Social networks are often criticised for the way their algorithms can trap users in bubbles of like-minded content. Users are exposed to content that aligns with their opinions and beliefs, thus limiting their exposure to divergent points of view. This creates a kind of implicit content moderation, where users are locked into their own opinions, which can reduce the diversity of perspectives and encourage polarisation.

Yet, new US research challenges these assumptions: if communities can form around shared values, this doesn’t prevent users from reacting to comments that run counter to their own, perhaps even going so far as to favour this kind of interaction.

Indeed, social-network users are more inclined to interact with posts that provoke them than with those that confirm their political convictions. Known as the “confrontation effect”, these reactions are fuelled by outrage, prompting individuals to respond to opposing points of view, the researchers from Tulane University in Louisiana and Duke University in North Carolina explained.

To better understand this phenomenon, Daniel Mochon and Janet Schwartz conducted a series of studies combining real data from social-networking platforms and controlled online experiments. Their aim was to understand why people who might generally be expected to avoid conflicting information engage with it more frequently online.

For their research, the experts showed political content posted on Facebook or X that focused on three topics – gun control, Obamacare, and former president Donald Trump – to a large cohort of participants. Each post supported either a liberal or conservative viewpoint: for example, one post might be in favour of gun control, while another would oppose it.

The results showed that users were more likely to click on and comment on posts that opposed their political views, rather than those that supported their beliefs.

“While previous studies show that people avoid content inconsistent with their beliefs, counter-ideological content actually drives higher engagement,” Mochon told Psypost. “We found situations where users were four times more likely to engage with content they disagreed with than content they agreed with.”

However, when it comes to engagement, the study found that “this isn’t always an accurate indicator of user preferences: while engagement in areas like sports or fashion reflects interest, political engagement often stems from anger, creating a vicious cycle”.

And although people are attracted by confrontation with opposing viewpoints, they avoid prolonged exposure to such content.

“Outrage is a powerful driver of online engagement, often leading users to interact with content they would prefer to avoid,” Mochon concluded. “Users should be more mindful of their reactions to online content and whether it is in their best interest to engage with it.”