From Perils to Possibilities: Understanding how Human (and AI) Biases affect Online Fora

Social media platforms are online fora where users engage in discussions, share content, and build connections. This review explores the dynamics of social interactions, user-generated contents, and biases within the context of social media analysis (analyzing works that use the tools offered by complex network analysis and natural language processing) through the lens of three key points of view: online debates, online support, and human-AI interactions. On the one hand, we delineate the phenomenon of online debates, where polarization, misinformation, and echo chamber formation often proliferate, driven by algorithmic biases and extreme mechanisms of homophily. On the other hand, we explore the emergence of online support groups through users' self-disclosure and social support mechanisms. Online debates and support mechanisms present a duality of both perils and possibilities within social media; perils of segregated communities and polarized debates, and possibilities of empathy narratives and self-help groups. This dichotomy also extends to a third perspective: users' reliance on AI-generated content, such as the ones produced by Large Language Models, which can manifest both human biases hidden in training sets and non-human biases that emerge from their artificial neural architectures. Analyzing interdisciplinary approaches, we aim to deepen the understanding of the complex interplay between social interactions, user-generated content, and biases within the realm of social media ecosystems.

Cognitive network science quantifies feelings expressed in suicide letters and Reddit mental health communities

Writing messages is key to expressing feelings. This study adopts cognitive network science to reconstruct how individuals report their feelings in clinical narratives like suicide notes or mental health posts. We achieve this by reconstructing syntactic/semantic associations between conceptsin texts as co-occurrences enriched with affective data. We transform 142 suicide notes and 77,000 Reddit posts from the r/anxiety, r/depression, r/schizophrenia, and r/do-it-your-own (r/DIY) forums into 5 cognitive networks, each one expressing meanings and emotions as reported by authors. These networks reconstruct the semantic frames surrounding 'feel', enabling a quantification of prominent associations and emotions focused around feelings. We find strong feelings of sadness across all clinical Reddit boards, added to fear r/depression, and replaced by joy/anticipation in r/DIY. Semantic communities and topic modelling both highlight key narrative topics of 'regret', 'unhealthy lifestyle' and 'low mental well-being'. Importantly, negative associations and emotions co-existed with trustful/positive language, focused on 'getting better'. This emotional polarisation provides quantitative evidence that online clinical boards possess a complex structure, where users mix both positive and negative outlooks. This dichotomy is absent in the r/DIY reference board and in suicide notes, where negative emotional associations about regret and pain persist but are overwhelmed by positive jargon addressing loved ones. Our quantitative comparisons provide strong evidence that suicide notes encapsulate different ways of expressing feelings compared to online Reddit boards, the latter acting more like personal diaries and relief valve. Our findings provide an interpretable, quantitative aid for supporting psychological inquiries of human feelings in digital and clinical settings.