User:Socialpsych22/sandbox

Emotional Contagion in Online Social Networks

Emotional contagion is a social process in which feelings or related behaviours are spread between individuals on a one-to-one basis and larger groups. (Singer & Tusche, 2014). In online social networks (OSN), this phenomenon manifests uniquely as emotions are spread across digital platforms through images, text and videos, enabling emotional synchrony within online communities (Sampson et al., 2018). The dispersion of emotions online varies from in-person contagion, as the dependence on non-verbal cues involved in the emotional transfer, such as body language, is eliminated (Herrando & Constantinides, 2021).

Understanding emotional contagion in OSN is of paramount importance, given how it can impact the outcomes of political polarisation, consumer behaviour and mood and well-being (Kramer et al., 2014). Nonetheless, significant gaps remain throughout this topic, including the role of individual differences and the long-term effects of exposure to online emotional content (Otieno, 2023). This article synthesises current literature and suggests future research areas in the field.

Theoretical Foundations of Emotional Contagion

Emotional contagion, a well-researched subject within the social psychological field, refers to the unconscious transfer of emotions between one another, primarily through facial expressions and vocal tone (Hatfield et al., 1993). Online social networks (OSN) have reshaped this process by utilising social media to infect others without the requirement of in-person interactions emotionally (Bottaro & Faraci, 2022). Previous research on in-person emotional contagion emphasises the role of emotional mimicry, where individuals copy and embody the emotions of others to align their emotional states (Hatfield et al., 1993). More recent studies show how emotional contagion differs when spread online.

Key Studies in Online Contexts

• Kramer et al. (2014): This foundational study demonstrated the power of emotional contagion induced on social media platforms. Facebook users’ feeds were manipulated to display either positive or negative content. Individuals exposed to more negative content on their Facebook feeds were less likely to share positive content themselves, indicating emotions can be transmitted through social media posts. The findings of this study also suggest despite previous assumptions, face-to-face interactions and nonverbal cues such as body language are not necessary for emotional contagion.

  

  Individual struggles during the COVID-19 pandemic.

• Lu and Hong (2022): During the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers examined how negative emotions spread through Chinese social media platforms, identifying factors such as perceived risk severity and lockdowns as amplifiers of emotional contagion. This study emphasised the need for broader societal awareness regarding the mental health challenges of digital emotional transmission.

These key studies emphasise how digital environments challenge traditional models of emotional contagion, such as Hatfield et al.’s (1993) original model. Therefore, theories must be adapted to account for unique digital features such as non-verbal communication and algorithms. Both Kramer et al. (2014) and Lu and Hong’s (2022) research highlight these differences and reiterate the need for updated theories that consider digital complexities.

Mechanisms of Emotional Contagion in Digital Spaces

Many mechanisms facilitate emotional contagion to thrive in online environments, such as social comparison, observational learning and empathy, and algorithmic amplification.

Social Comparison

The social comparison theory proposed by Festinger (1954) suggests that individuals evaluate and compare themselves against other people’s achievements or abilities. Online social network users are regularly exposed to the emotional expression of others. When upward comparisons are made (idealising those they perceive as better), individuals may experience negative emotions regarding themselves, which can be exacerbated through emotional contagion (Carraturo et al., 2023). For instance, viewing a friend’s success post may trigger feelings of inadequacy, with collective expressions of frustration or stress amplifying these emotions (Vogel et al., 2014).

Observational Learning and Empathy

Another mechanism of emotional contagion is empathy, defined as the ability to resonate with another person’s emotional state (Hardee, 2003). This trait allows the spread of emotions to occur through directly observing another person’s emotional state (Halpern, 2003). When using online platforms, individuals encounter emotionally charged content through text and videos, which evokes a similar reaction via empathy. Emotionally meaningful content, such as posts about personal achievements or struggles, can evoke similar reactions in the viewer through the trait of empathy, which results in the spread of emotions (Chen, 2023). This demonstrates empathy plays a crucial part in emotional contagion digitally, where emotional contagion occurs through text or video that elicits an emotional response.

