Moral consensus and divergence in partisan language use

Nakwon Rim,Marc G. Berman,Yuan Chang Leong

2023-10-15

Abstract:Polarization has increased substantially in political discourse, contributing to a widening partisan divide. In this paper, we analyzed large-scale, real-world language use in Reddit communities (294,476,146 comments) and in news outlets (6,749,781 articles) to uncover psychological dimensions along which partisan language is divided. Using word embedding models that captured semantic associations based on co-occurrences of words in vast textual corpora, we identified patterns of affective polarization present in natural political discourse. We then probed the semantic associations of words related to seven political topics (e.g., abortion, immigration) along the dimensions of morality (moral-to-immoral), threat (threatening-to-safe), and valence (pleasant-to-unpleasant). Across both Reddit communities and news outlets, we identified a small but systematic divergence in the moral associations of words between text sources with different partisan leanings. Moral associations of words were highly correlated between conservative and liberal text sources (average $\rho$ = 0.96), but the differences remained reliable to enable us to distinguish text sources along partisan lines with above 85% classification accuracy. These findings underscore that despite a shared moral understanding across the political spectrum, there are consistent differences that shape partisan language and potentially exacerbate political polarization. Our results, drawn from both informal interactions on social media and curated narratives in news outlets, indicate that these trends are widespread. Leveraging advanced computational techniques, this research offers a fresh perspective that complements traditional methods in political attitudes.

Computation and Language

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

This paper aims to explore the psychological differences in language use among groups with different political stances in the context of political polarization, particularly by revealing these differences through the analysis of large-scale real-world data. Researchers used word embedding models to capture the semantic associations formed by the co-occurrence of words in a large text corpus and identified patterns of emotional polarization present in natural political discourse.

Specifically, the paper analyzed two large datasets: comments from the Reddit community (a total of 294,476,146 comments) and articles from news media (a total of 6,749,781 articles). The study focused on seven controversial political topics (such as abortion, immigration, etc.) and examined the semantic associations between words related to these topics through three dimensions: moral-to-immoral, threatening-to-safe, and pleasant-to-unpleasant.

The study found that although the moral associations of vocabulary were highly correlated (with an average correlation coefficient of 0.96) in texts from both conservative and liberal sources, there were still reliable distinctions sufficient for researchers to distinguish texts from different political inclinations with over 85% accuracy. This indicates that despite the shared moral understanding across the political spectrum, there are consistent differences in shaping partisan language that may exacerbate political polarization.

Furthermore, by analyzing informal interactions on social media and carefully curated narratives in news media, the study results suggest that these trends are pervasive. By employing advanced computational techniques, this research provides a new perspective to complement traditional methods of studying political attitudes.