Inspired by empirical findings on social interaction dynamics, we consider agents characterized by heterogeneous activities and homophily. We show that the transition between a global consensus and emerging radicalized states is mostly governed by social influence and by the controversialness of the topic discussed. Compared with empirical data of polarized debates on Twitter, the model qualitatively reproduces the observed relation between users' engagement and opinions, as well as opinion segregation in the interaction network. Our findings shed light on the mechanisms that may lie at the core of the emergence of echo chambers and polarization in social media.

preprint2020arXiv

PRINCIPIA: a Decentralized Peer-Review Ecosystem

Peer review is a cornerstone of modern scientific endeavor. However, there is growing consensus that several limitations of the current peer review system, from lack of incentives to reviewers to lack of transparency, risks to undermine its benefits. Here, we introduce the PRINCIPIA (http://www.principia.network/) framework for peer-review of scientific outputs (e.g., papers, grant proposals or patents). The framework allows key players of the scientific ecosystem -- including existing publishing groups -- to create and manage peer-reviewed journals, by building a free market for reviews and publications. PRINCIPIA's referees are transparently rewarded according to their efforts and the quality of their reviews. PRINCIPIA also naturally allows to recognize the prestige of users and journals, with an intrinsic reputation system that does not depend on third-parties. PRINCIPIA re-balances the power between researchers and publishers, stimulates valuable assessments from referees, favors a fair competition between journals, and reduces the costs to access research output and to publish.