Algorithmic Amplification

The role of algorithms is fundamental when amplifying emotionally charged content. An algorithm (set of instructions) on digital platforms prioritises and increases the visibility of content due to engagement or relevance to an individual (Tufekci, 2015). This process leads to the circulation of emotion-provoking material. Algorithmic amplification on social media platforms such as Twitter not only increases the visibility of emotionally charged content but also reinforces emotional polarisation, as individuals are exposed to content already aligning with their existing emotional state (Binns, 2017). This suggests algorithms in social media platforms prioritise emotionally intense posts to amplify reactions across the platform, creating a cycle of strongly shared emotions. This phenomenon has been linked to heightened tension and societal divide (Tufekci, 2015).

Utilising Thematic Perspectives on Emotional Contagion

Different themes help explore emotional contagion in online social networks (OSN), such as helping behaviour, the self, conformity and social beliefs and judgments These themes help clarify the role that emotional contagion plays in online environments, highlighting societal dynamics and individual emotions.

Helping Behaviour

Individual actions taken to benefit others are largely influenced by emotional contagion in OSN (Ng, 2019). Highly emotional content, such as posts highlighting social issues or financial hardship, can have a catalytic effect on altruistic actions (Tee, 2015). Exposure to such content commonly triggers emotional responses that motivate individuals to donate or share resources when possible (Barsade, 2002). However, the effectiveness and sustainability of such gestures remain unclear, as they often skew towards superficial acts like sharing content rather than offering tangible support (Goldenberg & Gross, 2020).

The Self

Emotional contagion profoundly impacts the self-concept of individuals, as people tend to compare themselves against others, which can impact self-perception and worth. For example, engaging with a post that displays another person’s success can trigger feelings of worthlessness or inadequacy (Vogel et al., 2014). In contrast, positive content reflecting a person’s identity, such as sexual orientation, can enhance self-esteem and foster a sense of belonging (Carraturo et al., 2023). Emotional contagion can help shape an individual’s sense of self-identity both positively and negatively, as the concept of the self, being shaped by internal experiences and emotional exchanges online, is reinforced.

Conformity

Conformity refers to the process by which a person aligns their attitudes or behaviours with those of a group, usually to gain acceptance or avoid conflict (Coultas & van Leeuwen, 2015). This thematic concept is particularly fundamental in understanding emotional contagion, where dynamics between groups can intensify shared emotional states. This phenomenon is particularly prominent within the context of social media platforms, as feeds are curated algorithmically to display posts that evoke intense reactions. When feeds display this content, individuals may feel a perceived social pressure to foster similar sentiments to gain acceptance or avoid conflict (Steinert & Dennis, 2022).

Conformity that facilitates emotional contagion can exacerbate political polarisation, where emotional contagion extends existing beliefs and intensifies societal divides (Binns, 2017). When emotionally charged political content is shared digitally, users are more likely to intensify individual responses. This creates a feedback loop that heightens political polarisation further, deepening societal fractures. Therefore, the relationship between emotional contagion and conformity is vital when understanding the impact of OSNs on collective political and social behaviours.

Social Beliefs and Judgments

Social beliefs and judgments also help shape emotional contagion. For example, the way a post is interpreted emotionally usually depends on pre-existing biases and social norms. Research by Tandoc et al. (2015) suggested users are far more likely to share emotionally congruent content that aligns with their social beliefs, therefore sustaining emotional homogeneity within an online community. In contrast, emotional contagion in online social networks can also challenge social beliefs (Tandoc et al., 2015) Regular exposure to a range of emotional content, such as stories of resilience or empathy, can shift group norms and foster pro-social behaviours (Decety et al., 2016). To understand these dynamics, longitudinal studies must take place that track changes in social beliefs over a sustained period.

Outcomes of Emotional Contagion in Online Social Networks

Many fundamental outcomes are yielded due to the spread of emotions in online social networks, such as political polarisation, shifts in consumer behaviour and impacts on mood and well-being.

