In an age where social media is often blamed for driving political polarization, a new study flips the script, revealing that love – not hate – may be the key driver of online political discourse.
Researchers analyzing activity on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) during four consecutive Spanish elections have uncovered an unexpected finding: positive messages within political parties spread faster and more efficiently than hostile, negative content about opposing parties.
These findings challenge the common perception that negative political content is the most viral and engaging in online communities. This insight could have far-reaching implications for political strategies in the digital age.
“Contrary to a few studies, we found that in-party affinity messages are the most efficient (most frequently retweeted),” researchers wrote. “In fact, messages containing hostile out-party messages tend to obtain few retweets even among the most radical party followers.”
The study, led by Dr. Samuel Martin-Gutierrez, a postdoctoral researcher at the Complexity Science Hub, and a team of social scientists dove into the intricate world of social media networks, examining how political content circulates on platforms like X.
The findings, recently published in Nature Scientific Reports, revealed that users are more likely to share positive, in-party content, forming highly efficient “epistemic bubbles.” These bubbles are pockets of like-minded individuals sharing supportive messages about their preferred political party, particularly during election campaigns.
The longitudinal study focused on four major election periods in Spain between 2015 and 2019 and analyzed the content of millions of tweets. Using retweets as a proxy for influence, researchers used metrics such as ideological homophily (how much users’ retweeting behaviors aligned with their political affiliations), efficiency (how widely tweets were retweeted), and the balance between in-party and out-party messages.
Researchers found that while extremist parties tried to promote hostility toward rival parties, results consistently showed that positive in-party messages were more likely to be retweeted than negative messages about rival parties. This held true even in areas of the network associated with highly polarized, ideologically extreme groups, where the expectation might be that out-party hostility would dominate.
For example, researchers found that during the 2019 Spanish national elections, positive messages supporting far-left Podemos gained far more traction than negative tweets aimed at right-wing opposition parties. Even though Spain saw a rise in political fragmentation during this period, particularly with the emergence of new challenger parties like Vox, positive political content still outperformed negativity regarding reach and influence.
Political polarization has become a hallmark of modern democracies, and social media platforms are often blamed for exacerbating these divides. The rise of “echo chambers”—spaces where users are exposed only to content that reinforces their existing views—has been widely documented. These echo chambers are thought to deepen ideological divides and increase hostility toward opposing parties.
However, these new findings present a more nuanced picture. Results showed that while ideological homogeneity does persist within social media networks, particularly during election periods, positive reinforcement of in-party affinity is more likely to go viral than expressions of hostility toward other parties.
Researchers refer to this phenomenon as “epistemic bubbles,” where users share content that aligns with their own beliefs and identities. However, these bubbles are not inherently toxic or negative.
According to the study, positive messaging within these bubbles—focusing on the strengths and successes of a user’s chosen party—tends to be more effective in driving engagement than negative, hostile content aimed at political opponents.
One of the key factors the study explored was the impact of the new political faction in Spain, Vox, which has been described as a radical right-wing party. Political commentators have accused the emergence of the populist Vox party of creating ideological ripple effects across the entire political spectrum, heightening polarization, and changing the nature of online discourse.
However, the study found that despite Vox’s often aggressive rhetoric, even the most radical users were less likely to spread hostile content targeting opposing parties. Instead, in-party messages promoting Vox were more commonly retweeted, suggesting that positive partisan content holds more sway than out-party hostility, even among extremist users.
“When Twitter messages are dominated by in-party messages toward the most extreme parties combined with out-party hostility, the majority of users opt to not retweet,” researchers wrote. “Therefore, contrary to the usual assumption, the majority of Twitter users are reluctant to contribute to the diffusion of negative messages toward the other parties, even among the most radical party users/supporters, resisting the temptation to be transformed into exclusionary/negative partisan ‘echo-chambers.'”
These findings could have profound implications for political campaigning, particularly in an era where social media has become the primary battleground for influencing public opinion.
Campaigns often rely on negative ads and attacks on opponents, assuming these will generate the most engagement. However, findings suggest that focusing on in-party positivity—messages that emphasize the virtues and achievements of one’s own party—may be a more effective strategy for driving engagement and, ultimately, winning support.
The study’s authors argue that political campaigns and strategists could benefit from adopting a more positive tone. By using social media to highlight their strengths rather than attacking their rivals, this approach resonates more with followers and contributes to a healthier, less toxic online political environment.
While social media is often criticized for amplifying division, this research offers a glimmer of hope that positive engagement could play a more significant role in the future. If campaigns focus on promoting in-party love rather than out-party hate, fostering a more constructive and less polarized online political discourse may be possible.
Additionally, the study provides a fresh perspective on how online communities form and operate, demonstrating that even in highly partisan spaces, positivity has the potential to spread more efficiently than negativity.
Ultimately, as we look toward upcoming elections and the growing role of social media in politics, these findings suggest that fostering unity within political groups may be the key to reducing hostility across the political divide.
“My long-term goal for this research line is to go beyond the diagnosis of polarization to understand its structural causes using data and quantitative methods,“ Martin-Gutierrez told PsyPost. “I’m interested in understanding how an initially unpolarized society may transition into a polarized one.”
Tim McMillan is a retired law enforcement executive, investigative reporter and co-founder of The Debrief. His writing typically focuses on defense, national security, the Intelligence Community and topics related to psychology. You can follow Tim on Twitter: @LtTimMcMillan. Tim can be reached by email: tim@thedebrief.org or through encrypted email: LtTimMcMillan@protonmail.com