Conflicting narratives and polarization on social media

Armin Pournaki

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2507.15600

Conflicting narratives and polarization on social media

Armin Pournaki

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Narratives are key interpretative devices by which humans make sense of political reality. In this work, we show how the analysis of conflicting narratives, i.e. conflicting interpretive lenses through which political reality is experienced and told, provides insight into the discursive mechanisms of polarization and issue alignment in the public sphere. Building upon previous work that has identified ideologically polarized issues in the German Twittersphere between 2021 and 2023, we analyze the discursive dimension of polarization by extracting textual signals of conflicting narratives from tweets of opposing opinion groups. Focusing on a selection of salient issues and events (the war in Ukraine, Covid, climate change), we show evidence for conflicting narratives along two dimensions: (i) different attributions of actantial roles to the same set of actants (e.g. diverging interpretations of the role of NATO in the war in Ukraine), and (ii) emplotment of different actants for the same event (e.g. Bill Gates in the right-leaning Covid narrative). Furthermore, we provide first evidence for patterns of narrative alignment, a discursive strategy that political actors employ to align opinions across issues. These findings demonstrate the use of narratives as an analytical lens into the discursive mechanisms of polarization.

Explore related subjects

cs.CL cs.SI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Armin Pournaki. 2025-07-21. Conflicting narratives and polarization on social media. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.15600

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

In-context Learning vs. Instruction Tuning: The Case of Small and Multilingual Language Models

Instruction following is a critical ability for Large Language Models to be used directly by humans. This often requires supervised fine-tuning on curated instruction datasets, sometimes complemented with an alignment step. However, in multilingual scenarios, obtaining high-quality data for these stages remains challenging, motivating the exploration of In-Context Learning (ICL) as a possible alternative. In this work, we study whether ICL can serve as a substitute for Instruction Tuning in multilingual language models, while also examining how the comparison changes with model scale. Our results indicate that a gap remains between ICL and Instruction Tuning, motivating further research to reduce it.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

R3: Robust Rubric-Agnostic Reward Models

Reward models are essential for aligning language model outputs with human preferences, yet existing approaches often lack both controllability and interpretability. These models are typically optimized for narrow objectives, limiting their generalizability to broader downstream tasks. Moreover, their scalar outputs are difficult to interpret without contextual reasoning. To address these limitations, we introduce R3, a novel reward modeling framework that is rubric-agnostic, generalizable across evaluation dimensions, and provides interpretable, reasoned score assignments. R3 enables more transparent and flexible evaluation of language models, supporting robust alignment with diverse human values and use cases. Our models, data, and code are available as open source at https://github.com/rubricreward/r3.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Post-Training Large Language Models via Reinforcement Learning from Self-Feedback

Large Language Models (LLMs) often produce plausible but poorly-calibrated answers, limiting their reliability on reasoning-intensive tasks. Recent research suggests that Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning paths are inherent in pre-trained LLMs and can be elicited by simply altering the decoding process, where the presence of a CoT path correlates with higher answer confidence. Building on these insights, we present Reinforcement Learning from Self-Feedback (RLSF), a post-training stage that utilises the model's intrinsic confidence as a self-generated reward. By generating multiple CoT decoding beams from a frozen LLM, we compute the confidence of each final answer span and rank the resulting traces accordingly to create synthetic preferences. These preferences are subsequently utilised to fine-tune the policy through standard preference optimisation, requiring no human labels, gold answers, or externally curated rewards. RLSF simultaneously (i) refines the model's probability estimates--restoring well-behaved calibration--and (ii) strengthens step-by-step reasoning, yielding improved performance on arithmetic reasoning and multiple-choice question answering. By converting a model's own uncertainty into structured self-feedback, RLSF affirms reinforcement learning on intrinsic model behaviour as a principled and data-efficient component of the LLM post-training pipeline. Our results demonstrate that leveraging these inherent reasoning capabilities provides a robust path for enhancing model reliability without manual prompt engineering or external supervision.

cs.CL↗