Political Polarisation

Political polarisation refers to a separation of political beliefs or ideologies within a society (Dixit & Weibull, 2007). Emotional contagion intensifies the political divide through the amplification of emotionally charged content. Social media platforms such as Twitter create echo chambers where users are consistently exposed to content that aligns with their original beliefs, reinforcing extreme views (Friggeri et al., 2014). This can intensify individuals’ political opinions and create further societal divides. Binns (2017) suggested algorithmic amplification further extends these divides, which complicates efforts to foster constructive dialogue.

Consumer Behaviour

Consumer behaviour, the study of how individuals use goods and services to meet their needs, is heavily influenced by emotional contagion (Bagozzi et al., 2002). Emotionally charged advertisements influence consumer decisions, as users are more likely to engage with emotionally resonating content (Ziyadin et al., 2019). For instance, positive product reviews shared on social media can increase purchasing numbers by leveraging emotional contagion to build trust in the product being advertised (Howard & Gengler, 2001).

Mood and Well-being

The emotional tone of a person’s digital environment can hugely impact a person’s mood and general well-being. Individuals who are repeatedly exposed to negative content, such as distressing news, can intensify feelings of sadness and stress. Conversely, positive content fosters feelings of happiness and optimism (Tang et al., 2021). For example, after a natural disaster, individuals resorted to finding solace in online communities, as it was a platform to share thoughts and feelings (Chu et al., 2024). However, continuous exposure to negative emotional contagion can increase social isolation and depressive symptoms, suggesting emotional contagion in online social networks has a significant impact on a person’s overall mood and well-being (Tang et al., 2021).

Critical Analysis of Literature

While research provides valuable insights into emotional contagion in online social networks (OSNs), significant gaps remain. Kramer et al.’s (2014) study offers engaging evidence of emotional contagion in OSNs; however, it oversimplifies the complex interplay of user interactions (Pempek et al., 2009). The study's emphasis on broad patterns of emotional contagion overlooks the intricate details of how emotions are expressed and interpreted in a digital environment.

In addition, much of the current research disproportionately focuses on negative outcomes like political polarisation and mood deterioration. This overlooks the potential benefits of emotional contagion in OSNs, such as empowering minority groups through shared community emotional experiences (Li et al., 2022). These benefits display how emotional contagion can also be a fundamental mechanism for building solidarity in digital communities.

Individual differences such as personality traits like empathy and neuroticism complicate the field further but remain under-researched (Czarna et al., 2014). Filling these gaps within the research requires a nuanced approach that balances both positive and negative consequences whilst also considering user variability and constantly evolving technological landscapes.

Summary

Emotional contagion in online social networks is a powerful and dynamic research area with profound implications for people’s well-being, political viewpoints, and consumer behaviour. While vast improvements have been made in exploring the psychological, social, and technological mechanisms involved in the emotional spread, critical questions remain. Future research must address the long-term effects of emotional contagion as well as individual differences in susceptibility, such as personality traits. The role of algorithms must also be considered to develop a comprehensive framework for mitigating negative impacts while also leveraging its potential for positive change.

Reference List

Bagozzi, R. P., Zeynep Gurhan-Canli, & Priester, J. R. (2002). The social psychology of consumer behaviour. Open University Press.

Barsade, S. G. (2002). The Ripple Effect: Emotional Contagion and Its Influence on Group Behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4), 644–675. https://doi.org/10.2307/3094912

Binns, R. (2017). Algorithmic Accountability and Public Reason. Philosophy & Technology, 31(4), 543–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0263-5

Bottaro, R., & Faraci, P. (2022). The Use of Social Networking Sites and Its Impact on Adolescents’ Emotional Well-Being: a Scoping Review. Current Addiction Reports, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-022-00445-4

Carraturo, F., Di Perna, T., Giannicola, V., Nacchia, M. A., Pepe, M., Muzii, B., Bottone, M., Sperandeo, R., Bochicchio, V., Maldonato, N. M., & Scandurra, C. (2023). Envy, Social Comparison, and Depression on Social Networking Sites: A Systematic Review. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 13(2), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13020027

Chen, M. (2023). Angry Friends, Happy Crowd: How the Emotionally Charged Content Influences Online Behavior. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media, 3(1), 775–784. https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/3/2022331

Chu, M., Song, W., Zhao, Z., Chen, T., & Chiang, Y. (2024). Emotional contagion on social media and the simulation of intervention strategies after a disaster event: a modelling study. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03397-4

