What were the original findings regarding internet use and political division?

The initial study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), indicated a correlation between higher internet use and increased political division. However, the recently issued correction highlights a data coding error where the gender of participants in the pre-2016 data was incorrectly recorded, which has led to a more nuanced understanding of the impact of the internet on political polarization.

What was the nature of the data error that was corrected?

The data coding error involved misidentifying the gender of participants in the pre-2016 data of the study. This resulted in incorrect figures within the supporting information (SI) appendix, specifically Tables S2 and S5, and Figures S2, S4, and S12. Additionally, Figure 4 in the main text was also affected. The researchers corrected these errors, updated the replication code, and revised the supporting information to reflect accurate data.

What is the significance of the correction to the study?

The correction serves as a reminder of the importance of rigorous data analysis. It demonstrates how a seemingly small mistake can alter study conclusions. While the original findings suggested a direct link between internet use and increased political division, the corrected data presents a more complex picture. The implications involve reconsidering the simple cause-and-effect relationship often presumed and understanding the necessity of careful interpretation of social phenomena.

How does this correction change our understanding of the internet's impact on political polarization?

The significance of the correction lies in its impact on our understanding of how internet usage affects political polarization. Although the original research seemed to confirm anxieties about echo chambers and filter bubbles reinforcing existing biases, the corrected data suggests a need for a more nuanced view. This means that we need to rethink the simple correlation that was initially suggested and consider the role of the internet in shaping our political landscape more cautiously.

Did the correction fundamentally alter the original study's conclusions?

The authors have emphasized that despite the significant correction, the core statements and conclusions of the published article remain valid. The error, while affecting specific data points like those in the SI appendix, did not fundamentally change the overall narrative of the research. The updated data still contributes to understanding the complex relationship between internet use and political division.

Fractured political map with divided screens symbolizing internet polarization.

Is Internet Use Really Polarizing Us? New Insights into Online Habits and Political Division

Reese Marlowe in Politics & Policy December 2025 • 4 min read.

"A correction to a 2017 study sheds light on how internet usage impacts political polarization, revealing nuances in the data that challenge previous assumptions."

In an era dominated by screens and social media, the question of whether the internet is driving us further apart has become increasingly urgent. A 2017 study initially suggested a link between greater internet use and rising political polarization in the United States. However, a recently issued correction to that study offers a more nuanced perspective, urging us to reconsider the simple cause-and-effect relationship often assumed.

The original research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), pointed to a correlation between increased internet use and heightened political division. This seemed to confirm widespread anxieties about echo chambers and filter bubbles reinforcing existing biases. But what happens when the data itself is re-examined?

This article delves into the details of the correction, exploring how a seemingly minor error in data coding significantly altered the study's conclusions. We'll unpack the implications of these revised findings for how we understand the internet's role in shaping our political landscape, offering insights relevant to anyone concerned about online discourse and its impact on society.

The Data Glitch: Unmasking the Error

Fractured political map with divided screens symbolizing internet polarization.

The heart of the matter lies in a data coding error that affected the pre-2016 portion of the study. According to the correction, the researchers had inadvertently coded all females as males and all males as females in this segment of the data. While the 2016 data was correctly coded, this error had a ripple effect on the overall analysis.

This mistake impacted several key elements of the original study, specifically tables and figures within the supporting information (SI) appendix, as well as one figure in the main text. The researchers promptly updated the replication code and supporting information to reflect these changes, ensuring transparency and accuracy.

Tables S2 and S5 in the SI Appendix
Figures S2, S4, and S12 in the SI Appendix
Figure 4 in the main text

Importantly, the authors emphasize that despite this significant correction, the core statements and conclusions of the published article remain valid. The error, while impactful on specific data points, did not fundamentally change the overall narrative of the research.

Beyond the Correction: What Does This Mean for Our Online World?

The correction to this study serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of rigorous data analysis and the potential pitfalls of drawing hasty conclusions about complex social phenomena. While the initial findings reinforced existing anxieties about the internet's polarizing effects, the corrected data suggests a more nuanced picture.

It highlights the need to move beyond simplistic narratives and delve deeper into the multifaceted ways in which online interactions shape our political beliefs and behaviors. Are echo chambers as pervasive as we think? How do algorithms influence the information we consume? These are just some of the questions that warrant further exploration.

Ultimately, understanding the internet's impact on political polarization requires a commitment to careful research, critical thinking, and a willingness to challenge our own assumptions. The revised study encourages us to approach the online world with a more discerning eye, recognizing that the relationship between technology and society is far more intricate than we often assume.