Coultas, J. C., & van Leeuwen, E. J. C. (2015). Conformity: Definitions, Types, and Evolutionary Grounding. Evolutionary Perspectives on Social Psychology, 189–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12697-5_15

Czarna, A. Z., Wróbel, M., Dufner, M., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (2014). Narcissism and Emotional Contagion. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(3), 318–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614559652

Decety, J., Bartal, I. B.-A., Uzefovsky, F., & Knafo-Noam, A. (2016). Empathy as a driver of prosocial behaviour: Highly conserved neurobehavioural mechanisms across species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 371(1686), 20150077. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0077

Dixit, A. K., & Weibull, J. W. (2007). Political polarisation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(18), 7351–7356. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0702071104

Festinger, L. (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202

Friggeri, A., Adamic, L., Eckles, D., & Cheng, J. (2014). Rumor Cascades. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 8(1), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v8i1.14559

Goldenberg, A., & Gross, J. J. (2020). Digital Emotion Contagion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(4), 316–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.01.009

Halpern, J. (2003). What is clinical empathy? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 18(8), 670–674. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.21017.x

Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1993). Emotional Contagion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2(3), 96–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770953

Hardee, J. (2003). An Overview of Empathy. The Permanente Journal, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.7812/tpp/03-072

Herrando, C., & Constantinides, E. (2021). Emotional Contagion: A Brief Overview and Future Directions. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(712606). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.712606

Howard, D. J., & Gengler, C. (2001). Emotional Contagion Effects on Product Attitudes. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(2), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1086/322897

Kramer, A. D. I., Guillory, J. E., & Hancock, J. T. (2014). Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(24), 8788–8790. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320040111

Li, C., Ning, G., Xia, Y., Guo, K., & Liu, Q. (2022). Does the Internet Bring People Closer Together or Further Apart? The Impact of Internet Usage on Interpersonal Communications. Behavioral Sciences, 12(11), 425. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12110425

Lu, D., & Hong, D. (2022). Emotional Contagion: Research on the Influencing Factors of Social Media Users’ Negative Emotional Communication During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology, 13.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.931835

Ng, Y.-L. (2019). Active and Passive Facebook Use and Associated Costly Off-line Helping Behavior. Psychological Reports, 003329411986026. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294119860262

Otieno, P. (2023). The Impact of Social Media on Political Polarization. Journal of Communication, 4(1), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.47941/jcomm.1686

Pempek, T. A., Yermolayeva, Y. A., & Calvert, S. L. (2009). College students’ social networking experiences on Facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.010

Sampson, T. D., Maddison, S., & Ellis, D. (Eds.). (2018). Affect and social media: Emotion, mediation, anxiety and contagion. Rowman & Littlefield International.

Singer, T., & Tusche, A. (2014). Understanding Others. Neuroeconomics, 513–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-416008-8.00027-9

Steinert, S., & Dennis, M. J. (2022). Emotions and Digital Well-Being: on Social Media’s Emotional Affordances. Philosophy & Technology, 35(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-022-00530-6

Tandoc, E. C., Ferrucci, P., & Duffy, M. (2015). Facebook use, envy, and depression among college students: Is facebooking depressing? Computers in Human Behavior, 43(43), 139–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.05

Tang, J., Yu, G., & Yao, X. (2021). Emotional Contagion in the Online Depression Community. Healthcare, 9(12), 1609. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9121609

Tee, E. Y. J. (2015). The emotional link: Leadership and the role of implicit and explicit emotional contagion processes across multiple organisational levels. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(4), 654–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.05.009

Tufekci, Zeynep. (2015). Algorithmic harms beyond facebook and google: emergent challenges of computational agency. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13(2), 203-218.

Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Roberts, L. R., & Eckles, K. (2014). Social comparison, social media, and self-esteem. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3(4), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000047

Ziyadin, S., Doszhan, R., Borodin, A., Omarova, A., & Ilyas, A. (2019). The role of social media marketing in consumer behaviour. E3S Web of Conferences, 135(1), 04022. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/201913504022